nav
Home
About
Contact
MediaCenter
Resume
Photos
Stories
Movies
Books
Wiki
FAQ

fav sites
Gizmodo
Engadget
Slashdot
News
CNET
Wired
DazeReader

friends
Adam
Andrea*
Angie
Benny
Brad
Chris
Christine*
Craig*
Curt
David*
Donny*
Emily*
Gary
Gords*
Jacks*
Jam*
Jesse
Jessica
John
Jon*
Kevin
Lauren
Maeve
Mark*
Ming
Nat
Nick
Nicole*
Orr
Paul
Rafi*
Rannie
Tracy

UW WebBloggers
join
random
prev
next

Don't Surrender. Don't Resist.

Kevin Kelly and Sven Birkerts take vastly opposing positions in their essays on the electronic hive. Kelly suggests surrendering to new information technologies while Birkerts suggests refusing them entirely. While these essays have merit, both positions assume an adversarial relationship with technology. Neither author shares my belief that technology is not an un-controllable external force threatening to sweep us away, but rather, a set of tools, over which we the users have control and for which we have responsibility.

Kevin Kelly argues that the Internet is similar to an electronic hive made up of many individuals, who together behave like a single organism. He also argues that the price we pay for belonging to this emergent hive mind is that we 'don't expect, don't understand, can't control, or don't even perceive.' He concludes that to participate we have to surrender.

While Kelly is correct that the Internet is a decentralized network he is incorrect in assuming that each node is considered equal. For example, consider the world of weblogs where what differentiates nodes/weblogs is the amount of attention each weblog receives and is able to bestow upon other weblogs in the network. In effect attention is the currency of the economy created by this decentralized network.

By having both attention and the ability to bestow it implies that these nodes can control and do understand the network they are members of. They do so by both producing and consuming which affects the outgoing links from their nodes which in turn affects their incoming links and ability to increase the attention they and others receive. This shows that some 'bees in the hive' choose to take up roles that are not surrendered and passive. In fact these webloggers are shaping the rest of the Internet communities' expectations, understandings and perceptions.

Consider next, Sven Birkerts' argument that while humans are adept at adapting to new technological innovation, these innovations add yet another layer of abstraction between people and the natural world. He then argues that people trade their habits of the past for these new technologies, therefore widening the gap between people and the wisdom that gives them meaning and purpose. This, he concludes, results in a shallower individual. To fight this widening gap he urges people to resist technology.

While it is true that society is abstracting itself away from the natural world, this has been happening since people moved out of caves and into dwellings of their own creation. As with anything, humans will need to find the appropriate balance between technology and Birkerts' 'natural world'.

Resisting technology will no longer be an option for individuals such as Birkerts because those who do not adapt to technology will be disenfranchised by our increasingly modern society. Certainly this is a fate worse than the widening gap of which he writes. Those who wish to resist would do society more benefit by voicing their concerns and showing people how they can bridge the gap between their abstracted lives and the natural world.

While Birkerts' essay does a good job of raising the alarm on our willingness to blindly adopt technology, suggesting only resistance is not a realistic option. It would have been better to suggest ways that people can lessen the inevitable gap. Examples could have included suggestions of adopting personal 'disconnect hours'. These hours would allow people to turn off their connections to the network in order to spend time with their families, or themselves reading, exercising or meditating.

Whether it be considering the attention economy of the weblog world, or taking a timeout by disconnecting, my opinions stem from being an early member of a new generation where I first experienced interconnectedness with bulletin board systems and local area networks and finally with the Internet through the 90s. Not only has the Internet been a learning experience, hobby, and a job but also a way of life.

Experiencing the Internet from its pre-World Wide Web days up until today, I have a sense of both what the Internet is capable of and what it is not. I also have a feeling of being not only in control but also responsible for technology. I feel neither the need to surrender to it nor do I worry of it washing over me, because my relationship with technology is a symbiotic one rather than an adversarial one. I feel since I am in control that I can find the balance necessary to connect to what Birkerts' refers as the 'natural world'.

As with anything, people must approach new technologies with a realistic view of what they can and can not do. They must also approach new technologies with an open mind instead of taking an adversarial stand against it simply because at first glance it appears complex or abstract. Technology is something people created and it is something people can control, and moreover it is something we should all benefit from. Neither surrendering nor refusing should be options people consider as they face new technologies.