PDA

View Full Version : Technology's effects on society



Edge
01-19-2002, 04:09 PM
Is anyone concerned that as existing or future developer's, we are creating more and more powerful tools for our goverments to use in controlling our lives. A lot of new technoligies are said to be used in the prevention of crime, like face recognition programs which are linked to cctv which can identify wanted or known criminals. Fair enough, but who's to say they aren't logging everbody's movements and with the number of cameras rising rapidly you may face the prospect of being filmed from the second you leave your home. This shouldn't be a problem because our goverments act in our intrest's. Yeah right. they will use the data to control us and remove choices from our daily lives.
In a few years time you will probably be to paranoid to go outside, but thats okay you will be able use the internet for all your needs. Oh s**t thats controlled and monitored as well.
I may sound paranoid myself but I'm just gettiing myself used to it early.

Brian
01-19-2002, 05:47 PM
Who cares? As long as you're not doing anything wrong, what have you got to hide? Hehehe, and "controlling" the internet isn't possible. The internet is a chaotic ****hole which cannot be controlled or restrained.

DavidP
01-19-2002, 06:06 PM
technology is good in almost every way as long as we dont become too dependent on it. There should ALWAYS be a way to do something or get something WITHOUT having to get on the internet, or have a computer, etc. If automation breaks down, which it will once in awhile, there has to be a way to do the stuff that WAS automated while the automation is offline.

My only concern is that we are becoming too dependant on technology.

Govtcheez
01-19-2002, 06:41 PM
> you may face the prospect of being filmed from the second you leave your home.

Who cares? With the state of biometrics being what it is, they wouldn't be able to tell if I was me, my girlfriend, or the friggin' Easter Bunny.

>they will use the data to control us and remove choices from our daily lives.

By photographing me on my way to the grocery store? Doubtful.

> Oh s**t thats controlled and monitored as well.

Ya think so? That would explain how we hear about hack attacks on an almost weekly basis. Yup, they got it way under control. No matter what controls they put on the internet, there's always going to be somebody at home willing to put in the time and effort to crack it. It's been proven again and again. Everyday, the government tries to develop ciphers and encryption systems that are more and more invincible, and everyday, there are people trying to break them.

Read less 1984 and more news.

> My only concern is that we are becoming too dependant on technology.

Echo that.

Betazep
01-19-2002, 06:52 PM
Just to remind you... technology, in its extreme sense, is only prevelent in city societies for the most part. I do not think that the majority of the world (that doesn't live in the rich urban cities) is concerned with advancing technology other than its expansion into their world.

Many people live in the forests and deserts that are technologically barren. I do not think that some of these Grizzly Adams type people are really concerned with these things, as they are probably more concerned about getting food, being set for harsh climates and getting the ticks out of their beards. :) Some people directly choose this way of life to be away from urbanites.

When technology advances so much to take over these people and land, we have bigger issues than being monitored by the government. A world full of asphalt and buildings and lacking of nature would be the end of us all anyway.

Think about it....

you don't have to live with technology... you inevitably choose to because you live within it.

kermi3
01-19-2002, 06:53 PM
First of all I think it's very doubtful that the gov't's tracking us because this would take massive amounts of man power, even if they are using computers, and therefore couldn't be secret.

My real concern about technology is twofold.

First of all we are forgetting our "roots." Being outside, nature, physical activity, manual labor etc. These are all becoming things for the history books. Sure this sort of thing has happened before, the art and discipline of making a knife of stone was replaced by metal etc., but it has never before happened this quickly. A mere 150 years ago we were just discovering nitro-glycerin, much less computers. Moving at this speed there's no time for society to adjust and set acceptable norms for how our society should live before there's another new revolutionary discovery and we have to start all over again.


My second worry is that our society is becoming too impersonal. The Internet allows us to essentially never leave our homes. TV and movies force feeds us what life should be like. What's there left for us to do? To think about?

You know as little as 60 years ago people actually sat at home and talked at night for entertainment? Hard to believe isn't it. Now we have to be fed our entertainment. When I was a little kid I would come home from school, walk over to my best friend's house and we'd play basketball or football or something until our mother's made us go in to dinner. Now what do kids do? Play video games? Watch Cartoons all afternoon?

We have become so detached that TV, movies, and even the evening news with its constant coverage of murder and war no longer effect many of us. Last night I went and saw Black hawk Down (yes I know, a hypocrite), a very good but extremely gory movie. Seated next to me, in the bottom damn row, were 2 brothers, one couldnít have been more than eleven, the other NINE years old. As we watched I looked over at these 2 boys and they were not fazed at all by the gore and horrid war in this story. The one of my friends left the show in tears because it disturbed her so much. All these boys did was talk about how bad it was @ the end.

My final worry about all this technology is that we no longer bother to engage in cultural activities. If you were to poll all American's over 10 how many of them do you think have read a book for pure pleasure or intellectual value in the last month? I'd bet not many. Art, theatre, books, all things that are supposed to make you think about society and what is right or wrong have taken second seat to the TV which tells us what is right and wrong for us.

I'll stop now since Iím sure I've bored more than a few of you, and I've probably already got more typos than I can fix. But I'm not worried about over automation, instead I'm worried about the effects of rapid communication along with TV and movies that are becoming our only source of entertainment and judgment.


Oh and PS

On encryption, as I understand if pgp is pretty much unbreakable except by force, which at 128bit is pretty much pointless to try w/o huge supercomputers and lots of time.

Betazep
01-19-2002, 06:58 PM
>>>First of all we are forgetting our "roots." Being outside, nature, physical activity, manual labor etc. These are all becoming things for the history books.


How true it is...

iain
01-19-2002, 07:52 PM
technology is incredible and a wonderful thing, most technological advances benefit us. It is those that misuse the technology that create the adversities.

DavidP
01-19-2002, 08:29 PM
ditto to Kermi3.

I dont even go to rated R movies. Our new generations are becoming way too desensitized by the violence, sex, etc. that is available to be seen with technology...such as movies, internet, etc. Movies, the internet, and games are great things, but it takes a mature to handle them...and a mature movie maker to make a good movie.

Over just the past 10 years, the rated R movies of 10 years ago are now PG 13, the PG 13 movies of 10 years ago are now PG, and the PG movies of 10 years ago are G. I remember going to see that one movie about the princess a couple months ago....with Mandy Moore in it....but I incredibly surprised it was rated G because it had Mandy Moore makin out with a guy for like a whole minute....they want 6 year old kids to see that? I mean...yeah...Mandy Moore is friggin hot....but these are 6 year old kids here....

kermi3
01-19-2002, 08:45 PM
these are 6 year old kids here....


I totally agree. I was recently around a group of 2nd graders working on a communitee project and I was asked if I had a gf. When I replied no one of them said something like oh, another said "that stinks" and a 3rd said to the first "He wishes he had a gf" Already they have the mindset that that is what it's all about!

At a summer camp I used to work at many years ago I had to field (aka dodge) questions about sex, and my own sexual activity from 10-11 year olds!

I see this as being a terrible thing for our society. Not because kids this young shouldn't know about sex, that I can deal with, but they see sex as being THE thing. And moreover because it doesn't give them a chance to be kids! 10, 11, 12, and even 13 year olds shouldn't have to worry about how they look and about boy and girl friends! The only thing that they should worry about is having the time to be kids! Time to learn, to adapt to society, to start finding their place in the world, and most importantly to have learnFUN!!

That's what our technilogical high speed society has done I'm afraid :(

doubleanti
01-19-2002, 09:41 PM
yesh mah-stah... phun ^ enphinyty

ygfperson
01-19-2002, 10:36 PM
I dont even go to rated R movies. Our new generations are becoming way too desensitized by the violence, sex, etc.
From a 17 year old:
I disagree. I can see your point that seeing too much of anything makes a person desensitized to it, but I believe that kids can see the difference between TV and real life. I like R-rated movies, not because they contain violence, sex, etc., but because they don't make an effort to restrict content which might be deemed inappropriate. A G-rated movie is predictable and boring because I already know the situation won't be stressful. Why do you think movie makers try to make R-rated movies? I heard somewhere that that is their biggest audience.


First of all we are forgetting our "roots." Being outside, nature, physical activity, manual labor etc. These are all becoming things for the history books.
I agree to the first part. But these won't be buried in the past. Despite 5000+ years of cultural and technological evolution, we are still controlled by emotion. There will always be people whose opinions differ, and people who do labor simply to prove a point. The Olympics, for example.


but they see sex as being THE thing
I believe that being "sexy" is more of a fad than an actual feeling among pre-puberty kids. Kids are curious. They like to know stuff which makes others uncomfortable.


The Internet allows us to essentially never leave our homes.
Why do we leave our homes in the first place? Only for necessities, like food, and things which give us our necessities, like jobs? Will the Internet magically deliver them through its wires? Ok, I'm being a little too sarcastic. But we still need to move about. Cars have done more damage to this principle than the Internet will.


poll all American's over 10 how many of them do you think have read a book for pure pleasure or intellectual value in the last month?
Why read a book when I can download stuff to read later? I bought a pda to do that with. Honestly, though, I agree about the 'pure pleasure' part.


left the show in tears because it disturbed her so much. All these boys did was talk about how bad it was @ the end.
When I'm with friends, I try to act less thrilled with a movie than I really am. I do it because of peer pressure. Kids like to feel on top of the world, with nothing that bothers them.


there's no time for society to adjust and set acceptable norms
I agree, though I think that's more our huge population's fault than science.
To summarize: some things never change. Basically, don't take a kid's actions literaly. Kids are growing up, and no matter what they know they will still act on their emotions.

kermi3
01-19-2002, 11:05 PM
I believe that being "sexy" is more of a fad than an actual feeling among pre-puberty kids. Kids are curious. They like to know stuff which makes others uncomfortable.

This is true, however this is not something that a 2nd grader (approx age 7), or even a 5th grader (approx age 10) should ever have to think about. They are Kids and should be. This is not the time for kids to worry about how they look. This unneeded pressure is simply a burrden.

Moreover, if this is such a "fad" then why do we have so many teenage girls with dietary dissorders? This is a major problem even with women going into their 20s.


Why read a book when I can download stuff to read later? I bought a pda to do that with.

You just proved my entire point. Why learn something for myself when someone else can tell me what I'm supposed to get out of it for me?




When I'm with friends, I try to act less thrilled with a movie than I really am. I do it because of peer pressure. Kids like to feel on top of the world, with nothing that bothers them.

Prehaps I mistated what disturpbed me about these kids the mose.....During many of the graphic scenes in this movie I looked away after seeing the initail shot. Graphic scenes of on the battle field surgery and men being blown in half were something I didn't want to look at all the time. When I looked away I saw the 7 year old next to me with his eyes glued to the screen with a blank expression on his face. If this isn't desensitation I don't know what is.


Kids are growing up, and no matter what they know they will still act on their emotions.

This is partially true. However, kids also learn how to act by what they see around them. Both on TV, in the movies, and from the people around them. This is another huge problem that our "sped up" world has brought. Many parents are no longer able to spend large amounts of time with their kids, work gets in the way. Therefore kids don't have their parents to look to to learn how to act. Instead they only have their older siblings, older people around them, often teenagers, and popular culture to ditate how they should act.

Should a 7-10 year old really be watching MTV and its idolazation of sex?

Aran
01-19-2002, 11:12 PM
don't ever take views of the future seriously if they are too out there:

there are ethics checks between now and then.

doubleanti
01-20-2002, 12:06 AM
[light note [major]]
>It is those that misuse the technology that create the adversities.

i thought you said "It is those that misuse the technology that create advertisements"... which would be true... hehe

[serious note [minor]]

i'm glad you all agree that we can't live through a screen. what a time we live in, eh? it's interesting to see how we are all of different age groups and how we all respond differently to our coming realizations of an economy-minded environment... personally i'm still trying to rid the toxins myself. it's a difficult adjustment, but what can you do? all your simple life and youth is further complicated, time and distance seperates you from your simple pleasures... how can you cope with this change? you might figure of all here i'd be most militant against lyfestyle changes such... but how indecisive i am still indeed... well, at least we know we are in for a ride...

ygfperson
01-20-2002, 12:08 AM
Why read a book when I can download stuff to read later? I bought a pda to do that with
I meant that PDAs are more efficient than books, literally. My pda can resume at any page, any sentence. I can download a book to view wherever I have batteries. Only the medium where the words appear has changed. There is plenty of original reading material on the Internet.


When I looked away I saw the 7 year old next to me with his eyes glued to the screen with a blank expression on his face.
Before I type anything else, I'm assuming a "Saving Private Ryan" level of gore, because I have never seen the movie.
A blank expression could mean anything, like suprise, shock, fear, excitement, etc. I don't know what the 7-year-old kid was thinking at the time. I believe that kids are desensitized to TV/movie violence. Movie makers try to make their movie as realistic as possible to compensate. But violence on the screen doesn't necessarily mean real violence.


Should a 7-10 year old really be watching MTV and its idolazation of sex?
Personally, I almost never watch MTV. I think the music videos, shows, almost everything is too pop-culture flavored. It lacks anything interesting.
However, I think that 7-10 year olds have the right to watch MTV. If they like its content they should be able to watch it. Kids are more influenced by each other than by some tv show. If a funny moment on 'Daria' helps get a conversation started, why not?
I believe MTV is too sex-oriented. But I don't think the idolazation of sex hurts kids.

doubleanti
01-20-2002, 12:17 AM
i feel that morale is nature... and that it cannot be changed... [if you are familiar with my online persona then you'd probably understand why i feel this better...] it makes me feel lucky to have been reprocessed in this lyfe to be in a realization such...

but others say it's nurture... why is that? i'd like to find out whether or not there is a corelation between a beings purpose and a beings predisposition to reality... in a continuing lyfe-stream which extends over tyme, the predisposition does not exist [since tyme is arbitrary]... but rather if one is called such, it is refreshed at each renewal...

ygfperson
01-20-2002, 12:23 AM
to doubleanti:
it's ok, we're not flaming each other, you don't need to change the subject. its a lively debate.
gotta sleep.................

doubleanti
01-20-2002, 12:27 AM
oh, well good night, and sorry i inadvertently changed the subject...

speaking of which, where's garfield? he was the religious guy, and he would have a definitive declination to my belief that time is arbitrary wouldn't he?

E i F x 65
01-20-2002, 12:32 AM
if i am understanding what you r saying... im slow and i dunt understand big words... u r saying that we r born w/ our attitudes by way of nature... well true... that would explain why i have been exposed to violence yet i am not a murderer... and someone else could be exposed to the same violence and be a murderer... but if this were so... people would never change... or have the ability to change... but... people do

kermi3
01-20-2002, 12:39 AM
Ok...first of all I realize that I have probably come accross diffrently than I feel so I should probably try and clear that up.

I do not dislike the technology, on he conrary I think it is all a wonderful thing and I wouldn't give it up. The problem I have with it is simply how fast we've chosen to move with it. Essentially our lives, and the way we get information, have sped up at the same rate as processors have, and that I believe to be very bad.

I misunderstood what you were saying about PDA's, you are totally right they are awsome! lol I want one.



A blank expression could mean anything, like suprise, shock, fear, excitement, etc. I don't know what the 7-year-old kid was thinking at the time. I believe that kids are desensitized to TV/movie violence. Movie makers try to make their movie as realistic as possible to compensate. But violence on the screen doesn't necessarily mean real violence.

(yes Saving Private Ryan violence levels, along with some 3 Kings gut shot to boot)

You're right the kid could've been thinking anything, and he probably was desensitized to it. But this exact thing is the problem I think. In our fast paced world we have learned to take our cues from TV on how we should act. And while many kids may know the diffrence there will always be those who don't.

As fo MTV: #1 I totally agree way over sexed etc.

#2
Kids are more influenced by each other than by some tv show. If a funny moment on 'Daria' helps get a conversation started, why not?

You're totally right they are much more influenced by other kids, but they are also heavily influenced b those slightly older than they are.

Change your example, instead of Daria, what are kids going to think about say MTV Spring Break which will run non-stop for a month coming up soon? A show that is nothing but sex, sex, a little music, sex, jerry springer, and then sex. (In my personal unbaised lol opinion) Kids do start taking cues from this. I have been around a lot of kids, and I will see kids the same age (11-12), one of which wants to sit alone and talk about sex and making out constantly and to whom a major issue was when some of his friends were smoking and he yelled at them for it, but they got mad at him for yelling and kept smoking, and a second kid who only cared about goofying around and playing sports.

Prehaps I am over reacting. And I do truely beleieve that the positives of technology are incredable, I wouldn't knowhow to program if I didn't. However, I think that we have allowed technology to speed our own lives up to the point that we allow TV, MTV, Movies and video games to teach our kids instead of the good ol'baseball dimond and playing with other kids.

I think the technology is great, we just use it improperly. Prehaps given time to adjust to this high paced world we will do better. For now though I think the rapid movement puts a strain on us all, from fast food because parents are overstressed, to the stockbroker who can't stop because so much happens in so little time now, we are simply overloaded but informations and prehaps we just need to stop and smell the roses.

doubleanti
01-20-2002, 12:43 AM
>but... people do

hmmm... that is very true... i guess that's a kink in my plan then eh? perhaps it is that there is a resolution that you ultimately arrive at, and that every lifetime has it's resolution... but, since time is arbitrary, how can you say that resolutions are delimited by the extent of lifetimes?

status: thynking...

E i F x 65
01-20-2002, 12:51 AM
> how can you say that resolutions are delimited by the extent of lifetimes?

i dont quite understand ur question... r u asking if one's purpose is limited by the extent of his/her lifetime?... if that is ur question... it depends wut u mean by PURPOSE... a purpose can be long term objective or an immediate objective... can u clear up wut u mean?????

doubleanti
01-20-2002, 01:00 AM
i meant rather, that if one's standing in a life is static throughout that person's lifetime, that would mean that their karma is refreshed at the end of the old life and the beginning of the new... which can't be because people change, and time is arbitrary...

Govtcheez
01-20-2002, 01:03 AM
Wow, this sounds an awful lot like what we (aran elus, davidp, ken, and I) were discussing earlier tonight :)

Anyways... After only skimming the arguments... I think that kids are influenced quite a bit by pop culture in general (not just MTV), quite a bit by other kids, and quite a bit more by older kids. I know that when my brother was younger, he sure tried to emulate me, and still does (no, this isn't an ego-trip... It's the truth - younger siblings tend to emulate or copy their older ones). However, there's also other things that influence them - family, church, etc.... Basically, I agree with the webmaster's fine muppet....

However, as I was talking about with David, do you think it's right to hide things away just because they're more violent? I mean - yes, Saving Private Ryan was extremely graphic, and it sounds like the same can be said for Blackhawk Down. The thing is, these are both based on actual events. The worst scenes in Private Ryan (the DDay landing) were actually that bloody. I'm sure it's the same situation in BHD. Is it right to hide these things from kids just because they're graphic, or should the material just be presented in a different way, so kids wouldn't be desensitized to it?

One more thing:
E i F x 65, please type like a human being - are is not r, you is not u, what is not wut, your/you're is not ur...

Also - kermi, was the movie any good (disregarding the kids in there)?

static-style list - forgive my ramblings - it's 2 in the morning and I can't sleep...

E i F x 65
01-20-2002, 01:11 AM
o so u r saying that if one changes... that person's soul is not happy... well... people are different... some people are good... and some people are bad... then it is possible souls are different as well... in that some souls are good and some souls are bad... if this is the case... u cannot make a judgement for everyone and the spirits that dwell within them... for some souls... change could be a good thing...

heh... let me kno if im completely miss understanding u

E i F x 65
01-20-2002, 01:14 AM
to Govtcheez:

if u dunt like da way i type... dunt read wut i type

Govtcheez
01-20-2002, 01:17 AM
Being that your posts are in the middle of the thread, it's kinda difficult. Why's it so damn hard for people to type right?

E i F x 65
01-20-2002, 01:19 AM
it juss is

kermi3
01-20-2002, 12:12 PM
However, as I was talking about with David, do you think it's right to hide things away just because they're more violent?

I agree it's not right to hide things, however it is a fine line, because I believe kids do need a chance to be kids. You know time to learn from playing, fights on the playground, games etc.



Also - kermi, was the movie any good (disregarding the kids in there)?

Yes awsome movie, recomend it to everyone, just be prepared for Saving Private Ryan level gore. But definatley worth the $6!

Brian
01-20-2002, 01:40 PM
I have 10,000 karma and 10,000 fame. I'm GL.

hehe, first person to say what GL means in that context gets a cookie.

Govtcheez
01-22-2002, 07:17 AM
OK - GG, usually I let your spelling slide, but "Herodo Reveria"? What'd you get right, like 2 letters?

Also, I'd like to reinforce what kermi said about Black Hawk Down. Great, great, movie... Really, really bloody, though. I also saw plenty of little kids in there.

mithrandir
01-22-2002, 07:21 AM
I started to read a bit of Black Hawk Down but never got round to finishing it. Still that whole thing was FUBAR.