Originally Posted by
khutch
And your point is? You deny that something has value when it is used daily to help people. And you seem to be trying to use the fact that it does help people to "prove" that it is useless.
Where does "value" equate with "absolute necessity?"
Originally Posted by
khutch
The cell phone connects that brain to almost anyone, anywhere, anywhen in the world. You can call up wisdom from the dawn of writing on your phone and download the latest news. If your brain cannot see the value in that you undercut your own premise.
Coming to rely on data in the cloud atrophies the brain. I'm smarter than Google.
Originally Posted by
khutch
There is no accounting for taste.
If you truly believed that, you'd have dropped the issue there. Kubrick's 2001 was also better than Clarke's novella.
edit: just read that Clarke's was more like a Novelisation of the screenplay based on another short story. Cool. I didn't even need the internet to know by reading it that it sucked. Guess I have good taste.
Originally Posted by
khutch
You show no real understanding of whatever knowledge you have.
Do you really talk like this in the real world? Or has the technology of the internet reduced your ability to be civil? Just sayin'... I don't think I've insulted you anywhere, just debated you. That's been my intent.
Originally Posted by
khutch
Technology has no means whatsoever to use me. I use it, it is incapable of using me. It is pretty hard to do anything without using human technology and it has been for 250,000 years.
I don't like cell phones very much. Or TV at all. I like matches. I like computers. I like first, second, and third class levers. I like gears. I like bikes. I like typewriters. I like buttons and zippers too. I like woven cloth. I like books. I like...
Originally Posted by
khutch
My dogs cannot compose poetry. Human language is a technology they do not possess (although they understand a fair number of words). Poetry is a technology they do not possess, since they have no language. Human writing is a technology they cannot use or have any use for. The implements by which human language is recorded are another collection of human technologies they cannot use, except as chew toys. If you don't understand this, and I can't see why you would have tried to use this as an example if you did, then you are hardly qualified to comment on technology. Technology is so pervasive and so ancient among us that we use a thousand technological innovations every hour without even realizing it. Technology does not use us, it is us, the most profound expression of the human experience possible.
My female dog will slip you the tongue without warning. Is the experience better? Define better.... Dogs are very adept at expressing emotions including affection. Put a naked human being and a dog both in the deep northern woods in the depth of winter and which is most likely to be alive a month later? The dog. The dog has no technology, it can only use non-technological survival skills and adaptations and it has them in abundance. You can't even survive a night without clothes or at least a fire, and both are human technology. Your only hope is to somehow recreate stone age technology from the ice ages over a period of hours and days. Of course you increase your chances of survival a lot if you befriend the dog but animal husbandry is another ancient technology.
I totally owned you with the dog comment earlier. You can't even say "touche," can you, Laertes?
Originally Posted by
khutch
That is what "living without technology" would really be like. I'll take my life with a double dose of technology. If we stripped all the technology out of your bike you would be left with a small pile of worthless looking rocks and organic materials. It took a quarter million years of technological development to turn that into a human powered vehicle. It should not take that long to convince you of the value of a cell phone, all the hard work has been done. All you have to do is open your mind and that is not technology, that is intelligence, the wellspring of technology.
Ken
0_o I must really be a dummy who lacks intelligence, because you disagree with me, right?
Remember, I'm smarter than Google. And Ken, so are you.