-Licklider redirected ARPA funding from companies to Universities.
->Broad benefit.
->established the iron triangle of technology in industry, academia, and the military.
-1962: memo to "Members and Affiliates of the Intergalactic Computer Network" encouraged universities to link their computers.
->the INTERNET!!!
-"In a few years, men will be able to communicate more effectively through a machine than face to face."
->against communication as one-way process between sender and receiver
->cyber romance?
->will "to be online" be a privilege or a right?
->speech and handwriting recognition
-Need: for a quick access to computing to aid in decision-making.
What's interesting to me here is the notion of symbiosis. Note that most of the definitions involve plants or people or groups of people. The definition typically implies life. Life and a mutually dependent relationship. How do we benefit from the relation ship? Well, here, we have a tool that aids us in communication, learning, decision-making, and military purposes. But how does the machine benefit? We maintain these systems we create, yes. But is that enough to say that the machine benefits? Does existence hold any meaning for the objects that we fabricate for ourselves? I mean, human beings grow marijuana for the sake of smoking it, effectively guaranteeing its continuation as a species. A relationship that is identifiably symbiotic. But does that idea of symbiosis apply to the inanimate objects we create? What about an idea? Can humanity be said to have a symbiotic relationship with the ideas we have on a collective level?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is a really interesting notion. I think at its most fundamental level it's asking what is life? Because can we say that something is being hindered or benefiting if it is not alive in some way? We wondered about the sand beasts having "life" and so I wonder if our ideas and the inanimate objects we create have life or perhaps I mean some kind of conciousness, because benefit/hindrance is entirely subjective based on how it is interpretted by the reciever. So I haven't answered this question at all, but I am interested in discussing it.
ReplyDeleteI agree that its really interesting to consider the needs and desires of the machine. Are they anymore than simply to be used? I dont know why but i just think of the brave little toaster and the junkyard scene, where ultimately the fate of a machine is a direct result of its use in a symbiotic relationship with humans. It requires use, and the human requires its services. When either the machine can no longer function, or the human has found a replacement that relationship is replaced with a new one.
ReplyDelete