14 Replies Latest reply: Aug 17, 2010 10:47 PM by jeremy d. RSS

    Virtuality vs. Reality

    creig bryan-mUOxt4 Community Member

      With apologies to John T. Smith: Hope my tangential musings haven't brought about an F-14 escort divert.

       

      Mitchell Lopez brings thought-provoking observations to mind in his last  message on the hijacked thread. (DirectTV vs.Netflix).

       

      My original thoughts were also mirrored by Jerry Seinfeld during his  appearance on Letterman last night.

       

      And then there's this: A link to an article in the Washinton Post entitled, "Obsessed with  Smartphones, Oblivious to the Here And Now"

       

      Quick survey: How much time do you spend interacting with other humans in a virtual manner?

       

      How many minutes/hours of each day do you look at or talk on your telephone/blackberry/PDA?

       

      This question includes the use of telephones (you know, house phones), cell phones, PDAs, Blackberries.

      It includes laptop and desktop computers, but only for communication activities such as Skype, IM, email, Facebook, etc.

      It also includes on-line interactive games, and activities such as Second Life, as well as hand-held video games (PSP),

      but only when used interactively (with another person on-line remotely).

      It includes any use of Twitter, MySpace, (i.e. any social/business networking site), and any on-line forums (like this one).

      Of course, it includes any texting.

       

      Passive entertainment (TV/DVD viewing, Youtube viewing, etc) is specifically excluded--no human on the other side.

       

      While not specifically terming it a backlash, there does seem to be a certain groundswell of consensus building up, on two different sides of the issue.

      Mitchell's muse mentions generational cycles, but the technology that allows for instant information wasn't available before the telegraph/telephone, so generations subsequent to that are the first to be exposed to virtual space. (Some may argue for the immersive reality brought about by Gutenberg, but reading is passive--the book doesn't reply. Likewise, correspondence (parchment or paper) was collected and delivered in rain/wind/sleet/snow reality).

       

       

      I estimate that I spend about 3 hours each week day, communicating with others in virtual space. This figure includes my use of email and text, both personal and work-related. It includes any phone conversations, relatives and business contacts. It includes Twitter, tennis and Adobe forums. On weekends, that number increases to 4: I spend Saturday mornings catching up on the various on-line forums and Sunday mornings writing personal emails and talking to distant friends and relatives by phone and text.

       

      What about you?

       

      Keep Smiling.

        • 1. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
          Mitchell Lopez Community Member

          After pondering this for a day, I’ve concluded…

           

          I spend hours a day in the virtual world communicating, but I am an “infant” of what is to come.

           

          How relative now would a survey in 1894 be, asking how much time do you spend on the phone, versus face to face interactions?

           

          A rhetorical question: If you have to ask your neighbor (who lives 100 feet away) a question, do you walk over or call them on the phone?

           

          I still maintain that the world is in it’s infancy in being connected to the “matrix”. In the future, only the poor will actually have to physically pick up a device to communicate to someone afar, or walk that 100 feet. And they will be shunned for not being plugged in. It will be an all new lower social caste who will be prejudiced against.

           

          Let’s open our minds and envision what the world will be like in 50 years. Even those 20 something “clods" now, who bump into you in the mall while focused on their headsets/phones will not be the “beautiful people” and their norms will be archaic. There will be a “net” we cannot dream of. Our current smart phones will be part of a fossil culture.

           

          I am sorry for my vision. I have no control over the future.

           

          I’ve embraced the future. It’s a cultural evolution that is coming. Resistance is futile.

          • 2. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
            Community Member

            Hi,

             

            I don't have a cell phone or pda ....just a land line...and the computer ( internet )...so I'm thinking about an hour a day, sometimes more on the internet in this forum mostly...and that is usually multitasking with email stuff , maybe some other thing like listening to the radio, news, etc.

             

            However, although I'm falling behind with that technology ( cell phone , iphone ? ) I'm thinking it won't really progress as fast as most people think in general.

            I think this slowing of the progression will be mostly matters of privacy law, security ( identity theft etc), reliability ( stuff works better with less problems ) and a wearing out of the "novelty" of social networking ( people often lie or misrepresent themselves in virtual space and eventually it gets tiresome ).

             

            Since there's so many technical areas involved I can only generalize about some how come I think this, using some examples I've seen so far.

             

            1) computer managed cars ( Toyota problems for example ) are very difficult to diagnose and for reliability the old fashioned stuff (fly by wire as opposed to computer controlled servos) seem best suited in a wider range of environments .... I say fly by wire just cause most can relate to aircraft controls and backup systems on them.

             

            The very real possibility that there will be a sunspot big enough to make a magnetic pulse strong enough to knock out half the world's chip based systems in an instant ( only the military shields this stuff against atomic weapon pulses ) might put a big damper on the speed of progression ....or simply an atomic ( strategic to create the pulse ) attack in some area of the world.

             

            Here's an example of digital camera problem that is worrisome ( involving the chip that senses light ) and is slowing down the exclusive use of those instead of film ----  notwithstanding other issues of tethering and power, etc.....    when used with special effects ( big bang noises and explosions ) the " vibration " or frequencies generated often make the camera not function .....when a digital camera malfunctions like that everyone looks at one another and says, " What happened ? What's wrong ? "    The answer is always , " I don't know ".     Kinda like Toyota ?

             

            This isn't cell phone or hand held device related, but I think that is a novelty too, and as people crash into each other more often, or walk in front of moving cars etc....that will slow down the pace of progress in that area.

             

            Also, there are going to be less rather than more masts pretty soon...an infrastructure overload ....because vendors sell the products and then worry later about having the money ( from those sales ) to invest in the infrastructure....   That will back fire pretty soon I think...

             

            Rod

            • 3. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
              Mitchell Lopez Community Member

              Rod,

              With all due respect, Creig is talking about the loss of face to face human interaction, via technology. It is not an indictment of technology itself.

              I agree with you that technological hardware does have faults.

               

              The Toyota problems you mention are a problem with Toyota, not with the technology per se. I have had “drive by wire” cars for a decade. The difference is my car is German, not Toyota. There has never been an issue with my brand. (The other difference is mine costs much much more than a Toyota. So much more that I only see my model on the road once a week if I am lucky) The issue with Toyota is they did it on the cheap.

               

              Digital cameras are here to stay. This is why Kodak got out of the film business. The issue with digital cameras are that there are so many cheap ones out there, as opposed to robust/expensive ones.

               

              You are right on infrastructure overload. However, unfortunately that is a sound business plan for the service provider. They will not want to over build the infrastructure, without the traffic. Sound business sense says to only spend what you have to. The business model then says that only after you have exceeded your capacity, do you make extra expenditures on the infrastructure.

               

              That is a fact of life whether it is cel phone providers or auto manufacturers.

               

              You really don’t have a cel phone? That will really sku Creig’s survey. 

              • 4. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                Community Member

                Hiya Mitch,

                • 5. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                  johnbmx4christ Community Member

                  i dont have a cell either. we went over this in the other thread but since this thread is actually about this subject i'll chime in.

                   

                  "A rhetorical question: If you have to ask your neighbor (who lives 100 feet away) a question, do you walk over or call them on the phone?"

                   

                  i will be the one that walks on over. and although we dont consider ourselves (my family) poor (comparing ourselves to 3rd world people) you in the future will look down upon me as a lesser people cause i dont keep up with the latest and greatest.. i dont need the latest and greatest in technology. i need to eat everyday and sleep in a nice clean safe place. other than that i consider what we have, and will have, just extras in life and most of the time those "extras" take away from life. if you have multiple computers in your house and your spouse in right next to you and yet you sit there and chat on the computer with each other instead of talking then somethings wrong. i am not against technology..i love it..i love to play with stuff. where the heck is my flying car anyway? and of course we definitely cant afford things anyway..yes there is human interaction as far as communication goes and i think to an extent its awesome that we can connect with far away loved ones. but when it gets in the way of the physicalness of human interaction then there is a problem. it gets in the way of actually living life and enjoying your surroundings. videomakers know this all too well, looking through a little screen or eyepiece all the time..take the time to actually look outside that and it looks totally different (such as fireworks). i am sure if there was a study somewhere they would find out that we are not meant to live that way.

                  • 6. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                    Community Member

                    For some reason my mssg didn't get through from email totally....

                     

                    ------------------

                     

                    Hiya Mitch,

                     

                    -----------------
                    You really don’t have a cel phone? That  will really sku Creig’s survey
                    ------------------

                     

                    hehe...I doubt it,  as I'm about the only one I know in a 10 square mile area
                    that doesn't have  one.

                     

                    Oh, definitely , digital is here to stay, as are computer chips in  cars and
                    all that...I'm not in the least saying technology is not happening 
                    correctly.
                    But the speed of the advance and how fast it permeates  everything ( matrix
                    type stuff ) isn't ( IMO) going to happen as fast as  might be expected.
                    Only because of those drawbacks re: catching up with  infrastructure, better
                    quaility systems ( as in your car ) and so  on.

                     

                    I liken it to the movie 2001 .  When that was made it was feasible  that we
                    really WOULD have people in space by then...and it would really BE a  PAN AM
                    spaceship !

                     

                    haha...but things don't always turn out happening  as fast as we think
                    .....there are often setbacks.
                    I suppose a large part  of this is the real economy and built in resistance
                    to change.
                    Oil for  example comes to mind....  and the move to alternatives.

                     

                    Anyway, I love  technology and certainly don't want to appear to be a 
                    naysayer.

                     

                    Thanks , I hadn't realized I came across that way quite so  much...

                     

                    Rod

                    • 7. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                      Mitchell Lopez Community Member

                      Johnbmx4christ,

                       

                      I assure you that my comment that if in 50 years you are not tuned into the “neural net”, has no reflection on you or anyone alive today. It has nothing to do with not having a cel presently.

                       

                      It is just my belief that it could happen. And if it does happen, try to imagine how disadvantaged any one would be if they were not part of a communication system. Not only would they have no instant communication, they would not have the world’s info at their disposal.

                       

                      Yes, if a neural net did happen, it would be totally alien to us in the present. Perhaps currently the idea sounds abhoral. But look how society has changed just recently. Fifty years ago, would there be woman in combat, or a black president? Seventy five years ago, people used to wear a suit to a baseball game. My iPhone has more computing power that the Apollo flight that landed on the moon and that was just about 30 years ago.

                       

                      I’m not advocating a neural net. I’m just predicting. And if people who did not have this net are shunned, those are not my values. I’m guessing those values might exist. Human kind seems to need an underdog to kick around. (Which is a flaw with humans)

                       

                      Society and technology are changing at a speed never seen before. The world is moving like a bullet into a new age whether we like it or not. The days of leaving your house unlocked are over. The days of letting your kids walk to school are over. My kids, (6 & 8) require a computer at home to do their homework as some of their homework is web based. No one would have dreamed that when I was in elementary school.

                       

                      And if 6 year olds today need a home computer just to complete their homework, what idea is too far out in left field?

                       

                      • 8. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                        Bill Hunt CommunityMVP

                        Mitchell,

                         

                        A "neural net" might not be THAT far away, at least at a rudimentary level.

                         

                        There is a proposal, wrapped deeply within a concept that the US Government is working on - childhood obesity, a new "darling." This program is thought to be more powerful and useful, if infants are implanted with transmitters, to measure their caloric intake, and that the data would be streamed to a database for monitoring. If the infant consumes too many calories, over a determined period of time, notification could then be given to the parents, and if it continues above a pre-determined level, there could well be consequences.

                         

                        This suggestion is at a theoretical level now, and is not openly discussed. The few leaks indicate that "no other data" will be gathered, and that the chip will be a one-way transmitter only. The potential capability to gather other data will be "permanently" disabled, but with an operation, could also be activated. Considering the use of medical control telemetry now, I can imagine that it would not take an "operation," but just passing a telemetry transmitter near the area. In time, that "near" might well expand? Imagine implanting that transmission equipment in something like the scanners ar airports, or Federal buildings. What other potential data gathering could go on? Who knows?

                         

                        Currently, we have implanted defibrillator units, that can monitor most cardiac functions, and can act, should the received data not match an encoded pattern/code. These can be adjusted with remote, external telemetry, but right now the recalibration is in the hospital and the control units MUST be placed very close by. However, sensitivity is allowing for a greater distance from the telemetry unit. Once, it had to be pressed into the chest, immediately above the defibrillator, but now can be easily held above the chest, with no direct contact.

                         

                        Yes, it's a great jump from what we have at this moment in time, but advances are being made daily. Right now, it's kind of a one-way street, as the defibrillators only take orders, but some can furnish the full EKG to a remote, non-implanted monitoring unit, so with some models, there is two-way communication.

                         

                        With the driving force being to save all children from obesity, there is a perceived need, and it is a great one. Let your mind wander into the realm of Sci-Fi. Conjure up the image of a child, eating a Twinkie ® and increasing the caloric intake beyond what is prescribed. The data would be transmitted to some agency, and a determination would be made that the intake exceeded the standards. An alarm sounds and the Twinkie-police are dispatched. Fast forward to generation 2. Now, a signal is sent to this chip, and it inflicts a painful jolt. By generation 3, instead of the jolt, it sends impulses to the brain, basically saying "Twinkie is bad!"

                         

                        As electronics become even smaller, imagine a time where much more sophisticated chips are routinely implanted. Then, people would come into certain proximity with each other, and "communicate." Exactly how these communications would take place is probably still in the future. However, we have already reached a point of "pacemakers for the brain." Perhaps at a future time, those communications will be more like what we encounter today. Imagine sort of a "mind meld" scenario, where foreheads are pressed together, and data flows. Now, it would possibly start with just some people having the two-way chips, maybe law enforcement? They could gather data from others, and could issue directions. The communication would not be totally open.

                         

                        Much of this exists in very simple forms today, and research is on-going, with breakthroughs every quarter. Add the impetus for "saving the children," and I think that research will take off. I do not think that we will need to wait 50 years (I ain't got THAT much time... ), and will see early vestiges of this much sooner.

                         

                        Now, in my warped mind, I have flashbacks (double meaning here) of The Manchurian Candidate and The Parallax View. What will the future bring? Maybe great good - or maybe not?

                         

                        Just something to think about,

                         

                        Hunt

                        • 9. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                          John T Smith CommunityMVP

                          Hmm... 2 computers here ('cause I won't let my wife mess up use my computer) connected via DSL that rides on a land line with the minimum possible service... 2 cell phones on a family plan for any long distance

                           

                          Cell phones are capable of text & pictures & internet... but we have those features disabled and use them only to talk when we're away from home

                           

                          DirecTV & Netflix for entertainment (Netflix 'cause DTV's movie channels are more $$ and no more value) with an eclectic mix of what we watch

                           

                          In general, I think communication progress over the last 100 years has been good... although paparazzi feeding the tabloid press is not a good thing... but even there, they only fulfill a demand for gossip that people are willing to buy at a grocery checkout

                           

                          As far as me and people... my day job requires me to interact with people all day long, so by the time I get home I am "peopled out" and am just as likely to let a telephone call go to the answering machine as to pick up and say "hello"

                           

                          Would I have a shunt installed to join a neural net?  No... I want to be sure that my thoughts STAY mine, with no chance that someone else can peek

                           

                          But... that kind of technology would be good for someone like Stephen Hawking

                          • 10. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                            Bill Hunt CommunityMVP
                            Cell phones are capable of text & pictures & internet... but we have those features disabled and use them only to talk when we're away from home

                             

                            John T.,

                             

                            You have validated my very existence. I thought that I was the only person on Earth, who just used a cell phone to have voice communication.

                             

                            Thanks, and now I know that at least two others do the same thing. Like finding survivors after a cataclysm.

                             

                            Hunt

                            • 11. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                              John T Smith CommunityMVP

                              >only person on Earth, who just used a cell phone to have voice

                               

                              My wife gets SO mad when her son or grandson visit (especially the son, since he doesn't visit often) and every 2-3 minutes his cell phone vibrates and he stops interacting "real time" to stare at & return a text message

                               

                              He just doesn't seem to "get" that it is downright RUDE to come to visit, and then ignore whoever is trying to talk to him to read/return a text message

                               

                              Oh well... just another generational difference

                              • 12. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                                Bill Hunt CommunityMVP

                                We were recently attending a awards event. One man at the front table spent the entire event texting and reading, while the honorees were being introduced. He was about my age, so I would have hoped that he had better manners. At least his phone was set to silent, or it would have been unbearable. Obviously, the "things" in his life were much more important than those taking the podium, even though it was after 6:00PM.

                                 

                                Now, wife is on call 24-7, and might receive messages of great importance at any hour, and in any location. Her Blackberry can never be turned OFF. Still, she politely excuses herself, if she needs to read and respond. Comes with the territory. It's how one handles it, that really matters.

                                 

                                Had a family member to brunch the other day. He was asking us to front a new academic endeavor. He spent most of the afternoon texting and reading. I only hope that some of those messages were about someone else providing him with $. In about 3 hours, I think that we had his undivided attention for about 10 mins. Sign of the times, I guess.

                                 

                                Hunt

                                • 13. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                                  John T Smith CommunityMVP

                                  >undivided attention for about 10 mins

                                   

                                  Asking for $$ and could not give you undivided attention?

                                   

                                  Your decision... but I would have said NO!

                                  • 14. Re: Virtuality vs. Reality
                                    jeremy d. Adobe Employee

                                    My virtual interaction with other live humans is almost constant -- but -- I don't Facebook, Twitter, blog, MySpace, whatever. I do not have accounts with any of those.

                                     

                                    We work with people around the world (we're so globally hip, after all), and so meetings are usually by phone and are generally supplemented by a session where we share a virtual meeting room. This is actually quite handy, and the only hitch is in juggling time zones.

                                     

                                    We also take advantage of instant messaging, which occupies the space between email and yelling down the hall.

                                     

                                    There's the ubiquitous email, of course.

                                     

                                    Internal and external fora.

                                     

                                    Texting. My wife loves texting. I got a QWERTY phone just for communicating with her. The home phone is strictly a screening device now, and calls to it usually involve recorded messages from dentists, doctors, and politicians, and there are plenty of hang-ups.

                                     

                                    I try to get my ever-expanding center of gravity out of the chair as much as possible, escaping into the hallways and labs with my leather bound brain, adding and crossing things out as I encounter the various people on my team. It is, sadly, a long walk from California to Seattle, Minnesota, Hamburg... My other live interactions generally include baristas (baristae?) and waiters, butchers and check-out clerks, the mechanic who looks after my German fly-by-wire car, and drivers who get in the way of said car.