Internet – 5000 Days
A major focus of Kevin Kelly’s presentation is the idea of the evolution of a single huge machine that we are all part of through the web. Although it is a nice graphical description, I believe the single machine concept is not accurate at all. In actuality it is a huge network of independent machines each with their own hardware/software and operational characteristics. Kevin describes the characteristics of the network and web and then draws an analogy to a single human brain. Again, the analogy is not operational accurate. The single brain lives and sleeps and focuses and concentrates, and dies as a single entity with limited and single faceted input/output capability – when the eyes or ears fail, there is no backup. The network /web is 24/7 because it is highly distributed both in processing and input/output. Kevin could have focused on the strength of the distributed processing model – once the chip in your shoe burns out, it is a simple matter to replace the shoe. Or if Boston is hit by a hurricane, knocking out power for a week, the rest of the country can continue operation uninterrupted. The better analogy would definitely be a cloud surrounding the earth with millions of people/devices independently accessing the cloud.
Kevin makes some interesting observations. He is right in that no one could have imagined or thought that concepts like the Web or Wikipedia could be free or that the world’s information would be all digitalized. I look at Wikipedia and think of the encyclopedia industry which has gone the way of the windup watch industry and the kerosene lamp industry and the newspaper industry and the post office and the telephone – all evolved in ways which would have been characterized as “impossible” or “unimaginable” in their day. It is hard to imagine where we will head form here, and of course that is Kevin’s point.
Kevin is focused on a very idealistic view of computing and does not mention the practical considerations, limitations or the huge social implications, and these could be the topic of many hours of discussion. Kevin mentions not having to remember one’s phone number because they can “Google it”. This goes along with not knowing how to add/subtract because of calculators and spreadsheets, and not knowing how to spell because of spell check and not knowing how to write longhand because no one does anymore. These mental functions used to be part of the brain operational skill which people developed, but are no longer necessary. I do not know the implications of computer functions replacing brain functions and we may not know the true implication of this yet. A frightening characteristic of individual’s independently accessing the cloud (Kevin’s machine) is the social isolation that it brings – families riding in a car for hours without speaking because their eyes are glued to their smart phones. A new implication of smart phones and tablets is that the people and children who have them, always can find something to do on the devices. People and especially children used to get bored when they did not have anything to do and that forced them to do things that they were not necessarily interested in which broadened their horizons tremendously.
Kevin mentions that everything is now digitalized, but does not discuss the changes that have happened as a result. People no longer write letters that record for centuries their thoughts and are the basis for histories. Such interpersonal communications are now in emails which are not carried forward to the next year or new computer. A generation of family pictures can be lost with a hard drive failure. However people can now easily publish their own books and easily take pictures with tier smart phones. So the technical evolution has been far beyond data and processing.
Other practical considerations of the single entity knowing all information are relative to security and privacy – huge concerns. I have not heard the term “Big Brother is watching you.” recently but I can see the term coning into more frequent use. Security and privacy are huge implications for the single machine concept and I think the cloud concept where people can limit their scope is more acceptable and workable. Kevin’s description of a single all encompassing database in his internet “machine” is frightening. I am skeptical of that future image, but maybe technology will provide an answer to address the practical limitations.
The future is indeed unimaginable and although Kevin doesn’t articulate it, how healthy that is!