Analog Aesthetics

I've decided to add Google ads to my site. Whatever revenue they generate will go towards some type of charity/organisation to support artists of all kinds. I'll probably hold a public vote as to where they should go, so please email me any suggestions.

Going to Trier this weekend; it's almost like returning to my youth. Or like when you return home after being gone so long. Trier was my first exposure to Germany, my first home here, and I don't think I could ever forget it. There will be some wild stories to spread around the Pi-Rho Commune Campfire when I return.

Wired News featured a story today on the new $100 laptops designed to reach "every child on the planet." Two pieces of the interview with Nicholas Negroponte, MIT Media Lab and Wired magazine founder, particularly alarmed me:

1.)

WN: Is the goal literally to make computers available to every child that wants one in the world?

Negroponte: It's every child in the world whether they want one or not. They may not know they want one.

2.)

WN: Is it too early for me to preorder one?

Negroponte: You have nobody to order it from. I cannot tell you -- I even get checks in the mail from people who are ordering them. The fact that it's not going to be on the commercial market is something that really bothers people, because when they see it, a lot of people who see it say ... "I want to be able to buy one." Well, the truth is, if you could buy one it wouldn't be $100, it would be $225. And you'd still buy it.

1.) Children don't really have a choice. It's either keep up with the latest technology or be left behind. Where in this article did we talk about the ethics of technology? Teaching children to use it wisely, not writing viruses? It's also pretty alarming how many students these days copy/paste from the internet for scholarly papers, and professors are having a terrible time catching them for plagerism. In a world where all knowledge is at your fingertips, why bother creating? Why bother writing anything new? Just put your opinion out there (see, I'm guilty too). We want to give these kids the opportunities to learn skills to compete in a world market, so we're taking one element of our culture and making it immediately viable for them - but what happens is that their culture isn't ready for this shiny, bright aspect of American culture, and the bottom falls out. You've got kids with cell phones and internet but poor housing, broken families, inadequate health care, and no real social infrastructure for upward mobility. Learning to program is a good thing; they'll learn some good skills. But you can't expect a laptop alone to save a child's life.

Which brings me to the most alarming aspect of this - why is it more pressing in today's day to provide children with laptops than it was 10 years ago with books? I can't get over the passion with which technology companies want to change the world with their products, telling us all NOW's the time to focus on educating the world's children. What about 10 years ago? Private companies didn't feel it imperative to reach out then. Are they willing to do more than just shove technology in their faces, perhaps also donate large profits to other charitable groups, to actually improve the quality of their lives?

2.) The first thing the consumer thinks after reading this article - not, "oh great! Finally, someone thinking of the children" but instead "when and where can I get one?" We're a nation of consumers through and through. We see a fascinating new gadget and want one; the companies are already forming a market for them, so when they're finally ready, we'll all rush out and buybuybuy. This will be hotter than any iPod. We'll have tons of colors to choose from, lots of cozy covers to personalize our technology. It's pretty pathetic that in a world where everyone's downloading the same music, sharing the same knowledge, buying the same products, there's still a focus on remaining an individual through fashion.

I'll apologize if this sounds more bitter than it was meant to.

Get on the mic!