www.ditl.org

I find myself much in the same boat as Kendall although I attribute that to beginning life during the infancy of computer technology. Computers are nice but not necessary for my life to be happy, my phone is always with me more as a safety thing than a allways connected thing.

Yeah, PC's didn't start to become truly widespread until I was already an adult.

Where as one of my first memories is playing with a computer when I was 3.

I'm in the same range as Kendall. I don't mind the idea of constant access, but the idea of that continuous exposure worries me both for the possibility of generating an addictive syndrome and for the possibility of governmental/corporate abuse.

The big early 1980s home PC boom hit just as I was in school. Ian was in charge of the computer club, and knew more about them than anybody else in the whole school. For me, aged 12, computers were like the most wonderful new toy in all of history. Can't say I've greatly changed my mind ever since. Being offline for me would be like losing a leg.

Sonic Glitch wrote:Is it weird that as a member of this technologically focused generation, I'd prefer not to be as connected as we are, and that the thought of even more connection between us worries me?

You're not the only one. I didn't get online until 1999 or so. I might go through, for lack of a better term, withdrawal from it if the internet failed tomorrow. But I could get by.

RK_Striker_JK_5 wrote:

Sonic Glitch wrote:Is it weird that as a member of this technologically focused generation, I'd prefer not to be as connected as we are, and that the thought of even more connection between us worries me?

You're not the only one. I didn't get online until 1999 or so. I might go through, for lack of a better term, withdrawal from it if the internet failed tomorrow. But I could get by.

I have used it thoroughly since about the same time, but my dad has indoctrinated technology into me, it's part of me, I couldn't live without it.

The blackout was like hell for me, no internet for 3 days...

Nickswitz wrote:...The blackout was like hell for me, no internet for 3 days...

Try 52 days (no computer at all).








Seriously, don't...

There's only one part of Graham's idea I don't think is likely...

We'll have solved world hunger, or will be well on the way towards doing so.

The only reason we have hunger in this world is greed. And I don't think greed can be weeded out of humanity in only 50 years. At least not without something major and destructive happening.

stitch626 wrote:The only reason we have hunger in this world is greed. And I don't think greed can be weeded out of humanity in only 50 years. At least not without something major and destructive happening.

Agreed.

If something "major and destructive" happens, I reckon greed is far more likely to increase than decrease - people will look out for themselves, their families and their friends (not necessarily in that precise order) long before they start giving a shit about the rest of the human race.

Captain Seafort wrote:If something "major and destructive" happens, I reckon greed is far more likely to increase than decrease - people will look out for themselves, their families and their friends (not necessarily in that precise order) long before they start giving a s**t about the rest of the human race.

Exactly. Then everyone dies, at which point greed will have been wiped from humanity...

Hmmm, doesn't work nicely though.

People would still survive. It'd be a hellhole of a planet, but we'd survive nonetheless. We humans are a pretty adaptable breed.

"Hunger is caused by greed" is way too simplistic. I could as easily argue that there's a greed motivation to eliminate hunger. After all, I'm not suggesting that hunger will be solved by charitable giving, but rather by selling food, or the means to produce food, to the hungry people.

A vast swathe of the world lives in essentially the middle ages. Lifting them into the 21st century isn't just some sort of moral obligation on us; if it were I'd happily predict that it will never happen. But doing it will create vast new markets, enormous amounts of new wealth, new resources to exploit, all that good stuff. I'm not suggesting it will be easy, but although human history goes up and down in cycles, the general trend has always been upwards, for thousands of years, and I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that this will continue.

Well, when you put it like that, I agree that it could happen.