Final Exam … Final Thoughts

In Technopoly by Neil Postman, the author is expressing his viewpoint about the negative or downside of technology. Postman admits “that anyone who looks at technology as an either-or development -- that is, either all good or all bad -- is making a mistake.” All technological change is what I call a Faustian bargain. It gives you something, but it also taketh away something” (mrbauld.com). Technopoly was published in 1992 and odespite the fact that is only 17 years ago, it is light years in technological growth. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg who was just named Time Magazine’s Person of The Year was only 8 or 9 when the book came out.

The point it is impossible to call technology good or bad because it is both. What it always does, for me anyway, is amaze. While doing some Google searches on Postman I came across the eulogy given by his son Andy at Neil Postman’s wake. On Wednesday, October 8, 2003, at Parkside Chapel in Forest Hills, Queens, a son remembered his dad in a remarkable tribute that the miracle that is the internet has allowed me to experience.

I was so moved by Andy Postman’s stirring words that I contacted him via Facebook. I think his dad would have approved this usage of technopoly. Andy was obviously deeply impacted by his father. As was I…by my dad’s passing. My dad went to St Peter’s in Jersey City on the GI Bill and graduated with an accounting degree. He secured a job with what is now KPMG prior to graduation. My dad died alone in a horrible little room over a bar. I didn’t know where he was living nor did I care. No son should ever have to say that about his dad. It would impossible to quantify what alcoholism has done to my family. I hope many more sons say about Neil Postman what his son Andy said at his passing than what I have to say about my dad. By the grace of God I am 5 years sober and I spend much of my time speaking at prisons, to convicted drunk drivers, at drug rehabs and recently to the seniors at my old high school in the hopes that they don’t have to endure either what I nor my father endured.

Anyway, I think while there is a downside to technology, the upside usually outweighs it. Because of technology, I was able to relive the eulogy Neil Postman’s son gave for his dad and I was able to share the story about my dad with him. Of course, I am used to things happening very quickly using technology and the fact that Andy Postman has not responded to my message, which I sent to him all of 10 minutes ago… well, its starting to get annoying. Lack of patience, that’s a downside…

Here’s link to the Harvard gazette with a great article about embracing technology in education… I missed it for the paper, but it’s great… http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2010/12/digital-drive/

“What we want to be able to do is make sure the teaching is driving the technology,” said Katie Vale, director of the Academic Technology Group, Faculty of Arts and Sciences (FAS)...I think Neil Postman would agree that this is how technology and education can be combined for the ascent of humanity.

Moving forward, technological growth and innovation will continue to evolve at a dizzying rate and embracing it while at the same time acknowledging the downside is most certainly the way to take on society’s challenges in the coming years. And, as we have seen in this class from the invention of the first computer, to the widespread incorporation of the internet into daily life, young minds will keep on this path resulting in near daily changes to the way we live our lives.

The Facebook Effect III

In my second blog post about Computers: The Life Story of a Technology authors Eric Swedin and David Ferro quoted Steve Jobs of Apple Computer who stated about the Apple I, “We didn’t do three years of research and come up with this concept. What we did was follow our own instincts and construct a computer that was what we wanted” (Swedin and Ferro 96). Now, in the last blog about David Kirkpatrick’s The Facebook Effect it seems that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg shared the same instinct in the creation of his social network. Most people view our economic system as a zero sum game, but Zuckerberg sees a different future. Kirkpatrick writes, "Facebook is changing our notion of community, both at the neighborhood level and the planetary one. It may help us move back toward a kind of intimacy that the ever-quickening pace of modern life has drawn us away from" (332). Zuckerberg understands the universal theory that the more people you help the more you help yourself.

In December 2000, former President Bill Clinton stated in the online magazine Wired:

The more complex societies get and the more complex the networks of interdependence within and beyond community and national borders get, the more people are forced in their own interests to find non-zero-sum solutions. That is, win–win solutions instead of win–lose solutions.... Because we find as our interdependence increases that, on the whole, we do better when other people do better as well — so we have to find ways that we can all win, we have to accommodate each other....  

Zuckerberg understands our complex society. He states, “We want an ecosystem which doesn’t favor our own applications… People can develop on this for free and can do whatever they want. They can build a business inside of Facebook. They can run ads. They can have sponsorships. They can sell things, they can link off to another site” (221). Kirkpatrick tells readers that media theorist Marshall McLuhan is a favorite at the company. He coined the term “global village” (332). Facebook has united over 500 million people. McLuhan’s vision of bringing the whole of society together may be coming to fruition on Facebook.


Large companies run by old white guys… bankers, mortgage brokers, Wall Street financiers… wearing suits have landed the US and global economy in the worst recession in decades. Forward thinking entrepreneurs wearing t-shirts and flip-flops like Mark Zuckerberg will lead the way out of the abyss. His vision is clear on monetization; “The basic idea is that ads should be content. They need to be essentially just organic information that people are producing on the site… it’s part of our identity as people that we like something, but it also has commercial value” (260). The integration organically of economics will be crucial as the new economy evolves.

“We have the most powerful distribution mechanism that’s been created in a generation,” Zuckerberg pronounced (217). He is correct. Human relationships are the most vital form of human capital, and Facebook, in the sets of friend connections, has assembled a powerful network capable of unlimited forms of distribution channels. Whether or not Facebook will take over the world is unknown, but they have fulfilled Zuckerberg’s vision of changing the world. As Kirkpatrick tells readers, “The company is already embedded in the fabric of modern life and culture,” and the company’s social impact continues to broaden (334). And, with a leader like Mark Zuckerberg who possesses the instincts which have propelled Facebook’s meteoric growth, it seems the story of the site’s global impact is just beginning.

Final Exam Post I

In my previous blog posts on Neil Postman’s book Technopoly I expressed my disagreement with the author’s analysis and opinion. And, I welcome the opportunity to expand on those thoughts in the final paper. Criticisms of technology's impact on culture are not uncommon. And, Postman’s “gloom and doom” predictions of the negative impact of technology are totally fear-based and incorrect. Postman states, "Technopoly is a state of culture. It is also a state of mind. It consists in the deification of technology, which means that the culture seeks its authorization in technology, finds its satisfactions in technology, and takes its orders from technology." Technopoly, he argues, flourishes wherever people "believe that information is an unmixed blessing, which through its continued and uncontrolled production and dissemination offers increased freedom, creativity, and peace of mind.... Technopoly flourishes when the defenses against information break down" (p. 71 ). In the final paper assignment, we are asked whether technology contributes to or detracts from the philosophy of University educational missions and to answer the question “Are modern-day college campuses technopolies?” . Postman’s book is written with thinly disguised despair regarding technology. So, the paper topic, the way it is framed, may call for a concession that college campuses are a Technopoly, but, unlike Postman’s view, that is not bad.

In any case, I will be disagreeing with Professor Postman’s opinion that we live in a "totalitarian technocracy" (p. 48). The pseudo-intellectualism that permeates Postman’s book is obvious. The guy basically says us common folk are too stupid to sift through the information that is available because of technology. I personally have a lot more faith in the “average Joe” than does Postman. The idea that technology will render individuals impotent is utterly ridiculous. People seek out information to help them in their daily lives. The fact that the internet, for example, has made information easily accessible is a good thing, not a negative consequence as Postman purports.

One of my last blog posts was about Sal Kahn who is providing a new model for stripped-down free learning. According to You Tube he has the most popular open-course video library on its site, with more views than MIT, Stanford or UC-Berkeley. Private Universities should be fear-mongering, because Kahn has created a site which could put them out of business. And, the number of views his site generates proves that people are pursuing their information wisely. The “defenses against information” (71) which Postman warns readers are the minds of the people. My paper will show that new technologies create new opportunities for empowerment not powerlessness.

The Facebook Effect II

Facebook Chief Privacy Officer Chris Kelly declares about the site, “We’ve been able to build what we think is a safer, more trusted version of the Internet by holding people to the consequences of their actions and requiring them to use their real identity.” (201) Marc Rotenberg executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information takes a slightly different tact stating, “At every turn, it seems Facebook makes it more difficult than necessary to protect user privacy” (201). The problem with Rotenberg’s argument is that people willingly put their information on their Facebook page. Admittedly, once Facebook has the personal data of its users, the site targets ads based on a person’s “likes,” however, if privacy is an issue, don’t join Facebook. As twenty-five-year-old Facebook holdout Shaun Dolan proclaims, “My generation is unbearably narcissistic. When I go out with my friends, there is always a camera present, for the singular goal of posting pictures on Facebook. It’s as if night didn’t happen unless there’s proof of it on Facebook” (206). It seems, at least for the college aged and younger crowd, that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has indeed changed the world.

James Grimmelmann, an associate professor at the New York Law School explains that, “Most of Facebook’s problems are… natural consequences of the ways that people enthusiastically use Facebook” (212). The privacy issues usually revolve not around Facebook company policy, but rather behavior of a person’s accepted friends. The old adage “be careful who your friends are” is particularly appropriate for Facebook culture. In essence, Facebook is the ultimate virtual small-town. Everybody knows everybody else’s business. In the halls of the Facebook offices it’s a concept known as “ultimate transparency” or “radical transparency” (209). And, unlike many other locations on the Internet, we use our real names, thus we must be responsible for what we say. Zuckerberg emphatically states, “You have one identity… Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.” The CEO may be on to something. After revealing it’s news feed feature many users felt their privacy was in jeopardy and 700,000 of them joined a Facebook page started by Northwestern University junior Ben Parr. Zuckerberg did not flinch in the face of the mass criticism. In September 2008, Parr now a technology writer, effectively recanted. “Here’s the major change in the last two years; we are more comfortable sharing our lives and thoughts instantly to thousands of people, close friends and strangers alike. The development of new technology and the rocking of the boat by Zuckerberg has led to this change… News Feed truly launched a revolution that requires us to stand back to appreciate. Privacy has not disappeared, but become even easier to control-what I want to share, I can share with everyone. What I want to keep private stays in my head.”

The forward thinking of an entrepreneur is often light-years ahead of everyone else. When Robin Reed joined Facebook to help in recruiting new talent for the rapidly expanding company she was an experienced businessperson. But, she quickly realized the genius of  Zuckerberg and his Facebook team was their ability to create new ways of doing things. “So I decided to forget what I knew and have a beginner’s mind,” Reed concluded. The rest of the world might do well to take head of this advice.

The Facebook Effect I

In David Kirkpatrick’s The Facebook Effect facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg states, “We’re going to change the world.” (Kirkpatrick 43) And, with nearly 600 million users worldwide, it seems the social networking site already has changed the way people make “friends” and interact. In just 6 short years, Zuckerberg has transformed a Harvard dorm room novelty into an international phenomenon with no signs of slowing down. Readers of this book learn both the brilliance and the missteps of the world’s youngest billionaire. Zuckerberg and Sean Parker showed at the Sequoia capital offices in their pajamas to play a joke on the straight-laced venture capitalist firm. The young men made a fictitious business presentation having no intent on ever taking Sequoia’s investment. They did it merely to get back at the company for wronging Parker in his previous endeavor. “I assume we really offended them and now I feel really bad about that because they are serious people trying to do good stuff and we wasted their time. It’s not a story I’m very proud of” states the now maturing Zuckerberg (Kirkpatrick 105).

On Zuckerberg’s own Facebook page he has the following quote:

 "Make things as simple as possible but no simpler."- Albert Einstein

His business strategy for the growth of the social network seems to follow Mr. Einstein’s wise, but not easy plan. "Thefacebook had no content of its own. It was merely a piece of software-a platform for content created by its users."(Kirkpatrick 31)  Zuckerberg appears to run the company by following the desires of the folks on the site. In other words, it is “user generated.” And, as the author states "Their site was about people; Google was about data," (Kirkpatrick 54). Executives from the internet giant Google seemed to realize very early days of  Facebook that the site was a more than a fad and showed up at the rental house the initial team worked out of to see if Google could work with or maybe buy the young company. Zuckerberg, despite his youth and inexperience never considered selling his project. “Despite his baby face and general shyness, Zuckerberg was firmly and undisputedly in charge” readers are told (Kirkpatrick 51) 

"Their site was about people; Google was about data," (Kirkpatrick 54).

Sean Parker, who was an original founder of Napster played a “major-if controversial- character in the Facebook story (Kirkpatrick 46). Not only did Parker have a lot of internet experience, but he also had venture capital contacts. Zuckerberg and he met briefly at a dinner in New York and would soon live together in a rented house in Palo Alto. Shortly after moving into the house, Parker was the company president. This would lead to the first major investor in Facebook of $500,000 by PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel. Thiel being an entrepreneur himself said, “I was comfortable with them pursuing their original vision” and in one of the greatest understatements of all time added, “I thought it was going to be a pretty safe investment” (Kirkpatrick 89).

The first section of Kirkpatrick’s book provides readers with a very open and interesting story of the journey this amazing young company and it’s brilliant CEO have endeavored upon to “change the world.” Investor Thiel gave the minimalist Zuckerberg some advice that Einstein would appreciated… “just don’t fuck it up” (Kirkpatrick 89). It seems the young billionaire took that wise advice to heart.

Bill Gates' favorite teacher

Goodbye to college debt? ... Hello to Sal Kahn and Online Education...

khanacademy.org

Bill Gates says, Sal Kahn “is amazing," and, he continued, "It is awesome how much he has done with very little in the way of resources." A Harvard MBA and former hedge fund manager, Kahn may be changing the landscape of education for future generations for whom college may become an over-priced luxury item. Kahn began his modest endeavor like many entrepreneurs, accidentally. His seventh grader cousin, Nadia, was having trouble in math class converting kilograms. Kahn, in addition to his Harvard MBA also holds three degrees from MIT: a BS in math and a BS and a master’s in electrical engineering and computer science. According to their Facebook page, Kahn Academy is: A not-for-profit organization with the mission of providing a world class education, for free, to anyone, anywhere.

The video tutorial collection, all recorded by Kahn (his face never appears) and accompanied by his step-by step diagrams on an electronic blackboard cover everything from basic arithmetic to calculus, chemistry, physics, and finance and also has a web-app that dynamically generates problems for practice. Gates and his 11-year-old son Rory began soaking up videos, from algebra to biology this past spring after learning about Kahn from a colleague at his small think tank, bgC3.

Kahn’s library of over 1800 videos on YouTube is now seen an average of over 70,000 times a day- That is nearly double the student body at Harvard and Stanford combined. Kahn says he has reached about 200,000 students…every month! And he states, “There’s no reason it shouldn’t be 20 million.” He currently does not monetize the operation, relying on donations. The largest of which came from Ann and John Doer a Silicon Valley venture capitalist. When a PayPal donation for $10,000 appeared on Kahn’s site, Kahn e-mailed the donor because the normal donation is $100 and fund it was Ann Doer. She was suggested they meet and was shocked to find out that her donation had been the largest the “academy” has ever received. After returning home from their lunch, Kahn found a message from Doer saying there is $100,000 in the mail.

Of course, mainstream education is skeptical. “It’s a solid supplemental resource, particularly for motivated students,” says Jeffrey Leeds, president of Leeds Equity Partners, the largest U.S. private equity firm specializing in for-profit education. “But it’s not an academy—it’s more of a library,” Leeds predictably states.

The Kahn Academy Company Overview:

A not-for-profit organization with the mission of providing a world class education, for free, to anyone, anywhere. We are most known for our library of over 1000 videos on YouTube (all recorded by Sal Khan), but we intend to eventually provide a fully featured, free virtual school covering all major subjects.

With the growing popularity of Kahn Academy, overpriced colleges may become a thing of the past…

Kahn was recently featured by ABC news as their person of the week…

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/person-week-dad-answer-thousands-dad-math-tips-equations-viral-video-helping-thousands-students-david-muir-12252450

Sakai…Calculators…Math…Education… Technology

Having returned to Rutgers after 18 years to complete my undergrad degree has been an amazing and enlightening experience. Not knowing how much damage I had done to my brain during the previous two decades of substance abuse, I was scared to death. The incorporation of technology into the educational process was the obvious difference from my last time at Rutgers. Technology and the fact that I was actually in a classroom were both big differences. Soon after arriving at my first class in 18 years… 10 minutes late—no notebook---no parking permit...(but obviously with my lingering bad habits) I was introduced to the word “sakai.” I was expecting to be handed a syllabus and was told that it was located, along with other class materials at some mysterious location on the internet called “sakai.” The professor then proceeded to use this peculiar word about a dozen times during the shortened first class period. I was quite sure I would never make it.

For me, the good old days were not so good, so embracing change has become a way of life for me. And, after the fear subsided and I realized that I had not killed all of my brain cells, I was able to figure out this sakai thing. I really love technology, not really because of “APP’s” or new cell phones, but because there is no economic recession on the internet. I am dialed into new ideas and ways of doing things. I think we are in the middle of a revolution economically and folks who embrace change will prosper.

Anyway, to remind me how out of touch I am… or how old? …I took a math class this summer. Actually, I had to take a math class because I got a “D” in calculus sometime in the ‘80’s… the second half of the 80’s and the entire 90’s are a little blurry… and I showed up with a calculator that was a freebie from a bank. All my “peers” has these expensive engineering calculators. These contraptions looked more imposing than the math itself. When I last took a math class, we actually “worked out” equations on paper. Since it was summer session, it met 4 times weekly and moved very quickly. I had not opened a math book in over 20 years and what looked liked pedestrian math, proved to be a bit more because of the speed and my “lay-off.” However, with some help from an 18 year-old classmate who was actually taking his first ever college class, I was able to endure. School and live are so much easier when I show up and ask for help when needed…who knew?

At the end of this semester, I will have only 2 classes remaining… But having overcome Sakai, the “calculator” and several other much larger obstacles, my ability to embrace change is what makes the future look so bright…

Midterm Assignment

I really don’t like to agree with college professors as a rule, but it would be impossible to regard Wikipedia as a scholarly source. However, to ban it as a reference like Middlebury College is so close-minded and to me college is about being open-minded to possibilities not elitist about from where information emanated. To cite it as a source and not check the source would be like hearing something from Keith Olbermann and accepting it as truth. Some of it is probably true, but more research is required. The point, it can’t be cited as a source, but it is a great starting point. It should be used as a learning tool and not a research source…which is more than I can say about Olbermann. As our class presentations made clear, some web links will no longer exist and this alone makes it not entirely reliable as a source. Also, because the content on Wikipedia is largely acquired from anonymous posts it can contain a great deal of bias.

It seems to me, technology such as Wikipedia, Facebook and Twitter should be embraced by educators and the educational system to invite open, informal and liberal communication between teachers and students. Instead of technology being classified as …good-bad or downside-upside… it should be seen as a tool in the building of a life-long educational process. Just because Wikipedia is more informal than a scholarly journal does not mean it has no merit in the classroom. Sometimes colleges get so caught up in their scholarly pursuits that they seem to lose touch with what is going on in the “real world.” In the context of American culture, maybe thinking more about how they are cavalierly raising tuition prices and less about Wikipedia as a way to maintain credibility would be time better spent.

And, on the subject of credibility, what was apparent during the research of the Scientology page was that scholarly research can be questioned as well. Sociology Professor Anson Shupe from Indiana StateUniversity-Purdue University called Professor Stephen Kent from the University of Alberta a “bozo” in an email he sent to me and questioned Kent’ credibility both as a researcher and an expert on Scientology. Kent is described on the Wikipedia page as an expert and has been cited in many peer-reviewed scholarly journals but Shupe was clearly questioning his methods of research. When I looked further into Kent’s and Shupe’s backgrounds, it seems both have questionable methodologies in their research of Scientology. It appeared that Kent only spoke to ex-Scientologists in his research and Shupe, in his research of the controversy between Scientology and the Cult Awareness Network, read only the depositions that the prosecuting lawyer and Scientologist Kendrick Moxon had selected for him. It appears that students who do due diligence in their research may find the need to not only check the facts on Wikipedia pages, but those in peer-reviewed journals by college professors as well…

Made To Break III

Giles Slade outlines the end of the world due to e-waste quite nicely in the first 270 or so pages in Made to Break. On page 277 he finally admits, “The popularity of papers addressing Life Cycle Assessments and Extended Product Responsibility may indicate that the electronics industry is now undergoing positive change from within. Other indications of this change are the cost-free take-back, reuse, and recycling programs now in place at most major American electronics manufacturers, including Hewlett Packard and Dell.” (Slade 277) The author is describing the cycle of change that seems to always occur in the consumer world.

In 1859, William Jevons, then England’s greatest economist, was knighted by the queen of England for writing The Coal Question, which predicted that the British Empire would collapse by 1900 because it would run out of coal. He was correct, they did run out of coal. But, by that time they had switched to petroleum. The first oil well was drilled in Pennsylvania that year. My point is that yes e-waste is a problem… And, yes we will adapt. History has proven the naysayers wrong time and again.

To his credit, Slade does not engage in finger-pointing. He simply adapts a very pragmatic approach to a problem of e-waste.  He states, “During the next few years, the overwhelming problem of waste of all kinds will, I believe, compel American manufacturers to modify industrial practices that feed upon throwaway ethic. The golden age of obsolescence-the heyday of nylons, tailfins, and transistor radios-will go the way of the buffalo. Whatever comes in its place will depend on the joint effort of informed consumers and responsive manufacturers, who will, I believe, see the benefits of genuinely serving their customers interests through green design.” (Slade 281)

Slade is correct. Number one, the market is always adjusting. Just as the consumer got tired of Cadillac’s and bought longer-lasting and more economical VW’s, so it will adjust to the crazy technological and fashion obsolescence the author discusses in Chapter 9 and slow down on the constant cell phone purchasing. (Slade 267) And, number two entrepreneurial minds will grasp the importance and lucrative business opportunities in recycling will emerge. So, the author concludes that only by a cultural change driven by government, consumers and manufacturers will a resolution be reached.

To describe our culture of consumerism, the author invokes sociologist Colin Campbell who describes the “mystery” of modern consumption itself- “it’s character as an activity which involves an apparently endless pursuit of wants, the most characteristic feature of modern consumption being this insatiability.” (Slade 265) Slade combines Campbell’s description with the social cascade effect, which describes the sudden popularity of certain things like eateries, clothes or now, phones. It would seem to me that if society can change suddenly in one direction, it can go in the opposite direction. Green will be cool someday. Using “old-school” electronics will be hip and the world will not come to an end. Slade’s book does make the reader examine his or her own consumption diet and in this the book delivers a valuable message.

Overcoming “Crackberry” at the Internet Addiction Recover Center…

In an article in the Seattle Times March 14, 2010 reporter Tyrone Beason informs readers that the Blackberry has jokingly been dubbed “Crackberry” by owners who can’t seem to put it away even in social settings. According to a report from the University of California at San Diego, the average American consumes a brain-exploding 34 gigabytes of content and either sees or hears 100,000 words each day, from the Web to TV to text messages. The question the reporter seems to be asking his readers is, are we addicted?

An internet recovery program in Falls City Washington seems to indicate some individuals are in technological crisis. reStart cofounders Hilarie Cash and Cossette Rae treat clients who have lost jobs, relationships and homes because of their Internet addiction. The center is the first in the nation aimed solely at helping a new category of addict that researchers are still attempting to understand. By last February 2010, 8 people had gone through the entire program. http://www.netaddictionrecovery.com/

Some of the Internet addicts who show up here are so far gone that simple experiences such as working in a group and chatting across the dinner table have become foreign to them. They need to be shown not just the emotional rewards of physical activities but the basic lessons of human interaction. They must be brought back into the world.

As a species, humans are vulnerable to any outside stimuli that changes the way we feel. One of our nation’s biggest concerns today is obesity. As a staunch Libertarian, I am both a defender and believer in humans ability to judge for themselves and get and receive help from others if need be. In other words, even though there is an obesity problem, I don’t believe the government should outlaw cheeseburgers. I feel the same way about obesity and Internet addiction. I believe education is always the best medicine. And, if we need help we can go to rehab.

reStart is a program with 12-Step model of recovery….

 12 Steps and Principles for

Internet and Technology Addiction Anonymous

These twelve steps and principles are guidelines for members of Internet and Technology Addiction Anonymous (ITAA) to live by. We can recognize and overcome living issues by using the twelve steps and/or principles. If you choose to embrace these steps and principles into your life, it will get better, no matter what you are having a problem with.

1.      HONESTY: Admit that you, or yourself, are powerless to overcome your addictions and that your life has become unmanageable.

2.      HOPE: Come to believe that the power greater than ourselves can restore you to health.

3.      TRUST: Decide to turn your will and your life over to the care of your higher power as you understand it.

4.      TRUTH: Make a searching and fearless written moral inventory of yourself.

5.      INTEGRITY: Admit to yourself, to a higher power, and another human being the exact nature of your wrongs.

6.      CHANGE OF HEART: Become entirely ready to have a higher power remove all your character defects.

7.      HUMILITY: Humbly ask a higher power to remove your shortcomings.

8.      BROTHERLY LOVE: Make a written list of all persons you have harmed and become willing to make restitution to them.

9.      RESTITUTION AND RECONCILIATION: Wherever possible, make direct restitution to all persons you have harmed, except when to do so would injure them or others.

10.  ACCOUNTABILITY: Continue to take personal inventory, and when you are wrong promptly admit it.

11.  PERSEVERANCE: Listen (and continue to listen) to your heart. Earnestly seek to understand your higher power, whatever that may be on any given day. Continue to give yourself credit for earnest effort, however imperfect.

12.  SERVICE AND SPIRITUALITY: Having had a spiritual awakening as a result of these steps, share this message with others who excessively use technology and practice these principles in all you do.

Note: The Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous have been adapted for Internet Addiction. Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc. ("A.A.W.S."). A.A. is not affiliated with Internet Addiction Anonymous as A.A. is a program of recovery from alcoholism only.

Michael Wesch and YouTube… Are we Digitally Disconnecting or Connecting?

After viewing Michael Wesch’s talk at the Library of Congress on the effects of social media and digital technology on global society it got me thinking about what “digital disconnect” means in 2010. Wesch, who is a professor of cultural anthropology at Kansas State University, examines human uses of technology. His talk to the Library of Congress focused on the phenomenon of YouTube, and the community of people using it. The talk illustrated the power of the internet to transfer both information and feelings. For example Wesch tells the story of a chubby kid dancing alone in his suburban New Jersey bedroom who created a video which created a world-wide dance frenzy. This “silly” video has been viewed an estimated 600 million times. Ten years ago “digital disconnect” seemed to mean that kids in school were ahead of their teachers in using technology to do homework. Today, whether we are disconnecting or actually connecting by the millions is open to question.

The global social network Facebook now has about 600 million members. So, if we are spending hour upon hour connecting with others and making new “friends” online (while sitting home alone) are we connecting or disconnecting? As Wesch states, “YouTube is a celebration of new forms of community… the types of community we have never really seen before … global connections transcending space and time… and in fact they can actually invent new ways of connecting with each other and  it’s getting easier and easier to do.” Wesch concludes that the web is about linking people together and, we are going to have to rethink some things… even love.” The question, if we are connecting or disconnecting may have to be reevaluated as well.

“As media has changed, human relations have changed” proclaims Wesch. And, in 2010 technology is moving at lightening speed and the dynamic of human relationships appear to be changing as well. Communities are now being built via the internet. Facebook and YouTube are examples of virtual communities. In 1993 Howard Rheingold wrote a book called The Virtual Community. Rheingold may have been the first citizen of the internet community. In the book, he describes a population that is as real as any physical community. People meet, talk, seek information and even fall in love. As Wesch says about YouTube, what we see here is “people connecting very, very deeply.”

Technology can be what we make of it. We can continually focus on the “downside” of the virtual community. But, we can do that with the physical community. There was loneliness, isolation and negative human relations long before the internet. In my mind, technology can and will be embraced to overcome these and many other difficulties associated with everyday living… and, bring us closer as a global community.

Made To Break- II

It’s all about cycles… One day a guy wants to eat duck, the next day lobster. The bigger picture of American Consumption is no different. Herbert Marshall McLuhan described “all of human history as a process of change in which successive media technologies rendered preceding modes of human consciousness obsolete.” (Slade 182) And, he continues “if a technology is introduced either from within or from without a culture, and if it gives new stress or ascendancy to one or another of our senses, the ratio among all our senses is altered. We no longer feel the same, nor do our eyes and ears and senses remain the same.” (Slade 183) There it is… People like to feel good!


At one point during the timeline in the auto industry, what made people feel good was they liked to drive a Cadillac. Then, in the 1960’s, what made them feel good was not driving a Cadillac. Theodore Levitt described Henry Ford as the “most brilliant and most senseless marketer in American history.” (Slade 181) The point is… people like to feel good, and they get bored with what makes them feel good. Now, we can complicate that by saying that ‘death-dating” is wrong or evil or not environmentally sensitive. But think about, nobody says anything until the cycle is in full swing… and then they get a conscious.


In the 1960’s the Volkswagen gained popularity because it was “utterly dependable and trouble free.” (Slade 173) VW ran an advertising campaign illustrating that they did not make “superficial model changes” (Slade 174) which led to more sales. In the previous decades making superficial changes sold more cars. Interestingly enough, however, apparently it was ok for men to change their wardrobes more often. At the same time counterculture was telling Americans it was wrong to purchase cars with superficial changes, it was saying it was cool to buy more clothes. Esquire columnist George Frazier called it “The Peacock Revolution.” (Slade 178) Colors and different changes became acts of rebellion in the clothing in this industry while buying a non-superficial VW was also an act of rebellion. Madison Avenue caught on, and engaged in “cycle after cycle of rebellion and transgression, marketing new goods, new fads, new symbolic gestures of defiance” (Slade 179).


Slade attempts to say that the VW ad campaigns were the impetus for change because he embraces the “anti- death-dating” liberal mind-set. However, what he fails to understand or admit is the utter hypocrisy of this thinking. Lets protest by buying Volkwagens because they last longer, but lets throw our perfectly good clothes away to make a fashion statement. The very act of changing one’s style of clothing is an embracing of the death-dating one is supposedly defying. People were trying to feel good long before the 1960's and the emergence of the VW. Innovation makes people feel good, and the downside of innovation makes people feel bad... 


It’s all about cycles.

The Social Network...

The Social Network is a film about the founding of Facebook by Harvard dropout Mark Zuckerberg. Zuckerberg founded the website while a sophomore at Harvard in 2004 and within less than seven years the social networking website has 550 million users. Zuckerberg, played by Jesse Eisenberg comes across as a bit arrogant, an anti-social nerd and very angry. It’s hard to tell how angry actually, because the acting is not that great. If I was not interested in the details of Facebook’s origins, I might have walked out. The film is based on the book “The Accidental Billionaires” by Ben Mezrich, who got most of his information from co-founder, Eduardo Saverin. Zuckerberg comes across as a genius computer programmer who wants to create “something cool.” At first, he is not motivated by money. In the movie when Facebook had reached 4,000 users, Saverin, Zuckerberg’s Harvard classmate, argued that it was time to monetize the website by selling advertising on it. Zuckerberg disagreed, saying: “Facebook is cool. If we start installing pop-ups for Mountain Dew it’s not gonna be cool.”

　
The movie clearly shows that Zuckerberg got the idea for Facebook after listening to the Winklevoss twins, also Harvard classmates, who discuss their social networking site called Harvard Connection. But Zuckerberg argues persuasively in the movie that the basic idea was his. Competitors should be given the freedom to see who can best turn an idea into a marketable product. The brothers who would later row in the Olympics sued Zuckerberg for allegedly stealing their idea. They "settled" in 2008 for $65 million.

　
On a business trip to New York City, Saverin and Zuckerberg set up a restaurant meeting with Sean Parker the 20-something founder of both Napster. Up to this point in the movie, Zuckerberg was usually glum. But he suddenly his face lit up in a huge smile once Parker started talking. Zuckerberg appreciated Parker and they both were entrepreneurial at heart. Zuckerberg was mesmerized by Parker’s vision of Facebook’s future he told him, “A million dollars isn’t cool. You know what is cool? A billion dollars.” Later, at a San Francisco night club, Parker tells Zuckerberg the story of the founder of Victoria’s Secret who sold the company to Limited Brands for $4 million only to regret it two years later when the company was valued at $500 million. According to Parker, the founder was so distraught at selling too early that he jumped to his death off the Golden Gate Bridge. The lesson for Zuckerberg was simple, be patient and you’ll maximize the value of the business.


In the end… great story, so-so acting. I loved watching the entrepreneurial vision of Parker and Zuckerburg combined and the twists and turns of the companies development, all played out within the framework of the Winklevoss and Saverin lawsuits. My final thought… wait for the Red Box release…

Billionaire Entrepreneur and Financier of Politically Conservative Activist Rutgers Grad James O’Keefe wants to give kids $100,000 to Drop Out of College

PayPal Founder and early Facebook investor Billionaire Peter Thiel a technology entrepreneur who has been widely recognized by the World Economic Forum (which honored Peter as a Young Global Leader) and by BusinessWeek, which named him one of the 25 most influential people on the web has announced a unique program for young people in the changing economy. Last month Thiel invited controversy by announcing the Thiel Fellowship, a program offering young entrepreneurs $100,000 to drop out of college and launch high-tech start-ups. In a press release Thiel said some of the innovations that changed the world the most were created by college dropouts who had “ideas that couldn’t wait until graduation.” Thiel, who has made billions with PayPal, Facebook and the Clarium hedge fund, cites such examples as Elon Musk who dropped out of graduate school to start Zip2, which he sold to Compaq for $307 million. Thiel is a billionaire as a result of early Facebook investments and being the co-founder of PayPal. He is calling this his "20 under 20" program, and he thinks that by doing so he is encouraging young adults to not limit themselves with inside the box thinking.

Thiel when asked about his political beliefs in a 2006 interview, stated, "Well, I was pretty libertarian when I started [in business]. I'm ‘way’ libertarian now." Theil’s offer has provoked different reactions. Higher education, directly confronted by the Thiel Fellowship, has also weighed in. Dr. Jeff Cornwall at Belmont University posted an invitation for Thiel to come visit Belmont’s programs for experimental learning. Cornwall wrote that he would introduce Thiel to some student and alumni entrepreneurs who came back to school after they dropped out when they realized what they were missing. On the other hand, Nick Saint at Business Insider said “it’s ridiculous to suggest that most people who go to college do so from the love of knowledge for its own sake.”
　
Thiel gets at the heart of the jobs issue and the sky rocketing costs of a college education with his Fellowship. Universities continue to cavalierly raise tuition prices in spite of the down economic time. After graduating, students are saddled with thousands of dollars in debt and no jobs. Thiel’s offer is bound to inspire some students who are probably already questioning their future economic situations to look in a different direction.
　
“There are a lot of things people learn in school, but they don’t learn much about entrepreneurship. We think that actually trying to encourage this is good” the billionaire stated. He believes there is more value for the entrepreneur to launch a tech or scientific idea immediately that to wait the full four years of college or eight years of grad school…
　
And, in 2010, working for yourself seems a safer bet than going to college, getting oneself into debt and not finding a job…Thiel may be on to something
　
Thiel received a BA in Philosophy from Stanford University and a JD from Stanford Law School.

Made to Break ...

　
In Made to Break, Giles Slade illuminates the dizzying shift America has made to a throw-away society. The author tells us that, “Not only did we invent disposable products, ranging from diapers to cameras to contact lenses, but we invented the very concept of disposability itself, as a necessary precursor to our rejection of tradition and our promotion of progress and change” (Slade 4) Made to Break is a history of twentieth-century technology in terms of obsolescence. Americans love new stuff… it’s that simple. We like cool phones, cars, clothes… any cool stuff. The problem, Slade tells us is that the old (or not so old) stuff is piling up. However, it’s really not the consumers fault. Planned obsolescence is defined as an “assortment of techniques used to artificially limit the durability of a manufactured good in order to stimulate repetitive consumption” (Slade 5).


Dating back to the auto industry manufacturers realized that consumers would trade up for style. Henry Ford made his Model T automobile to last many years after purchasing it. General Motors later discovered that car buyers would make choices on fashion as well… This revelation changed the way American business was done. Companies profit more when products have shorter shelf lives - because they sell more products that way. This is no conspiracy theory but, rather, simple economics. Henry Ford’s vision of a classless American transportation device would become a “social stratifier” (Slade 41)


As we move forward into a new millennium, the author asks readers a disturbing question about the future of a society based on consumption. The author calls it “product addiction” (Slade 51) Addicts base how they feel on external stimuli, and Americans judge themselves by the newest or nicest car, phone, computer or bestseller. And, manufacturers understand this, they supply the “drug” to provide the temporary “high.” The problem... where to put the not so old stuff...


Personally, I have faith in the “process.” I believe Americans in the future will come up with a way to recycle the “old stuff.” As I have stated in earlier posts predictions of our societies demise always arise, and we overcome, because the human mind is an unlimited resource. Usually some self-appointed intellectuals blow some “hot air” when the economy is in a downtown. Slade reminds us, “Most of the utopian plans-technocratic or otherwise- that emerged during that troubled year of 1932 spoke of the need for a body of experts who would restructure society so as to achieve a balance between supply and demand“ (Slade 71). These “experts” are always, always, always intellectuals from some college campus. Then, things get better, and they go back to teaching their unproven theory to 20 year olds.


Pain is a great motivator, and we overcome and innovate… History has proven that and there is no reason to think any differently now…

Life Lessons From Wikipedia… Dalby Part 2

I am sorry, but I had to do it… For all the students at Middlebury College…

The following is taken from the “Wikipedia” entry at Wikipedia.org …

-The Wikipedia community has developed many policys and guidelines to improve the encyclopedia; however, it is not a formal requirement to be familiar with them before contributing.

-What is contributed is more important than the expertise or qualifications of the contributor.

As a contributor using the pseudonym “The Cunctator explains on his user page: To be a good Wikipedian, be respectful, overly combative, self-critical, vulnerable, hortatory, ambitious and analytical. Above all, to be a good Wikipedian, edit and create entries.(Dalby 121)

After finishing Andrew Dalby’s book, I think what I like most about Wikipedia is the fact that there is no hierarchy. The Cuncatator, which means the ‘delayer,’ understands that the human condition is one long extended process. The principles which Wikipedians practice to ensure the their community lives on are based on progress, not perfection. And, as Dalby explained to his readers, the community good is larger than any one person. When co-founder Larry Sanger tried to enforce, what he believed, was his authority by stating on a Wikipedia talk page that: “When push comes to shove, if a decision must be made and there’s a serious controversy, and I’m partaking of it, sorry, but I’ll get my way. And you’ll be expected to hold your tongue after that.”(Dalby 122) The co-founder, after some communal debate, was informed that his employer could no longer afford his salary. Wikipedia, as a group, apparently has a conscience, and it won over Sanger’s ego.


Dalby, who is obviously a passionate supporter of Wikipedia, does not hesitate to outline the downside of Wikipedia which according to their website is "written collaboratively by volunteers around the world" who write without pay. He talks about the commercial spam and vandalism (purposeful misinformation) on the site as problems which undermine the  credibility of Wikipedia as a reliable news source. But, as the author states, “vandalism and spam are not the fault of the servers, ot the site itself, or the software. They are our fault as human beings. We’re given access to the site, we’re bored and stupid and we write childish and unpleasant things and leave a mess; we’re greedy and we add links that we think will bring us money. (Dalby 212) Dalby might as well be talking about the population in general, not just Wikipedia." By this I mean, usually it's a small minority who step out of line and cause trouble for the larger population. Most folks on Wikipedia play by the rules, and the few that don't cause most of the trouble.

 “The officially openly-stated view of Wikipedia is that it’s a work in progress. It isn’t a reliable source and shouldn’t be cited as if it were.” (Dalby 191) However, the author concludes his book by summarizing the site’s cooperation with the global media in the kidnapping of New York Times reporter David Rohde. Wikipedia showed it’s maturity level by keeping any facts about the incident off it’s site until after the reporter had escaped and was safe. (Dalby 223-225) It seems the site and the community may be growing up. And with 3,445,161 articles, 21,896,032 pages in total, 420,535,401 edits, 852,833 uploaded files and 13,249,643 registered users, Wikipedia is probably here to stay.


PS The above statistics were taken from the Wikipedia site… so be careful, they may unreliable…(Another win for the students at Middlebury!)

Wikipedia...

As discussed in our first “Technology and Culture” class, the internet is sometimes similar to the “wild west.“ A Harvard professor who included nine Wikipedia articles for his Jewish history class stated it best by saying, “Wikipedia represents all that is great and all that is dangerous about the Internet. It is incredibly powerful and readily available, and yet can mislead the unwary and spread disinformation.”(Dalby 104) In Technopoly, Neil Postman proclaims, “Information has become a form of garbage, not only incapable of answering the most fundamental human questions but barely useful in providing coherent direction to the solution of even mundane problems.” (Postman 69) I don’t know this for a fact- maybe I’ll start a Wikipedia page about it- but I get the notion that Professor Postman probably does not have “warm and fuzzy” thoughts and feelings for Wikipedia. A journalist from the venerable New York Times referred to Wikipedia as an “intellectual lunatic asylum.” (Dalby 62) Personally, I like a little insanity.

For the same reasons that many intellectuals would not embrace Wikipedia, including Middlebury College in Vermont which outlawed references to Wikipedia in student papers, (Dalby 105) are the same reasons Wikipedia is so appealing to me. Wikipedians, especially people who contribute to the online encyclopedia regularly, seem like such a fun bunch of folks. How can you not like someone who calls themselves “Cereales Killer” and the community in which such creative pen names are the norm?


I find disorganized, self policing groups like the “people who wiki” extremely fascinating. They understand that their survival and that of Wikipedia is based on their abiding by a set of rules and traditions. In a mass collaboration such as this, one would think that volatile topics like political allegiances would produce tense exchanges, but as Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Whales explained, “It turns out it’s actually the party of the thoughtful and reasonable people and the party of the jerks. And those aren’t left or right, they can come from all sides.” (Dalby 111) Historian Roy Rosenzweig said that “Wikipedians say they want to describe disputes rather than to take sides in them, to characterize differing positions fairly.” (Dalby 78) And this is because the common welfare of the group comes first in this community. They know that close-minded folks like those at Middlebury College will have evidence to fuel their ignorance if Wiki entries are inaccurate and the only way to continue to grow is to put the good of Wikipedia first and ego second. Dalby details a couple of misinformation mishaps in the first half of the book, but in comparison to number of articles on Wikipedia, they are minimal.


As my favorite French admin Cereales Killer concluded, “… and that’s why Wikipedia corresponds to my vision of the sharing of knowledge, the common ownership of gray matter, with no partisanship, for the good of all… I see Wikipedia as a great way to share knowledge in a completely disinterested way. (Dalby 79) I think Thomas Jefferson would agree with Cereales Killer!!


"Information is the currency of democracy."

Thomas Jefferson
American 3rd US President (1801-09). Author of the Declaration of Independence. 1762-1826

Solo Presentation... and an unexpected email validation

Go to school... get a job... retire with a gold watch... In 1950, that may have been a reality. In 2010, in the current and future economy, that formula is leaving and will leave many folks angry, confused and unemployed. And when questioned about an alternate income stream they shrug their shoulders and roll their eyes. The reality is that safe… has become the new risky. Most people in the workplace are seeking safety and security and being an employee has become a precarious existence. And people who insist on utilizing an outdated income producing model like the traditional workplace are about to be placed on the endangered species list. The truth is the current workplace is broken and it has been for a long time. Working for someone else- being dependent on someone else for a paycheck- has become a recipe for personal economic disaster.

The question for the average person then is, “What is a viable Plan B? The network marketing business model is a possible answer. Once viewed in a negative light, direct sales or network marketing has become the wealth creation vehicle of the new millennium. Economist Paul Zane Pilzer, in his new book The Next Millionaires explains how old models of opportunity in physical distribution have given way to new opportunities in intellectual distribution, defined as teaching people about products or services that they didn't even know exist.

This Just in… I just received an email (Oct. 12^th) from the Rutgers Bookstore which is owned by Barnes and Noble that Avon will be doing a presentation of their products and business opportunity at 40 different college bookstores (including Rutgers) around the country. And, when clicking on the link in the email, a Facebook page “pops up.“ The incorporation of technology into the changing culture is under way. It was only a matter of time before a network marketing company realized there are no jobs in the private sector and started to recruit hard at college campus locations. I actually have been telling my friends this for months. Avon will be the first of many direct-sales companies bringing their opportunity to college campuses. Why wouldn’t they? There are no jobs.
　
It’s funny because I was about to describe the lukewarm response that the class gave to the industry. And the point is that people are resistant to change. Those who embrace change in this economy will leave those holding on to the traditional work model behind. It’s happening right now. The gap between the “have’s and the “have-nots” will keep increasing because those who cling to the go to college-get a job plan will find themselves deeply in debt and unemployed. The death of the W-2 wage earner is near and the rise of the 1099 worker is under way.

Professor Pilzer predicts that ten million new millionaires will be created between 2006-2016, and The Next Millionaires explains how you can become one of them-- especially if you are in direct selling, technology, home-based business, product distribution, or an emerging trillion-dollar industry like wellness.

Avon… which does 8 Billion dollars a year in sales understands that ThereAreNoJobs and now the company is going to tour the country to show college kids a Plan B…

The economy is changing… those who can’t let go of the past will sit on
the sidelines and watch … those who embrace change will prosper…

Thank God for the Neil Postman’s of the world ...

And we should all live in communes, wear khaki pants and grow our own broccoli…

Thank God for the Neil Postman’s of the world exist to save us idiots from our “massive ignorance.” (135) The second half of Neil Postman’s book Technopoly did not state that we should all live in communes so our society could operate on a higher plane, but only because the author ended the book. Somehow, technology has become a “malevolent force requiring opposition” (177) and educating our children with his agenda will improve society. Postman accuses 18^th century statistician Francis Galton of being guilty of having a pathological romance with numbers (129) because he has to… The author’s zeal in attacking technology would seem crazy if he didn’t have someone to call fanatical. Time has already begun to prove the author mistaken. In Chapter 6 the author expresses his opinion that technology has corrupted the field of American medicine which , Postman claims, is “notorious for its characteristic aggressiveness.” (95) Since the author has no medical credentials this may or may not be true. However what has happened as a result of technology is an emergence of a new industry. The word “wellness” probably didn’t exist in 1993 when this book was penned, but it has become an exploding industry because of technology and consumers ability to access health information via the internet. Vitamins, food supplements and gym memberships are all an integral part of popular culture. The wellness industry has created an increased awareness in preventative health. New technologies and information availability are responsible for this paradigm shift. As I stated in my first post regarding this book, the author’s fear-based scarcity mind-set sought to isolate a period of history and call technology “malevolent.” The emergence of the wellness industry has given the consumer the ability to educate and implement new health related products because of technological innovations. This reader gives the American patient or consumer much more credit than Professor Postman.

In the next couple of chapters Postman invokes a new word -Scientism- to describe the fields of anthropology, psychology and sociology and proclaim then not sciences. (144-163) He says technology has made them sciences when they really are not. If you are confused, that’s ok, because so am I. And, of course he takes a shot at President Reagan. (162) It would not be a book by a college professor without a Republican bash. Anyway, he proceeds to tell his readers that technological advances have left society without a “moral center.” (179) The author then presents his agenda to correct all the wrongs technology has wrought on society.

The final chapter of the book called The Loving Resistance Fighter reveals the authors cure for our massive ignorance. And, shocking as this may seem, Postman wants to change the curriculum in the school systems. Of course this includes waxing poetic about the good old days. Pop culture bad, humanities good. (If this were a documentary, I would have walked out by now.) The computer is evil and “our youth must be shown that not all worthwhile things are instantly accessible and there are levels of sensibility unknown to them.” (197) According to the author, this return basics will “allow us to distance ourselves from our current ignorance and then “criticize and modify it.” (199)

In his introduction, Neil Postman claims that “the uncontrolled growth of technology destroys the vital sources of our humanity. It creates a culture without a moral foundation. It undermines certain mental processes and social relations that make human life worth living.” (vii) This reader could not disagree more. I embrace and welcome change, both personal and technological. I do agree with the author’s concept of the ascent of humanity. He says it is idea-centered and coherence-centered.(188) However, in my opinion technology is an integral part of the evolution and ascent of mankind. I believe that Professor Postman’s Technopoly concepts will be proven wrong over time and we will all live healthier, fuller, more abundant lives because of technological innovation.

Scarcity... Neil Postman's misguided perspective

If the second half of Computers: The Life Story of a Technology was defined by abundance, then the first half of Neil Postman’s Technopoly illustrated scarcity. As a discriminating reader, I find it helpful to due some due diligence on an author when I am engaged in reading any text. And, it wasn’t surprising to discover that Mr. Postman was a college professor. As a forty-something year-old guy returning to college, I find the onslaught by some professors against technology to be somewhat tedious. The waxing poetic about the simpler times of tool-using cultures (20) by Postman is in the same vain. My personal opinion is that this stems from fear. University professors, in the past, could spoon feed their dribble to naïve 20 year-olds who had very little life experience against which they could weigh the theory presented to them within the confines of the university classroom. In the first class I took after my “brief 18-year hiatus,” I heard something in a class of over four hundred students that I knew, from personal experience, to be misinformation. I get the same vibe when reading Postman. The author claims to be a dissenting voice (5) but, I would argue, that he is actually mimicking what many in his profession believe. And, dissenting opinions very rarely reach the insulated world of a college classroom. Postman is afraid of information because now his profession is not in charge of its dissemination.

The very act of seeking information is the essence of the human experience. One of the first things a child learns to do is ask… why? Postman says that, “Unforeseen consequences stand in the way of all those who think they see clearly the direction in which new technology will take us.”(15) The author apparently wants humans to stop asking questions. What his scarcity, fear-based mind can’t comprehend is that to survive is to rely on constancy, but to change is to grow. The author admits that “history takes a long time” (81) but his fear wants to isolate modernity as negative. A great paradox of the human existence is the fear of change versus the desire to grow and create. In the past which Postman is describing during the first half of the book and apparently where he wants us to stay, there was some security in doing things the same way, but what any forwarding thinking person understands is that the only security that really exists is embracing growth.


Postman references God often in the first half of the book. He often implies that technology has replaced spirituality, or at least is in conflict with it. Somehow he has concluded that penicillin is an alternative to prayer. (54) This is the essence of a scarcity mindset. “In the Middle Ages, people believed in the authority of their religion, no matter what. Today, we believe in the authority of our science, no matter what,” claims Postman. (58) What he doesn’t and will never understand with a scarcity mindset, is that theology, spirituality, economics and technological innovation are all the same thing. All of these factors contribute to the idea that God has given us the tools to go out and create an abundant life. There is no such thing as a trouble-free world. But, information combined with new technologies will create a better more abundant world for all who embrace, not run from change.

Abundance... (Computers: The Life Story of a Technology -Post 2)

In the second half of Computers: The Life Story of a Technology, one of the most prominent themes to emerge is that of abundance. The unlimited potential of the human mind is on full display with the development of the personal computer and it’s widespread acceptance and the incorporation of the internet into the daily life of many average people. When the Altair 8800 was featured on the cover of Popular Electronics in January 1975 and four thousand orders were placed for designer Edward Robert’s machine a new market for home computers had emerged. (87) In the thirty-five short years since then, the home computer and the market for it has undergone immense changes. Forward thinking entrepreneurs like Steve Jobs, a cofounder of Apple Computer, saw the commercial potential of the computer. Launched in 1976, Apple sales had risen to $300 million and employed 1,500 people by 1981. (93) Time magazine actually chose the personal computer as their Man of the Year for 1982 naming a machine instead of an international leader for the only time in the publication’s history. (96) As Jobs stated of his Apple I computer, “We didn’t do three years of research and come up with this concept. What we did was follow our own instincts and construct a computer that was what we wanted.” As the development of the PC has shown, when people unlock their potential and follow their instincts, the advancements are staggering.

The dizzying growth of the industry resulted in much economic upheaval. Computer software, which was initially free with the purchase of a personal computer, became a rapidly budding industry. In 1970, software sales in the US were less than half a billion dollars. By 1985 this new industry had grown to $25 billion. (103) IBM was thrown into disarray by the PC and it’s associated markets and lost a shocking 8.1 billion dollars despite bringing in $62.7 billion in revenue in 1993. (107) Microsoft founded in 1975 by Bill Gates and Paul Allen employed 50,000 people and brought in revenue of $35 billion of which $26 billion was profit. (109)

The internet development was also fueled by human instinct and abundant thinking. A desire to share information between universities and save money on the purchase of machinery led to the beginning of the internet. (114) Through the early years of modifications and tweaks which made the internet user friendly, the contaminant to the process became Wall Street. When private business saw the potential to reach unlimited numbers of people, investors sought to cash in. The “dot-com” boom which promised riches to those at the forefront, crashed when Time-Warner media company purchased America Online in 2001 based solely on AOL’s stock valuation. (128) This proved to be a financial disaster when the stock crashed. An abundant, emerging industry such as the internet can be tarnished by greed. And, Wall Street is usually the source of greed. Making money is not a bad thing, as the economics of the PC and internet worlds have shown readers of Computers: The Life Story of a Technology, but once the purity of the process is tainted by greed, a scarcity mindset overcomes the abundance mentality and the process stalls. It seems, to this reader however, that the “dot-com” frenzy is being replaced by proper business practices in 2010 and the economic impact of the internet has only just begun.

As the last couple chapters of the book allude to, greed is not the only problem that comes with the advancement of technology via the internet. Concerns for national safety stemming from potential military and security problems have also arisen. (140) The dark side of humanity seems to coincide with any advancement we make. What is evident, is that technology is not slowing down. Bringing the subject matter into the year 2010, it seems that US citizens should look back at the development of the computer and internet and see hope. Using the same instincts, ingenuity and abundant thinking as the forward thinking folks referenced in the book, it seems anyone can harness these technologies and create their own place in this still burgeoning new world.

Dreams…

In Computers: The Life Story of a Technology authors Eric Swedin and David Ferro detail how the computer has revolutionized our lives in the last half of the twentieth century. The first four chapters of the book take the reader through some of the history of the computers development. The account is filled with vision, passion, controversy and genius. In other words, the story of the computer is one of dreams. However, the advancement of technology is one that is not always embraced by all members of society. Dating back to 1085 when merchants resisted the development of the Arabic number system and in the mid 1700’s when Frenchmen Joseph Marie Jacquard had his life threatened by professional hand-weavers who saw his looping machine for weaving tapestries as a threat to their livelihood common folk have tried to block growth. Jacquard’s dream won. He was praised by Napoleon and his business flourished. (p.17) The printing press and it’s role in the expansion of trade led to the widespread adoption of the Arabic system. The point is… A powerful dream is an unstoppable force.

Interwoven into this remarkable scientific journey is economics. The desire to do things faster, more efficiently, effectively and conveniently is inevitably driven by economics. Mathematicians desire to speed up the calculation of numbers led to an adding machine which would sit on the corner of a desk. The Brunsviga company in the US sold 20,000 of these machines in the late 1800 and early 1900’s. (p. 13) Charles Babbage authored Economy of Manufactures in 1832 which sought to illuminate the ties between social forces and the Industrial Revolution. Babbage was both a trained economist and an inventor. It’s impossible to separate economics from the technology. When the United States took the census in 1900 it adopted a new technology to aid in the calculations. Some in the newspaper industry were skeptical it would work. (p. 22) The new technology saved $5 billion dollars. As is often the case today, the media usually doesn’t have  entrepreneurial vision. Are we in the year 2010 currently in the middle of an economic crisis or the greatest entrepreneurial opportunity? Turn on the television and hear the gloom and doom about the economy, or read The Next Millionaires and discover where the opportunities exist.

The authors of Computers: The Life Story of a Technology tell us that in 1960 there were less than 7,000 computers built worldwide and by 1970 there were 130,000. (p. 83) In 2010 many people carry hand-held technology which has the capability to run an international business. The computer is allowing anybody the same opportunity to achieve complete financial independence from the comfort of their home. The nature of work is changing because of the computer. Since late 2007, nearly 8 million people have lost jobs. And, amazingly, as reported by the Wall Street journal, 700,000 job losses are from only 25 companies. There is no such thing as a "good job" anymore, but as Computers: The Life Story of a Technology reveals, it is always a good time to dream… and it's impossible to stop the wave of technology... Entrepreneurs always thrive in down economies…Stop trying to fight a tidal wave and start dreaming again!

PS. Dreamers are always ridiculed... until their dreams come true

My first blog post...

My roommate and I are currently in the middle of a failing experiment. We cancelled our Verizon television, phone and internet service about two months ago. We were attempting to go an unspecified time without TV watching, and that is working well. I no longer sit in front of the tube staring blankly at ESPN with little regard for the content of the broadcast. Amateur ping-pong would sometimes take the place of a real sporting event. The point being, TV is a cesspool and watching it turns a mind to mush. The TV part of the experiment is working wonderfully. The mental obsession to grab the remote upon entering the house has been removed!

However, my addiction to the internet has me spending hours in my local coffee shop, Espresso Joe’s in Keyport, the township where I live, guzzling Diet Dr Peppers all day. . It would definitely be cheaper to get internet service at the house since I drink about 5 Diet DP’s - but people watching would suffer tremendously. Since I am in career transition… not working that is… my primary reason for countless hours scouring the web is the home-based business industry. The daily routine really does not vary. I leave the coffee shop to go to classes at Rutgers --where I am a full-time student for the first time in about two decades-- and come back when they are done. I’m pretty boring these days.

I have never had a blog, but had been considering one, so this one will be loosely dedicated to the exploding home-based business industry. The formulation of the blog was simple enough… I merely followed the "blogger" directions. Following directions is a skill I have only recently acquired. I have linked a couple of books which I found helpful in my research and will add some videos in the next couple of days (if I can figure out how).

In Economist Paul Zane Pilzer’s book The Next Millionaires he predicts 10 million new millionaires will be created in the coming decade. The economy is changing and those who resist change will get left behind.

If you read The Next Millionaires which came out in 2007, everything he has predicted about the economy has come to fruition.

In the book, Professor Pilzer explains in detail why the 21st century will be known as the age of the entrepreneur, and how you can become one of the next 10 million millionaires--especially if you are in direct selling, technology, home-based business, product distribution, or a soon to be trillion-dollar industry like wellness. Pilzer explains how intellectual distribution, defined as teaching people about products or services that they didn't even know exist, will replace old models of moving goods or services such as retail outlets. (Drive by a strip mall and observe the empty storefronts if you doubt this.) And, drawing on his 33 years of experience as an entrepreneur and employer, it explains how to use your past to find your place in the new economy.

So that’s really it, the blog will reflect my interest in this industry.