Technology: Good or Bad?

[ANARCHit3cht]

Technology is a very broad term that can encompass many things. It has its clear benefits, but does it not also come with disadvantages? Many argue that relatively unrestricted access to internet is detrimental to our cognitive ability or that social media can make us less social, and its easy to see why they could reach those claims.

But what about things like the mobile phone stethoscope attachment that could let a doctor monitor a patient who is hundreds(or more) of miles away? Or the documentary Kony 2012 that brought to attention the acts of the LRA?

The simple question is, do you think technology is doing more harm than good? If not, do you feel that way about ALL of technology, or are their certain aspects that you could do without? Do you think it will get better or worse? Where do you see technology taking us in the future?

 

[Chikara]

It's definitely making us less social offline. I can't tell you how many times I've gone out to dinner, or went to a bar with friends or family, and they rarely put their cellphone down. It happens all the time.

Though no, I don't think we're too bad about it yet. I'll start to think otherwise when machines and computers taking jobs from people becomes a serious issue(which has already started happening).

 

[ANARCHit3cht]

It's definitely making us less social offline. I can't tell you how many times I've gone out to dinner, or went to a bar with friends or family, and they rarely put their cellphone down. It happens all the time.

Though no, I don't think we're too bad about it yet. I'll start to think otherwise when machines and computers taking jobs from people becomes a serious issue(which has already started happening).

Exactly! How long before you go to McDonalds and the only employee they have is the guy that services the production line? I'm not against automation of certain things, but is there not a certain point when we should just do it ourselves? What happens if the technology we become dependent upon somehow fails? Then what would we do when we find ourselves lacking the skills we need that the technology stood in substitute for? It's a bit of a scary thought I'd say.

 

[Chikara]

Exactly! How long before you go to McDonalds and the only employee they have is the guy that services the production line? I'm not against automation of certain things, but is there not a certain point when we should just do it ourselves? What happens if the technology we become dependent upon somehow fails? Then what would we do when we find ourselves lacking the skills we need that the technology stood in substitute for? It's a bit of a scary thought I'd say.

McDonalds is actually saying they'll be doing just that if the minimum wage goes up too much. They don't want to pay people $15 an hour to flip burgers and ask if you want extra sauce. Honestly, I wouldn't want to either. But it's a shame it's having to come to that. Companies like that will do just about anything to save a buck, and McDonalds is one of the first to threaten doing so.

 

[Her]

Given that our generation is the first to be fully immersed in the social media world, I suppose it is only natural that we dove headfirst into it. Why wouldn't we? Most of us couldn't imagine a world where millions of people weren't connected to us at the whim of what we typed in a search bar, unaware of the consequences. Most of us weren't aware of any physical consequences of immersion in social media until about 5~ or so years ago, when the first studies of the effects of internet usage were made public.
What I find interesting though is that many people simply accept diminishing of attention spans & such as acceptable repercussions to their internet usage. I can't blame them, given that I don't really care either. I find it annoying that I can't sit through a tv show or movie without having something else to balance my mind while I do so, but I'm not about to change my internet usage any time soon.
I find that demonisation of social media often plays into the 'cursed millennials!' mantra that so many in their mid-30s and up seem to love. Very rarely does this demonisation draw from the aforementioned studies as opposed to the fact that we have a collective identity they don't understand. So, I tend to be wary when someone decries social media without backing it up.

As for a 'general' point, technology is doing far more good than harm. The advancement of technology, and therefore the advancement of humankind, will naturally have some consequences that we may not be able to overcome. But I believe that these small repercussions are outweighed by the good of the new technological age.

 

[ANARCHit3cht]

snip

I have to say, most any articles I found, including the one I linked in the first post point to the idea that its how you use the technology that determines the effect it has. That social media, when used correctly, actually helps us socialize more, albeit in a much different way than the older generations are used to and might be comfortable with. But is that inherently wrong?

McDonalds is actually saying they'll be doing just that if the minimum wage goes up too much. They don't want to pay people $15 an hour to flip burgers and ask if you want extra sauce. Honestly, I wouldn't want to either. But it's a shame it's having to come to that. Companies like that will do just about anything to save a buck, and McDonalds is one of the first to threaten doing so.

And what does that say for the job market? It's already piss poor enough as it is. Not everyone can e a doctor or a lawyer or an engineer. I mean, even if they all learned the skills there can only be so many doctors in any given area. SOMEONE has to be the guy that flips my burgers. And its funny that the minimum wage is their issue--that only goes up as the price of living goes up

 

[Her]

I have to say, most any articles I found, including the one I linked in the first post point to the idea that its how you use the technology that determines the effect it has. That social media, when used correctly, actually helps us socialize more, albeit in a much different way than the older generations are used to and might be comfortable with. But is that inherently wrong?

Of course it isn't. In time, there'll be a mode of communication for our children (such as full-body holograms or something) that we'll dually embrace and decry as detrimental. At least that's the traditional way of thinking, given that each generation before us has the same reaction to their offspring. But maybe we'll be the generation that breaks the chain as we'll have a social understanding of technology that no one before us has had.

 

[Chikara]

And what does that say for the job market? It's already piss poor enough as it is.

Exactly what I said before, companies will do whatever it takes to save a buck. Including getting rid of most of your employees so you don't have to pay them as much as each state demands. If that means having to spend the money on touch screen ordering systems, then they'll just say "so be it". They'll make the money back in no time, especially since they won't have to give as much in payroll each week.

Not everyone can e a doctor or a lawyer or an engineer. I mean, even if they all learned the skills there can only be so many doctors in any given area.

That's not true. Jobs in the medical field are rising in necessity, no matter the profession. Though I'm not educated on the need for lawyers and engineers.

SOMEONE has to be the guy that flips my burgers. And its funny that the minimum wage is their issue--that only goes up as the price of living goes up

It shouldn't be people who have college degrees though, and that's the upsetting part. That's where the first section of your post comes back around. The job market sucks right now. Number of jobs is up, but so is the percentage of poverty.


...Thought I would reply to you, even though some my responses go a waaay off from the topic of technology, haha.

 

[ANARCHit3cht]

That's not true. Jobs in the medical field are rising in necessity, no matter the profession. Though I'm not educated on the need for lawyers and engineers.\

Well that might be true, but still not EVERYONE can fill in those positions. They are still of a limited amount if we all become doctors then who is going to be the guy who flips my burgers? Or if that becomes automated, who is going to raise the cow that the burger was made from?

That aside, here is what I see is a larger problem: There are a lot of things designed to make locating a vein easier for doctors, nurses etc. When I was in the hospital, mostly all of the nurses SUCKED at setting up an iv/drawing blood etc without the use of the machinery designed to assist in this matter. What happens in a scenario where the machinery isn't available? Because we're learning our skills to be used in tandem with this advanced technology, it's coming at the price of having underdeveloped skills when the technology isn't present. The only ones who didn't blow a vein were the nurses/doctors who were much older and learned the skill when such technologies weren't present or as well as adapted to become so common place.

 

[Spiff]

That aside, here is what I see is a larger problem: There are a lot of things designed to make locating a vein easier for doctors, nurses etc. When I was in the hospital, mostly all of the nurses SUCKED at setting up an iv/drawing blood etc without the use of the machinery designed to assist in this matter. What happens in a scenario where the machinery isn't available? Because we're learning our skills to be used in tandem with this advanced technology, it's coming at the price of having underdeveloped skills when the technology isn't present. The only ones who didn't blow a vein were the nurses/doctors who were much older and learned the skill when such technologies weren't present or as well as adapted to become so common place.

Companies are well aware of this and provide proper training for equipment failures/vacancies. I'm a pilot, and this neato technological wave we've seen has completely changed the way we fly our approaches and en route/departure phases with components like GPS, area navigation and autopilot. it's honestly made it disgustingly easy to fly an airplane. Yet they still teach us how to fly using simple radio navigation and they still equip the aircraft with the instruments that interrogate them. The FAA also requires that we keep all textual charts for intended routes of flight on our person in case of any computer/tablet failure.

Yeah all this technology is damn convenient, but we all know not everybody will have access to it, just as well as we know it is capable of failing any time. In fact I had a partial transponder failure this morning, but I knew how to divert my plans because we're trained to deal with it.

Also, remember when we thought smoking was good for you? I'd be funny if technology turned out the same way, huh. :/

 

[CoffeeDrink]

Technology always has it's drawbacks, it's just the matter of dealing with it and utilizing it properly. Me? I don't use a facebook or have a twitter or whatever else people are saying hello and posting how much food they ate at the Taco Bell or how their feet stink. So if you don't like the piece of tech, don't use the piece of tech.

 

[Tek]

Technology: good and bad. With every increase in the complexity of society, the possible good magnifies as well as the possible bad.

We can eradicate diseases from the face of the planet (debatable but I'm presenting this as a possible good). We also have the power to make this planet uninhabitable, possibly for millions of years, through any number of means including nuclear warfare. Actions of this scale are simply impossible in hunter-gatherer and agrarian civilizations. If we continue to evolve, the solar system, then the galaxy, then the entire universe will be our playground and battlefield.

Said differently, the general trend throughout humanity's evolution is for the scale of dignities and disasters to increase with every techno-cultural advance. The simple answer is as simple as that.

 

[ANARCHit3cht]

Companies are well aware of this and provide proper training for equipment failures/vacancies. I'm a pilot, and this neato technological wave we've seen has completely changed the way we fly our approaches and en route/departure phases with components like GPS, area navigation and autopilot. it's honestly made it disgustingly easy to fly an airplane. Yet they still teach us how to fly using simple radio navigation and they still equip the aircraft with the instruments that interrogate them. The FAA also requires that we keep all textual charts for intended routes of flight on our person in case of any computer/tablet failure.

Yeah all this technology is damn convenient, but we all know not everybody will have access to it, just as well as we know it is capable of failing any time. In fact I had a partial transponder failure this morning, but I knew how to divert my plans because we're trained to deal with it.

Also, remember when we thought smoking was good for you? I'd be funny if technology turned out the same way, huh. :/

Well yeah, that makes sense when it comes to do with something like flying an airplane. People's lives are at risk. But can you expect them to be so stringent when it comes to a machine that flips burgers? It breaks down, the one guy they kept around flips the burger manually while the machine gets serviced. Or the one guy fries the fries manually while the machine gets serviced. It isn't a life threatening situation unless somehow something irrational happens like the french fry machine malfunctioning and throwing hot oil in the face of a customer.

Technology: good and bad. With every increase in the complexity of society, the possible good magnifies as well as the possible bad.

We can eradicate diseases from the face of the planet (debatable but I'm presenting this as a possible good). We also have the power to make this planet uninhabitable, possibly for millions of years, through any number of means including nuclear warfare. Actions of this scale are simply impossible in hunter-gatherer and agrarian civilizations. If we continue to evolve, the solar system, then the galaxy, then the entire universe will be our playground and battlefield.

Said differently, the general trend throughout humanity's evolution is for the scale of dignities and disasters to increase with every techno-cultural advance. The simple answer is as simple as that.

I'd say eradicating diseases is a good thing. But on a side note, is it not scary that said diseases once "eradicated" are typically kept by diseases organizations such as the CDC? My main concern or the main reason I believe technology is "bad" is because we use it to replace what are otherwise very useful skills. What happens in our bright and technological future if say a CME comes from the sun, throws Earth's magnetic field out of whack and and causes important conductors that run the "system" to overload and then everything fries? And then we don't have access to this technology and we didn't prepare ourselves for such an event because we're clearly infallible creatures and our amazing technology would never fail. Or let's say we are prepared and we can get things back up and running, what about certain things(hospitals, prisons etc) that would be highly dependent upon the constant uptime of this technology? I mean, I guess in the case of a hospital it can be irrelevant because you can't perform like, a brain scan, without the technological advancements we made.

I rambled a bit... but to me its just scary that we can form a dependence upon something that can so easily become defective or disabled. I guess that isn't a fault of technology so much as it is how we apply said technology though...

 

[Lotus the Cat]

And what does that say for the job market? It's already piss poor enough as it is. Not everyone can e a doctor or a lawyer or an engineer. I mean, even if they all learned the skills there can only be so many doctors in any given area. SOMEONE has to be the guy that flips my burgers. And its funny that the minimum wage is their issue--that only goes up as the price of living goes up

Actually, technology is going to take away from fully intellectual jobs such as lawyers, economists, computer programmers, and minimise the work for intellectual jobs that have a physical side (e.g. doctors and engineers). I watched an interesting TED talk on the AI "deep thought". I highly recommend watching the video - it is very interesting.

It has been shown that computers can listen, read, write and understand the content of pictures. A team at Stanford University applied deep learning to tissue analysis and the outcome was that the computer was better at predicting survival rates of cancer sufferers than the human pathologists. In addition, deep learning made a new contribution to science as it was able to identify that the cells around the cancer were found to be just as important as the cancer cells themselves for diagnosis. While this doesn't fully eliminate the role of doctors as the physical work (applying treatment) is still required it greatly reduces their workload by removing any part of their job associated with data analysis.

 

[ANARCHit3cht]

Actually, technology is going to take away from fully intellectual jobs such as lawyers, economists, computer programmers, and minimise the work for intellectual jobs that have a physical side (e.g. doctors and engineers). I watched an interesting TED talk on the AI "deep thought". I highly recommend watching the video - it is very interesting.

It has been shown that computers can listen, read, write and understand the content of pictures. A team at Stanford University applied deep learning to tissue analysis and the outcome was that the computer was better at predicting survival rates of cancer sufferers than the human pathologists. In addition, deep learning made a new contribution to science as it was able to identify that the cells around the cancer were found to be just as important as the cancer cells themselves for diagnosis. While this doesn't fully eliminate the role of doctors as the physical work (applying treatment) is still required it greatly reduces their workload by removing any part of their job associated with data analysis.

Then its even worse than I thought! It's a scary scary thing if you ask me. While that is all great and dandy what happens when that technology fails and then there isn't a doctor competent to do that because he hasn't had to do it for years or only learned about it in theory because a machine does it. Very scary.

And then on another point of view. If the doctor has a significantly reduced workload... then he can do more in his day that would typically require another doctor to do. Meaning there'd be less jobs as doctors available. It's getting pretty scary!

 

[Dter ic]

I'd say that technology is more beneficial than harmful to society. Generally speaking, technology is really a tool so it ultimately depends on who uses it which depends on whether it does good or harm - for example, encryption or TOR networks gives individuals privacy protection although of course it can (and will) be used by terrorists to hide their activities.

It's easy to say that social networking has changed people for the worst, often with comparisons against outside life like having "real friends" vs "online ones" or when new platforms like tinder or snapchat are used and things go horribly wrong. Maybe it's not because young individuals that use it are 'stupid' but rather inexperienced with new platforms. I mean everyone knows how you're meant to act IRL when you meet someone new for the first time and become friends but it's a entirely different thing online.

 

[Pendraflare]

I don't want to say that technology is bad, but I can understand why people think it's annoying and making others less social. But for the people that already have enough people outside of the internet world as they do, those people likely won't really get too invested in the long run. But if we don't, then we might find ourselves needing something to occupy time that we have, which could be why we're so attached to some of the technologic devices we have.

 

[Lotus the Cat]

Then its even worse than I thought! It's a scary scary thing if you ask me. While that is all great and dandy what happens when that technology fails and then there isn't a doctor competent to do that because he hasn't had to do it for years or only learned about it in theory because a machine does it. Very scary.

And then on another point of view. If the doctor has a significantly reduced workload... then he can do more in his day that would typically require another doctor to do. Meaning there'd be less jobs as doctors available. It's getting pretty scary!

The computer learning is so powerful you don't need to be proficient in the field for the AI to learn it. The presenter in the video I linked has no medical training and has a medical company he started based on such an AI. Therefore, if the system you were using were disrupted, you would just build it back up again. Where the skills matter are the physical tasks, which this technology would not replace anyway.

I agree that it is definitely scary. As mentioned in the video, the majority of jobs in the developed world are "information" jobs, that computers are quickly learning how to do better than humans. What this means for society is alarming, as it suggests widespread unemployment is what we have to look forward to. Whether this is a good or bad thing is yet to be seen and it suggests that the economic structure currently used (i.e. capitalism) will no longer function and we may have to change to a socialist system.

 

[Cerberus87]

Of course technology is good. Without it, we'd still be mostly gatherers who live off fruit, like monkeys. Even trivial things like the mastery of fire and the invention of the wheel are "technology", and you can't argue these basic discoveries were very important to us.

The topic title was very poorly worded, because the topic addresses only a specific type of technology.

 

[twocows]

Anything has the potential to be misused, and we should of course always be vigilant that we don't blind ourselves to the potential misuse of our inventions. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't make them. Technological advancement is inherently a source of good because its core purpose is to improve the quality of our lives. There are always those who would abuse this process (or any process) to their own ends, but the core idea behind creating new technology is certainly one of good.