After reading through everyware 58-60 I get a sense of the obstacles and non-obstacles being addressed by ubiquity supporters. The value of the system is analyzed and seen as somewhat cliche futuristic goals mixed with the unpredictable desires of society. It seems that society wants simplicity of ubiquitous functions, the complexity hidden within simplicity of the system allowing society to spend "less time fumbling with change." It seems that society is not demanding ubiquitous computing directly but rather through demand of new technology productions which integrate into the ubiquitous system.
It seems that the current value of the system is determining its time of implementation rather than any computing obstacle. It is fascinating to read how we are in a technological state of possibility where such ubiquitous world is clearly possible and economically feasible. The processing power is efficient and will continue to increase beyond the limits of Moore's law leaving no processing obstacle foreseeable. And for storage capacity, it seems to be heading down a similar path where no certain obstacle hinters on the system. To be able to capture an entire life of experience within a grain of sand is somewhat fathomable in today's technologically advancing pace. I do not feel technology will create any obstacle for society's implementation of ubiquitous computing. I agree with Greenfield that the only obstacle facing the ubiquitous system's integration is society's lack of acceptance and demand for such a system.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I have heard of Moore’s Law before, but I never thought it would hold true once processing speed hit really high figures. Like a bell curve that applies to almost everything, a peak of slowing down must be reached eventually. Appearently according to Greenfield and most computer scientists, Moore’s Law will continue to hold up strong for the next at least the next 30 years or so. Doubling of processing speed and hard drive capacity will make computing so powerful within the upcoming years.
“It seems that society wants simplicity of ubiquitous functions, the complexity hidden within simplicity of the system allowing society to spend ‘less time fumbling with change.’” Isn’t this what society has ALWAYS wanted from its technology? However, society is always skeptical to actually believing that certain technologies are better and actually are simpler just because these technologies are different and society dislikes change. A perfect example is the market for computer systems. Most people go out and buy a Windows OS machine rather then buying a Macintosh OS simply because it is what the majority of what people are using and it is what they are used to. Macs are actually a lot simpler to use and I tell a lot of my college friends this, but they immediatlely deny it and shoot it down even though they have never used them because they are different and look complicated. But if anyone actually uses a Mac for at least a week, they would realize the simplicity and intuitiveness of its user interface. New things take some time to get used to, and a shift to a simpler ubiquitous future would be a similar shift because even though it would seem to make life simpler, there will still be denial and doubts in its usefulness and simplicity.
Post a Comment