Comments on Informing Ourselves To Death

This article is full of fascination. Postman reflected on the action of technologies and information in our society by standing on a philosophical level. I don't exactly know the situation 15 years ago, but I clearly remember the discussion on information explosion 5 years ago all over the campus. Whatever 15 years or 5 years, human beings have not found the right answer yet until now. Postman presented some essential questions:

* What technologies do/undo to culture?

* It creats more/less than it destroys?

* Does new technology tend to favor some groups/harm other groups?

* What does technical change always result in? ---winners/losers

* What is dangerous? ---technologies/ourselves

I agree with Postman that the actual society is cruel. Winners win more by using new technologies, whereas losers lose more by succumbing new technologies. Scientist develop technologies for human's better life originally, but they are always being used as a kind of tools finally. Although the winners are not always doing that consciously, in a sense they are given more power by new technology.

The small experiment and the trope are so interesting. A brand new deck of cards or a shuffled deck of cards is just like our belief system. This is root of the problem. Unsure belief amplified the din of information. Computers merely manipulate and generate information. People are drowning in sea of information because of themselves.

So, the tie between information and action has been very important for us. In a way, when we create some information, we should think about the use of it. That namely means specialization, diversification, and narrow communication.

Comments on Chapter 2: Before the speaking telephone

It seems that wise people often do same thing by different means at the same time. The battle between Bell and Gray is such an example. The article focuses on these two precursors and extends its visual angle into a crowd of scientists. The process that they were making continual effort to improve the devices before speaking phone was so moving. Human beings are always able to invent a new item when they need it. What about the supervening necessity? For prototypes of speaking telephones, it was the need to validate Helmholtz's discussion of waves.

Comments on chapter 3: The capture of sound

In a way, telephone is an outcome of the commercial development. The social need, namely the modern business corporation asked for its emergence. Another example of supernening social necessity is the jukebox, which was arisen by the amusement requirements of the urban masses.

The most important element of the suppression was the law of patent, besides the failure of vision. On the other hand, the problems of technical diffusion are existing. My question is what on earth is the category of supervening necessity?