A key word that repeatedly presented itself in our reading this week was autonomy. The Webster definition of autonomy is the right or condition of self-government. The chapters we read in the book authored by Jennifer Slack and the excerpt from Lewis Mumford’s book discuss our relationship with technology and how it is affecting our autonomy. 

Chapter 5 introduces us to Luddism. one of the three responses to the received view section 2 discusses. Luddites were accused of being anti-technology, machine breakers. The reader goes into the many ways Luddites were characterized and described as if it was intentional to make them look like extremists and steal any credibility from them. Luddism was a movement of workers and artisans who lived in England in 1811-1817. Before this time there was mutual support in the relationship between workers and an industry. Author Jennifer Slack says this changed with “the gradual encroachment of the practice of laissez-faire capitalism, which shifts the idea of mutual support and obligation by arguing that the economic situation of the country improves when the owners of industry are permitted free rein to maximize their profits, and when the quality of life and work of the individual worker is not given highest priority.” Basically companies lost the moral responsibility they had to workers so they could maximize their manufacturing and minimize their costs. Which ultimately began the cutting out of the middle man- the workers.

Luddites were best known for machine breaking. They would mostly go after machined that they felt were forcing technology unto society. Leeds Mercury reported,” They broke only the frames of such as have reduced the price of the men’s wages. Those which belonged to masters who had not lowered their wages, they did not meddle with.”

Luddism was seen so negatively that 12,000 troops were deployed against Luddites and many of them were killed. Laws were passed that put many of them in jail, deported and hung. The issues raised against them was that they were resisting the changes imposed on them by manufacturers. The legacy of the Luddites was one of riots and destruction of machines in revolting against the effect technology was having on industry’s. 

Chapter 7 discusses the Unabomber. I found it interesting to read that there was a huge production of making Kaczynski appear insane. My favorite part of the chapter was this, “some claimed that he was insane because he did not admit that he was insane or would not cooperate with experts who wished to declare him insane; a Catch-22 if ever there were one! To admit to being insane is to be insane, but to deny being insane is also to be insane!”

“His work, despite his deeds,” wrote Dr. Keith Ablow, a psychiatrist and member of the Fox News Medical A-Team, “deserves a place alongside Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley, and 1984, by George Orwell.” It’s interesting that the Unabomber is almost seen as prophetic with how our relationship is now with technology. 

Thankfully we are not completely ignorant to technology and its power. Information like that of section 2 of Slack’s book and Lewis Mumford’s writing are continuously giving us insight as to the takeover machines can have over us if we allow it. 

Our reading this week help us to formulate a broader view on technology. Much of the advantages that technology has developed, many of us see as things we need. Chapter 2 brings about the concept of convenience. In modern day terms convenience refers to something being suitable to us, it bringing about comfort or ease. The way these words and their meanings are evolving has much to do with our development of technology and its’ progression. 

            Chapter 2 discusses how we have used technology to overcome bodily limits. We see physical limitations as something that we must overcome. To overcome the limitation of space the chapter uses as examples the different types of transportation we have invented to overcome it. Though our bodies couldn’t possibly be in three different parts of the world in one day on our own two feet we have overcome this bodily inconvenience with technology, the airplane. It also describes how technology now wants to “collapse space and time so that the communicator/traveler can be everywhere at once without exertion.” You can now be on a Skype call with your family, while being in another country on a business trip and also watch a video of the example the book gives, a watering hole in Africa through the website AfriCam. It seems that whatever bodily limitation we believe ourselves to have, we try to overcome it with technology.

            Technology has now changed we to what people consider wants vs. needs. Needs are generally described as need for shelter, food, water, clothing, sleep, physical contact and procreation. Now with our advancement in technology, many companies would not be able to function without internet and Wi-Fi in their businesses. They would probably describe these things as a need. 

            One of my favorite things chapter 2 discusses is that the ultimate limit of the body is its own lifetime. I like the statement Slack uses in stating, “all living bodies, at least as we write, will die.” “If death is the ultimate limit of the body, the ultimate technology will one one that overcomes death. But, perhaps, this is like the four-minute mile, and once that limit is overcome, a new limit horizon will stretch out before the inhabitants of the future.” This part of the chapter really made me think. What if death is only a limitation of the mind? If it’s just a threshold we are getting closer and closer to overcoming. We’re already learning ways on how to extend lives, things that at one time seemed impossible. It’s very exciting to think that we may just be thought processes away from overcoming the limitation of death. 

            The chapter also argues that the expectations on what technology is supposed to do for us has become very demanding. But, I believe that our demand on it, technology, is what has stretched it so much in such a rapid pace of growth. Years ago we were much slower at technological development. Now it seems as if we are constantly on the leading edge of something that will impact our culture. 

This weeks reading began with a somewhat pessimistic view of the internet. As the chapter introduces you to Andrew Keen’s idea’s of the web and describing it as Socrates’ nightmare, I felt some resistance to the writer. He makes synonyms out of the words narcissism and personalization faulting Web 2.0 for basically creating a platform anyone to express themselves however they choose to. His strong language against our internet culture made me want to disagree with him but as I continued reading the chapter I realized that he has some valid points. 

In the past artists were mostly harassed by paparazzi and tabloids. What fans think of their Hollywood and sports idols is information that now has easier and quicker access to these artists. Honestly though, weren’t these type of people always there? Didn’t we have people sending hate mail to anyone who tried to do something different or great? The opinions of bloggers and disgruntled fans has more light now than ever, but I don’t believe the existence of blogs created them. We’re just able to see them now, unless of course they go anonymous. 

In the chapter Keen argues that conversation “carried out by anonymous, self-obsessed people unwilling to reveal their real identities denigrates into anarchy”. The optimist argues that anonymity encourages vibrant debate and whistleblowing. I believe the variance in opinion gives access to differing thoughts and can encourage individuals to think for themselves, and yes the downside of that is that idiots get to share their opinions too. 

I believe there needs to be allowance for such conversation as it allows different frames of thought to individuals who may be seeking answers on questions they’ve been afraid to ask. 

For example, parents raised me in a particular religion I never felt quite right in. I had many questions about things we learned while congregated with other like believers. I would pose these questions to my parents but would usually get shut down by their parental hierarchy. When my father decided to get dial-up in our home it was a huge step of freedom for me. To navigate the internet and read the opposing thoughts and ideas, some that supported ideas I was starting to believe on my own, helped me to draw out my own conclusions on this religion and eventually helped me to go a different way. I give the internet credit for that because at that time in my life everyone surrounding me was of that particular religion which was somewhat cultish. Having contrary thoughts was not supported and I was treated like the black sheep every time I brought up an opposing view. Finally getting the internet introduced me to thousands of sources I wouldn’t have had access to. 

I believe this is what the internet is allowing consumers, freedom to go their own way. Towards the end of the chapter, Thierer begins to discuss how we should be excited about the change the internet has brought to our culture, and like any new invention brought to society, it still has kinks to work out. I agree with some of the pessimistic points of view on how the internet can be affecting our individuality but I also believe that much of what pessimists are worried about are just learning curves as our culture expands with the addition of Web 2.0 to our lives.