Comments for Kester Brewin

Comment on Paying Attention, Not Glazing Over: The Power of Genuine Human Presence by Alex

Alex — Thu, 23 May 2013 16:01:35 +0000

Great post Kester, It reminded me a lot of Shane Hipps’ “The Hidden power of electronic culture” and “Flickering Pixels” Both well worth a read.

Comment on Paying Attention, Not Glazing Over: The Power of Genuine Human Presence by chris

chris — Tue, 21 May 2013 15:37:48 +0000

As always, thank you for sharing your thoughts. Your part about guns as mediating technology reminded me of a piece that someone I know made:

http://mattlumpkin.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-medium-is-message-social.html

Both of you have identified the challenge of dehumanization that can take place without thoughtful reflection on the technologies that we employ.

Comment on Paying Attention, Not Glazing Over: The Power of Genuine Human Presence by Jas Gray

Jas Gray — Tue, 21 May 2013 14:15:18 +0000

Love it. I’ve never liked the polarization of technology being positive or ‘evil’ and think conversations like this are sorely needed. Let’s just get real and admit that convenience comes at a cost. I’m reminded of people’s reactions to the world created in Bruce Willis’ Surrogates, with many of my peers unable/unwilling to see that this is where technology is inevitably taking us. Cheers for sharing.

Comment on Digital Privacy: Techno-Conservatism, or a Matter of Freedom? by Narcissus

Narcissus — Tue, 07 May 2013 21:18:26 +0000

It seems an undesirable place to me as well. Though a part of me wonders if the voice I hear is in fact the 1st century converts shouting over the port side – Welcome to the party! What took you so long?

Comment on Digital Privacy: Techno-Conservatism, or a Matter of Freedom? by KB

KB — Tue, 07 May 2013 19:42:15 +0000

I think you’re right about choice remaining – my concern is the level of ridicule. To live without a smartphone, without Facebook etc is possible without much ridicule, but I can foresee a world where to live outside of the dominant digital cartography will bring huge ridicule, and a level of alienation that might make ‘normal’ labour impossible. That seems an undesirable place to me: when ‘normal’ becomes laughable and difficult to sustain.
Will have to look up Snowcrash!

Comment on Digital Privacy: Techno-Conservatism, or a Matter of Freedom? by @Marcokie

@Marcokie — Tue, 07 May 2013 17:19:47 +0000

Neal Stephenson imagined a future where google glass like devices are common in his book Snowcrash (written in 1992 amazingly!)

The contradiction is that with so many data feeds that’s not really searchable everything recorded becomes invisible.

Comment on Digital Privacy: Techno-Conservatism, or a Matter of Freedom? by Narcissus

Narcissus — Tue, 07 May 2013 16:09:37 +0000

There is always a choice. Right now, some live like the pirates you so well describe. Off the grid, away from blogs and smartphones. Without fanfare and usually with ridicule. I sense many (most) simply do not want that lifestyle and the challenges it presents. Who will tweet about us if they can’t see us? So the “system” (the aggregated sum of all our choices) chooses so that we can still say, rather slyly, we wanted something else.

When Kierkegaard choose to go after the Corsair, he knew what life that would bring. As did the choice to not marry Regina. As did the choice to write in Danish. I suspect we shall have to do likewise me hearties. Or we can just blog about it on our new google glass as if we were really peeved.

Comment on Giving Up The Internet: It’s Never About The Tools by Steve Priest

Steve Priest — Fri, 03 May 2013 07:58:28 +0000

Doesn’t our ‘addiction’ to the ‘internet’ simply tap into our innate need to commune on some level? To give up the ‘internet’ in this day and age is tantamount to becoming a hermit. It is treated with suspicion in the same way as when you were at school and one kid in the class or school who didn’t own a telly was treated like an alien. We couldn’t possibly imagine not having the conversation about the latest episode of Dallas or Scooby Doo.

Moreover, where the ‘internet’ really works, for me, is in being able to maintain a connection with people with whom a physical connection has occurred but is not always practical or possible to maintain.

When I met my wife 30 years ago on holiday we wrote copious letters to one another in the aftermath to bridge the 100 miles between us. Now my daughter meets a boy and she texts or ‘Facebooks’ them with the same vigour, albeit greater frequency.

Essentially, the ‘internet’ (not sure why I am persisting with the quotes there) and the tools we access it with, like most technological advances, merely speed up the process on connecting people together.

Comment on Giving Up The Internet: It’s Never About The Tools by KB

KB — Thu, 02 May 2013 14:04:14 +0000

Nick – great comments. And I guess what I have tried to do here is get into the tension between the literal and philosophical / psycho-social interpretations of that concluding statement… but you can call it a trap!

With people investing so much of themselves online, I think you’re right to express some regret at the situation where people have ‘become’ their facebook. In other words, rather than being present in any moment, with their kids, whatever, they are looking at it from a perspective of ‘wow, my fb friend will think this is cool,’ or ‘this will get me a lot of sympathy-likes.’

The follow-up question then might be whether this diminishes people’s essential humanity so much that the internet is where…’people’… aren’t. Because it is a place where we become something less-than-person.

Then again, in more psycho-spiritual terms, it could be that the modern locus of the ‘soul’ is one people’s fb accounts: it is where they store all of the best and purest of themselves… But that doesn’t make it good.

That’s why I was trying to make a cheeky challenge to people (and to myself) to remove their sense of identity and validation from the internet… but to do that as a path towards understanding that that will only lead them to see that the deep desires and aches for fulfilment that they have are not cured by logging off.

Hence, what I think we need to do as a culture is continue to embrace these technologies, but simultaneously return to an existence that is more located in the physical. Because I just don’t buy it that online friendship is any substitute for real physical presence. Big tech companies will keep trying to convince us, but only because (and who knows with Google Glass coming) they haven’t yet found a way to slap advertising on a bunch of mates at the pub… (Though may be Nike and Ralph Lauren beat them to it)

Comment on Giving Up The Internet: It’s Never About The Tools by Nicholas

Nicholas — Thu, 02 May 2013 13:39:19 +0000

Hi Kes, I hope your well mate.

Interesting experiment, but I can’t say that I am surprised by this guy’s findings. I do however want to make a small point regarding your brief assessment of his statement ‘The internet is where people are.’. You say:

‘But to say that “the internet is where people are” is wrong, because “people” are made up of each one of us – and that would mean that “the internet is where I am.”
It is not, or at least it should not be. I am where I am. I might use the internet, but I do not enter it, or become located in it.”

I agree with your literal assessment, however I don’t believe he meant this in any way, literally. I think that the statement ‘The internet is where people are.’ is very true psychologically; as the majority of people I know, in essence, live their entire social lives through the internet. Although this is not the physical interpretation that you clearly pointed out (and probably purposefully to start a debate!), I think it takes precedence over it.
Indeed if we treat the statement ‘The internet is where people are.’ from a purely philosophical standpoint, to me, it becomes a far more interesting quote. For me, regretfully, I think ‘The internet IS where people are’.
I apologies if I have fallen in to one of your deep logical traps! Just let me go and I will be on my way!

Nick