The first “ah ha” that caught my eye was a small, mundane point, but it stuck with me. It was in the reading “Technologies of the Third Mediamorphosis” from Mediamorphosis: Understanding New Media by Roger Fidler (1997). It was the point that originally the term “computer” was used to refer to people who made particular calculations. That was something I never knew and found it interesting.
Along with that reading I also never realized that advancements toward wireless communication were taking such huge strides way back in the mid 1800′s. Babbage and Byron where so ahead of their time, but if they hadn’t been the advancements may not have moved as quickly as they had to get us to where we are today. I think that no matter how far off the information is to becoming a reality it is very important scientists continue to experiment and document their findings. Because as suggested, at the rate we are moving in technological advances as long as the information falls into the right hands a breakthrough can be found at any minute. The article also suggested that there are too many people out there and the information is just getting spread around instead of being concentrated in one specialized area. I believe that this is a good thing. The more hands that get on the information the more minds that can process it. Maybe a collaboration of information is what is needed for a big breakthrough or maybe even multiple break throughs. Ever heard of the phrase “two minds are better than one!”
In another reading, “Networks of Remediation” from Remediation: Understanding New Media by Jay David Bolter and Richard Grusin (1999), there was comment made that I disagree with. The comment was, “ This does not mean that the mode of financing causes American Television to be what it is, but rather that the character of a technology such as television is articulate through a network of formal, material, and social practices.” Now I understand that the author was saying that a medium is not a creator of a media, but rather they coincide with one another. I just don’t think the author should have used TV as an example because being a communication student I strongly believe that the way a TV program is financed is what causes it to be the way it is. For example, a well-known publicly funded TV station is PBS and they have been very low on funds, which has been effecting production. Moreover, Fox broadcasting is own by a very conservative company and this tends to affect the types of shows ran and information reported by their news teams. The Internet of maybe even radio might have been a better source for an example in this article.
How do I see the Internet in the year 2045….? I believe that everything, and I do mean everything will be accessible through the Internet. Also everything will be voice activated and accompanied by video. Business meetings, shopping, appointments and banking will be done almost exclusively over the net. I also predict that we will be able to access the Internet through our televisions using the cable connection. And we will be able to serf using our remote control.
