News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by nick_urban on Monday February 14, 2011 @10:36AM (#2217087)
Does it strike any one else as at least a _bit_ disturbing that he thinks his "mind" is in his smart phone, and finds no problem with this other than that service providers are greedy?

An obvious way to avoid becoming beholden to service providers is to retain some independence from our devices. It's not like people didn't travel before the invention of the iPhone.

Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by swombat on Monday February 14, 2011 @12:28PM (#2217627)
Does it strike any one else as at least a _bit_ disturbing that he thinks his "mind" is in his smart phone, and finds no problem with this other than that service providers are greedy?

No. It is natural and true. Intelligence Augmentation is already there, in the form of the internet and our array of portable computers, which give us access to any information or computation we know how to find or express. We are already some distance to Stross's Manfred Macx (from his novel Accelerando) - lost and slightly bemused when disconnected from our external brain. It's not so obvious yet, and most of us still have some independence, but those of us who know how to use the web are lesser people without access to it.

Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by nick_urban on Monday February 14, 2011 @09:23PM (#2219803)
I don't particularly object to the idea that we hold some of our intelligence in our environment. I think it's true, and actually forms the basis for my objection. What I object to is that we should naively allow that environment to be changed from one which offers manifold possibilities for a full range of embodied engagement (the natural world and man-made things which relate to our bodies in a way which does not significantly restrict our possibilities, e.g. clothes or hand tools) into one which encourages superficial stimulus-response behavior and instant gratification according to pre-fabricated programs.

It sounded to me like Don Norman had already accepted that idea to the point that he didn't even realize it was a choice. He worries about a future of greedy carriers controlling our phone-brains. I worry about the fact that our minds could become so beholden to devices that, regardless of whether those devices are open or privately controlled, we diminish the depth of our experience and our tendencies towards reflective thought.

If drugs were available that increased our abilities but made us less thoughtful, would you accept that without deliberation? Would it really be better if those drugs were easy to make at home or handed out for free rather than sold in stores? This is already happening with Ritalin and "smart drugs". They improve our ability to carry out mental work but diminish our ability to reflect on what we are doing.

"Smart" drugs and phones are only so in terms of instrumental reason, not in terms of creativity or contemplation of ends.

Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by Tuna-Fish on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:00AM (#2217209)
Should we discard our clothes harden ourselves for the weather to become less dependent on clothing manufacturers?

Technology is what separates humans from the rest of the animals. As time goes by, we will become more and more dependent on our technology, and this is a good thing, because I with my smartphone or laptop can do things I wouldn't be able to do alone.

Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by grammaton on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:27AM (#2217316)
False analogy. There is a big, big difference between clothes that keep you from perishing due to exposure, and your shiny new smart phone. The real problem here is that the author is, apparently, incapable of thought without an array of instant-access resources at his disposal.
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by KeithMajhor on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:32AM (#2217339)
The difference, in this case, between clothes and "your shiny new smart phone" is novelty. Since the subject of the article is the future I don't think the analogy was unreasonable.
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by amouat on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:35AM (#2217352)
Clearly he is capable of thought without "instant-access resources", given that he drafted the article without them.

Internet access is becoming a fundamental human requirement; this need should not be overly exploited by corporations.

Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by grammaton on Tuesday February 15, 2011 @10:22AM (#2221491)
Food, water, shelter, medical care. These are fundamental human requirements. The internet is not. Sorry, but it's just not.
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by cool-RR on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:46AM (#2217408)
Clothes don't crash spontaneously...
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by Padavies on Monday February 14, 2011 @12:39PM (#2217676)
Janet Jackson may disagree
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by randallsquared on Monday February 14, 2011 @12:29PM (#2217636)
Incorrect. I periodically have clothing fail. Typically, of course, I throw away crashed clothing, rather than rebooting it. :)
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by knshaum on Monday February 14, 2011 @03:06PM (#2218388)
The vendor really should supply a patch.
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by snippyhollow on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:06AM (#2217233)
I still use a map instead of a GPS and an old Sagem (my 810X) phone with prepaid card that last almost one week on battery. Not because of FUD of the (French) FBI tracking me, and not because I can't see all the benefits of using a GPS or a smartphone, but because I feel free this way: I don't have to pay for a smartphone + contract or (exhorbitant) roaming fees and I'm not dependent on batteries. Plus, I still know how to read a map ;-) Guess what, I lived in the French Alps, in Tokyo and now in Paris and I didn't get lost nor did I miss events.
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by mkr-hn on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:12AM (#2217260)
You can know how to read a map and use GPS. I use a GPS, but I still check road signs to make sure it's right, and so I can use my map if the GPS breaks.
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by snippyhollow on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:17AM (#2217276)
;-) denoted humour. Also, "using a map -> keep your map reading skills updated" doesn't imply "using a GPS -> can't read a map". And even A->B doesn't necessarily imply B->A.
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by mkr-hn on Monday February 14, 2011 @11:31AM (#2217333)
From time to time learned expectations override basic logic. Whoops.

I'm used to crotchety old people complaining about GPS killing map reading skills.

Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by gwern on Monday February 14, 2011 @01:22PM (#2217874)
It's a perfectly reasonable thesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Mind). Do you have any objection beside some transitory subjective distaste?
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by leot on Monday February 14, 2011 @02:20PM (#2218155)
In fact, Don Norman is among the world's most qualified to say this kind of thing: he was founding Chair of UC San Diego's Cognitive Science department, where (among other theses) the notion of distributed cognition was developed (during Norman's time as Chair).
Re:I have seen the future and I am opposed by OO7 on Monday February 14, 2011 @04:47PM (#2218842)
Actually, it goes deeper than that. Given the positions he held, it is fair to say, that he has to have manipulative skills: put simply, he is a manipulator.

Manipulators use phones, mails, memo-s etc. as remote control devices. And since manipulators are more often than not weak on substance, they rely on input from outside more than "creators", who have more inherent values to live off from.

I think he just got pissed by being blown out of the water because of his net-blackout.