_The worst case scenario for the technology is if it gives in entirely to ads and shopping. This is merely the speeding up of consumption and production by capitalism.
_Pervasive computing is now more than ever apparent in the space of the city. As mobile phone use increases so does the network that provides us with the connectivity. The spatial effects are apparent, such as virtual communication in actual space, and increased conversation through mobile devices as opposed to person to person conversation.
_There is undoubtedly an increase in the speed and efficiency of information sharing, as well as the consumption of products, and their distribution technique. I believe we are pushing towards an urban condition of immediacy of conversation via the devices; hyper-collaborative, efficient, and convenient. However, it is also a dangerous condition of control and manipulation. There needs to be a produced agency within the public collective to display that we together are what makes the machine's potential, and not the machine that dictate's our's.
1 comment:
(I've been enjoying digging back through your process here)
I think the worse case scenario is far worse than the blandly benign one cited above.
There is the potential for harm to be rendered unto you by your mobile device.
Consider http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/mar/23/israel6
The mobile phone as a device for espionage and assassination.
If your goal is ultimately subversive (and think carefully on that, on the one hand, and how could it not be, on the other) then there are certainly more extreme [mis]uses of the technology.
As you've considered before (sorli) there are a range of consequences to broadcasting your location while not knowing that you're broadcasting it.
Post a Comment