< Return to Video

Douglas Rushkoff - Computers for Humans

  • 0:00 - 0:07
    ♪[Jazz music]♪
  • 0:07 - 0:09
    So yeah, being one of the first
  • 0:09 - 0:14
    net culture or computers in society writers
  • 0:14 - 0:19
    was, strategically, a poor move for me.
  • 0:20 - 0:22
    And I'm living proof, though,
    you can still survive it,
  • 0:22 - 0:27
    if you can get through it somehow,
    by answering e-mail more slowly
  • 0:29 - 0:30
    It's funny,
  • 0:30 - 0:33
    I wrote some notes because I thought
    I should be responsible,
  • 0:33 - 0:36
    because you guys are real computer studies,
  • 0:36 - 0:38
    computer science people,
    as opposed to just,
  • 0:39 - 0:40
    you know,
  • 0:40 - 0:45
    your average,
    digitally illiterate audience.
  • 0:46 - 0:50
    So I don't really need to make the case
    - I probably don't -
  • 0:50 - 0:54
    on why learning something about
    digital technology is a smart thing,
  • 0:54 - 0:57
    because you guys have already
    made that choice.
  • 0:59 - 1:03
    But something that occurred to me
    on the way here, actually,
  • 1:03 - 1:06
    that you might not realize as young people
  • 1:06 - 1:09
    if you don't mind being called that
  • 1:11 - 1:14
    ...is that it's very hard to get
  • 1:14 - 1:19
    an accurate sense of the biases
    of the digital media environment...
  • 1:19 - 1:23
    ...when you've been raised inside it.
  • 1:23 - 1:29
    In other words, what I want
    to suggest to you is that
  • 1:29 - 1:35
    those of us who are old enough to have
    experienced and consciously experienced
  • 1:35 - 1:42
    the shift from a pre-digital media
    environment to a digital media environment
  • 1:42 - 1:43
    actually
  • 1:44 - 1:47
    understand something or sense something
    or experience something
  • 1:47 - 1:51

    about the biases of digital technology
  • 1:51 - 1:56
    that is relatively difficult for those
    of you who have been raised
  • 1:56 - 1:58
    with digital technology to get.
  • 1:58 - 2:02
    Right now this is the opposite argument
    I made through most of my career.
  • 2:02 - 2:06
    In 1995, I wrote a book called,
    Playing the Future, where I argued that,
  • 2:06 - 2:08
    "Don't worry, you grown ups!
  • 2:08 - 2:11
    Digital technology is coming
    and you feel overwhelmed.
  • 2:11 - 2:15
    But you guys are digital immigrants
    whereas kids are digital natives.
  • 2:15 - 2:19
    So you'll speak the language like
    an immigrant, they'll speak like a native.
  • 2:19 - 2:21
    You're always going to feel
    slightly out of place and unsure,
  • 2:21 - 2:24
    and every time you have a hypertext link,
  • 2:24 - 2:27
    you're gonna be a disoriented
    because we're not used to that,
  • 2:27 - 2:30
    whereas kids are going to experience
    that very naturally.
  • 2:30 - 2:33
    That what looks disjointed to us,
    will be a natural terrain for them.
  • 2:33 - 2:37
    And they will have command,
    don't worry, the kids are alright."
  • 2:37 - 2:42
    But as I've grown older, and
    as I've watched where cyberspace has gone,
  • 2:42 - 2:45
    and where our culture has gone, or hasn't,
  • 2:46 - 2:52
    I realize that some of my elders were
    actually more right about this than I was.
  • 2:52 - 2:53
    And in reading all the
  • 2:53 - 2:57
    finally catching up
    with who I was supposed to read,
  • 2:57 - 3:01
    when I was younger, McCluen and Ong,
    and all the great media theorists.
  • 3:01 - 3:05
    I would read about the digital or
    the media environments,
  • 3:05 - 3:07
    and this notion that McCluen had that,
  • 3:07 - 3:12
    if you ask a fish about water he wouldn't
    be able to tell you what it is, right?
  • 3:12 - 3:18
    Because the fish is swimming in the water.
    The fish not aware of the water.
  • 3:18 - 3:21
    If you ask someone who is raised
    in a television environment,
  • 3:21 - 3:23
    "Oh, what about the impact of television
    on you?"
  • 3:23 - 3:25
    You can't say it because you're living
    in it.
  • 3:25 - 3:28
    You're living in that media environment.
  • 3:29 - 3:32
    Likewise, those of us who are living in
    a digital media environment,
  • 3:32 - 3:36
    it's very difficult for us
    to parse its effect,
  • 3:36 - 3:39
    for us to feel what it is
  • 3:39 - 3:42
    for us to understand the difference
    between
  • 3:43 - 3:45
    what it is to be a human being
  • 3:45 - 3:50
    and what it is to be a digital being.
  • 3:50 - 3:51
    And
  • 3:53 - 3:59
    being able to parse it, though,
    being able to begin to look at that
  • 3:59 - 4:03
    What Norbert Weinert used to call,
  • 4:03 - 4:05
    "the human use of human beings."
  • 4:05 - 4:08
    He was one of the first people to talk
    about cybernetics
  • 4:08 - 4:10
    I think he invented the word, actually,
    back when, cybernetics.
  • 4:10 - 4:13
    Even though it got stolen.
  • 4:13 - 4:17
    He was really looking at as we develop
    a computer environment,
  • 4:17 - 4:19
    how will we recognize the difference
  • 4:19 - 4:21
    between humans and the machines
    that we're in?
  • 4:21 - 4:25
    How will we understand how to create
    a human,
  • 4:25 - 4:29
    or a humanity-encouraging,
    digital media environment?
  • 4:31 - 4:36
    Now the reason why I think this
    is important is because most of my peers
  • 4:36 - 4:39
    strongly disagree with this sentiment
  • 4:39 - 4:42
    Most of my peers, and call them
    the sort of,
  • 4:42 - 4:45
    the Negroponte, Kevin Kelley,
  • 4:45 - 4:48
    Wired Magazine, Chris Anderson,
  • 4:49 - 4:55
    all the way to Ray Kurzwhile
    on that spectrum, Clay Shirkey.
  • 4:55 - 4:59
    There's this sense, and I used to have
    some of it,
  • 4:59 - 5:03
    this sort of letter ripped sense
    about technology
  • 5:03 - 5:06
    that is uncomfortably consonant with
    corporate capitalism.
  • 5:06 - 5:08
    But that's another story.
  • 5:08 - 5:09
    That
  • 5:09 - 5:12
    human beings are merely one stage
  • 5:12 - 5:17
    in information's inevitable evolution
    towards greater states of complexity.
  • 5:17 - 5:20
    And they tell this very compelling story
  • 5:20 - 5:24
    about the beginning of time all the way
    through now.
  • 5:24 - 5:28
    That matter has been groping
    toward greater states of complexity.
  • 5:28 - 5:33
    That we had atoms became molecules
    and molecules became
  • 5:33 - 5:37
    sort of these weird pre-proto-life things
    which became cells
  • 5:37 - 5:40
    and now we have this whole life thing
    that happened.
  • 5:40 - 5:42
    And life got very complex
    through evolution
  • 5:42 - 5:43
    and we had people
  • 5:43 - 5:45
    And people built machines,
  • 5:45 - 5:50
    and machines are just sort of in that big
    blue, overtake humanity moment.
  • 5:51 - 5:52
    And when they do,
  • 5:52 - 5:57
    then machines, our computers, our networks
    will be the real host
  • 5:57 - 5:59
    for the evolution of information
  • 5:59 - 6:02
    and we human beings can tend
    to those machines
  • 6:02 - 6:05
    or, at best, upload our consciousness
  • 6:05 - 6:08
    and then they will continue that journey
    for us.
  • 6:09 - 6:12
    You know, and each one has
    a different metaphor for explaining it
  • 6:12 - 6:15
    You know, whether it's Kevin talking about
  • 6:15 - 6:18
    what technology wants, right?
    What technology wants,
  • 6:18 - 6:20
    like it really wants.
  • 6:20 - 6:23
    It's not bias towards something, but
    it wants something,
  • 6:23 - 6:25
    we've made this thing.
  • 6:25 - 6:28
    Just as God made people,
    people made technology,
  • 6:28 - 6:31
    and this child will go on
    wanting something.
  • 6:32 - 6:35
    Or Ray Kurzwhile who will talk
    about the singularity,
  • 6:35 - 6:40
    which I'm sure you've all read
    or heard about, even on,
  • 6:40 - 6:44
    if you find out about it in Vice Magazine
    or anything, at this point
  • 6:44 - 6:47
    The idea that technology reaches
    this point of,
  • 6:48 - 6:52
    not self-consciousness or self-awareness
    necessarily, but it just surpasses us
  • 6:52 - 6:55
    It becomes this thing and can keep going.
  • 6:57 - 6:58
    It's a...
  • 7:01 - 7:05
    for me it's a discomforting view
    of humanity
  • 7:05 - 7:09
    but it's also, I would argue,
    an incorrect one, you know?
  • 7:09 - 7:12
    It's one that is...
  • 7:13 - 7:19
    it's one that is the result of living
    unconsciously in a digital media environment
  • 7:19 - 7:23
    It's one where you let the digital media
    environment dictate
  • 7:23 - 7:25
    what you are and how you think
    about the world
  • 7:25 - 7:28
    rather than maintaining some
    sense of humanity in that.
  • 7:28 - 7:30
    So, what's interesting to me
  • 7:30 - 7:34
    as I look at the history of computing,
    which now we have
  • 7:34 - 7:37
    and as we look at computers in society,
    which is a real thing.
  • 7:37 - 7:42
    I mean, 20 years ago, 10 years ago,
    when we taught courses like this, it was futurism.
  • Not Synced
    Computers in Society was a course was a course in, "What's it gonna be like someday when people have e-mail?"
  • Not Synced
    I mean, there were times, and I'm sure you were in those conversations
  • Not Synced
    when people like me used to go to a cocktail party or go to a publisher, or explain to a magazine editor.
  • Not Synced
    Someday people are going to have their own computers
  • Not Synced
    They are gonna send messages to eachother using little text editors
  • Not Synced
    using, you know, word processors,
  • Not Synced
    and they would literally laugh us out of the room.
  • Not Synced
    They did not - they - it seemed so outrageous, that - Or they'd walk around
  • Not Synced
    No, you're not gonna have to implant chips in people, they're gonna walk around with phones that are gonna track them everywhere they go
  • Not Synced
    and they're gonna do this voluntarily
  • Not Synced
    They're gonna give all their information - it's all just - and no one believed us. But, of course that happened.
  • Not Synced
    But, the thing that's interesting to me about computer history, if we're gonna follow it from the history of humanity
  • Not Synced
    rather than the history of technology, right? Let's not worry about paper tape to punch cards to tape to discs to hard drives to RAM.
  • Not Synced
    Let's not worry about machine evolution. But you look at the difference in people, right?
  • Not Synced
    If we look at history as the human story rather than the story of stuff
  • Not Synced
    then the interesting thing becomes - the big switch, I think, is the shift from a pre-literate to a literate society, right?
  • Not Synced
    When we look at the impact of the printing press.
  • Not Synced
    Do we talk about it in terms of, "Oh, look! These rooms filled up with books!"
  • Not Synced
    No, that's not the part that's interesting.
  • Not Synced
    The part that is interesting is people learned to read
  • Not Synced
    and then when they learned to read, they had personal interpretations of the Bible, right?
  • Not Synced
    So we had a Protestant Reformation, with people rebelling against the Church,
  • Not Synced
    So we had the idea of "one man, one vote," because everyone has their own perspective.
  • Not Synced
    It coincided with prospective painting.
  • Not Synced
    It coincided with central banking.
  • Not Synced
    And all of these other, very, analagous human inventions that were all about people having individual perspectives,
  • Not Synced
    "One man, one vote," it led to the Enlightenment, and all this other stuff.
  • Not Synced
    Consumerism, Industrial Era and everything else.
  • Not Synced
    When we look at digital technology I think we have to look at it that way.
  • Not Synced
    In other words, what is the difference between a pre-literate digital society and a post-literate digital society?
  • Not Synced
    You know, I'm over arguing for digital literacy. I think digital literacy is inevitable, you know?
  • Not Synced
    I feel like I'm making that - when I, and I, it's my main talk that I do.
  • Not Synced
    It's like, you know, "Programmer be programmed!" And I wrote this book, Programmer Be Programmed.
  • Not Synced
    We have to learn to program. If you don't learn how to program, you're just swimming blindly in a sea of information.
  • Not Synced
    Kids don't understand the biases of the technologies they use.
  • Not Synced
    You know, if you ask a kid what Facebook is for, he'll say Facebook is here to help him make friends.
  • Not Synced
    But we all know Facebook is really not here - it's really here to monetize the social graft and all that.
Title:
Douglas Rushkoff - Computers for Humans
Description:

DOUGLAS RUSHKOFF talk "Computers for Humans" in the Computers & Society Speaker Series at the Courant Institute NYC on Nov 27 2012.

Users do not know how to program their computers, nor do they care. They spend much more time and energy trying to figure out how to use them to program one another, instead. And this is a potentially grave mistake. Just as the invention of text utterly transformed human society, disconnecting us from much of what we held sacred, our migration to the digital realm will also require a new template for
maintaining our humanity. In this talk, Dr. Douglas Rushkoff -- author of Program or Be Programmed, Life Inc, and the upcoming Present Shock, shares the biases of digital media, and what that means for how we should use and make them.

Additional Camera: Brittany Vanbibber

PUNKCAST 2115

http://isoc-ny.org/p2/4502

Webcast Support: NYI http://nyi.net

more » « less
Video Language:
English
Team:
Captions Requested
Duration:
01:13:55

English subtitles

Incomplete

Revisions Compare revisions