4 ms·

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 servi

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.

Tuna-Fish 16y ago
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.
- grammaton 16y ago
  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.
  - KeithMajhor 16y ago
    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.
  - amouat 16y ago
    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.
    - grammaton 16y ago
      Food, water, shelter, medical care. These are fundamental human requirements. The internet is not. Sorry, but it's just not.
- cool-RR 16y ago
  Clothes don't crash spontaneously...
  - randallsquared 16y ago
    Incorrect. I periodically have clothing fail. Typically, of course, I throw away crashed clothing, rather than rebooting it. :)
    - knshaum 16y ago
      The vendor really should supply a patch.
  - Padavies 16y ago
    Janet Jackson may disagree
snippyhollow 16y ago
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.
- mkr-hn 16y ago
  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.
  - snippyhollow 16y ago
    ;-) 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.
    - mkr-hn 16y ago
      From time to time learned expectations override basic logic. Whoops. I'm used to crotchety old people complaining about GPS killing map reading skills.
swombat 16y ago
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.
- nick_urban 16y ago
  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.
gwern 16y ago
It's a perfectly reasonable thesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Mind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Mind). Do you have any objection beside some transitory subjective distaste?
- leot 16y ago
  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).
OO7 16y ago
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.

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.

Tuna-Fish 16y ago

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.

grammaton 16y ago
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.
- KeithMajhor 16y ago
  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.
- amouat 16y ago
  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.
  - grammaton 16y ago
    Food, water, shelter, medical care. These are fundamental human requirements. The internet is not. Sorry, but it's just not.
cool-RR 16y ago
Clothes don't crash spontaneously...
- randallsquared 16y ago
  Incorrect. I periodically have clothing fail. Typically, of course, I throw away crashed clothing, rather than rebooting it. :)
  - knshaum 16y ago
    The vendor really should supply a patch.
- Padavies 16y ago
  Janet Jackson may disagree

snippyhollow 16y ago

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.

mkr-hn 16y ago
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.
- snippyhollow 16y ago
  ;-) 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.
  - mkr-hn 16y ago
    From time to time learned expectations override basic logic. Whoops. I'm used to crotchety old people complaining about GPS killing map reading skills.

swombat 16y ago

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.

nick_urban 16y ago
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.

gwern 16y ago

It's a perfectly reasonable thesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Mind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_Mind). Do you have any objection beside some transitory subjective distaste?

leot 16y ago
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).

OO7 16y ago

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.