CONVENIENCE
One
of the motivations behind technological innovation is the hope that someday we
might be able to overcome all human limitations. Among
those, the two that have instigated more discussion are the limits of time and
space. As digital technology and social media continue to advance, the
human dream of transcending time and space seems to become less and less a
utopia. Technologies that allow us to communicate across the world, to move
faster and more comfortably, and to be in multiple places at once without
having to be physically present, are praised by many for their ability to make
life more “convenient”. Indeed, greater interconnectivity and the chance to
“dovetail” trying tasks to technology can and should be considered positive
outcomes of technological developments. However, praising the benefits that
technology doubtlessly can have, should not lead us to glorify new devices
failing to take into consideration other implications of “progress” such as: convenience
for whom? And convenience to what extent?
In
many cases, technologies are built to favor elites; they meet the “needs” of
profitable consumers and, thus, represent a convenience only to those that can
afford it. They can contribute to the
creation of an even greater gap in the standard of life between the wealthy and
the poor. Moreover, as Slack and Wise argue, our world has evolved in so many
ways that those that used to be wants have often become cultural necessities.
What happens to those that cannot afford to buy those cultural necessities? As
the authors of the book Culture = Technology
emphasize, the problem now seems to be that “to be
a fully functioning adult member of the culture, you are likely to have
accepted as necessities various technologies and technological practices that
are not biological, but are rather cultural necessities.” In fact,
shifts in society and cultural changes have made the line between needs and
wants even more blurred. There are many technologies we end up needing in our
culture, cars being just one of them. The problem is, not all can afford these
new technologies, and those that cannot, end up missing out on many
opportunities.
Another
issue concerning convenience is that while technology can make certain things
easier, cheaper, and faster, there is always a loss, often ignored in the
process. To name one: what about the satisfaction that comes from doing things
the hard way? If things are too easy, they become sullen. Slack and Wise argue
“convenience offers the ultimate quick fix that is doomed to leave us needing
yet another”. Indeed, while technology does make us more productive, it also
makes us more dissatisfied.
The
lesson I learned reading this chapter of the book is that convenience always
comes with a price.
My
question is, how much is convenience worth? What are we willing to give up for
it?
