The Task:
Pick a communications technology, detail its use and analyze.
The Communication Type:
All communication via a standard cellular phone.
The Usage Breakdown:
Texts Sent: 12
Texts Received: 11
Average time to type message: 30 sec.
Average time to read message: 20 sec.
Total time texting: 9 min. 40 sec.
Calls sent: 0
Calls received: 1
Average time of call: 3 min. 32 sec.
Total time calling: 3 min. 32 sec.
Total Time Communicating: 13 min. 12 sec.
Analysis:
Due to the fact that the day of communicating that I have recorded above started at around 11 o'clock in the morning may have something to do with the relatively low amount of logged cellular communication. It also may have something to do with the fact that most of the people with whom I would have a need to communicate are within earshot of me most of the time. With not a whole lot of necessity to use a cell phone, I chose not to when I can.
As can be seen from the data, texting is the preferred method of communication when I do use my cell phone. That is because most of the communication that I do does not have a lot of urgency to it, or is informal, otherwise I would make a phone call. Also, if the message that needs to be sent or the information that I need to have communicated is not lengthy, the text message predominates over the phone call. This is simply because if the message is simple a text message is, ultimately, faster than a call. This is reversed, however, if the conversation is lengthy because a talking is quicker, and easier, at relaying a lot of information compared to typing.
This type of casual, at your leisure, style of communicating was hard to imagine in the mid 1980's. In Gibson's book, Neuromancer, he writes about a system of conveying information that looks a lot like the Matrix. Information is stored and accessed in a 3D "consensual hallucination," also called cyberspace. I imagine that the information would be stored much like items are around a room. So why doesn't our communication and information sharing today happen in this 3D "hallucination" affect?
I believe that the answer is extremely simple. No, its not just that the technology didn't allow for cyberspace to develop that way (although with the technology that we have today it could very well happen). I believe that the 3D version would just take to much time and effort to use. For example, in my communications I generally, if not always, use the method that is going to give the result that I want the fastest and easiest. I wouldn't call on the phone, or even text for that matter, a person who is standing right beside me. That would be inefficient and time-consuming. So why would I "walk" around in a 3D cyberspace to find some information when I can just type it in on the computer or click a few buttons? People like to store information on their computers, or the internet, because they don't have to go search through that filing cabinet to get a file. With the computer you simply type in what you want, and click a button or two. Even a Google search, for something that isn't on your computer already, happens in a matter of a few seconds.
All of that is not even mentioning the fact of how you would access a technology like Gibson's Matrix. In the book, the character Case has to attach nodes and sensors on his body, called "jacking in," in order to use the Matrix. To me, that sounds a lot more complicated than opening a phone or clicking on your browser icon. Not only is it complicated but it also requires a certain amount of dedication. As the requirements to use something increase, the dedication to use that thing also increase. Because accessing the internet only requires the click of a button, and contacting someone only requires typing a few words, the dedication to performing that action is very small. For instance, just walk down the street and see how many people are walking and texting. There are even those who would text while driving. Some people argue that multitasking doesn't exist but whatever these people are doing its awful close to it. Case on the other hand, cannot do things like this because of the dedication that "jacking in" and using the Matrix requires. In the fast paced world of today there is no time that can be wasted in communicating and gathering information. Why use a method, like Gibson's Matrix, that requires so much attention yet achieves the same results as another method, like the Internet, with far less strings attached?
I agree with you that Gibson's matrix just isn't as practical or convenient as the internet as we know it. It would take a much larger commitment to use the matrix than it does to log onto the internet for a few minutes. The casual use of the internet would probably not be possible in Gibson's world. The idea of the matrix might sound cool but I don't think it would be nearly as useful in everyday life as our version of the internet.
ReplyDeleteP.S. I like the way you structured this post. It caught my attention and made me more interested to read the analysis.
I'd also like to agree with your point about how the usage of 3D space would be inconvienent for quick communitcation. This was an point that really hadn't dawned on me until I read your post. I also agree with your statement that your lack of mobile communication has to do with the face that in college, most of the people that you would need to communicate with would be just a few doors down from you. I know that's true for me as well.
ReplyDeleteHere you begin with a very clever and logical claim:
ReplyDelete"To me, that sounds a lot more complicated than opening a phone or clicking on your browser icon. Not only is it complicated but it also requires a certain amount of dedication. As the requirements to use something increase, the dedication to use that thing also increase."
You are dead-on right about why we don't use Case's form of interface. This is also why we don't use avatars in a 3D world in the class, but meet in person. We do not need a virtual environment to achieve any tasks so it remains simpler to meet in person.
The last claim, about dedication being proportional to requirements, needs some clarity. Are you saying that as the requirements increase, the needed dedication for mastery increases?
If that is what you mean, it makes sense: one can drive a car fine and never be capable of competing in a Formula-One race.
Sorry about the confusion about my statement on the requirements and dedication.
ReplyDeleteDr. Essid I agree with the interpretation that you have proposed but I was trying to get across another point for which I don't think I provided enough information.
What I was trying to illustrate was that if something, like the Internet, required hours of waiting just to be able to type in your first search into Google, your dedication to using the Internet would have to be very great.
Back when the only internet access available to me was dialup, I would have to do something very similar to this. As a result, when I finally was able to use the Internet I would put aside all other chores or activities because I had already designated so much effort to the internet. It would not make any sense for me to spend hours waiting to be able to do a task only for that task to last 30 seconds or be insignificant.
This is what I was trying to demostrate with my claim that, if the requirements to use a technology are great, the dedication to using that technology is also great.
Thanks for the clarification. Back in the days of dial-up Web surfing, we had a routine:
ReplyDelete--pull up page
--leave room to do something else (or go to lunch!)
--come back
--read page.
Imagine if Internet speeds had never risen. I doubt that we'd have abandoned the Net. Instead, we'd have structured our online routines differently to account for the lag.
One early use of the term "avatar" was for a subprocess that might do useful work for you while you did other things. It might shop for airline tickets, search a search engine, and so forth. As Internet speeds increased, the use of that sense of "avatar" waned.