Slashdot Log In
Jamais Cascio on Gadgets and the Future
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Mon Aug 07, 2006 03:22 AM
from the too-many-blogs dept.
from the too-many-blogs dept.
Armchair Anarchist writes "Futurismic has just posted the first column from its new monthly contributor, the renowned Jamais Cascio. Cascio is best known as a co-founder of Worldchanging.com, but is also a prolific blogger (at his own site 'Open The Future'), writer, public speaker and pundit on many aspects of futurism and foresight. This new piece sees him discussing the way futurist thinkers tend to focus on gadgets and technology, and advocating the use of more critical approaches."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading ... Please wait.

Is this guy int he right line of work? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Is this guy int he right line of work? (Score:2)
Maybe he should change his name to "Always HP" and get sponsored ?
Don't try this at home, kids (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Don't try this at home, kids (Score:1)
Ah, so it's not just me who found the blurb a bit strange then.
I mean, does this guy have any actual experience in the industry he's talking about? The blurb just mentioned he talks alot...
Re:Don't try this at home, kids (Score:2, Funny)
Seriously, the column linked isn't all that bad; but it's hardly newsworthy.
Re:Don't try this at home, kids (Score:1)
And his main argument is flawed, too: (Score:1)
Re:Don't try this at home, kids (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Don't try this at home, kids (Score:2)
Uhh... so that's what it's called now? Well see ya guys later... I'm going to indulge in some "science fiction," if you know what I mean.
yes and no (Score:3, Insightful)
Take the mobile phone, for instance. When people were imagining mobile phones and how they would work, how much at
Re:yes and no or cell phone usage (Score:2)
People driving their cars through traffic while holding a phone to their ear
Re:Jamais Cascio facts (Score:1, Redundant)
Society creates art, or art creates society (Score:4, Insightful)
The answer, obviously, is that neither choice is exclusive of the other, and that both are often true.
Re:Society creates art, or art creates society (Score:1)
Yes, some call it interaction, and some add "weak" and "strong".
CC.
I'm sure he is a splendid chap 'n all... (Score:4, Insightful)
And really - a futurologist who finishes his column with "I can't wait to see how it turns out." - that's right up there with "only time will tell" - much beloved of lazy trainy-journalists who have got tired of thinking and have completed their allotted word count.
Re:I'm sure he is a splendid chap 'n all... (Score:1)
Last time I heard futurist in a sentence (Score:2)
Re:Last time I heard futurist in a sentence (Score:2)
Re:Last time I heard futurist in a sentence (Score:1)
Re:Last time I heard futurist in a sentence (Score:2)
Technology embodies our values (Score:5, Interesting)
Sounds like he's just discovered what Langdon Winner [langdonwinner.org] has been saying since the 1970s, and others since before then. Slashdot frequently sees posts like "a razor blade can be used for good or evil" implying technology is value neutral -- but it isn't. Technology embodies our values, especially when looked at as a system including favorite economic stories at the time -- including a decision to invest in, say, designing nuclear weapons design or marketing larger SUVs instead of say, curing river blindness or designing electric cars -- decisions driven by values.
Contrast, say, Disney's investments in controlling media with DRM versus the RepRap [reprap.org] project to make a free 3D printer. Winner goes further in his book _Autonomous Technology_ and suggests large bureaucracies "reverse adapt", changing their environment to perpetuate themselves, including the legal environment. So, if you can't make or share your own media or 3D models, then you are dependent on Disney or whoever. Consider the kind of technology to sustain the values described here: CLAWS: Creating Livable Alternatives to Wage Slavery [whywork.org] and how it might differ from the politics and policies and technologies and infrastructure of today. Or from this essay The Abolition of Work [whywork.org]: "Clearly these ideology-mongers have serious differences over how to divvy up the spoils of power. Just as clearly, none of them have any objection to power as such and all of them want to keep us working. ... Only a small and diminishing fraction of work serves any useful purpose independent of the defense and reproduction of the work-system and its political and legal appendages. Twenty years ago, Paul and Percival Goodman estimated that just five percent of the work then being done -- presumably the figure, if accurate, is lower now -- would satisfy our minimal needs for food, clothing and shelter. Theirs was only an educated guess but the main point is quite clear: directly or indirectly, most work serves the unproductive purposes of commerce or social control."
Cascio article (Score:2)
Re:Cascio article (Score:1)
Correction: The intelligent machine built in th US would not be officially censored.
Re:Cascio article (Score:1)
You point out the humongous weak point and fallacy with all such "futurist" stuff. According to the 1974 Senate Select Committee Investigation on the Transportation Industry, a successful conspiracy to
Futurists get it all wrong lately. (Score:2)
Examples? sure! I currently have great TV service at home, I do not have Cable or Dish I use the Internet. Some of the shows I want to watch are NOT
futurists (Score:3, Informative)
Who? (Score:2)
"Futurismic has just posted the first column from its new monthly contributor, the renowned Jamais Cascio.
Who?
Cascio is best known as a co-founder of Worldchanging.com,
Wow. They changed the world so much I never heard of them.
but is also a prol
Who gets to comment? (Score:3, Insightful)
This snippet from the blogger's bio encapsulates, basically, why calls (like this one) for a turn away from "content" to "a more critical approach" make me nervous. It's true that social values influence technology, and that the nexus of the two is an important area of study-- but why is it that offers to critically examine that nexus always seem to come from outsiders who aren't themselves involved or well-versed in the technology?
Everybody has an opinion, naturally, but a learned commentary on bioengineering, coming from a poli-sci type who may or may not have taken even the most introductory biology courses, would carry about as much weight for me as a lecture on Aristotle from my cocker spaniel. If "critical futurism" is poised to become a valid scholarly/intellectual discipline, I'd much rather see it populated by actual scientists and engineers-- people who're themselves helping to create the future, and who should therefore be in a good position to comment on how it's going-- than by film-school types who've read Foucault but can't do math.
Futurism is and always has been a scam (Score:2)
Re:Who gets to comment? (Score:2)
For what it's worth, my focus in my study of anthropology was human evolution, and I spent about six years post-grad school working in IT. If you check the archives of my articles at Worldchanging.com, you'll see that I have a reasonable
Jamais Explores Own Rectum (Score:2)
Let's elevate those people who actually achieve something making changes in our society like Li
Re:Jamais Explores Own Rectum (Score:1)
Linking T
Re:jamais..Some people have no shame.. (Score:1, Flamebait)
You sound like 'Bill Gates', with your arrogance & ignorance!!"
Where did I tell anyone to do anything? Yes, I know what Linus does and has done (for the most p
Re:Jamais Explores Own Rectum (Score:1)
Didn't we have enough Political Sci turned pundits (Score:2)