How much changed when printing arrived?

Thanks, Gutenberg – but we’re too pressed for time to read.(Naughton, 2008)

Naughton’s article discusses the effects that technology has, and that we overestimate the short term impact, and underestimate the long term impact – using the printing press as an example. Naughton goes on to remark that Sir Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the web, is the modern day Gutenberg.

What strikes you as interesting?

The most interesting thing about this statement for me is that given the ‘long term’ we are looking at, how will we ever be able to verify this? The example of the printing press is several hundred years.

Looking at the comments about the use of the British library struck a chord.I am a power browser. I use google docs to surf in and out of papers that may or may not be what I need. Sometimes I want to find more information on a subject, or evidence to support arguments raised by others. This is just like going to a library and skim reading books, which I did in my youth, to find out if they contained anything useful – only quicker!

How clear do you find the argument about the First Law of Technology – for example, the point about overestimating?

The articles we read in H807 spring to mind here, when we talked about the adoption of technology. Naturally every producer wants this adoption to happen quickly, but it’s in ‘crossing the chasm’ (Moore, 2004) that any short term benefits and impacts are realised. I am not sure that one can estimate long term impact. One can have hopes, but do we really imagine that we can prdict what will happen in 500 years? After all, we are still in the infancy of our ‘Web revolution’. As with most things, it’s much easier to plan for the short term impacts. I am not even sure that people think about the long term..after all…how many people truly care about what happens in 100 years?

For me a law needs more than one example to make it even remotely useful. I am not sure that every example could fit into this. For example, contraception. It fell out of fashion after Roman times, and came back into fashion in the last few hundred years? It returned to help against disease in the 1500’s, was petitioned to be banned in the 1800s, and had a huge resurgence in the 19^th and 20^th century. It’s use has split opinions, challenged perceptions, been hailed a sin, and saved millions of people. Yet has Birth control hindered our population growth? Or is this an invention that because there was not a widescale acceptance of it. Has there been long term benefits and disbenefits?

Anyway…..some other laws………….

Melvin Kranzberg's(1985) six laws of technology state:

1. Technology is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral.
2. Invention is the mother of necessity.
3. Technology comes in packages, big and small.
4. Although technology might be a prime element in many public issues, nontechnical factors take precedence in technology-policy decisions.
5. All history is relevant, but the history of technology is the most relevant.
6. Technology is a very human activity - and so is the history of technology.

Dr. Melvin Kranzberg was a professor of the history of technology at the Georgia Institute of Technology and the founding editor of Technology and Culture. 

Or how about Clarke's Three Laws of prediction formulated by the British writer and scientist Arthur C. Clarke.

1. When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
2. The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible.
3. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

Or ….Asimov’s laws……

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

 Personally I may be with Clarke!

Moore, G.A. (2004) ‘Darwin and the demon: innovating within established enterprises’, Harvard Business Review, vol.82, no.7/8, pp.86–92.

Naughton, J. (2008) ‘Thanks, Gutenberg – but we’re too pressed for time to read’, The Observer, 27 January; also available online at http://docs.newsbank.com.libezproxy.open.ac.uk/ openurl?ctx_ver=z39.88-2004&rft_id=info:sid/ iw.newsbank.com:UKNB:OBSC&rft_val_format=info:ofi/ fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rft_dat=11E7B3EDD7DE4678&svc_dat=InfoWeb:aggregated5&req_dat=D77DAA714D5D439CB66B27643275D140 (last accessed 7 February 2012).