l*y
发帖数: 21010 | 1 We used to worry that people who don't own a smartphone (in the
developing world and in poor neighborhoods), i.e. a cheap device to access
the Internet, would be left behind, unable to capitalize on the vast body of
knowledge available online. The smartphone would have been yet another rich
/poor divide.
Smartphones have become cheap enough that most of the world now has one.
The effect of smartphones has been different: it is creating two cultures,
but not based on connectivity to the Internet (which is now virtually
universal), rather based on the preferred device for accessing the Internet.
People who tend to use a computer of some sort with a decent screen, a
decent keyboard and office tools like a word processor, are more likely to
read long articles and even books, browse extensively, write and read long
emails, engage in lengthy discussions with near and remote parties. In other
words, they tend to be "literate".
People who tend to use a phone to access the Internet (small screen,
slow speed), don't read long articles, don't browse beyond the first search
result, mainly click that they like someone's picture or post, mostly
communicate via short text messages, don't engage in lengthy discussions. In
other words, they tend to be "illiterate".
(If i texted this discussion to one such person, s/he would simply reply
"agreed! how r u? - Sent from my smartphone": they don't even know that one
may be discussing their habits, because that's too long of a discussion to
enter on the small screen and the small keyboard of a device whose batteries
die quickly)
The propensity to read/write deeper thoughts does not precede but
follows the choice of device. If you are exposed to poets every day, you'll
tend to read and write poetry. If you are exposed to newspapers every day,
you'll tend to read the stories. If you are exposed to smartphones every day
, you'll tend to text. If you tend to text and skim the surface of the
Internet, you indirectly shape your mind to only deal with superficial
matters.
Whether a cause or an effect, heavy smartphone users also tend to belong
to the category of people who don't read books, and don't subscribe to
magazines/newspapers (regardless of income, race, nationality and age group)
. Therefore there is no major ulterior source of information on world
affairs. Documentaries might be their main source of information on world
affairs because smartphones still have not replaced the movie-on-demand
services that require a tv set (a large screen) to watch the movie.
Specialized blogs might be the second most important source of information.
Members of the smartphone subculture (regardless of whether they come
from affluent families or not and regardless of their education) have no
time for politics, poetry, philosophy, etc .
For example, social media used to be platforms to have (heated)
discussions about all sorts of topics, but now the postings and the comments
to those posts tend to be cryptic (and misspelled) one-line sentences
In terms of interpersonal communications the smartphone also ends up
causing a regression to the pre-email age: if you want to have a lengthy
discussion with someone, you'd better do it over the phone. Texting won't do
it: too difficult to exchange lengthy thoughts. De facto this marks a
return to the age of the phone conversation, before email took off in the
1990s.
The smartphone user tends to conceive the Internet as a tool to find
restaurants and gas stations, not as a post-telephone communication tool.
This marks a return to the Internet of the 1970s that was used (outside of
work/research) to find very basic information.
Not coincidentally, the smartphone is often used to play music in a mode
that is lo-fi compared with the hi-fi equipment that has been available
since the 1980s. This too marks a return to the quality of the old
transistor radios and early cassette players.
Typing skills that had become essential in the 1990s are rapidly being
lost in favor of "thumbing" on the tiny keyboards of the smartphone
Virtually none of the users of smartphones and various kinds of
computers now knows how a computer works, what a transistor is and why it
has to be made of silicon, facts that had become mandatory knowledge two
generations earlier
Literacy used to be roughly determined by proximity to wealth and
education, now it is determined by penetration of one specific technology,
which might actually be higher in (wealthy and highly-educated) high-tech
centers like Silicon Valley than in provincial towns. |
|
