Monday, October 24, 2011

Hypermediacy and Convergence as Prosthetics

I know it isn't exactly an example of modern film making at its finest, but there's this scene in Iron Man 2 where Tony Stark (Robert Downey, Jr.) is being questioned by the U.S. Secretary of Defense. Stark is asked whether or not he is in possession of the Iron Man weapon, and Stark responds that what he has is better defined as a high-tech prosthesis. A few moments later, he pulls out a smart phone that literally allows Stark to manipulate the real world through an example of ubiquitous computing.

The reason I bring this up is that I see the eventual convergence of technologies as well as hypermediacy as eventually functioning as a virtual/digital prosthetic--a seamless and essential extension of ourselves. I think the corporations. hegemomic overlords, etc. want this to be the eventual goal as well but maybe don't know it yet.

Maybe Apple knows it. When the iPhone was first released in 2007, I read an article (it might have actually been on Wired, but I don't remember exactly) that explained to iPhone users how and when it was appropriate to look up information when you were with friends in some social setting. The point of the article was to give geeks gentle advice on how not to be a know-it-all with their new gadget and constant internet access, but what I took from it was how constant internet access would eventually fundamentally change how we interacted with each other. Don't remember the name of that movie with the cowboy guy from Ghost Rider and The Big Lebowski? In a few seconds, you'll know his name is Sam Elliot, and you'll know the name of the movie, too. Apple wants you to see your iPhone not only as a tool or gadget but part of your identity. We're going to become so accustomed to having video communication, voice communication, libraries of data and information, picture galleries, etc. all available to us at all times, we're going to become dependent on it.

I don't think that's a good or bad thing; I just see it as the way it's going to be. It won't be universal, not for at least 20 or 30 years, but as baby-boomers like my parents age, retire and die, those of us who grew up with technology and are completely comfortable with it will see its place as an extension of our identities as natural. Privacy concerns won't really matter to us like it does to some groups today.

Internet browsers won't ever actually go away entirely, as the Wired article referenced in Bolter and Grusin posits (see 221-226), but they will first become more important as they replace the need for a desktop computer. I mentioned this in my introductory post, but I have 5 machines I use consistently right now: my desktop at home, my office computer, my tablet, my phone, and my netbook. I can access all of my necessary files on any of these computers due to the way I use apps primarily available in an internet browser. I bet Google, Dropbox, and the other services I use see me as the ideal customer because I've become somewhat dependent on what they're offering. As companies start to realize what it means to have everyone constantly using a different digital device, the smart ones will offer a way to make accessing the virtual self across platforms seamless and natural. The actual medium will become inconsequential.

When that happens, the corporations will love it. Advertising will be everywhere, and everything will be monetized. Instead of using your tablet one way and your PC another, your individual digital experience will seamlessly transfer across all technological platforms in an example of ubiquitous computing. Here's kind of an example of what I mean:



Of course, the reality in that video would be hell, at least from our perspective now. Maybe by the time that technology develops we're have become gradually accustomed to it--like boiling a frog.

What does this mean for tech writing? As readers/users/our audiences gradually shift towards the "prosthetic" model of technology use from the current "window" model (having a very obvious interface through which technology is accessed instead of a seamless platform), I think we'll have to assist in that transition somehow.

I don't know, though. Maybe it's because I've been awake drinking Mountain Dew all night, but watching that video again kind of makes me want to throw up.

2 comments:

  1. I think this is how my grandpa views the world I live in. It's comfortable for me, but he would much rather be back on the farm with very little media, no technology more "advance" than a TV, and no noise louder than a bird chirping. Personally, I would find the decor visually exhausting and would take a .22 to any speakers that insisted on playing that remediated version of "Girl from Ipanema." Your video reminded me of the creepy advertisements from the movie "Serenity" that were holographic projections that followed everyone around. This was my favorite ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7idn3PcKBM

    I loved your post. As usual, your fluid writing style complements a wealth of wonderful ideas.

    ReplyDelete