Military Review

About demons in the car and memes of destruction

32
About demons in the car and memes of destructionHere, some argue that, I quote, “the growth in the number of tablets and the development of broadband wireless Internet will lead to the fact that the very perception of information will change: time will become too expensive a resource for which information will have to be fought by all available means. The format of short - from 10 to 30 seconds - video sketches will be widely used. The average time to watch a video will decrease. As a result, people completely stop memorizing anything. Why is this necessary when there is a handy tablet with voice control at your fingertips that will quickly find any information? The consequences are scary to imagine. ”


Reading this kind of statement is weird.

Humanity had to "stop remembering" many thousands of years ago, with each century aggravating the likelihood of loss - well, of course, if Alexander’s fears have at least some soil. After all, a few thousand years ago, writing appeared. Writing down something valuable, the person obviously helped himself not to forget about it, which supposedly should have led to the loss of the ability to memorize.

Recording methods have been improved: from arbitrary symbolic marks with serifs on a stone to printing technology, extremely cheap pencil pens at the cost price and the same publicly available paper. For several centuries, if desired, people can carry with them a notebook and the writing materials necessary for its use. And in the twentieth century, all this could already fit in a breast pocket, which many did.

Without any, we will notice, computers, wishing wrote down everything that not to forget about it. People kept calendars not to miss the date, glued papers with reminders to themselves on the refrigerator or on the mirror. Some even made secretaries for themselves, one of whose duties was to remind the employer of upcoming affairs.

Why didn't all this lead to the loss of the ability to remember something? Why, instead, has the number of what the average person remembers not decreased, but increased?

Elementary.

First, there can be no such radical evolutionary changes in a pitiful several thousand years. Evolutionary account - hundreds of thousands and millions of years.

Secondly, the usefulness of memory has not gone away. It has even increased many times - since most people’s activities have shifted from performing the simplest mechanical actions towards multi-step work that requires analysis and planning. To use the recorded, you must be able to keep it in memory at least for a while - while you look at other recorded information. For analysis, it is necessary at least for a while to remember what has just been read, for, generally speaking, analysis always includes a set of facts and theses, and not just one. Man, therefore, is more often trained in memorization than a few thousand years ago. And led him to this state including the ability to store information somewhere else besides her own head.

Human memory has quite definite limits, both in terms of the number of things that can be simultaneously held in “RAM” and in terms of long-term capacity. However, qualitative leaps in technology rather quickly required the ability to go beyond these limits, and it was this opportunity that was realized through the invention of "writing" in the broad sense of the word - not as the ability to only write text, but in general the ability to store information using symbolic symbols including illustrations, diagrams, and so on.

Thanks to this remarkable invention (which, of course, was not “one-act”, but stretched in time and space), scattered facts could be recorded - not only in the coming days, but for many months, years, or even centuries. Not only for yourself, but also for those who will live after you, or who live at the same time as you, but very far away.

The generalization of the facts led to the possibility of “archiving memory”: now it was possible to memorize not individual results, each separately, but their generalization. Not "numbers", but "formula". Not specific ratios of specific quantities, but the regularity of the ratios of all quantities of a certain class.

That was where the horror was! Avon as - "memorize the formula." Is this what, “young people will now forget how to memorize” ?! Boys Boyes

Instead, the next generation began to memorize more and better. First, because of the change in the nature of the activity associated with technological progress caused by including the invention of writing, and secondly, because they actually began to train more often. The biological structure of the head remained the same, but it already had the ability to train. You do something all the time - you start to do it better and better. Information is usually written down in order to use it, and when it is read it is “loaded” from a sheet of paper into the operational memory of a person. More downloads - more training - better develop the corresponding ability.

Against the background of this huge leap - from memorizing private observations to recording patterns - the ability to write something into an electronic device actually turns out to be a minor amendment to the one already created. Yes, now, with the advent of computers, it has become much easier to store records and even among them it has become possible to find the required items much faster than even in the recent past. However, if the previous, much more ambitious step did not “kill the ability”, but instead led to its development, then why would the current step manifest itself in a strictly opposite way?

In the presence of writing, “a convenient tablet, which is always at hand” is almost the same as “a notebook, which is always at hand,” and the availability of the Internet is similar to having a library card of the Lenin Library. Faster? OK. It's good. But what's terrible? Only in that faster? Good only when slow? But why not remove the catalogs in the Lenin Library that allow you to quickly find the book you need? Surely only the need to manually sort through all the books, arranged in a random order, will keep humanity's ability to memorize!

Or is the fact that “the information is simplified to thirty-second clips”? Well, this is not a matter of the carrier, but of the information itself. What, the one who now spends all time for viewing of such rollers, earlier at this time would study the theoretical physics? Oh no, he would have watched football on TV, gladiator fights or how the river flows. If he didn’t have simple access to pop content, he would simply spit at the ceiling, if he wasn’t forced to do something.

In other words, the whole “boys” is sucked from the finger. More precisely, not from a finger, but from the fear of new technologies, quite characteristic of the average person.

A man is afraid of what he does not understand. And instead of understanding and starting to understand, he spends time on reflection about the fear of the already existing, but still incomprehensible to him. And sometimes - to broadcast this fear to others. This is the effect of the sensationalism of the quoted statement. “Dark technologies are coming. I see a future full of sorrows, troubles and gnashing of the tooth. " Why? But why not! I just see it. Technology! Boyus! Fuck knows what my Google-glasses shine in my eyes and what my robot vacuum cleaner thinks about. I do not understand what all this is based on, and therefore I suspect evil.

Technologies came into use, but the knowledge and knowledge that justified them remained the lot of a small group of specialists. Hence a lot of new fears among the broad masses - before radiation and other radiation, gene modifications, artificial intelligence, implants, autopilot and electronics.

Looking at the screen of his communicator, a person is aware that this thing is made by people. But he does not know how it works. He does not know how programs are written - even in principle. He does not know physics and chemistry. He can only read.

And he read somewhere that inside this thing there is a whole bunch of demons capable of sucking his brain, destroying his life and damaging all his loved ones. True, "demons" sometimes appear under some pseudoscientific name, but this only makes them even more demonic, because the "authority of science" is also mixed with the authority of spontaneous beliefs.

People believe that this thing, though done by people, but not from this world. Something terrible is hidden in it. If you read from it, the vision will deteriorate, which for some reason did not deteriorate when the same person read the same texts from paper pages. Why? That's how! “This thing shines with artificial light!”

A person does not ask himself what it is, “artificial light,” and whether he differs in some way from the light of “natural,” since he generally has little understanding of what light is. The screen of his communicator shines on him with the same photons, which otherwise would have flown to the retina of his eyes, being reflected from the sheet, but it seems that these photons seem to be “some other”. And because of this, spoil the sight. Not a small print, not tired eyes - which would have manifested itself when reading a paper book in exactly the same volume - but this one is “artificial”.

In fact, the difference between "natural" and "artificial" light really exists. The first - the light of the sun - has a much wider spectrum, but this seems to be creating less fear, not more. From the screen it is impossible, for example, to receive the lion’s dose of ultraviolet in one sitting and get burnt, and on the beach, from the sun, it is possible.

In addition, there are differences in polarization. However, a person is daily exposed to both polarized and unpolarized light, and the intensity of both is much higher than the intensity of light from the screen. If this could lead to problems, then here one should be afraid of natural light rather than artificial.

Another phone irradiates the brain and internal organs. Than? Do not ask. After all, he still does not know what “radiation” is. A light bulb irradiates it every day. Every day he walks through space filled with radio waves, infrared and ultraviolet radiation, as well as radiation, but for some reason he thinks that it is the radiation from the phone that will surely kill him. He did not measure the dose and did not read about such measurements, because he does not know what a “dose” is. But he "knows" about the danger, because it was written about her in the yellow rag, thrown last week into his mailbox.

I remember I flew on an airplane in which flight attendants forbade the use of mobile during the entire flight, and not just during takeoff and landing. Even for reading. Even with the included "aviation mode". Of course, the entire salon read from a variety of devices, watched a movie with them or played games. But the flight attendants tirelessly ran through the cabin for many hours of flight and demanded "turn it off all over."

By the way, the requirement to turn off electronic devices during takeoff and landing, and “aviation regime "in them, no more meaningful. The frequencies at which portable electronics work - whether Wi-Fi, bluetooth, mobile network are turned off or not - do not even closely intersect with the frequencies used by on-board electronics, and therefore they are not able to prevent it from working correctly.

This requirement arose in the days when telephones only appeared, and therefore the airline safety personnel responsible for flight safety did not yet know whether the telephones could interfere. Therefore, just in case, such a requirement was also included in the schedule.

The only sensible explanation that could be used: reading absorbs the attention of the passenger, and therefore he does not pay attention to what the crew is saying at the moment. However, reading paper books absorbs attention no worse, but for some reason they do not offer to stop reading them during takeoff and landing.

In addition, it is theoretically possible that if several dozens of passengers simultaneously begin to install mobile communications, a surge of electromagnetic radiation will have sufficient intensity to cause interference in the headphones of one of the crew members, despite the rather large space separating the crew and passengers. However, even a small probability of this is eliminated by a ban on telephone calls - but not on the use of electronics for other purposes.

They could not substantiate their claim, for the only thing they knew was that “the electronics prevent the control of the aircraft.” How? No need to think about it. It just hinders.

At the same time for turning off the device, they took off the screen on it. Apparently, the artificial light prevented the electronics in this plane. Despite the fact that anyone who wished could see that this “artificial light” completely stops even with a sheet of plastic of millimeter thickness, and therefore it can only be broken by a device that is important for controlling an airplane located in the passenger’s head and for some reason not covered by this destructive radiation.

The flight attendants did not understand that right at the same time the sun rays enter the aircraft cabin, whose radiation spectrum, generally speaking, is much wider, and the intensity is much higher. Yes, the flight technique breaks only from the included screen of the communicator.

From best intentions, illiterate flight attendants struggled with electronics, which included passengers, for their own sake, passengers, safety. But even good intentions with ignorance of the physics of processes are nothing more than a handful of stones, with which they pave the way to hell.

If illiteracy will prevail, we personally observe the ban not only on the use of electronic cigarettes in the cabin, but also on the use of all electronics in general. It will not make any sense, since it will be caused only by the total technological illiteracy of all the participants in the chain who make decisions.

And exactly the same demonic fear of electronics will lead to similar consequences in other areas. In case of an unfortunate scenario, we will still hear mothers demanding that their children stop using electronic notebooks in order “not to spoil their memory.” Exactly the same as many of them already require not to read from the screen in order to “not spoil the eyesight.”

Yes Yes. Just because somewhere another author shared his “fears” - the critical mass for introducing a meme into the minds of the broad masses is typed this way. Memes mostly do not come from scientific laboratories, but from the usual press. Be careful with words, their effect is stronger than other real physical effects.
Author:
Originator:
http://www.odnako.org/blogs/show_26824/
32 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 19 July 2013 07: 15 New
    +7
    Electronic "crutches" unambiguously weaken the human brain (and even the person himself), which begins to use them from childhood: "toys" replace toys, "walkers" - sports, social networks - society, access to information - memory training. And all together (among other things) leads to the fact that even having unlimited information about everything, a person simply cannot find the one he needs, because he does not know what he needs. Somewhat exaggerated, but true. I would probably suggest banning these "gadgets" up to grade 5-6.
    1. sergey32
      sergey32 19 July 2013 08: 51 New
      +2
      Life is changing, and so are children. I remember a few years ago I’m taking the youngest one from the kindergarten, he asks me, “Dad, what were your favorite games in your childhood?” Well, I say, hide and seek, catching up. "And I have the Prince of Persia, 3 part."
    2. Ross
      Ross 19 July 2013 08: 51 New
      +7
      But the truth is, the number of people thinking primitively, superficially, lazy to delve into the essence of things is multiplying.
      1. cosmos111
        cosmos111 19 July 2013 09: 40 New
        +4
        Quote: Ross
        But the truth is, the number of people thinking primitively, superficially, is multiplying

        Great thinking and education.
        The larger the duped population, the easier it is to manipulate it. (US example)
      2. lelikas
        lelikas 19 July 2013 12: 34 New
        0
        Quote: Ross
        But the truth is, the number of people who think primitively, superficially, are lazy to delve into the essence of things is multiplying.

        - I do not have a tablet, old upbringing, but I did not understand the author, it remains to add horses and guns to a bunch of people, gadgets and planes.
        1. 12061973
          12061973 19 July 2013 19: 06 New
          0
          and there is a computer
          Quote: lelikas
          I don't have a tablet, old upbringing

          but there is a computer. laughing
    3. an-sar
      an-sar 19 July 2013 10: 06 New
      +1
      The simplest thing is the loss of power supply and more than one mathematical problem will not be solved!
    4. Max_Bauder
      Max_Bauder 19 July 2013 14: 06 New
      +1
      In general, I am a supporter of progress, before they plowed the land with a plow and cattle, but wait tractors for people, mechanical engineering is all robotic, minus progress - garbage, there is a lot of it, in space, on earth, in water.

      And the most dangerous thing is that they do not decompose, because the origin is not organic but chemical (oil, plastic), and they cause enormous harm to the environment, that is, to the place where we live.

      So even though we chop the branch (branch of the tree) on which we are sitting, we need to find another branch, that is, to transfer the production technology to organic (let geneticists think how to come up with a robot out of a cage) in order to recycle garbage and decompose them, because according to physical laws, nothing disappears, but simply goes into another shell.

      The rain pours, penetrates into the soil, then underground streams pour into the sea, the sun evaporates the sea, the vapors then turn into water crystals, colliding crystals turn into a drop, then fall to the ground like rain. Such is the cycle. Everything on Earth is so arranged.

      If We - people, do not turn our garbage into something useful, as before (manure - fertilizer was sown to grow vegetables, also dry cow feces were used as solid fuel), then we will come to an end from garbage heap.
    5. aviamed90
      aviamed90 20 July 2013 18: 32 New
      0
      serge-68-68

      Remember how it all began!

      Organizations and enterprises in the 90s began to buy computers with "286" processors.
      To the question: why? The answer sounded: well, how, you can calculate this or that ...
      And then, as it improved, for the most part, its functions were reduced to printing documents, social. networks, toys, viewing photo-video and "Wikipedia". And, well, yes, I forgot about "1C-Accounting"!
      And where are the calculations of trajectories to unknown planets? But no ...

      Instead of a tool and an assistant, the computer has turned, basically, into "entertainment".
      Here it is (entertaining) and must somehow be limited.
      Well, programming, statistical and various other time-consuming calculations have nothing to do with this (to gadgets).
  2. Mikhail m
    Mikhail m 19 July 2013 07: 26 New
    +1
    People who use the brain by 5% are not extinct yet. And they will not run out. Otherwise, the advertising business will dry up in the bud.
    1. Shumka
      Shumka 19 July 2013 07: 34 New
      0
      Gyg I was a little jarred by the proposal about the limit of the human brain, but how can we talk about the limit if it is known that a person does not use his brain by 10%.
      1. True
        True 19 July 2013 10: 42 New
        +1
        There is nothing superfluous in the human body! Everything is used 100%. This is for your consciousness, memory and thinking only a smaller part of the total "power" of the brain is used. And the rest of the mental power is the control of the functions of the whole organism, it is like the Computing Center and the Control Center, which automatically regulates numerous physiological processes of the body - respiration, blood flow, the work of the heart, stomach, liver, etc. - fulfillment of thousands of current operational life support tasks. body! If you try to "switch" these functions to something "other" the body will simply die, and therefore it is categorically IMPOSSIBLE to "penetrate" into this process! These are more than 95% of the brain's power and are engaged in CONTROL of the functions of the whole human body.
      2. Max_Bauder
        Max_Bauder 19 July 2013 12: 06 New
        -1
        This is also a big myth that a person uses only 5 or 10% of the capabilities of his brain, look at nature ... how many animals use their capabilities not 100%? the answer is not at all, evolution (even from the Divine point of view that He created man in the image and likeness of himself) made so that man now uses exactly as much as he needs in this life, in a specific period of an era (I do not say era, since humanity does not live so much , bye) Earth, between 10 years to say 000.

        Another thing is whether there is a limit to human development (both physically and mentally)? I think (IMHO) that a man as he was will remain so, that is, I do not believe that they were monkeys, it has already been proven that Cro-Magnons lived simultaneously with Neanderthals, and the difference in height, skin, etc. and now there are people of different skin colors and heights, from a black basketball player to a pygmy in Africa. if you find the armor of an ancient Roman and put it on, it will suit you, because a person does not change, and his brain works to its limit, especially during a war (stressful situations).

        After all, how else can we explain that ours created an atomic bomb, a little two years after the Americans, Stalin probably put the scientists in a cell and said: either in a year you will make me a bomb, or tomorrow I will shoot you, you will involuntarily rush your brain =)
    2. Max_Bauder
      Max_Bauder 19 July 2013 12: 25 New
      +1
      And as for smart minds (sorry for taftology), it has long been known that 10% of people create something new that changes people's lives, develop civilization, say, and the rest 90% are just consumers. Throw 100 people including us on a desert island, can anyone make a phone? a laptop? lighter? a light bulb? even give you resources.

      Not everyone will be able to make an elementary fire, or a raft, to catch an animal or a bird, catch a fish, cook and eat. Many (almost all) of us are just consumers.

      I do not agree with the author that he makes fun of human skepticism, because without him a person would have disappeared long ago, researching something new, even a Neanderthal would not put his hand into the fire to check what it is. I will give an example, when they invented a nuclear bomb, in addition to the blast wave, people did not know about its damaging factors such as radiation and radiation (radiation sickness), you look at the regulations of that time (1950-55), during the offensive they planned to do a bomb strike (like artillery preparation) and then make an offensive, and when they learned about the radiation, they realized that our own people would also have died.

      So they do the right thing, consider the thing dangerous until proven otherwise, they prove it officially - then please.

      Everyone knows that plants are alive and react to their environment, many experiments have been done to find out what is good or bad for growth. Remember that in the traditions of the French there is something like humming when caring for grapes, it is also not in vain, it has been proven that good music helps to grow, bad music, on the contrary. So we also found out that WIFI inhibits plant growth, it is not known how it affects human cells (or maybe it is known, but for some reason they don’t talk about it yet, good or bad, or maybe they don’t talk in vain).

      Also, people scientists play with genetic engineering, taking one adding to the other, well, for example, that the flounder gene is injected into the cells of an apple, so it does not deteriorate for a long time, until no one also examined people who ate such an apple, whether it affects people well or badly. But I want to know what to risk first. and if I don’t know, I’ll manage it better while I can.

      Have you guys got the idea that American burgers, chips with fries and Coca Cola lead to obesity? a liver disorder? look at their citizens, stars, cellulite even in thin ones ... definitely from food, for example, an American would live with us, eat cucumbers and tomatoes from the garden, would look exactly different.
      1. True
        True 19 July 2013 13: 24 New
        +1
        Speaking of Neanderthals: the brain of the Neanderthal was larger than the brain of the Cro-Magnon, the tools were in no way inferior ... All NOT Africans are a cross between Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons.
        “Genetic material inherited from Neanderthals is 1 to 4%. This is not much, but enough to assert that all of us except Africans are reliably inherited a significant part of the traits, "said Dr. David Reich from Harvard.
  3. krasin
    krasin 19 July 2013 07: 44 New
    +6
    The head is not a dustbin to remember everything, there is a notebook for this!
    So the teacher told us at school (60 years).
    Why our scientists are advanced is because our way of thinking is different because of our upbringing.
    And now, because of the Unified State Exam and the educational system, modern technologies make children out of mindless consumers. As in advertising, "take everything from life."
    1. Gato
      Gato 19 July 2013 10: 52 New
      +3
      Quote: krasin
      And now, because of the Unified State Exam and the educational system, modern technologies make children out of thoughtless consumers

      That's it. It's about the principles and goals of education, and not about the presence / absence of gadgets and other bells and whistles.

      My parents told me how they fought with ballpoint pens in schools (the handwriting allegedly deteriorates), I myself remember how we were forbidden to use calculators (in grades 9-10, when everyone had learned the multiplication table for a long time laughing )

      Well, who now needs beautiful handwriting and the ability to multiply in a column?
  4. My address
    My address 19 July 2013 07: 50 New
    0
    The more information, the better the memory. Not in proportion, but better. And memory is one of the components of intelligence. In the foreseeable future, a qualitative leap of intelligence is quite possible. A sharp change in the ability to memorize with this will be a trifle. The law of the transition of quantity to quality has not been canceled.
  5. Vorchun
    Vorchun 19 July 2013 08: 26 New
    +3
    The author is not very aware of the harmonic components of radio frequencies. The radio receivers of the aircraft navigation aids can receive the upper or lower harmonics of the signal of cell phones and other radio-emitting devices, thereby interfering with the aircraft navigation aids. They (interference) are the greater, the shorter the distance, the greater the power and bandwidth of the emitting device.
  6. bunta
    bunta 19 July 2013 09: 02 New
    0
    At the expense of disconnecting phones. Something told them, intuition probably. But more recently, an interception of Boeing control from an iPhone was demonstrated. http://habrahabr.ru/company/apps4all/blog/176381/
  7. alicante11
    alicante11 19 July 2013 09: 10 New
    +1
    Yeah, on airplanes, the fight against electronics comes to idiocy when stewardesses ask you to turn off the phone, which works in "flight mode". Like, it still bothers. At the same time, when the stewardesses sit in their seats at the last stage of boarding, one hundred percent some people pull out the phones and begin to inform their relatives about their arrival.
    Indeed, if there is any danger, you need to specifically talk about it. Otherwise, the "hot heads" will not translate.
    1. Gato
      Gato 19 July 2013 11: 05 New
      0
      Quote: alicante11
      Indeed, if there is any danger, you need to specifically talk about it. Otherwise, the "hot heads" will not translate.

      V.V.Ershov wrote on this topic (GA pilot with very many years of experience) if sclerosis does not change in "Revelations of a Sled Dog"
  8. Fox
    Fox 19 July 2013 09: 37 New
    +1
    I observe advanced youth (students) - sadness ... there is REALLY no memory ... as well as the ability to analyze incoming information. They are very easy to manipulate.
  9. Max otto
    Max otto 19 July 2013 09: 58 New
    +3
    Comrade A. Krasin. It was because of the upbringing that the scientists were better, I know from myself: the cell phone was discharged in a strange city and p .... c (this is the word that fits, sorry) almost a disaster, I don't know a single number, that's it! Since then, all the numbers in the head, in the phone's memory are only temporary or for work, in life they are not needed numbers. By the way, I threw out the diary, the same nonsense happens, if you write it down, you will forget. And a person who is not inclined to work on himself will carry and carry with him all sorts of kilograms of priblud, and a backpack.
  10. Gato
    Gato 19 July 2013 10: 47 New
    0
    In other words, the whole “boys” is sucked from the finger. More precisely, not from a finger, but from the fear of new technologies, quite characteristic of the average person.

    Actually, this phrase can be limited, and not "spreading thought along the tree"
  11. krez-74
    krez-74 19 July 2013 11: 32 New
    +2
    I am sure that most of the inventions of modern mankind, is only to slow down its true development! A man has ceased to appreciate a lot of the things that he cannot do without, it’s just that little time has passed, so he doesn’t notice it.
  12. Averias
    Averias 19 July 2013 11: 38 New
    +3
    The question raised in the article has been discussed for a long time. Just yesterday, on Discovery, I watched a program dedicated to the Internet and gadgets. If we put aside "democratic" propaganda, the same thing was said there. Rather, it was discussed - harmful or not. Using my example, I can say: I have about 10 computers in different versions (PC (server, game and work), notebooks, tablet and smartphone). Yes, convenient for communication and entertainment, convenient for reference information. But I love to read a book (but since they are expensive nowadays, I have an electronic library, but all the classics and my favorite books are on paper). I laid tiles in the garage, counted in my mind and not on my computer, sheathed the balcony, now I will build an extension, I count everything in my head and with the help of a calculator. A friend drives her son away from the computer, forcing him to read books and he got involved, reads. Why am I all this, but to the fact that everything depends on the culture of upbringing in the family (I'm talking about the younger generation). And also from the presence of gray matter in the head and education. If a person is stupid, then a computer will not help him either. And for a normal and well-rounded person, a computer and other gadgets are just a tool. After all, we do not refuse to drive by cars, but we can also say - they say we are lazy, we don’t walk.
  13. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 19 July 2013 11: 45 New
    +4
    The author is cool. The winner of the dragon is a hero, but ... the dragon is big and scary. Therefore, you need to mold a dragon from a bread crumb the size of a finger, and then heroically defeat it! Hooray to the author, hooray!
    No, the function of recording information does not harm the brain and consciousness. Yes, to understand this fact, the brains of a first-grader, who has already mastered paper and a pen for writing, rather than a fool, are enough ... The massive use of personal computer technology brought consciousness only benefit until the moment the Internet was launched. An external database is good. And what is evil? Well...
    What is the value of reason in general? The ability to store facts? When is it from the warehouse into which cars were stuffed with metals, rubber and plastics? The value of the mind in the ability to work with information, transform data, combine from them what was not there before. Processing raw materials into the final product is what is truly valuable. But with this, the problems started ...
    The original database should be stored in the brain. The larger this base, the more diverse it is, the more the mind has more opportunities to work with it. It is impossible to establish links between facts and data that you do not know. Previously, the specialist also used external databases - books, reference books ... but he read them many times, because otherwise the task of finding data at an acceptable time could not be solved. And now? And now you can study the data ... but you can be too lazy. In a short period of time, the search work will be solved for you, google, so to speak, that's all.
    The author tries to prove that memory has not become worse. No, I didn’t, it doesn’t need such lengthy proof at all. The need for her, memory, heavy use has disappeared! Result? There is no database of its own, in the brain, only unsystematic fragments. There is nothing to be connected between! Result? There is no higher brain production - new discoveries, inventions, improvements. In external databases, will they find anything for you, saving you from "extra" work? Yes, that is right. But how can you know what you want? For the creator’s brain to begin installing previously non-existent connections, the data must already be in it. And they are not in it. They are on Google search ... No discoveries. There are iPhones, there are tablets, but there are no discoveries.
    In general, the author heroically proved that the production of AKM does not harm the environment. And here I agree with him. That's just a bullet fired on the forehead, kills! But this is completely unimportant to the author.
  14. Ross
    Ross 19 July 2013 12: 06 New
    0
    Quote: cosmos111
    Quote: Ross
    But the truth is, the number of people thinking primitively, superficially, is multiplying

    Great thinking and education.
    The larger the duped population, the easier it is to manipulate it. (US example)


    In fact, it all started in 90, when stupid television advertising swept over and the youth created their new language.
  15. Captain45
    Captain45 19 July 2013 13: 47 New
    0
    Quote: Max_Bauder
    And as for smart minds (sorry for taftology), it has long been known that 10% of people create something new that changes people's lives, develop civilization, say, and the rest 90% are just consumers. Throw 100 people including us on a desert island, can anyone make a phone? a laptop? lighter? a light bulb? even give you resources.

    Jules Verne "The Mysterious Island", engineer Cyrus Smith. In my opinion an excellent example about 10%.
  16. okosl
    okosl 19 July 2013 13: 49 New
    0
    Have you heard the main news? The authorities have leaked the entire database about all of us into the network, block access to your data while it is possible (find yourself and click close access)! Here is the site- http://vbazes.gu.ma
  17. Captain45
    Captain45 19 July 2013 13: 59 New
    +2
    My opinion about all the new gadgets: earlier, while working in the criminal investigation department, I had to write a lot of all kinds of official papers from various orders to inquiries, but any trail wrote even more of mine. It really was written by hand on a draft, then it was typed on you by typewriter There is no doubt that the process was time-consuming, but it made you think. Any psychologist will say that writing by hand develops motor skills and the process of thinking. Now looking at how young people work, I am sometimes amazed: there are ready-made forms, decrees in my computer, so I’ve thoughtlessly raised they nod suitable in meaning, change dates, surnames and stamp. Maybe that's why we can’t really investigate matters, they don’t think, but insert ready-made blocks that are suitable in meaning. And of course not against PCs, cell phones, make life easier, allow you to store large amounts of information, faster to find compared with paper archives.
  18. georg737577
    georg737577 19 July 2013 14: 38 New
    0
    A simple observation - with the advent of electronic calculators, the number of people who know the multiplication table and can simply count "in their minds" has dropped catastrophically. And that's a fact. Does this mean progress for humanity? I doubt it ...
  19. Fastblast
    Fastblast 19 July 2013 15: 57 New
    -1
    Undoubtedly, the computer carries out the influence both negative and positive on the mental abilities of a person. But let's not forget that this is a highly subjective influence.
  20. Ytfluunu
    Ytfluunu 20 July 2013 18: 46 New
    0
    From 3rd to 8th grade, in math lessons, we practiced oral counting. in 9-10, about solving problems in physics, methods were also given for fast computation, without resorting to "columns". I am silent about calculators, no one even thought of using them for solving school problems. it was considered normal to remember the squares of two-digit numbers at least up to 20.
    yesterday I counted to the client in his mind how much it would be - 48 payments of 18000 rubles each. was perceived almost like a circus act ...