×

Compromise in changing world

When it comes to change, there must be a happy medium between purpose and inevitability. Some of us resist change with a ferocity equal to the degree of defense its advocates mount. Change for the sake of change sometimes seems pointless — even vexing.

What nobody can control is the inevitability of change. But we can heed Buddhist philosophy for sage guidance on weathering our change-weariness, especially in this era of accelerating technological “improvements,” by recognizing and learning to accept the impermanence of all things. Sometimes, we can even control our response to the maelstrom.

Even with impermanence being the reality of everything, shouldn’t a supposedly brainy and rational species learn to create rational change, thinking it out before we rush headlong into the latest, greatest thing that looks so good? Why must we have this new gadget or digital enhancement?

Because it’s there.

Technological change ripples across every area of human endeavor, messing up or enhancing culture and communications, depending on one’s perspective.

Former English politician and Member of Parliament Lady Nancy Astor was on to the idea of balanced impermanence. She said, “The main dangers in this life are the people who want to change everything — or nothing.” What a smart view of impermanence, and one that ought to infuse the change-mongering of a truly deliberative human race.

Here’s one possible compromise between the forces of all or nothing — gradual digital advances that ease everyone in to new ways of doing a process and communicating about it. Like maybe leaving some words for those of us who didn’t grow up in an iconic era. Sometimes it feels like “back to the hieroglyphic future.” It took me a long time to decipher that three parallel lines in the corner of the screen meant “more useful actions here.” True, maybe that’s a cumbersome phrase for the size of today’s gadgets, but couldn’t the digital wunderkinds compromise by leaving in place a compact phrase here and there, like maybe “More” or “Tools”?

Communication is a fine thing. If technologists fail to heed that imperative, their product is flawed. Understandable suspicion might even arise, given the stated transhumanist intentions of tech gurus like Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and Ray Kurzweil. “Create your digital persona. Expedite your purchases and medical needs with this microchip under your skin. Become a computer footprint and you can live forever.” That is the mantra of the artificial intelligence club. If it’s robotic, it’s good.

Some of us aren’t willing to buy into that new religion. Not so fast. Let’s think about this first.

Artificial intelligence is still clumsy enough to create comic fodder. What user of text messaging hasn’t experienced the garbled or absurd message created by a program that’s self-consciously smarter than its users and yet wipes its hands of responsibility for its foibles? I recently tried to send the message “I got you a pack of bacon.” Little did I realize one false move on the minuscule keyboard had rendered the message “I got you a pack of becoming.” OK, yes, I’m the one who hit send! But I maintain that if phones didn’t insist they’re smarter than us, we might not have evolved into a race of sloppy button-pushers. On a different occasion, I caught the mistake before sending a message created by an algorithm that assumed I was too stupid to realize I’d typed “UB Ortho” when what I meant was clearly “UB Orthodox.”

Our digital gadgetry is telling us to relax. “I got this,” I can picture it saying.

Do you, phones and tablets and watches and desktops? Then how come none of you told me that “Appetizer” now means “Enough food for everyone at your table”? I had to learn the hard way, complaining time and again about restaurants’ grandiose portions. Finally, a young person informed me that service is often “tapas” now — plates meant to be shared unless designated “small” or “large.” Remember the days before “default” was a common word, when the default mode was “all appetizers are small”?

Yes, those days are gone. Like food service on airlines.

And ample leg room. Maybe that’s “tapas” too — everyone shares.

Side dish of becoming, anyone?

Renee Gravelle is a Dunkirk resident. Send comments to editorial@observertoday.com

Newsletter

Today's breaking news and more in your inbox

I'm interested in (please check all that apply)
Are you a paying subscriber to the newspaper? *
   

COMMENTS

[vivafbcomment]

Starting at $4.62/week.

Subscribe Today