After reading the presentation listed in the blog topic, please comment with your thoughts on the impact this new technology may have on society. Share your thoughts on such things as benefits or challenges perceived, note how the power structure in society might change, discuss ways this technology might be abused, or discuss who will win and lose as a result of this technology.
Parents might like this idea, but their children are going to HATE IT! It is very advanced and that is cool. It is just another way that big brother (or should we say, big parent) is watching us. I had heard of similar devices but this just takes it one step further with the text message notification.
Ok, I may be the only one who feels this way so I feel a disclaimer is appropriate. I am currently experiencing the dynamics of parenting a teen. As a parent I have become used to the dramatic "hate" that is expressed but my heart rests peace even then because I know my job is to guide her to become happy, healthy, safe... It is not my job to make her like me or be her friend. Any child of driving age, especially in the current climate, would likely be upset by parent's use of this technology.
I think teens are less mature now than teens in past generations. I think that has happened because families are less connected. They sit in the same room and play on the internet or gaming console or watch tv. Less face-to-face connection, according to brain research, causes neuropathways to develop at a drasticly slower rate. So with a multimedia life contemporary children will have a less developed brain which causes them to think at a younger developmental stage, much more self-centered and concrete. The striking thought I have is that parent-child connection is the foundation for the child's growth in many ways, including growing children to make responsible and lawful decisions. This device is a way for parents to not have to work at parenting, a lot like how tvs, computers, and such has become the babysitter.
Also, teens are less supervised. My guess about why they are less supervised is that parents feel comfortable having the digital connection using a cell phone or device like this one. Unfortunately, so many parents know so little about what is happening in their children's lives. This device is expensive and looking at the image it is blocking their field of vision and would hopefully be able to rest in a different location. Even with those negatives, I can see great value in a technology like this, especially if you use the GPS on their cell phone to verify that they are located where they are supposed to be according to two sources.
It is kind of like children are Wikipedia: large numbers of people are helping to develop them, making them alone unreliable. So while they are children and statistically more likely to do something dumb, parents have a responsibility to keep them safe. The information initially retreived from the child can now be easily verified using these technologies.
On another note, I wonder how the device knows when they are speeding? Speed limits are just signs they are not digital signals.
Tiwi upsets me. I remember when I was about 10 years old my dad used to let me sit on his lap and steer while he drove. Those were some beautiful memories. All the while he was teaching me how to be a safe driver. When I got a bit older, he would let me sit in the passenger seat and reach over to steer. This may sound dangerous, but his constant vigilance was not controlling or overbearing. In fact, it was a chance for beautiful bonding moments as well as helping me become a very good driver. When I got my license at the age of 15 (that was in Alabama), he never let me drive anywhere without him sitting next to me for more than a year. This technology is a terrible idea. It deprives parents of one of the last opportunities for serious bonding before their kids become adults. Another problem I have with it is that it perpetuates a cultural mistrust of young people. Rather than teaching them to be responsible, it encourages them to think that they only have to be careful when being watched - and then can do anything they like when out of the watchful eyes of adults. This is a big problem in society today. Such technology is just a symptom of a deeper problem. If young people are old enough to drive, they are old enough to be trusted with a car and the lives of those in and around the car. If not, they are not old enough to drive. Parents, teachers, and society should be trying to help young people develop their own logical conclusions on what is right, wrong, safe, dangerous, or acceptable. We should not tell them the "rules" (as this device does) and try to enforce those rules. That is a recipe for disaster.
Strangely I am going to have to side with big brother on this one. Although we are all very comfortable with cars the truth is that they are the biggest killing machines around and eventually our culture is going to rein them in a bit.
When wearing seatbelts and motorcycle helmets become mandatory many people got upset. It was an impediment on personal freedom. However, the cost to the public for unsafe behavior was too high to ignore.
The question to me is: does the possible gain outweigh the lose to personal freedom and anonymity.
In this case I think it does outweigh the cost. This type of technology (which I think will eventually be installed in every car on the road) will save countless lives and huge amounts of money.
Eventually our cars will police us. We will still be able to drive any where we want but unsafe driving will not be an option. The savings in lives and money make the lose to personal freedom acceptable.
Another interesting debate in the driving scene is appropriate driving age. In the United States many states put the driver's license age at 16. Many countries put the driving age at 18, with a lot of exemptions for say mopeds. I know that here in Oregon when you get a license before age 18 you need parental consent (unless you're married or emancipated) and that technically it is a provisional license. There are extra rules for when you can drive and who can be in the car. So should technology be used to monitor provisional drivers? While I want teenagers to develop the ability to think and act responsibly, I also want them alive. Last year I had some students decide it would be fun to take corners at super excessive speeds. They were lucky to escape with relatively minor injuries, except for a severed finger. Would this device have stopped them from driving fast? No, but they would have had a few more reminders to slow down. I don't want to see this technology become mandatory but I also would not blame a parent for wanting it depending on their teenager.
Parents might like this idea, but their children are going to HATE IT! It is very advanced and that is cool. It is just another way that big brother (or should we say, big parent) is watching us. I had heard of similar devices but this just takes it one step further with the text message notification.
ReplyDeleteOk, I may be the only one who feels this way so I feel a disclaimer is appropriate. I am currently experiencing the dynamics of parenting a teen. As a parent I have become used to the dramatic "hate" that is expressed but my heart rests peace even then because I know my job is to guide her to become happy, healthy, safe... It is not my job to make her like me or be her friend. Any child of driving age, especially in the current climate, would likely be upset by parent's use of this technology.
ReplyDeleteI think teens are less mature now than teens in past generations. I think that has happened because families are less connected. They sit in the same room and play on the internet or gaming console or watch tv. Less face-to-face connection, according to brain research, causes neuropathways to develop at a drasticly slower rate. So with a multimedia life contemporary children will have a less developed brain which causes them to think at a younger developmental stage, much more self-centered and concrete. The striking thought I have is that parent-child connection is the foundation for the child's growth in many ways, including growing children to make responsible and lawful decisions. This device is a way for parents to not have to work at parenting, a lot like how tvs, computers, and such has become the babysitter.
Also, teens are less supervised. My guess about why they are less supervised is that parents feel comfortable having the digital connection using a cell phone or device like this one. Unfortunately, so many parents know so little about what is happening in their children's lives. This device is expensive and looking at the image it is blocking their field of vision and would hopefully be able to rest in a different location. Even with those negatives, I can see great value in a technology like this, especially if you use the GPS on their cell phone to verify that they are located where they are supposed to be according to two sources.
It is kind of like children are Wikipedia: large numbers of people are helping to develop them, making them alone unreliable. So while they are children and statistically more likely to do something dumb, parents have a responsibility to keep them safe. The information initially retreived from the child can now be easily verified using these technologies.
On another note, I wonder how the device knows when they are speeding? Speed limits are just signs they are not digital signals.
Tiwi upsets me. I remember when I was about 10 years old my dad used to let me sit on his lap and steer while he drove. Those were some beautiful memories. All the while he was teaching me how to be a safe driver. When I got a bit older, he would let me sit in the passenger seat and reach over to steer. This may sound dangerous, but his constant vigilance was not controlling or overbearing. In fact, it was a chance for beautiful bonding moments as well as helping me become a very good driver. When I got my license at the age of 15 (that was in Alabama), he never let me drive anywhere without him sitting next to me for more than a year. This technology is a terrible idea. It deprives parents of one of the last opportunities for serious bonding before their kids become adults. Another problem I have with it is that it perpetuates a cultural mistrust of young people. Rather than teaching them to be responsible, it encourages them to think that they only have to be careful when being watched - and then can do anything they like when out of the watchful eyes of adults. This is a big problem in society today. Such technology is just a symptom of a deeper problem. If young people are old enough to drive, they are old enough to be trusted with a car and the lives of those in and around the car. If not, they are not old enough to drive. Parents, teachers, and society should be trying to help young people develop their own logical conclusions on what is right, wrong, safe, dangerous, or acceptable. We should not tell them the "rules" (as this device does) and try to enforce those rules. That is a recipe for disaster.
ReplyDeleteStrangely I am going to have to side with big brother on this one. Although we are all very comfortable with cars the truth is that they are the biggest killing machines around and eventually our culture is going to rein them in a bit.
ReplyDeleteWhen wearing seatbelts and motorcycle helmets become mandatory many people got upset. It was an impediment on personal freedom. However, the cost to the public for unsafe behavior was too high to ignore.
The question to me is: does the possible gain outweigh the lose to personal freedom and anonymity.
In this case I think it does outweigh the cost. This type of technology (which I think will eventually be installed in every car on the road) will save countless lives and huge amounts of money.
Eventually our cars will police us. We will still be able to drive any where we want but unsafe driving will not be an option. The savings in lives and money make the lose to personal freedom acceptable.
Another interesting debate in the driving scene is appropriate driving age. In the United States many states put the driver's license age at 16. Many countries put the driving age at 18, with a lot of exemptions for say mopeds. I know that here in Oregon when you get a license before age 18 you need parental consent (unless you're married or emancipated) and that technically it is a provisional license. There are extra rules for when you can drive and who can be in the car. So should technology be used to monitor provisional drivers? While I want teenagers to develop the ability to think and act responsibly, I also want them alive. Last year I had some students decide it would be fun to take corners at super excessive speeds. They were lucky to escape with relatively minor injuries, except for a severed finger. Would this device have stopped them from driving fast? No, but they would have had a few more reminders to slow down. I don't want to see this technology become mandatory but I also would not blame a parent for wanting it depending on their teenager.
ReplyDelete