Ramblings of an old Doc

 

When I read this, I was reminded of the news item a while back about flying modems, and of Google’s sniffing networks during its ‘Street Mapping’.

Zuckerberg’s story? “We’re bringing internet access to remote areas.”

Maybe, but if these areas are so remote (Philippines and Paraguay now with more to come), do they have electricity and computers? Do they even want them? I seem to remember pictures after the massive hurricane they had. I thought they needed food and stable shelter along with medical help more.

Flying facebook internet drones seems about the last thing they need.

Also, are we really doing them a favor? Is doing them a favor even in the calculus? Why is connectivity necessarily a plus, and why do we have to westernize them? To sell them things?

Anyway, Zuckerberg’s Internet.org is drumming up business in the name of ‘progress’. He’s quite serious. He’s got former NASA JPL Communications people developing new land, air and orbital connectivity, inventing new technologies to market cat memes and droll, emotive truisms to ‘like’, ‘share’ and sell.

I really don’t want to believe everyone in the world wants to work the twitter and facebook machines.

So why do I (almost) automatically think data mining (and NSA)? I should mention that the same comes to mind when visiting the grocery store. Guess I’m just a cranky, old guy.

Source:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2455585,00.asp


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Mar 30, 2014

I guess I'am to old fashioned. WC is the only site I'am on.  I don't see telling the world what I had for breakfast, when I hit the can or where I'am going.  Also to me, the phone is to talk on, if the person isn't there and I need to, I leave a message, I don't text.  I didn't buy a phone to type.

on Mar 30, 2014


I guess I'am to old fashioned. WC is the only site I'am on.  I don see telling the world what I had for breakfast, when I hit the can or where I'am going.  Also to me, the phone is to talk on, if the person isn't there and I need to, I leave a message, I don't text.  I didn't buy a phone to type.

Surprisingly there are still a whole lot of folks around that are of the same mind set WOM, I'm also in that group.  

on Mar 31, 2014

Count me in. Nowadays it isn't a telephone, its a 'phone'. It should be called a teletext.

on Mar 31, 2014

Also to me, the phone is to talk on, if the person isn't there and I need to, I leave a message, I don't text. I didn't buy a phone to type.

That's alright if they have messaging turned on, but if they're like me and many others I know, messaging is turned off cos it's a pain in the ass... for a couple of reasons. 

Firstly; if I could not manage to answer my home phone within 20 seconds, all missed calls went to messagebank, which was no good to me if I was in another room and couldn't get there in time.... it then meant I had the expense of retrieving the message AND making a 50c return call if it was important, and all for the sake of a few seconds.  Moreover, this 20 seconds was/is default, cannot be extended and thus ensures that the caller registers an outgoing call whether they leave me a message or not. 

Secondly; if someone left me a message on my mobile, I could not access it anyway.  I was supposed to dial 121 to reterieve it, but that never ever worked so I had it disabled because it was wasting mine and the callers time and money.  Whenever I rang 121 I just got a garbled noise and no messaage... and it cost me 50c each time for that privelege, not to mention what it cost the caller.

I still get this recorded message [can't get that one disabled] if the person I'm ringing doesn't answer their mobile within the allotted time:  "Please say your message in 10 seconds and it will be converted to a text which can be read by the intended recipient.".... so even if I wanted to leave a voice message via my mobile I can't, and I simply won't wait for that kind of expensive crap anymore.  If they're going to convert my voice to text for a price over and above the cost of a regular text, plus charge the recipient to retrieve it, then I'm going to remove the middle-man entirely by simply hanging up before the recorded message and sending my own 10c - 20c text anyhow.

Yup, I'm as tight as a fish's arse [which is watertight], and I will quibble over 50c charges I'd rather not have to pay, but then that's how I manage to afford to get the things I really want... PC gear and the like.

on Mar 31, 2014


I guess I'am to old fashioned. WC is the only site I'am on.  I don't see telling the world what I had for breakfast, when I hit the can or where I'am going.  Also to me, the phone is to talk on, if the person isn't there and I need to, I leave a message, I don't text.  I didn't buy a phone to type.

I resonate with what you have written.  I have a phone to have a conversation. Talk, listen, etc.I really treasure actual conversation - and find the locations where a quiet conversation can be had to be diminishing rapidly.  Even the coffee ships now have loud music playing all the time.  ARGGG. 

I do, however, find texting to have its value as an adjunct to voice.  If the message i am leaving is short, mainly info, I send a text instead.  Quicker, easier, and more convenient to recipient - especially out in public.  Text:  'running late for meet at java's coffee, delayed ten minutes.  BRT. -elana' is better, IMHO, than shouting into cell phone, trying to leave a voice message.  And recipient has to dial voicemail, navigate queues, and try to listen to voice message (hopefully not garbled) over noise of people/cars/vendor musac/etc. all around.  Texting is a great 'addon/ajunct' but not a replacement for conversation.  Pet peeve: Its frustrating to me, my kids (30 somethings) all want to text, and not talk.  So we exchange intermittent texts for an hour.  Why cant we just talk for 10 minutes?  I am getting old, aren't I?  I wonder if the new connectivity, like google glass, will bring us back to conversing?

2 Pages1 2