I think about technology and generational interactions somewhat differently. To me, technologies are platform that we sit on top of as bridges. The capabilities are catalysts to new behaviors and new connections.

Although I was raised in a family of scientists and science fiction fanatics, I never look at the machine or platform as anything but subservient and empowering to new human capabilities.

Great discussion. Thanks for sharing

Whether it is historical events, data, travel, eating, conversation, or an activity dropping a kid off at school, the cumulative total of all of the events manufactured by the world's population from 1901 to 2000, is way less than the body of events manufactured by humans and machines from 2000 to 2010…and the latter by much fewer people, but more machines. I find this very interesting because of its import and consequences. I also think it may be the reason why generations seldom click: that chasm. There has been no generation (man or machine) that has been less intelligent overall than its predecessor, but the consequences of these include a strain on the older population in their bid to catch up, and a frustration by the younger population…a frustration caused by their inability to understand, for example, why they have to learn cursive. That is the chasm: a gap caused by the faster growth of machine intelligence behind which human intelligence lags.

I feel, though, that when our current suite of technologies becomes mature and complete enough to serve as the infrastructure for higher forms of technologies like GNR (Genetics, Nanotechnology, and Robotics), only then can machine and human intelligence develop concurrently. I once had a silly dream that I walked into a hospital asking to update my RAM and that it was my right to get that update. That's scary, but I digress. The point, though, is that all imbalanced systems always strive towards equilibrium which is, itself, not stable (e.g. simple supply and demand) and so reverts back to imbalance.

I feel we are still at a point of imbalance i.e. cell phones, social networks, video, refrigeration, flight…all these stuff we create…we are still in a phase of weaving what will later become the very fabric of futuristic technologies and the culmination of human existence. I mean, by 2099 (which is not that far away), could humans have contact lenses replace TV screens, monitors, phones etc? Or, could social network data become portable/rememberable merely by thinking? After all, hearing aids at some point were unimaginable and were a big deal.

People lag behind technologies and when they think they are on a par, then a newer generation comes up with some newer technology. This imbalance/chasm will not continue though, since the two parties generally strive to equate. So, will we become more like machines (via contact lenses, implants, etc) or will machines take on more humanly emotional forms of intelligence? One thing is for sure, though: the intelligence of man and machine will someday equate … and it may cause an episode of struggle. I don't know.

But great post, Arnold. This stuff makes me think. Thanks.

And has inspired many to share their thoughts in the comments.

Thanks much for sharing the stories about your family. It is important that each of us addresses what this means to our own families and our relationships to our parents and grandparents. And potentially spur some action.

Kids don't want to go to Grandma's because she doesn't have wifi or a PS3. Grandma is irrelevant because she isn't a net native, doesn't lol, and doesn't text her grandkids. These days if you aren't on Facebook and don't text, you are largely invisible outside of in-person interactions. The levels of connection and engagement that younger generations expect and even demand puts a double hurt on our older generations.

It takes hours spread over days (at least) to teach people things that are completely new. For example I just finished cleaning up a giant milk and Cheerio puddle that resulted from my attention lapsing as I let my daughter feed herself a bowl of Cheerios while typing this reply. We regularly put the time into children as we see their whole lives ahead of them. With grandparents we often pass on these opportunities because they are old and it would be hard. How many of us will take the time to find a phone with ergonomics that Grandpa can handle for texting? With a menu system that he can navigate? Who will take the time to make a quick reference sheet on letter paper with 30 point font that spells out the meanings of lol, fml, smh, etc.? (big market opportunity in this general space – senior tech learning/use)

Unless we take the time to engage with our older generations, we will only have ourselves to blame when they are gone and we wonder why we didn't know them better.

http://www.ivantemelkov.com/like-fine-aged-wine-people-over-50-add-flavor-to-social-media/#more-843

What a great discussion!

It goes both ways I guess but I'm an optimistic embracer of new technology and believe that we are better for it.

Do we all get a bit ADD with new tech and checking in and too much time online? Sure…but this will work itself out and I still hold strong to my premise that this is an enricher of life and that different people will strike different balances between all of these aspects.

It's early days…a lot more pieces of the puzzle are coming together. What we can't do is become reactionary and reject new tech. What we must to is to adopt it to how each of us want to live.