Give me the simple life v. conspicuous consumerism.> If we go along with what you ask, then at some point in the future we are > going to run into a wall, and then we may be forced to accept the "morality > committee" telling us what and when we can have something. They do this in > China now when it comes to having children. If you knew anything about China you would realise it has nothing to do with morality: its a pragmatic approach to limiting exponential population growth.
> Do you honestly feel you should have anything your heart desires, just > because you want it? If that were truly the case, then why do 6 million > daily (and counting) users of marajuana still have to break the law? Do you > argue for them as well? Now who has the morality comittee? Marajuana (not that it interests me a jot) - the crime is out of all proportion to the punishment. Heck, we have drink and fags legally which are every bit as harmful (but in the UK are a huge source of tax).
Going back to technology: it is a valid question. Modern technology is not sustainable: period. The "digital revolution" as a by product is a wonderful way of forcing consumers to consume more. MS switches off the support and you have to replace what wasn't broke. With your "modern" cameras how many will be usable in 10 years (let alone 50 like mechanical counterparts).
As to phones and cameras. I can't understand the need. However the phones have become an addiction for many users. It's something to do. Adverts (here anyway) stress how embarrassing it is to have less than the most modern. Ring tones are not a necessity but a badge of rank. Photo-capable phones - actually there is a lot to be said for the idea - when the new wave becomes old hat and kids move on to the next gimick there's still a lot to be said for being able to transmit a picture from your handset.
Quality? Absolute crap pictures but that misunderstands the meaning of the pictures. The importance is taking part in the sharing (for it's own sake) - being one of the crowd.
Outsiders don't need mobile phones ... less still photo ones. Nobby Nomates has no one to share his snaps with ;o(
Bob
Technology that could provide life-enhancing benefits to many financed by the frivolity of the few can't be all bad. Yanomami villagers recording rain forest clear-cutting with their digicams is an example. Discarded cell phones are free to the needy for emergency 911 service.
The democratizing effect of information technology weakens and has a reforming effect on regimes that govern by the Big Lie. The government/corporations may have better access to personal information about citizens but more citizens know more about the government/corporations and they can make sure the government/corporations knows they know.
Instant, cheap, and ubiquitous graphic communication may create a more civil society.
Being able to record and transmit civil infractions on impulse is an interesting idea: I'm on my daily walk through the 'hood and passing the house with all the code violations - I make a snap and speed-dial my councilperson. I can send the neighborhood watch a picture of a suspicious character - oops it's only a neighborhood watch guy.
Go here for an example of a sort of cell phone cam album. http//www.640x480.net/index.html
Build a Lookaround! The Lookaround Book, 2nd ed. NOW SHIPPING http://www.panoramacamera.us
