Taitology

The most recent issue of the Economist has run a couple stories on coupling technology with reality. The claim is that the television, video games and the internet have shown their value in creating imaginary virtual worlds, but have yet to improve my reality. The internet’s latest buzzword, social networking, is proving that society wants technology to add to their lives, instead of removing them from it.

Software running on mobile devices is the next clear evolution of the connected lifestyle. Entrepreneurs around the globe are betting that people want information on the move. Simple examples include locating businesses and friends based on physical proximity. How far can this evolution go?

The Economist ran a couple articles about using virtual-reality-style technology to augment our senses. Imagine directions from your in-car GPS device, overlaid on the road through your windshield. How about visiting a doctor who uses a pair of glasses to locate your blood veins before giving you a needle. Those examples only target our visual senses. We’ve all been to museums with audio guides for additional information about the displays. I am sure that prosthetic research has yielded a technology for augmenting touch sensitivity.

Those are just some examples of the products that have already been proposed. I appreciate that our young, tech savvy generation wants push the limits of technology. I know at least one person with a different perspective on the real value of these techno-fantasies. Jim Balsillie (RIM’s CEO) is not allowed to bring his Blackberry into his home, according to his wife. There is an important lesson in Mrs. Balsillie’s words; not all aspects of our lives are open to change.

Is every new technological innovation an improvement to society? Are there some parts our lives too sacred to be taken away from us? Are there some parts of society, or our planet, that will never change despite technological innovation?