8/16/01
Christian social tradition is one of minimalism, of ascetism, of denying
the baser instincts of the flesh in order to cultivate spirituality. One
does not give into "temptation" or "sin". One in essence does not seek or
indulge in the pleasures of the flesh. One lives strictly by a set of
rules, as with any other Orthidox religion. One strives to live simply,
uninterested in wealth beyond what is necessary for immediate survival.
One only has sexual relations within the confinies of marriage. One fasts.
All primal urges are thus controlled by some set of rules. Each is subject
to its own complicated rituals and regulations, so that the urge in
question, which is in essence a physical need, not become corrupted. One
controlls one's urges, one is not controlled by them. In so doing, a
society is made where the impetus to cause harm is removed. Society is
functional, safe, and reliable. Individuals needs are fulfilled, and they
enjoy the spiritual purity of "right" living.
Society also lives under a constant shadow of guilt and impending
punishment from above. One cannot find joy in the physical, only the
spiritual. The ascetic lifestyle does offer great and pure spiritual
existence, though it is clearly not for everyone.
As a counter, observe the neo-pagan movement. One is encouraged to rejoice
in all the things the Christian viewpoint discourages. One eats as they
need, not to excess, whatever they choose to eat or what is available.
One cares not for silly things like clothing. One has sexual relations
more freely, as an expression of love. One makes sacred pleasure, rather
than making it sinful. Pleasures and life of the flesh become the
spirituality, in a sense, All the things made not OK in Christianity are
made OK in modern paganism. The only rule is that what you do not harm
anyone. One respects ones self, others, the physical and the spiritual.
As a society, there is a sense of community to support unplanned
children, share in foods and shelter needs, and generally tend towards
adopting a commune style living. Not following the rules of Christianity
has many problems. However, these are dealt with by the society itself, so
it remains functional.
One way cherishes inner beauty, and rejects the physical. The other,
cherishes the physical as spiritual, and does not restrict itself any more
than absolutely necessary. Which is better? Well, there's the rub. Both
are perfectly functional, and offer the follower a satisfying lifestyle.
Of course, neither lifestyle is right for everyone. By diametrticly
opposing eachother, functional options are made available for the
lifestyle one preferrs.
The whole point is, it doesn't really matter. You can be happy either way.
There are many options beyond these, even. If one's physical needs are
fulfilled, one is secure. If one's needs are filled in abundance, one is
prosperous. If one feels spiritually content, one is holy. If one is at
peace with themselves and the life they lead, one is happy. If one has all
of these things, one has reached heaven.
8/24/01
Technology is ever advancing. This is a given. As our machines become
smarter, so too does the interface we use to access them. Interface
becomes smoother, easier, more natural, higher bandwidth. We have gone
from wired circuits to punchcards to keyboards to fully graphical displays
with a variety of pointing devices. We even have voice. Each advancement
smooths the interface, makes it more like the machine is merely an
extension of the self. Ask anyone who touch types. Are they aware of the
keyboard? Not really. One merely thinks what one wants to enter, and one's
fingers hit the appropriate keys. The hands are trained to be a part of
the interface, the mind can abstract and assume it is a part of the
functions of the body.
We want as an ideal to simply plug a wire into our heads, do nothing with
the body, and have a direct neural control over our interface. Indeed,
such may eventually come to pass, though it is a long time in the making.
At the moment, what we have is pretty close in effect, if slower than pure
thinking would be. Indeed, how different is full immersion when you have a
21" monitor, headphones, and are so into what you are doing that you are
completely unaware of the world outside of your machine? We already have
full immersion, it just takes a bit of work on our parts to do it.
The problem with these interfaces, is as they become more advanced, they
become harder to learn. Each advance is an abstraction. Each abstraction
separates the use of the interface from the natural monkey manipulations
our bodies are initially trained to do. Each tends to rely on givens
learned from other forms of interface. Some realize this, and strive for
intuitive markings, which helps greatly. But still, as our systems become
more advanced, the interfaces become more reliant on terms and conventions
used in other forms of interface. The learning curve gets steeper, the
more advanced and abstract the work being done.
It may well be soon that one will need to learn one interface before one
can learn to use a more advanced one. Once one is proficient with the
mouse, one can use an optical pointer attached to the eye. One learns to
use a standard keyboard before learning a Cording keyboard. It only
becomes more difficult for new users of computers to learn their use as
their complexity increases. We may soon have to offer starter PCs, such as
designed for children, before turning someone loose on a commercial
product. We already have AOL for those who can't handle the Internet.