Technological Mindset

helen smith
Jun 10 · 3 min read

In November 2012, the eyes of the world were on Belize, all thanks to John McAfee. McAfee Activate also announced yesterday that he’s shifting his presidential run over to the Libertarian party while still maintaining his focus on cybersecurity from his initial campaign “We’re facing a cyberwar,” he said. Still, even McAfee admits Everykey has an obvious security flaw: If someone steals your key, they’ll immediately have access to everything you’ve integrated with it. While he says Everykey is working on that issue, fixing it will likely involve some sort of biometric authentication, which means the company needs to completely rethink its hardware.

Computer software tycoon and hedonist John McAfee is a person of interest and wanted for questioning in the connection with the murder of his neighbor Gregory Faull. Should people really follow what John McAfee says? Much more surprisingly, if you disregard numbers of social media followers and focus exclusively on the trust factor, McAfee — who has promoted some shady projects in the past — still came out first. link for Mcafee Security:

Several decades in the past that was not human interactive modus operandi, which are incacerated to today, we are totally depended on our gizmos and their enablement for us to function in our technological society and world today. Such massive changes, coming with increasing velocity, will disorient, bewilder, and crush many people. “If we examine the effects on culture of the introduction of money (as opposed to operating under the barter system) we’d not look at individual exchanges of goods so much as the new types of exchanges made possible by the technology and the ways in which the technology gave rise to accelerated change and growth within society.”

Our total dependency upon and on these new enabling viral streaming technological techniques, have thorough overwhelemed our analogical technological mindset, to that of the new digital environ and social technoligical environ and reality. Because he shared that process with us we are able to apply his thinking to the new media of our era, namely the digital media, and derive from his observations of electric mass media insights into the workings and effects of digital media. He and Leonard (ibid.) also predicted that the relationship to humankind‘s knowledge would change with electrically-configured information as we are beginning to see in this the Internet Age.

With the shift from print media to digital media, such a change was inevitable. This major change in human behaviour has come about within a remarkably short time, but its implications need to be considered. The Technological Society is a description of the way in which an autonomous technology is in process of taking over the individual values of every society without exception, subverting and suppressing these values to produce at last a monolithic world culture in which all non technological difference and variety is mere appearance.

In our technological society, technique is the totality of methods rationally arrived at and having absolute efficiency in every field of human activity.” Ellul emphasizes rationality, efficiency, procedure. Finally, it explains the explosive speed with which the WWW is filled up with contents from the grass roots level (e.g. family snapshots) on the one hand and from the sphere of mass media and formal institutions (e.g. electronic journals) on the other. 3) Mass media will articulate the integrative aspects of society: providing widespread common experiences, homogenizing opinions, offering intellectual leadership, transmitting information generated at top levels of societal institutions.

What is different today, of course, is that producers of content now have access to potential audiences that was largely missing in previous generations. Jhally (1982) and Livant (1982), in earlier iterations of the ideas that would be central to their later collaborative piece, emphasized their departure from Smythe in the extent to which they saw audiences working not for the advertisers but for the mass media (Jhally, 1982: 208; Livant, 1982: 213). In short, they work to create the demand for advertised goods.’ Smythe’s observation was central to his critique of what he saw as a failing by Marxist theorists to adequately account for the production of audiences in their analyses of the political economy of the media, which, according to Smythe, tended to focus overwhelmingly (and misguidedly) on content production.