Comments on: Joel Barker on Future Technology http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/04/10/joel-barker-on-future-technology/ Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:08:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Joel Barker http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/04/10/joel-barker-on-future-technology/#comment-31095 Joel Barker Tue, 20 Feb 2007 20:03:23 +0000 http://www.speedofcreativity.org/?p=910#comment-31095 Delightful review of my presentation. A quick answer to why I did not speak to some of the technologies that were obvious to you (Web 2.0 and open source) was because I didn't want to have to explain them to make sure my audience understood them. This is a common dilemma for time based presentations. You had many wise observations. One I would quarrel with is the idea that some human "technologies" aren't technologies. If you define a technology as a tool with which you solve specific categories of problems, I think they are. If you ever want to chat on the telephone about this, I would be up for it. All the best in your future! Joel Barker Delightful review of my presentation. A quick answer to why I did not speak to some of the technologies that were obvious to you (Web 2.0 and open source) was because I didn’t want to have to explain them to make sure my audience understood them. This is a common dilemma for time based presentations.

You had many wise observations. One I would quarrel with is the idea that some human “technologies” aren’t technologies. If you define a technology as a tool with which you solve specific categories of problems, I think they are.

If you ever want to chat on the telephone about this, I would be up for it.

All the best in your future!

Joel Barker

]]> By: Ellen Weber http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/04/10/joel-barker-on-future-technology/#comment-4325 Ellen Weber Wed, 31 May 2006 14:21:08 +0000 http://www.speedofcreativity.org/?p=910#comment-4325 What a wonderful summation of what sounded like an engaging talk.... I am intrigued by your compelling theme woven throughout -- the world will not not wait for us in the US.... and wondered how we can move past some of the systems we have allowed to hold us back and take our place again with winners. It seems to me the US will want to do so next time... by valuing people of all cultures more ... as part of that currency that can help them build in the areas you described so well.... What do you think? <a href="”http://www.brainbasedbusiness.com”" rel="nofollow">Brain Based Business</a> What a wonderful summation of what sounded like an engaging talk…. I am intrigued by your compelling theme woven throughout — the world will not not wait for us in the US…. and wondered how we can move past some of the systems we have allowed to hold us back and take our place again with winners. It seems to me the US will want to do so next time… by valuing people of all cultures more … as part of that currency that can help them build in the areas you described so well…. What do you think?

Brain Based Business

]]> By: Wesley Fryer http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/04/10/joel-barker-on-future-technology/#comment-964 Wesley Fryer Tue, 11 Apr 2006 17:17:41 +0000 http://www.speedofcreativity.org/?p=910#comment-964 I think you are correct, Conn. Joel's presentation reflects a clear bias toward technocratic rather than dynamical policymaking-- and management of change. I have been continuing to read <a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=discoveringharry%26link_code=xm2%26camp=2025%26creative=165953%26path=http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html%253fASIN=0684862697%2526tag=discoveringharry%2526lcode=xm2%2526cID=2025%2526ccmID=165953%2526location=/o/ASIN/0684862697%25253FSubscriptionId=02ZH6J1W0649DTNS6002" rel="nofollow">"The Future and Its Enemies: The Growing Conflict Over Creativity, Enterprise, and Progress"</a> by Virginia Postrel, which is coloring my thinking quite a bit now. Most folks involved in policymaking are steeped in technocratic ideas, which has as its foundation an assumption that we can plan for everything in advance and therefore "control" the direction and speed of change. I think those assumptions are false. As you say, ambiguity is there and we can't eliminate it. So we need to recognize this as we attempt to prepare students for the future. Joel gives the idea that we will be able to anticipate and plan for all possibilities. I think his method of getting diverse folks together to brainstorm and collaborate is good, but it is misleading to think that it will lead to complete technocratic predictability. I think you are correct, Conn. Joel’s presentation reflects a clear bias toward technocratic rather than dynamical policymaking– and management of change. I have been continuing to read “The Future and Its Enemies: The Growing Conflict Over Creativity, Enterprise, and Progress” by Virginia Postrel, which is coloring my thinking quite a bit now. Most folks involved in policymaking are steeped in technocratic ideas, which has as its foundation an assumption that we can plan for everything in advance and therefore “control” the direction and speed of change. I think those assumptions are false. As you say, ambiguity is there and we can’t eliminate it. So we need to recognize this as we attempt to prepare students for the future. Joel gives the idea that we will be able to anticipate and plan for all possibilities. I think his method of getting diverse folks together to brainstorm and collaborate is good, but it is misleading to think that it will lead to complete technocratic predictability.

]]> By: Conn McQuinn http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/04/10/joel-barker-on-future-technology/#comment-963 Conn McQuinn Tue, 11 Apr 2006 17:08:27 +0000 http://www.speedofcreativity.org/?p=910#comment-963 Hi, Wesley - I appreciated your editorial insertions. Maybe I missed something here, but it looks to me that Mr. Barker doesn't address the impact of chaos theory. I agree that it's great to teach kids to think through implications; it's an important skill in a world with many more choices than ever before. However, as chaos theory has reflected, one of the most important things we've learned is that, in a complex system, <i>it's impossible to predict all potential outcomes</i>. We aren't going to help kids by training them in 20th-century planning techniques to "reduce uncertainty." We need instead to teach them to be able to deal within a world of great ambiguity. Nobody right now has a good idea of what tech will look like ten years in the future, and nobody <i>can</i> know. There are simply too many variables interacting with one another to make that possible. Kids need to be able to make plans, and need also to recognize when to abandon those plans and make new ones. The danger with long-range planning is that it makes people stop observing and thinking once a plan is in place. Conn Hi, Wesley -

I appreciated your editorial insertions. Maybe I missed something here, but it looks to me that Mr. Barker doesn’t address the impact of chaos theory. I agree that it’s great to teach kids to think through implications; it’s an important skill in a world with many more choices than ever before. However, as chaos theory has reflected, one of the most important things we’ve learned is that, in a complex system, it’s impossible to predict all potential outcomes. We aren’t going to help kids by training them in 20th-century planning techniques to “reduce uncertainty.” We need instead to teach them to be able to deal within a world of great ambiguity. Nobody right now has a good idea of what tech will look like ten years in the future, and nobody can know. There are simply too many variables interacting with one another to make that possible. Kids need to be able to make plans, and need also to recognize when to abandon those plans and make new ones. The danger with long-range planning is that it makes people stop observing and thinking once a plan is in place.

Conn

]]>