【clover】ECONOMIST DEBATE by Misir

misirUID: 2684938

The moderator's opening remarks
Feb 26th 2008 | Mr Daniel Franklin

Our first debate in this series involved a vital area of public policy. For this second debate the focus is firmly on the individual, and the impact of technology on our lives. The question at hand should make us all examine our own use of technology, and perhaps produce surprising answers.

We all use technology. Everyone reading or taking part in this debate is of course connected to the internet. For that, at least, let us be thankful.

But even as it opens up extraordinary new possibilities, is technology making our lives too complicated? I am able to write this opening statement far away from my desk, courtesy of wireless connectivity, on a hotel veranda
阳台, 走廊overlooking the English Channel on a Sunday morning: miraculous simplicity! Yet my wife, whose birthday we are celebrating here, may view it differently: an unfortunate complication of her special day. This debate is about a question many of us grapple with on a daily basis.

Two dimensions of the issue emerge from the thoughtful opening statements. First, Richard Szafranski, a partner at Toffler Associates, raises the broad impact of technology on our environment: its contribution to global warming, the creation of new chemical compounds with uncertain impact on life and health, the invention of weapons of mass destruction. Surely, he argues, such things complicate our lives.【技术的坏处->复杂？】

Second, and more palpably, there is the matter of the breakneck development of personal technology. Mr Szafranski argues that the abundance of this stuff is such that we suffer from "over-choice" as well as "surplus complexity": all those ring tones to choose from and personal devices to be baffled by. Far from simplifying our lives, choosing between so many options is hard and increasingly complicated work.

John Maeda, president elect of the Rhode Island School of Design, accepts that technology can add complexity to our lives, and we can all empathise with tales of maddening computer crashes and infuriating printer glitches. But, he claims, it also has the capacity to remove even greater complexity that existed beforehand: who wouldn't grapple with a fidgety hearing-aid if in the end it overcomes deafness?. Furthermore, he believes, we are tech "explorers", experimenting and adapting technologies to our needs over time: he raises the prospect that we are entering a time of simplification, a "Renaissance of design-led development." In short, "the bad rap given to technologies today will be only temporary."

Where does the balance lie? That is what I hope this debate will clarify. Mr Maeda reckons there is 90% upside and 10% downside; Mr Szafranski, without putting a number on it, thinks it's the other way around. What do you think?

One last word before the debate begins. You have, rightly, on previous occasions looked closely and critically at the wording of the propositions. In this case, as Mr Szafranski notes, it might be objected that technology didn't "promise" anything, though I think it's probably fair to say that many people assumed (and tech companies routinely claim) that its purpose is to simplify not complicate. "It didn't work," asserts Mr Szafranski. Or did it?

misirUID: 2684938

The proposer's opening remarks
Feb 26th 2008 | Mr Richard Szafranski

Standing back, we now can be fairly certain that the science and engineering that enabled humans to create today's engines of industrialisation, electrification, physics, medicine, genetics and the appliances of the information age also added significant complexity to our lives. Technology warmed the planet, added pollutants to the atmosphere and oceans, affected life forms by changing the background magnetic field (including adding increased extremely low-frequency radiation), enabled nuclear weapons and created thousands of chemical compounds that can help or hurt life. One cannot conclude that the convergent effects—social, environmental, political, economic, legal, psychological—of these technological developments simplified living or our lives. Technology has failed to simplify our lives.

Coping with the challenges caused by a warming planet will not be simple. Knowing the health effects—the effects on humans and other living organisms—of various pollutants and combinations of pollutants and appropriately dealing with them will not be simple. Understanding the biological consequences of changed magnetic fields and increased point and area sources of radiation is not uncomplicated. The problems associated with nuclear weapons' proliferation are only less complex than the problems that would arise from the use of such weapons. And it becomes increasingly difficult to assay the interactions, the lag times and the health consequences of the chemicals we ingest, even those we consume intentionally. Simpler lives? No.排比论证~学习之，主要是生态和环境方面的

Dealing with any one of these challenges is not simple; they are multi-dimensional and have converged and co-exist. "Technology"—shorthand for the fruits of science and engineering—and its convergent unintended and intended consequences have complicated our lives.
开始举例了（与日常生活相关的）：
Take some familiar but trivial examples. The technologies that enable mass customisation, the internet and wireless devices and their applications, but a small sample, cause humans two problems that complicate our lives immensely. First, over-choice. Second, surplus complexity. Over-choice describes the human response to alternatives and variations so numerous, so potentially satisfying and so complex that humans can no longer decide easily. "Surplus complexity" is unnecessary and unwanted complexity.

We—hundreds of millions of us and growing—embrace the very technologies that make our lives and our relationships more difficult and fill many of our waking moments with activity. We love—to the point of gluttony—to communicate, play, invent, learn, imagine and acquire. Information technology has given us tools to do all of those anywhere and round the clock. We are awash in the benefits that high-bandwidth fixed and mobile wireless communications, email, text messages, pictures, games, data and information give us, including instant access to thousands of products. The seductive ease with which we can engage in any and all of those activities, or quests or endeavours makes it difficult and stressful to not be overwhelmed by choices. Choosing takes time and our time is not unlimited. Devices and applications that save us labour in one area may merely allow us, and sometimes seem to compel us, to invest labour in other areas.这段是具体阐释over-choice.

We say or hear, "I must do my email tonight, or by tomorrow I'll have over 600 to read." We want to buy a pot. Search on "pottery" and get 254,000,000 results. We want to find the John Li we met at a conference. Search on "John Li" and get 8,600,000 results. Do I do email, narrow the searches, eat dinner, pick up my laundry or call a friend? Because technology has spawned numerous complex variations I must repeatedly go through the act of evaluating and choosing — a labour of deciding. Technology has imposed the encumbrance of over-choice on us.还是over-choice，比较现实的例子

Over-choice is made more likely and burdensome by the complexity resident in each of the choices that are presented to us. There are hundreds of choices within the seemingly simple one of getting a cellular telephone and choosing a provider and a plan. Some phones also are Pocket PCs with CDMA and GSM, video-players, music-players, web browsers, calculators and so forth. One must decide where and when the complexity becomes surplus. Choosing ring tones from among the surplus complexity evident in the thousands of tones available is almost unfathomable over-choice.

Businesses know that solutions to over-choice, on the one hand, and engineered surplus complexity, on the other, can produce revenue. Their solutions may complicate the problems. It may be that few consumers have or take the time to read a website's terms of services, privacy policy or licensing agreement before hitting "I agree." The willing or inadvertent disclosure of information about behaviour and the data bases that record past searches create the potential for precise marketing. Behavioural marketing, for example, uses data from multiple sources, including data in the public domain and data acquired by a target's past web searches, to push tailored products and services. More choices. When surplus complexity is engineered into a product—of a product's, say, 41 features, the consumer only wanted two—consumers pay for unnecessary and unused features. Unbundling is seen by some businesses or some industries as such radical customisation that it is priced prohibitively. We live in the multifaceted bundles that technology has enabled.从大规模生产到专业制定，许多plus-complexity 出现了。。。

The system as a whole, the system we create and sustain and live in, now has so many and so complex separate parts that understanding consequential interactions, potential outcomes—intended and unintended—and long-term effects is more difficult than ever in human history. One might argue that the genesis of problems like over-choice and surplus complexity is in human frailty or human wants satisfied by technology, but, without technology, more simplicity would endure. Technology is the beneficial culprit that allowed us to do this.

One cannot conclude that humans making bad choices are the real culprit unless one ascribes to the unborn—past and future—the ability to choose. Technology, personified as defendant, could probably prove "I made no promises." Just so, but the issue under consideration is less any specific promise asserted than it was the promising possibilities of making our lives simpler that lured us, as we humans employed technology to solve problems and create opportunities.

It did not work.

misirUID: 2684938

The opposition's opening remarks
Feb 26th 2008 | Mr John Maeda

Technology exists to advance and enhance our world in new ways. Sometimes it lets us add a new capability to our daily routine like the guilty pleasure of [url=]SMS[/url][s1] -ing during a boring meeting. In other cases technology literally takes the pain away, as anyone with a successful hip replacement髋关节置换(术) can attest. Adopting any technology is a conscious act of adding complexity to our lives. However while adding new complexities, a successful technology is able to at least dampen and at times completely remove the greater complexities that existed prior.先抑后扬。。

Fitting a hearing aid to your ear on a daily basis adds complexity, but the benefit of being able to hear significantly better makes life simpler. Keeping the fire of your [url=]Blackberry[/url][s2] constantly lit drives you crazy, but your BB lets you be CEO while slipping away to attend your son's soccer game. Automobiles keep you stuck in traffic and expend excessive energy, but these same technologies can transport you to the mountains or beach for repose. When looking at your life overall, there should be no doubt that technology has simplified many aspects of your existence. It has given you options to live your life how you want and when you want in ways that were never before possible. And truly, what is more simple than being free? 还是先抑后扬的手法，但是很有说服力。。

The bad rap given to technologies today will be only temporary. Yes my wireless Bluetooth headset sometimes forgets that my iPhone exists even when they are only a millimeter apart. Yes a few months ago my computer crashed for the first time in three years and I lost all my data. Yes my laser printer and I will dance an odd lovers game of "I could have sworn I told you to print but you don't seem to notice me." 【这几个例子挺形象的，现实生活中的】But we are in a transitional period where technologies are brittle not because they are failing per se — they are just new and experimental. And yes, we are all the unlikely guinea pigs that are happier on some days than others. Do you think the people that first owned and drove automobiles lived untroubled lives? I think not, but the benefits likely outweighed any setbacks otherwise we would still be riding horses today.

Remember that computers did not really take off until less than ten years ago. They were these big, ugly, and clunky boxes with even bigger "TV sets" attached to them. Now within a size smaller than my fist a computer that is hundreds of times more powerful sits within my palm. And within a few months it will become twice as powerful. In the history of humankind, there have never been similar technological advances happening at the incredible rate of change today. The glitches are there because we are all explorers, and just haven't been told we are thus so.

Recognise simplicity as being about two goals realised simultaneously: the saving of time to realise efficiencies, and later wasting the time that you have gained on some humanly pursuit. Thus true simplicity in life is one part technology, and the other part away from technology. Much confusion lies today in the fact that technology has invaded many of our recreational activities such as music listening and video viewing. Thus as explorers in technology, we have ventured out of just the "got-to-have" categories of pacemakers and other life-saving necessities, into the "nice-to-have" categories of iPods and other life-styling gadgetry. Our thirst for exotic experiences in technology only pushes us further down the path of increasing unpredictability. Engaging new technologies is about embracing new inventions and the passion for cultural advancement — it is a game usually only reserved for the young that we can now play no matter how old we are.

We voluntarily let technology enter our lives in the infantile state that it currently exists, and the challenge is to wait for it to mature to something we can all be proud of. Patience is a virtue I am told, and I await the many improvements that lie ahead. To say that technology is failing to simplify our lives misses the point that in the past decade we have lived in an era of breakneck innovation. This pace is fortunately slowing and industries are retrenching so that design-led approaches can take command to give root to more meaningful technology experiences. There are advanced developments underway at MIT, CMU, and Stanford for improving user interfaces, data visualisation, network reliability, and energy management that will reduce the 10% of downsides we feel today compared with the 90% of upsides brought on by both life-saving and life-styling technologies.

The conveniences gained of extended life spans, click-to-buy anything off of the web, and even online dating are all concrete examples of enhancement that vastly simplify our lives. They make our lives more complex in addition: a longer life means more to think about, an online purchase can come in the wrong colour, and a virtual date can go awry. Do the positives outweigh the negatives? Often you will find that the answer is: Yes. When any newer technology is concerned, you are adopting the cause of innovation and as such should expect some turbulence along the way. In the near future we will see a renaissance in design-led technology developments that will reduce the bumpiness we currently experience to give way to simplicity every day. Technology will unite with design and the arts in unprecedented harmony such that not only will our lives be simplified, but more importantly satisfying

[s1]Short Message Service）短信服务

[s2]所谓“黑莓”（BlackBerry）是指一种移动电子邮件系统终端，可以配合手机使用。目前有内置“黑莓”功能的手机产品。它的终端包含一个非常小的标准电脑键盘，黑色的按键看上去如同草莓表面的黑籽儿，因此才得到这个昵称。

misirUID: 2684938

The opposition's rebuttal remarks【争论的味道浓厚】Feb 29th 2008 | Mr John Maeda

As Richard Szafranski points out, technological advancements have brought about much change for the worse in our world, and these include many pollutant by-products with both visible and invisible consequences. There is an interminable list of all the wrongs set forth by human beings' constant tampering and [url=]fidget[/url][s1] ing with the workings of the world in the name of curiosity. But were it not for the humans long ago who creatively discovered how to keep a fire going to keep themselves warm—a technology for its time—our ancestors would likely not have made it through many cold winters and we really would not be having this discussion at all.

Or even consider the nature of this online debate, hosted by The Economist and made possible by the internet. Though in the past this technology just provided missile guidance computations for the military, instead today here we are online and thinking together in an open forum of tens of thousands of people. At this very moment and requiring no effort on your part to travel afar or even walk to another room, it would seem technology has simplified your ability to engage in a global discourse. Wouldn't you agree?

Around three years ago I began to tire of technology and all of the associated downsides like daily computer crashes, terrible oil spills in pristine waters killing fish and other wildlife, or the endless pool of email in which we all wade and sometimes come close to drowning in. I am sure you know the general feeling, shared by Mr Szafranski's own accounts. My own journey of concern led me to envisioning the ten "laws of simplicity" as a means to cope and better understand the core issues of modern technology issues today. To give the conclusion upfront, it is really about having the right choices in life. Mr Szafranski is correct in pointing out that there is too much choice in the world. Like many things in life, this problem of having to make decisions is also an opportunity to make choices. By the way, isn't having choice, freedom?

A colleague of mine, Sarah, said that her friend had contracted mercury poisoning from eating too much sushi in New York. Her story immediately conjured up my regular reaction of fright on the airplane to: "Sir, would you like the fish, meat, or vegetarian option?", where I instead hear in my head, "Sir, would you like mercury poisoning, mad cow disease, or genetically engineered crops?"太妙了~绝~赞~绝赞 That is until Sarah popped my bubble when she added that her friend religiously ate sushi three or four times per week. I should note that the average Japanese person might have sushi once every two or three weeks, which explains why Tokyo-ites might avoid the hospital by simply heeding the sage wisdom听从圣人的智慧 of observing moderation in one's diet. Would it have been better if the sushi restaurant simply refused to serve Sarah's zealous friend and thus made the choice unavailable to him?

By creating legislation to rid the problem of creating situations of over-choice and surplus complexity, can we make the world a simpler place? Probably. And although Mr Szafranski does not pose a particular solution to the issue at hand, legislation is the only likely route to go if the desire is to limit choice and control complexity. But the world is bound to become a boring one if we go that route. Technology is like anything in life. Do too much of it and you pay the consequences付出代价. Use it in moderation and the benefits will outweigh the effort you put in.

Having choice is good, especially when the available choices are all excellent ones. The promise of technology to simplify our lives is not met when 35 of the 41 features on Mr Szafranski's hypothetical product are irrelevant and you really only use one or two. If the product is a cellphone, you are likely to use the one feature that works the majority of the time, the phone; on a digital music player you are unlikely to use the calendar function and instead choose its primary function, playing music. Extraneous features are added to many products today because of the natural love for experimentation among the technologists that design these objects. Their conscious play in the marketplace is important, for it challenges the norm of how we think about our products. They are innovating and taking risks, which is what we are taught as a point of pride in the educational system of the US and the first world.【都扯到教育的目的了~】

A new generation of designers is emerging that will remove the 35 or so features and replace them with three or four new and excellent capabilities that would not have been invented if it were not for the 35 innovative failures that came before. We live in an open laboratory of ideas today that over the next ten years are being edited for fuller human consumption, with the power of design married to advances in technology. Think of the simplicity of using Google's interface to search any term in the world and you will immediately feel confident about how a well-designed technology experience can work.

We live in an age of unparalleled无比的, 空前的progress, when creative innovations bear the fruit of advanced experimentation on every corner. You might ask yourself, "Why experiment on me?" The answer is because we live in an exciting era that is still under construction, where you can think of yourself as more of a test pilot than just a regular everyday customer. If you want a hassle-free product, go and buy a pair of old-fashioned cotton socks instead of the latest iPod. The socks may make you feel warmer, but the videos of your family will warm your heart even more.极具讽刺意味~

[s1]to move or act restlessly or nervously

misirUID: 2684938

我声明一下：以后不做新的DEBATE了，以后的帖子将会以总结前面看的为主要内容。