Generations, Technology, Attitude

Let’s revisit some of the half-baked musings about generational differences and technology I’d started last month: When last we left it, I was still bouncing between the idea that generational attitudes drive how we use technology, versus the idea that human nature (and thus behavior) is pretty much the same, so it’s the availability of technology that matters.

It’s kind of a chicken-and-egg problem. Or two sides of the same coin. Or an endless loop of attitude affecting technology affecting attitude. Throw in a shifting pendulum for good measure.

With regard to attitudes towards technology, there have always been attitudinal differences within generations.  Some people (for the sake of argument, let’s call them “geeks”) have always tried to tinker, to take things apart to see how they work, to push the limits of technology; whereas everybody else just wants them to work. Maybe the continuum that matters isn’t strictly generational, but rather a creative continuum that’s intra-generational — something along the lines of tinkerers, creators, modifiers and consumers.

Theory: Working with bits (software, networks, and digital assets) makes it a lot easier for tinkerers to have an immediate, visible impact on society. If you’re working with atoms (physical things) and you’re a basement inventor, it’s hard to have an impact unless you end up becoming Philo Farnsworth (the inventor of the electronic TV), whereas right now, you can have an idea — it doesn’t even have to be a particularly good idea [viz. HotOrNot, I Can Haz Cheezburger] — and you can move the needle (again, not necessarily in a good way).

In this case, technology enables the attitude (say, the desire for insta-fame, a looser concept of fair use and intellectual property, etc.), which swings the pendulum over to the tinkerers, until the inertial mass of passive consumers catches up and co-opts the technology, swinging the pendulum back until the next technological shift enables the next attitudinal shift.

(I’m starting to sound like the Time Cube guy, aren’t I?)

While we’re on the subject, the bits vs. atoms effect hits pretty hard in both the realms of attitude and technology. The technologies behind digitally networked media that let you make an infinite number of perfect copies distributable online enabled the attitude “I like free stuff,” with attendant effects on attitudes towards fair use, ownership, the expectation of paying for stuff (and getting paid for stuff).

(Attitudinal differences on what should be free and what we should pay for is something that I’ll try to revisit in the future. The interesting thing, I think, is that it’s an argument that’s shaped by your idea of entitlement and fairness — the economic arguments are just rationalizations based on where you’re coming from based on that.)

Anyway, that’s going to be my conclusion right now — when it comes to generational differences, technology and attitude are inextricably linked.

If any of this made sense, please leave a comment and explain it back to me.