So Peggy Noonan has an interesting piece on the Iranian election sitch, touching on the role of technology in a revolution. She, rightly so, notes that technology such as Twitter and YouTube only intensify and encourage the sentiments of people, they don't create them.
Well, gee. Information still plays the role of information no matter what delivery system it's in. Remember how the printing press made something of a stir? We humans are social creatures. It's why we are the dominant species. Better delivery systems just widen that society. We expand ourselves.
I do take exception to her closing call for more serious names for technology inventions, as she complains that Google, Twitter and Facebook are "baby talk." I call bullshit on that. We geeks don't need -- as xarker put it -- "borrowed gravitas." We don't make the same distinctions that the generations before us did between what we're told is serious and what we see as serious. More like what is useful and what is not useful. Need to be aware of and need to act on.
What's the value to me of video from Iranian protesters versus knowing that traffic is backed up on I-26 and I'll never make it to my job interview on time if I go that way? Arguably Iran is more "serious" in terms of global politics and the meaning of life, but I need that f'n job. The two pieces of information are not comparable, yet the delivery system is. I get both in real time. Does it matter that "Twitter" sounds kinda cute?