Our current communication devices are functional 1) if they are fit to work in all situations, and 2) if consistent among them. Or what is the same: 1) We want everyone to adapt to our standards, and 2) To ensure that all machines have the same language. And how do we define the interface but as the visual and tactile system by relating men and machines, which by nature must be unitary, and the mathematical language with which the machines talk? The interface is the magnet: the rock around which all our media tour.
mobility is accelerated when people create a common language with which to get along with strangers. The language itself was and is the main communication interface. The language border has always been social crucible and empires have many borders. The example of pidgin (Chinese pronunciation of the word business) is well known: a hybrid English spoken by many Asians from the early twentieth century, through the long (bad) business dealings with the British. Spanglish, in substance, is another current example. Languages \u200b\u200bare results of differences. The search for a common code is the essence of communication.
But if the language has been essential in these cultural and imperial transmission, new electronic and digital languages \u200b\u200bpresent new achievements in the development of common systems and adapted to use simple and direct. This is not about creating hybrids made of friction, but to unify the general assembly in a single code, along the lines of "natural law" of the tecnoeconomÃa based on the creation of standards. In the new religion of connectivity universalized, it makes no sense fighting with strangers machine languages.
Homo mobilis assumes that everyone is moving too using their own standards, and indeed finds a reality. The standard rule governing mobility. When you move around, you just want someone else's computer that sits against which has "the" operating system, to avoid wasting time. For ATMs and the current system of graphic display menus give good example. Most graphics display screens are menu driven set, a computer language born in the early 80's, and immediately applied to the ATM, and later to all information systems on display. Multivision provides menu options (not expandable) and gives the confidence to "undo" a decision already made. In the sensitive case of ATMs, they found a large initial reluctance among a public fearful of mechanical error or spoofing, the "reversibility" in the choice of options was a direct and personal hook. Later, to expand on this point. The standard information with which the machines communicate with us is imperative, in that it generated total dependence on the user, since under the false mantle of ease of use, are monopolized the possibilities of different ways to perceive other visual organization .
portability standard creates force. Before the advent of the railway in 1841, the hours marked the public watches Bristol and London were different. When the first was 6:15 in the City was 6:00. Nobody cared because no one affected the time difference. Relations between the cities were happening at a speed at which the minutes and seconds had relatively. With the advent of the train, or the telegraph, and implementation schedules, the hours were consolidated for the benefit of a "system of internal integration of time" that the machine itself imposes on users. The modern transport schedules so transformed short, our conception of productive time in all areas: work, school, the fun, family, the trip. Everything is governed by an orderly logic of time, which gives meaning to information. Later, the virtual portability of communication devices of the twentieth century, transported add to wish oneself, to carry everything yourself. This distinction is essential because it confirms the standard definition of a common platform on which each individual or industry displays its contents. The perception of the standards as simple scenarios to fill has blinded a deeper critique of expansionist nature of communication, since the "common system" is conceived in a closed court and non-negotiable: the freedom of the individual and his inalienable right to communicate and receive information anywhere, anytime.
mobility and portability require the establishment of operational standards that make our management and the world. Not to leave anyone out. The notion of temporal ordering sets out measures to know where a connection to its point of departure. In the tortuous path of colonial exploration, conquest of interfaces has been one of the most valuable booty. Search centuries of a system for calculating sea land length paved the way towards a world clock, set, of course, the "starting point" in Greenwich, England in 1833. The portability has been partner to use a consistent interface to allow a passenger to measure its position in the same way in any part of the world. Therefore the world must adapt to it. If something is perceived as contiguous colonialism in the nineteenth and twentieth century and contemporary globalization is the fact that not first conceive an area "free movement", not now conceive a self-time, outside the system. "No culture should be isolated": this was the line adopted by the United States in the late nineties in a magazine Correspondence, edited by Daniel Bell, and condemning those companies who do not want to become "global."
The only time that the individual runs, sold as a privatized time but in full harmony with the whole, thanks to technology and management techniques. Airports, train stations, vehicles, all work the same way and not confuse the user. The buttons on computers, and hundreds of small kitchen appliances, personal, etc. Are designed to be recognizable and similar to everyone else: consistent design language. Individuals display their mobility through communication to communion with their surroundings. The language of the machine keeps him warm.
0 comments:
Post a Comment