PDA

View Full Version : Technology - Brilliant or Evil?


Eldritch
02-19-2003, 02:35 PM
Which form of technology (anything man-made, essentially) do you think has had a negative impact OR will have a negative impact in the future for mankind in general?

Examples would be : atomic bomb, cloning technology, cars, etc

Personally, I don't like all this biometric security they're talking about implementing in airports here in the U.S. I have nothing to hide, but I don't want to be screened like a potential criminal, and I don't like the idea of all this information about me accessible to the gov't. I don't feel like trading away bits of my freedom for the illusion of safety.

What do you all think?

Reborn Outcast
02-19-2003, 02:59 PM
Why do you think cars are a negative impact? If they are then planes and boats have a negative impact and we'd still be riding on bikes. Naw, cars aren't negative. But I agree that the A-bomb and clones will and have had a negative impact on society.

Eldritch
02-19-2003, 03:03 PM
I don't necessarily think that cars have had a negative impact, I was listing them only as examples.

I was looking for people to come up with their own examples of what they think is negative technology, not just to agree with the samples I listed, lol.

But about the cars, one could argue that although they've helped us get around, their impact on the environment has been CONSIDERABLE, not to mention what all the various oil spills have done over the years.

mace_sundancer
02-19-2003, 03:09 PM
if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about...or do you? something you wanna share?

Eldritch
02-19-2003, 03:15 PM
I don't have anything to hide, but I don't feel it's necessary to invade my privacy that much just to prove it. Besides, each time they do something like that, they bring us that much closer to the total lack of freedom written about in 1984.

C'jais
02-19-2003, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by Reborn Outcast
Naw, cars aren't negative.

Once the polar ice caps melt and the earth is covered in a huge flood, I suspect you'll find cars a "negative impact on society as well", at the least.

You can't stop science. What can be invented, will be invented.

But we can prevent their use.

Reborn Outcast
02-19-2003, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by C'jais
Once the polar ice caps melt and the earth is covered in a huge flood, I suspect you'll find cars a "negative impact on society as well", at the least.

You can't stop science. What can be invented, will be invented.

But we can prevent their use.

So you don't want cars? Should we scrap em cause the polar ice caps are going to melt in 10,000 years?

Eldritch
02-19-2003, 04:14 PM
Originally posted by Reborn Outcast
So you don't want cars? Should we scrap em cause the polar ice caps are going to melt in 10,000 years?

I don't know where you've been in science class, but the melting of the polar ice caps will happen much sooner than 10,000 years.

However, the melting of the polar ice caps will NOT raise the sea level - check in any Oceanography book (or science book for that matter) : ice displaces the same amount of water as the liquid form will.
Same principle as ice cubes in a glass of water - if the water is at the top of the glass and there are ice cubes in it, the water will not overflow when the ice cubes melt.

However, with a hole in the ozone layer the size of Australia over the south pole, it's certainly not helping global warming. The only way the sea level will rise is if the Continental ice caps start melting - which they have, quite steadily in the last 40-50 years. Global warming is what causes the contintental ice caps to recede (melt) like that, and global warming is caused by greenhouse gasses - CO and CO2 are some of the worst - which are provided in large quantities by cars.

C'jais
02-19-2003, 04:35 PM
Originally posted by Aru-Wen
However, the melting of the polar ice caps will NOT raise the sea level

I stand corrected - thanks Aru-Wen.

No Reborn, of course we need cars. But we need to research better alternatives before long.

Reborn Outcast
02-19-2003, 04:44 PM
Originally posted by C'jais
No Reborn, of course we need cars. But we need to research better alternatives before long.

Yes I can't wait for teleportation. :D It would be sweet to be able to say "Beam me up" or something. :D Also I can see those livable spacestations (like a big ring or something).

And Aru-wen I was putting out taht time frame for effect. :D

I think guns have deprived from society. I know its impossible to take them all away but to limit the amount that can go out to the public would be nice...

Commander Bond
02-19-2003, 04:45 PM
Technology is wonderful... all aspects. If I could create a perfect clone of myself tomorrow, I would. Cars are brilliant fun and are helpful for those distances that would wear the soles from your shoes (and sometimes wear the legs from your body). The atomic bomb is needed when we find another planet like Earth and invade.

Nature is evil. I wrote this little rhyme to illustrate my point of view about all things 'green'...

"Don't like trees, don't like grass.
Give me steel and give me glass."

That about sums it all up...

Global warming is a load of old rubbish, made up by some enviromentalist scaremongers who think we have a debt to pay back to the planet which gave us life. I tell them to get a life. Simple.

Yay for all things mechanical and yay for all things which produce toxic fumes. I'm off to breathe in some carbon monoxide...

Eldritch
02-19-2003, 04:45 PM
Originally posted by C'jais
I stand corrected - thanks Aru-Wen.

No Reborn, of course we need cars. But we need to research better alternatives before long.

No problem.

We do need cars Reborn, but haven't you noticed that most major automobile manufacturers have been scrambling to come up with a more fuel efficient car? They're also looking down the road for other power sources - there is a new concept car by GM whose prototype was just completed that runs on Hydrogen cells and by-wire technology. You should actually take a look, as it looks more like a plane or ship from SW then it does a car. It has no pedals, the acceleration/braking is all handled from the wheel! :eyeraise:
GM Hy-Wire Prototype (http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/auto_technology/2002/8/hy_wire_hybrid/)

Reborn Outcast
02-19-2003, 04:51 PM
Originally posted by Commander Bond
Technology is wonderful... all aspects. If I could create a perfect clone of myself tomorrow, I would. Cars are brilliant fun and are helpful for those distances that would wear the soles from your shoes (and sometimes wear the legs from your body). The atomic bomb is needed when we find another planet like Earth and invade.

Nature is evil. I wrote this little rhyme to illustrate my point of view about all things 'green'...

"Don't like trees, don't like grass.
Give me steel and give me glass."

That about sums it all up...

Global warming is a load of old rubbish, made up by some enviromentalist scaremongers who think we have a debt to pay back to the planet which gave us life. I tell them to get a life. Simple.

Yay for all things mechanical and yay for all things which produce toxic fumes. I'm off to breathe in some carbon monoxide...

I hope you were joking or I would consider this trolling.

Clones cannot be perfect, the memories of one person cannot be transmitted to a clone which is why no-one would essentially have a "double."

Without nature we would have oxygen or BEAUTY in this world. Maybe we should throw you in a cell, nothing green there!!!

Global Warming is a fact. Take it somewhere else please.

P.S. (Toxic fumes (according to my knowledge) are what cause global warming which you don't believe in.)

Thanks.

Reborn Outcast
02-19-2003, 04:55 PM
Sorry for the double post but I just now saw your post Aru-wen. Yes I agree with everything you're saying its just that I didn't understand why cars was down under things that you thought took away from society. :D

That car is pretty cool btw. :D

Eldritch
02-19-2003, 05:07 PM
They were really just on my list as an example of how varied the technology can be. Not just destructive stuff. Enough about cars, though.

What else do you all think has been negative?

mace_sundancer
02-19-2003, 05:12 PM
the internet

mobile phones (and yes, i do own a mobile...)

Pedantic
02-19-2003, 05:46 PM
I don't think that any technology is intrinisically good or evil. However, I do believe that the way in which the technology is used can be good or evil. In other words, the human element determines the how good or evil the technology is. :)

DC | Dark Luke
02-19-2003, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by Pedantic
other words, the human element determines the how good or evil the technology is. :)

That`s right, humans uses for a determined kind of technology it`s what it makes the tech great or evil.
The desire of being better and powerful than other is what i think that makes technology a threat to human kind.

There is technology created especially for a good porpuse, like solar cells for cars or for other vehicles, that makes no harm to the world.

Salu2

Katarn07
02-19-2003, 06:03 PM
Technology isn't good or evil. The way they are used is what will be judged.

Internet is great and useful for fun/ rec and school. Then again, you can get your financial info stolen off of it if you're not cautious...

Tyrion
02-19-2003, 06:04 PM
To rephrase some guy...

"Technology doesnt kill people. Humans kill people."

(The theme was some guy's, the words mine.)

Technology is great...but our selfishness,greed,and lust for powah is why we use them for evil.

Of course, someone without the bad traits wouldnt be human in my eyes(perfect,yes.But they would deserve they're own species),but unforturnatly for nature,we survive like cockroaches,so we're here till a meteor comes...




Me? Pessimist? nah....:D

Pedantic
02-19-2003, 06:20 PM
Originally posted by Tyrion
"Technology doesnt kill people. Humans kill people."

Ironically, I was thinking of the same sort of phrase because I was thinking about guns when I was reading this thread. Or arguments against gun control, if you will. :)

Darklighter
02-19-2003, 06:23 PM
The advancement in technology, full stop, is evil. You can't single out things like atomic bombs, industrial factories, oil tankers and such as evil and forget the rest. All technology as a whole contributes to the destruction of our planet and our species. Technology is human being's downfall; we have used it to eat away at the planet, like Ty said, merely out of greed. Our lust for power has destroyed us, and it is still happening today, more than ever. I really believe what Agent Smith said now in The Matrix:

It seems that when i came to classify your species I observed that you're not actual mammals. You see every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment, but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply. You multiply until every natural resource is consumed. The only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern: a virus.

There you go. That is all we are. A virus, a drain on this planets resources. We have used technology, and through our quest for knowledge exploited it for our own personal gain. The sad thing is, it's too late to fix things now.

Pisces
02-19-2003, 06:33 PM
Technology has an upside and a downside if you want it in basics.

There's an upside to pretty much any given piece of technology (even the A-bomb although the size of the upside is arguable), cars which transport us in our daily lives, or even the internet which has greatly broadened and advanced communications.

Then there's the downside to almost any given piece of technology. Cars, everyone knows of the heavy environmental damage they've caused over the years. There's the internet which may have resulted in an expansion of communications but also resulted in a large increase of things such as racism, child pornography, and general discrimination (not to mention it causes some serious swearing from me when it freezes). Then there's my last example which was the a-bomb but I don't think I have to get into depth about the downsides of that.

Anyway, like plenty of other people have said, it depends on how technology is used, nothing more really.

C'jais
02-19-2003, 07:17 PM
Originally posted by Darklighter
All technology as a whole contributes to the destruction of our planet and our species.

Everything, including trees, water, mountains and tectonic movements contribute to the earth's self-destruction.

No species can work in a symbiosis with its environment unless supressed by other forces, such as predators. Creatures with the resources to dominate others and carve a larger territory out for themselves, will. Creatures with intelligence on our level will eventually want to make their environment more comfortable for them.

Since we're by far more advanced than any other species on this planet, it is impossible for us not to use technology (heck, even chimps use technology) to make living easier for us.

Technology is human being's downfall

While you could argue that this is the case, without technology we'd still be nothing more than primitive animals.

we have used it to eat away at the planet, like Ty said, merely out of greed.

Every single organism on this planet operates out of greed, and greed alone. There is no cooperation between the species, and the only thing that ensures that the climate remains in status quo is that no species is vastly better than any of the others, or able to conform the surroundings to themselves.

And here we are.

Our lust for power has destroyed us, and it is still happening today, more than ever.

Would you rather sit in a cave, with an average lifespan of 35 years and have your teeth rotting away?

I'm content with my "lust for power".

There you go. That is all we are. A virus,

While we are at heart a virus, every other organism on earth would be same, given the intellligence and ability.

a drain on this planets resources.

True, but while we drain massive resources, we're also gifted with the ability to create resources. Although distant, the promise of cold fusion and terraforming sure sounds fantastic to me.

We have used technology, and through our quest for knowledge exploited it for our own personal gain.

We could not have done otherwise. Technology is forged through need and greed.

The sad thing is, it's too late to fix things now.

Nature and technology go hand in hand. There's no fundamental difference between the human race being destroyed by a meteor impact, a nuclear war, the sun exploding or us being swallowed by vulcanic eruptions and huge earthquakes.

We can now circumvent natural disasters to a large degree, protecting our species from being wiped out by random catastrophes. I'd rather take the decreasing risk of destroying ourselves, than the sad fate of being doomed to destruction by "natural disasters".

Darklighter
02-19-2003, 07:31 PM
And I thank you C'Jais, for picking apart my whole speech and genuinely making a fool of me:)You know if you look at things in such minute detail you really miss out on the bigger picture. What I am getting at is that human beings are killing the world faster than it should be killed. Put it this way; would our planet survive longer if humans had never existed? My answer to that question is a simple 'yes', and that is what my speech was trying to say. The planet would be better off without us. And please don't say the 'you're wrong, we as a species are a great asset to this planet' speech, because in my eyes, it is wrong. What will all of this that we have now and are trying to achieve come to? If we cannot find a suitable planet elsewhere to colonise and destroy like we have this one, the technology will eventually fade out and die, and we will be back to square one. Maybe we will never come back in other universe, in another time, maybe we will, who knows? It's really sad that such an intelligent race could do so much damage. How ironic.

C'jais
02-19-2003, 07:53 PM
Originally posted by Darklighter
What I am getting at is that human beings are killing the world faster than it should be killed. Put it this way; would our planet survive longer if humans had never existed? My answer to that question is a simple 'yes', and that is what my speech was trying to say.

We're not really destroying the planet, or killing it, we're changing it to fit ourselves as much as possible. The planet will most definately be destroyed when the sun explodes in a few billion years, but that's a long time ahead.

I don't believe we're capable of destroying the entire planet, with all life included. A nuclear holocaust would not wipe out all life. The ecosystem would go on, albeit one suited for much simpler organisms.

And please don't say the 'you're wrong, we as a species are a great asset to this planet' speech, because in my eyes, it is wrong.

We're no asset, but we're not the opposite either - we're just here. Once you look at nature as something that's just there, including humans and technology, you can't really say that something works against nature or the "natural way of things and how they're meant to be" - things just happen.

A nuclear war would end up destroying a lot of life, but it wouldn't mean the death of life itself. A meteor impact would do the same, and we don't look back at history and proclaim that "nature was cruel to itself" when the big mother crashed down and destroyed most life in the cretacious period. It just happened, everyone adapted to the changed climate, the world lived on.

We are not in a position to place ourselves equal to other animals. We're something far more advanced, and we can't help ourselves when we change the environment to fit our needs. Any other species would do the same, given the tools to do it, as said before.

There are no good or bad changes when viewed from above - just changes.

And I thank you C'Jais, for picking apart my whole speech and genuinely making a fool of me

Don't take it personal, friend ;)

I just have this itch y'know...

However, look at it this way: If we were supposedly able to "terraform" other planets, making them hospitable to life and transforming them from barren rocks to lush forests, would you consider this "helping nature", or just changing the environment?

It can go both ways you know ;)

Eldritch
02-19-2003, 11:12 PM
Originally posted by Darklighter
Put it this way; would our planet survive longer if humans had never existed? My answer to that question is a simple 'yes', and that is what my speech was trying to say. The planet would be better off without us.

I wonder how you came to that conclusion. Who knows what evolutionary path the earth or one of the other species would've taken had we not been here?

Who's to say that by us being here, we saved the world from some other more horrible evolutionary track?

nova_wolf
02-20-2003, 05:05 AM
Nah - the only way Earth is gonna go is the Sun engulfing it.

It would have been unspoilt for that little longe may be if we had remained mere chimps (although I suspect some of us are secretly still at that stage.... :p )

Nuclear war will turn Earth into a large ball of ash, but Earth will still exist, and some other form of life will take over.

Ultimately, the human race can only really srew itself over... And I have a feeling that if it happens - good bloody riddance!

Darklighter
02-20-2003, 07:37 AM
Originally posted by C'jais
Don't take it personal, friend ;)

I just have this itch y'know...

Yeah I know, sorry m8:)lol

I suppose I didn't take into account the fact that everything might in fact be predetermined. It was planned that we would evolve into a species that could break the boundaries of rational thought and begin to explore the outer realms of our capability. Maybe we are in fact a blessing (lol) but have just used our power in the wrong way. Or maybe we just need to learn how to treat each other and our planet more carefully (I believe humans need to learn a lot). I just get angry at our species sometimes, that we might be doing things all wrong. Sorry if I went off on one, I don't mean to. I agree C'Jais, that maybe we are just 'here', and as a species with as much ambition as ours, we need to discover right and wrong for ourselves.

SmartDragon
02-20-2003, 11:22 AM
good and bad of all tech look at clones, full human clone moral dilema, clones of certain cells forming new livers, arms etc good if we can get it right. and the human race will wipe its self and take most of the live on the planet with it, that is unless something changes fairly soon. what has to change I'll leave up to you.

Commander Bond
02-20-2003, 11:56 AM
Just a quick question: how can nature be beautiful? There is no structure, no order, no set uniform. If every tree were the same, in perfectly alligned rows, then maybe I'll let nature off. But they aren't. Plus, the drop brown leaves all over the place during Autumn. Bright, shiny steel buildings don't.

Why put me in a cell, Reborn Outcast? Just because I don't like nature doesn't mean I like being cramped up in confined spaces! A nice massive lobby, with glass and marble-effect flooring is a large open space, but I love it (it's where I work sometimes... I travel a lot for my job).

Global warming is rubbish. Saying things like the polar ice caps are going to melt and flood the entire world... yeah, right. I've been to the North Pole (well, quite close, but my team and I turned back after a slight problem) and I can tell you first hand that the ice there is not in danger of melting away. Take my advice: never believe anything you hear from people like "Greenpeace" or protesters who march against nuclear power stations, landfill sites and the such-like.

Besides, without nuclear power plants, Homer Simpson would be out of a job (this is a joke, not meant to be taken seriously)!

:007:

Eldritch
02-20-2003, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by Commander Bond
Global warming is rubbish. Saying things like the polar ice caps are going to melt and flood the entire world... yeah, right. I've been to the North Pole (well, quite close, but my team and I turned back after a slight problem) and I can tell you first hand that the ice there is not in danger of melting away. Take my advice: never believe anything you hear from people like "Greenpeace" or protesters who march against nuclear power stations, landfill sites and the such-like.

You must've missed my previous post on this subject, so here it is again:
Originally posted by Aru-Wen
I don't know where you've been in science class, but the melting of the polar ice caps will happen much sooner than 10,000 years.

However, the melting of the polar ice caps will NOT raise the sea level - check in any Oceanography book (or science book for that matter) : ice displaces the same amount of water as the liquid form will.
Same principle as ice cubes in a glass of water - if the water is at the top of the glass and there are ice cubes in it, the water will not overflow when the ice cubes melt.

However, with a hole in the ozone layer the size of Australia over the south pole, it's certainly not helping global warming. The only way the sea level will rise is if the Continental ice caps start melting - which they have, quite steadily in the last 40-50 years. Global warming is what causes the contintental ice caps to recede (melt) like that, and global warming is caused by greenhouse gasses - CO and CO2 are some of the worst - which are provided in large quantities by cars.

mace_sundancer
02-20-2003, 02:37 PM
bond, you are worrying me...'nature isn't beautiful because it's not symmetrical'? wtf kind of an arguement is that? oh and if you were going to go iinhale some CO2 why aren't you dead?

shukrallah
02-21-2003, 06:04 PM
technology is good and bad

Bad:

the more technology invented the more i have to go to school and learn made up stuff.

Good:

the more technology invented the more video games they will make and i can be happier.

most of science is made up stuff that cant be proven, yeah maybe there is global warming, but i dont believe, i heard that every few thousand years the temperature rise a few degrees, in couple hundred more years it will go down. but of coarse none of that can be proven either. none of us will be alive when it happens so i wont worry about it. and if you dont know im going to tell you, just about every thing in your science class is made up, half of it cant be proven, they could have everything all wronge and we gatta sit there and memorize useless facts that i wont be thinking about when i grow up.

thats what i think.

Eldritch
02-21-2003, 07:54 PM
As your reply is ignorant and uninformed, I won't even dignify it with a proper response.

shukrallah
02-21-2003, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by Aru-Wen
As your reply is ignorant and uninformed, I won't even dignify it with a proper response.


ah good, u know im right so u cant say anything!!!


come on u believe all that crap they tell us in science class, its all made up. i was wrong about that global warming thing though, although its not really called global warming, its called revelations. Man screwing up the planet then the antichrist comes. yeah thats what it is.

Pedantic
02-21-2003, 08:10 PM
Originally posted by Commander Bond
Just a quick question: how can nature be beautiful? There is no structure, no order, no set uniform. If every tree were the same, in perfectly alligned rows, then maybe I'll let nature off. But they aren't. Plus, the drop brown leaves all over the place during Autumn. Bright, shiny steel buildings don't.

Actually, many things we find in nature are based on complex fractals. :)

Eldritch
02-21-2003, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
ah good, u know im right so u cant say anything!!!


come on u believe all that crap they tell us in science class, its all made up. i was wrong about that glabal warming thing though, although its not really called glabal warming, its called revelations. Man screwing up the planet then the antichrist comes. yeah thats what it is.

:rolleyes: First off, I don't know how old you think I am, but "science class" was years ago for me. You're just showing your age and inexperience in the world.

And if you think that "glabal" (I assume you mean 'global') warming is really what is written about in the book of Revelations... you've got issues. You're young - time will change the song you sing.

And good call on the fractals, Pedantic.

shukrallah
02-21-2003, 08:46 PM
(lol) oops i spelled it right earilier in this thread:D :D :D :)


look there is no convincing u and no convincing me so we should quit arguing. technology is ok to a certain point. it has good points and bad points which everyone had figured out by reading this thread. and u started the science class thing, not me.

Eldritch
02-21-2003, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by lukeskywalker1
look there is no convincing u and no convincing me so we should quit arguing. technology is ok to a certain point. it has good points and bad points which everyone had figured out by reading this thread. and u started the science class thing, not me.

When I brought up the science class thing, I was talking to someone else, and I was refering to them, not myself.

You're right though, there's no point arguing, but I'm not trying to convince you anyway - just pointing out the difference between opinion and ignorance.

shukrallah
02-21-2003, 09:35 PM
Originally posted by Aru-Wen
When I brought up the science class thing, I was talking to someone else, and I was refering to them, not myself.

You're right though, there's no point arguing, but I'm not trying to convince you anyway - just pointing out the difference between opinion and ignorance.

[lol] come on that last line wasnt needed "- just pointing out the difference between opinion and ignorance." and u know that, theres no need to call anyone ignorant. oh well i guess we left on peaceful terms not being bitter enemies, over something neither of us can control. and ur the first guy to agree with me about that whole not convincing thing in an argument.:)

Chewbacco
02-22-2003, 12:47 AM
I'm against human cloning cause it just seems wrong. This could have a negetive impact on mankind itself. But I am ok with animal cloning. Oh, did you hear that the first cloned sheep died recently at the age of six? That is half the life span of a regular sheep. Too bad.:(

Reborn Outcast
02-22-2003, 01:04 AM
Originally posted by Commander Bond
Just a quick question: how can nature be beautiful? There is no structure, no order, no set uniform. If every tree were the same, in perfectly alligned rows, then maybe I'll let nature off. But they aren't. Plus, the drop brown leaves all over the place during Autumn. Bright, shiny steel buildings don't.

Nature is orderly. How do you think plants survive? By producing glucose by photosynthesis which needs to be in PRECISE order so it will work. And trees that all look the same and in straight lines? Thats kinda sick man. Diversity is what makes nature beautiful. A huge, looming oak tree with leaves orange and yellow in autumn. Next to it is a dark green pine tree, the scent coming off it is amazing. A bluejay is chirping in the oak while a cardinal is in the pine. A deer walks under the trees, nudgeing her babies with the buck close behind. That is what makes nature beautiful.


And Chewbacco I agree with you completely. Also, I don't know if this is "technology" but it is kinda recent but cigarrettes. Those are harmful to the human society.

BlackDove
02-22-2003, 04:01 AM
Computers are evil.