DISQUS

HA! - Glad I wasn't the only that unfollowed or blocked a few people that were driving me nuts! Safe travels!

I believe that Larry and I are actually writing about the same future, just different points on that time line, because I agree with everything he writes, except the use of the word "always".

Our families and their habits sound very similar too, and with the foresight to add on that unlimited texting plan, I'm actually able to afford the 4-5 thousand texts a month my teen sends and receives!

I disagree with Mr. Lawfer's assertion that the value of "face to face" will never be surpassed by web-based interactions.

In fact, based on what we already know about the way the brains of young people are literally developing & working very differently from those of 25+ yr old people, and based on R&D already underway in top labs around the world, I firmly believe that todays 13 year olds will be able to function at a much higher level of productivity & accuracy than is known today, and that it will be done in an almost 100% virtual world.

Much of this is captured in the concept of the "Digital Native" and Moore's Law, but is also easily seen through the acceleration of the evolution of technology. Back in the "olden days", many generations would live & work on the farm, using many of the same tools & technology as previous generations. As technology "era's" came & went (e.g., Agricultural era to Industrial Age in late 1800's/early 1900's in the US, etc.) each technology "generation" was increasingly short-lived, as it was surpassed by the next advancement. Still, each "technology generation' would encompass several or more generations of man. Three or four decades ago we reached the point in the US where most people were no longer spending their entire lives working for one company, and were not only changing companies, but would also embark on new careers in entirely different fields of business.

We now live in a world that most of our grandparents & great-grandparents would not recognize. A world where each generation of man encompasses numerous "technology generations". The speed with which these technology generations are coming & going, is ever-accelerating.

People currently in their early teens & younger are "natives" of a way of doing things that many of us, while comfortable with, are using as alternatives to the way WE originally learned how to do them. Todays children are learning those ways as the primary way of doing things.

Instead of running down the street to see of johnny can come out & play, Sam text messages Johnny. Jane texts or IM's Suzy for help with homework. A 6th grader texts her social studies project group with the time for their group meeting, and they all log into the video chat room (w/ public & pvt text chat capabilities - or they just use their cell phones) at the same time. Soon, they be meeting in a virtual world such as SecondLife, and by the time todays 6th graders have 6th graders, they very well could be meeting in a full immersion virtual world such as we only see imagined as the Star Trek "Holodeck".

Face to face having maximum value "forever"? Like the handwritten letter home from college, instead of a quick email or text message - or "tweet", it may eventually be considered a very special event, but it will most assuredly become increasingly rare, just as those handwritten letters have become.

PS - And with gas prices predicted to hit $5 a gallon by July 4th, 2008, I think a lot of people are going to quickly "get over" the loss of whatever value they perceive to exist in those face-to-face occasions! ;-)

Chris,

You clearly and simply lay out the tools & potential uses. I see this general style in most of your posts, and very much appreciate it.

Another thing I like, and very much agree with when you write: "we get hung up on evaluating tools and thinking about which are the best for the job...and then, next thing you know, the day’s over and nothing’s been done." I've referred to this as "Analysis Paralysis" for years now. In the case you describe in your post, it's analogous to trying to learn to swim by reading books, watching videos, doing everything BUT getting in the water. Wanna learn how to do it - jump in!

Yesterday I completely deleted my "personal" Google Reader & de.licio.us accounts & started from scratch - because I had learned a lot from "just diving in".

Again, thanks for your post & your overall style of writing, it makes it so much easier to see what part of the pool I want to dive in to next!

Have a great day! - Troy.

I'm looking forward to it, thanks for the heads up.

I don't follow even a small percentage of the #'s that many do, but one thing I've begun learned is possible is to filter the stream real-time, by turning SMS notifications on - to my cell-phone - for a small number of those whose comments I do not want to miss. So whether it's a tweat from @chrisbrogan, @susanreynolds, @newmediajim, or my high school friend @jeffwilson, I get it, while leaving the rest of the stream for future perusal.

But as you so rightly state - the uses for this tool are wide & varied, and in fact, serve as a virtually different application for most regular users.

Again, looking forward to your insight tomorrow.

Hey Chel,

I saw Chris Brogan's tweet wishing you a happy birthday, and I wanted to add my own wishes - so "Happy Birthday!"

- have a good week - Troy.

Hi Chris, this is an interesting post, applicable on many levels as you point out.

I apologize ahead of time for such a long comment, but sometimes being included is life-changing...

I manage the Advanced Prosthetics/Amputee Studies Research Program for the Army. This program manages the research that benefits our amputee soldiers at places such as the new Military Advanced Training Center @ Walter Reed Army Medical Center in DC, and the Center for the Intrepid at Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, TX.

While engaging with some of the worlds leading medical researchers, I have Project Officers that run much of the day-to-day "administrivia" of the program. It would be easy for them to disconnect from the meat of the project & sink into the paperwork. Because these amputee soldiers have literally given so much, I feel a strong obligation to give them back as much as possible. So instead of leaving these Project Officer's to do only paperwork, I give them direct responsibility for key phases of our research efforts. With this responsibility, they become personally invested in the projects success.

Yes, including them like this helps my workload, but most importantly, it results in a positive outcome & benefit for our soldiers, and it gives these Project Officers a rewarding personal stake in a very rewarding program that is bringing great things our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines.

Everyone that has worked as a part of this program has been touched and changed by the experience of working with these stronger-than-real-life young people. Without being included, we would have missed the opportunity to have our lives changed for the better.

Thank you for letting me share that.

"...arguments over language..." is exactly - and only - what it is. Everyone "knows" what "it" is, but often do not call "it" by the same name. Getting from here to though is not unmapped, nor is it particularly difficult.

Here's my example...

In my day job, I manage advanced medical technology research programs for the US DOD. If you've read anything about the Army's Center for the Intrepid at Brooke Army Medical Center, or the new Military Advanced Training Center at Walter Reed, I manage the research programs that feed much of the technology that goes into those programs. I have an MBA and prior work experience in operations mgmt for companies such as Nortel Networks, Williams Comm, etc. I work with lots of MD's, and PhD's, many of whom are world renowned for their research and discoveries (think neural-controlled prosthetic limbs, ruggedized C-Leg from Otto Bock, etc.)

A problem that appeared early in the program was that of different languages ultimately based on different perspectives. We had different words for the same thing, and it did cause conflict. For example, my definition of "proposal", was the same as their definition of "protocol", yet my definition of "protocol" was something very different. It is critical in research that everyone completely understand these terms with no confusion. Misunderstandings result in funding delays or denials, disapproved research applications, etc.

Once I realized the cause of this conflict, the correction was fairly simple, though not always pain-free (read: professional ego's!) process of what I called "aligning our dictionaries." In fact, this is actually part of human communications 101, the series of clarifying questions, etc. that we all know and love and realize is always more complicated when the communication is neither face-to-face, nor synchronous.

So whether "it" is a graph or a network, a universe or a galaxy, a system of systems, or a network of subnet's, I think this could be a fairly simple process, though not necessarily painless process of aligning dictionaries.