answered question
2
Votes
Votes
6
Answers
Answers
M$0.80
Am I considered a minority in society today? if so, of a large group or few?
Being of person not interested in adapting most of the updates in technology, ipods, blackberrys, computer games, the debt it card use and such am I a minority to many?
voted interesting: tchachra M$0.05, buddawiggi M$0.25
answers (6)
Perhaps you will fall under the category of the minorities. But you should analyze that for a moment as the fact that you do not use many of today's technology does not make you inferior in any way. You simply do not need them. On the other hand, you use a computer to find certain information that are valuable to you. You know how to use Google search and email. That alone puts you in front of the pack of a certain group of people that also do not use all of the available technology today. That said, you can also see yourself as being a majority in a certain group of people:)
| Asker's rating: |
Thank you for your response.
Thank you for your response. I definitely am one that could do without all these devices up unit I was dropped into my current situation.
Thank you for your response. I definitely am one that could do without all these devices up unit I was dropped into my current situation.
voted helpful: fightingback
I feel like a minority but thats okay. Everyone is a minority in some way they just do realize it. All people are equal to me no one is more inferior to another, its not in what you know or how much you have its just you as a person with your own capabilities and knowledge. Everyone is different that's what makes the world interesting and keeps it together.
Tip fightingback for this comment
|
Report
Actually I am one of the ones that utilize everything you mention above on a regular basis. I am also married to someone who works in the IT industry but has no use for the things you mention above.
So the answer is...no you are not a minority. There are quite a few people that do not need all of the gadgetry and wizardry we have available to us.
However, I do have one question.... You are clearly on the web and asking a question on Mahalo....so you do somewhat use the technology available to us today. Correct? ;)
So the answer is...no you are not a minority. There are quite a few people that do not need all of the gadgetry and wizardry we have available to us.
However, I do have one question.... You are clearly on the web and asking a question on Mahalo....so you do somewhat use the technology available to us today. Correct? ;)
voted helpful: fightingback
I am in a serious situation somewhat in hiding my children had to set me up with the ability to google search and communicate with e-mail other than that I wouldn't be on the computer. I ran into mahalo when I searched info and found a page I thought I could finally get out proper info on other than what the officials what you to think but I have been unsuccessful with it because of my technolofy illiteracy. Thank you for your response.
It is amazing how quickly the Internet and cell phones caught on even with older adults. My parents are online daily and have their cell phones. No they do not text yet.
But everyone has their own comfort level with technology. But to answer you I think in a way you are in the minority.
But everyone has their own comfort level with technology. But to answer you I think in a way you are in the minority.
source(s):
my personal opinion
my personal opinion
voted helpful: fightingback
One of my best friends since 1st grade doesn't use anything you mention. She doesn't even have television. She is an entrepeneur with a good business and an excellent work/life balance. There are fewer people like you or my friend but I don't think that is really significant in any way.
I predict that with time you will become more comfortable with and adept at using technology since you sound passionate about using it to do something positive for society.
I predict that with time you will become more comfortable with and adept at using technology since you sound passionate about using it to do something positive for society.
tags: technology
voted helpful: fightingback
I tried posting this in whole, but I got on a role and it got too big for a single post, so I've split it into a primary Answer with appendix Reply's.
First, it kinda depends on how you define "minority", because some people define "majority" as only happening when there's a group having greater than 50% of whatever's being measured, whereas others define it as simply being the largest group among many others, such that it can be smaller than 50% of the metric, but will still be said to constitute a majority, i.e. the largest single shareholder of the Chase Manhatten Bank holds 3%, and that shareholder is considered to hold a significant "majority".
Anyway, it sounds like you're just not an "early adapter", and all I can say is... Good For You!
I make my living at IT, and I know way more about the actual physics of how silicone-chips works than 95% of those marketing themselves as IT pros, and I've been in plenty of situations where there was a strong push from others to do early adaptation (i.e. I was the 12th guy in North America to set up an httpd server back in the days when the World Wide Web had been built for and was being used by *only* Particle Physicists, and I was pushed to do so by my bosses), and over the years I learned some things that evolved into personal principals, and so, because somebody asked, here they are:
First, you have to understand that after a company has gone through the jazz of investing in the creation and/or development of a new product, they have to get that invetment back before they can even think about breaking even, so for the first little while all attention and revenue is focussed on covering the cost of development, and the most common technique is to hype the novelty of the item for the first little while, in order to justify charging a lot more than what it's really costing to build the devices, because they have to get back the cost of research and development, and they are *very* much under the gun of investors to do at least that before feeling happy about their accomplishment.
On average, it takes about six months to recover the cost of R&D, so for the fist six month, things will be priced as high as they can possibly get away with, and so, for them, early-adaptors are the Godsend of their business.
Six months also happens to be about the same amount of time it takes competitors to reverse engineer and start producing cheep knockoffs of what's been created, so, if the marketing plan has gone well and the cost of R&D has been recovered by the time copys start showing up, then the extreme pressure from investers will drop down to normal ordinary everyday bitching for "more dividends", and the price drops to something loosly reflecting what it really costs to build, ship, stock, and sell the item.
So... *I* don't jump on the bandwagon, because I know in about six months it's going to drop big-time as soon as they've recovered cost of R&D, but I empathize with their need to recover R&D costs, which means, generally, I don't go around explicitly disuading anyone who's excited about buying something new if they really want to. If they want to be the first on their block to have something... *let* them.
They get some neighborhood prestige (which they've *paid* for, so *let* them have their shine), for their early adaptation is what's covering the cost of developers being willing to take the risk of launching something new which will eventually become something cool and affordable enough for me to buy.
be cont...
First, it kinda depends on how you define "minority", because some people define "majority" as only happening when there's a group having greater than 50% of whatever's being measured, whereas others define it as simply being the largest group among many others, such that it can be smaller than 50% of the metric, but will still be said to constitute a majority, i.e. the largest single shareholder of the Chase Manhatten Bank holds 3%, and that shareholder is considered to hold a significant "majority".
Anyway, it sounds like you're just not an "early adapter", and all I can say is... Good For You!
I make my living at IT, and I know way more about the actual physics of how silicone-chips works than 95% of those marketing themselves as IT pros, and I've been in plenty of situations where there was a strong push from others to do early adaptation (i.e. I was the 12th guy in North America to set up an httpd server back in the days when the World Wide Web had been built for and was being used by *only* Particle Physicists, and I was pushed to do so by my bosses), and over the years I learned some things that evolved into personal principals, and so, because somebody asked, here they are:
First, you have to understand that after a company has gone through the jazz of investing in the creation and/or development of a new product, they have to get that invetment back before they can even think about breaking even, so for the first little while all attention and revenue is focussed on covering the cost of development, and the most common technique is to hype the novelty of the item for the first little while, in order to justify charging a lot more than what it's really costing to build the devices, because they have to get back the cost of research and development, and they are *very* much under the gun of investors to do at least that before feeling happy about their accomplishment.
On average, it takes about six months to recover the cost of R&D, so for the fist six month, things will be priced as high as they can possibly get away with, and so, for them, early-adaptors are the Godsend of their business.
Six months also happens to be about the same amount of time it takes competitors to reverse engineer and start producing cheep knockoffs of what's been created, so, if the marketing plan has gone well and the cost of R&D has been recovered by the time copys start showing up, then the extreme pressure from investers will drop down to normal ordinary everyday bitching for "more dividends", and the price drops to something loosly reflecting what it really costs to build, ship, stock, and sell the item.
So... *I* don't jump on the bandwagon, because I know in about six months it's going to drop big-time as soon as they've recovered cost of R&D, but I empathize with their need to recover R&D costs, which means, generally, I don't go around explicitly disuading anyone who's excited about buying something new if they really want to. If they want to be the first on their block to have something... *let* them.
They get some neighborhood prestige (which they've *paid* for, so *let* them have their shine), for their early adaptation is what's covering the cost of developers being willing to take the risk of launching something new which will eventually become something cool and affordable enough for me to buy.
be cont...
cont
BUT... there's another aspect to the game that I don't like at all, and which I *refuse* play, and which I *can* do because I *do* my research, and to illustrate the concept, I'm going to use for example the Alpha processor and the Intel Pentium series as a case study.
In the early 90's the mass market of PC users were doing a grunting series of upgrades from 286's to 386's to 486's, with speeds topping out at around 90 MHz, while DEC had beta Alpha processors in the lab smoking out the gigahertz.
DEC's plan from the minds of (made evil by "the system") bean counters and marketing execs was to release Alpha processors in phases, starting with a 266 MHz unit, and then, just as everyone got comfortable, would release a 500Mhz unit, to have everyone spend more to upgrade, and then when that's settled down they'd release a 700Mhz unit, causing another round of upgrading, etc. etc. when in fact they could have just started with a 2 gigahertz offering.
Intel knew they couldn't compete with that, but popularilty of the PC had made them big enough to think about challenging DEC, which was number two after IBM at the time, and so, combined with figuring they didn't have much to loose, they did a strait-out, barefaced violation of the Alpha patents in order to make the first Pentiums, and basically dared DEC to do something about it, and so, indeed, DEC picked up the gauntlettes, and it started shaping up to be a Battle-Royal.
Washington stepped in and broke up before things could get ugly because both were so huge that if it turned into a serious fight it could do real damage to the economy, and at that time North America was still pulling out of a recession from the early 90's. A settlement was "persuaded" upon the parties, allowing Intel to continue with the Pentiums.
Among other things, the ol' anti-trust card was threatened at DEC, such that even though in this case DEC probably would have won some monopoly time by virtue of the patents, DEC knew they'd loose precious market time defending themselves in order to do the release/upgrade/release/upgrade cycle, and so the terms were accepted, but only on condition that Inetel not do an immediate release of a maxed out Pentium smoking in the gigahertz range, such that DECs marketing plan for the Alpha got cloned onto Intel, and Intel had *no probelm* with that part of the deal! They loved it! Otherwise they would have got into a CPU-speed race with DEC (presuming they'd been able to justify breaking the patents) such that CPU's would have had to be coming out in the gigahertz range in the middle 90's, but now they got to stage it out at the same rate DEC already had planned for the Alpha.
As a consumerI refuse to be a pawn in that game. I was keeping up on my research, I knew what Alphas and Pentiums could and would be able to do, so instead I sat down and looked at my computing needs, and determined what balances of CPU speed with other factors like speed of the bus, speed of the glue chip, and for networking situations, bandwidth of the network etc. I'd really need.
I determined that for 99% of all *server-side* applications, that when factoring in the speed of a 10Mb ethernet, that a 300Mhz processor would handle most demands for most applications, and that a 600Mhz would handle most demands on a 100Mb ethernet... and *that* was being uber-generous for long-distance networking situations, where the aggregate bandwidth rarely if ever gets up to that (your home/office LAN is probably a 10/100 ethernet, so at home or in the office you get those speeds between machines, but as soon as you venture out over the net, you run into bandwidth bottlenecks).
I also calculated that for workstations (aka client-side) computing, it would be something in the range of a 700-1200 Mhz processor that would handle most applications, given other constraints like bus speed and the speed of the glue chips and disk I/O etc.
So... I sat there with my Atari and my Amiga (Issa luffAmiga... so smarta designa stilla are they), running an ST640 terminal emulator when needing to connect to and work on a server, and plunked away, biding my time while others ran around in a panic wondering how they were going to afford all the upgrading.
The Pentiums eventually got up to the 600 MHz range, and so, when the 1.2 GHz units started coming out, I let it be known I'd consider picking up their "old" units, and I'd check them out to see which ones had been designed with thoughtful engineering and built with good parts, and those I would score, and from those I built a real sweet hosting little operation at an excellent cost.
And to this day I've still got some of those puppies running as servers, still happily serving up everything the users want and need, still able to swamp a LAN if called upon to do so, and still sitting there with processors idling 90% of the time. (The key to extending the life like that is first to make sure they are well designed by thoughtful engineers and built with good parts, and the second is to never turn them off, because the way the manufacturers artificaly age a machine to get the mean-time-between-failure measurement is to turn them on and off, on and off, in order for it to heat up and cool off, heat up and cool off, in order for the parts to expand and shrink, expand and shrink...)
Furthermore, what with the advent of Beowulf clustering and subsequent incarnations of various forms of cloud-computing, I found I could even backpeddle a bit to the 300 MHz units and still get excellent results... all based upon making sure the original parts were intelligently engineered and well built.
So, for server-side computing, I definitly did/do *not* play the early adapter game, and that philosphy has served me well, so don't feel bad.
On the workstation client-side, I underestimated the CPU requirements a bit - I figured 700 MHz would cover most everything, but actually you'll probably need 1.2 MHz for 99% coverage - but in my defense, it's because I didn't anticipate the extent to which Microsoft would allow MFC, the Microsoft Foundation Class library of C++ classes - the class library that became a standard for so many third-party developers - be hammered out in such a mad-panic that it wasn't put through normal development review, and became an abomination. Applicatons built with MFC take a lot of computational overhead to run right, and it's not necessary if you know how to write your own classes, but most people are going to be buying a third-party app sooner or later, and odds are high that it was built with MFS, so...
Anyway, people who knew me thought it was odd how I was hanging back with an Atari and an Amiga, waiting to buy while they were upgrading from 90MHz to 150Mhz to 266Mhz to 600Mhz in a panic, and now they can't figure out why I'm hanging *back* with my array of beuwulf clustered 300-700 MHz servers, surviving a NASDAQ collapse and a near economic meltown while they go bankrupt, but I *did my research*...
BUT WAIT.... THERE's MORE!
So far I've just been talking about hardware, however there's also the Applications, and I can *tell* when applications are still in the process of settling out and converging.
All dealings with hardware I base on hard-core research done with a calculator and manufacturers white papers, which is doable because hardware is scientific, but Applications are culturally psychosociological, and I have my own personal instinct for those.
Of course it's easy to see when applications are being released at a high cost in order for the developer to recover the cost of R&D, and it's not hard to see when little upgrades are being trickled out for marketing to squeeze a maximum dividens for shareholders, but there's something else, to do with the fact that whereas hardware is pure science, and operating systems are mostly a case of pragamatcs, the applications themselves - the stuff that people reallty want and what the hardware and operating systems are for - are a socio-psycho-cultural phenomena, such that one has to use their common-sense (women call it female-intuition and men call it gut-instinct) and mine says that for so much of that stuff, it's just not quite the right time yet.
Sure I have a cell phone. A simple one I bought years ago and it does everything I need a phone to do, but for the rest of it... call display, speed dial, voicemail...
But there's going to be a total merger of what we get from ipods and blackberries and transistor radios and cell phones etc., such that one unit will snag and mp3-encode tunes from the air and have little qwerty keyboards to pop out to do texting and automatically sniff out wireless internet connections with a little browser window and make phone calls etc. etc... and they're just not quite there yet, so I'm waiting.
Likewise, I haven't bought into tweeting yet, because it's just not quite defined yet what the real fundamental useful value of it is going to be, but I know that someday such knowledge *will* be established, and then, yes, I'll plug in.
But please, if you love always being the coolest guy with the latest gadget, enjoy, because if early adapters don't have fun, then there's nobody to pay for the costs required to eventually lead to the universal kinda device I'm waiting for, therefore... if you're into it... ENJOY!
BUT... there's another aspect to the game that I don't like at all, and which I *refuse* play, and which I *can* do because I *do* my research, and to illustrate the concept, I'm going to use for example the Alpha processor and the Intel Pentium series as a case study.
In the early 90's the mass market of PC users were doing a grunting series of upgrades from 286's to 386's to 486's, with speeds topping out at around 90 MHz, while DEC had beta Alpha processors in the lab smoking out the gigahertz.
DEC's plan from the minds of (made evil by "the system") bean counters and marketing execs was to release Alpha processors in phases, starting with a 266 MHz unit, and then, just as everyone got comfortable, would release a 500Mhz unit, to have everyone spend more to upgrade, and then when that's settled down they'd release a 700Mhz unit, causing another round of upgrading, etc. etc. when in fact they could have just started with a 2 gigahertz offering.
Intel knew they couldn't compete with that, but popularilty of the PC had made them big enough to think about challenging DEC, which was number two after IBM at the time, and so, combined with figuring they didn't have much to loose, they did a strait-out, barefaced violation of the Alpha patents in order to make the first Pentiums, and basically dared DEC to do something about it, and so, indeed, DEC picked up the gauntlettes, and it started shaping up to be a Battle-Royal.
Washington stepped in and broke up before things could get ugly because both were so huge that if it turned into a serious fight it could do real damage to the economy, and at that time North America was still pulling out of a recession from the early 90's. A settlement was "persuaded" upon the parties, allowing Intel to continue with the Pentiums.
Among other things, the ol' anti-trust card was threatened at DEC, such that even though in this case DEC probably would have won some monopoly time by virtue of the patents, DEC knew they'd loose precious market time defending themselves in order to do the release/upgrade/release/upgrade cycle, and so the terms were accepted, but only on condition that Inetel not do an immediate release of a maxed out Pentium smoking in the gigahertz range, such that DECs marketing plan for the Alpha got cloned onto Intel, and Intel had *no probelm* with that part of the deal! They loved it! Otherwise they would have got into a CPU-speed race with DEC (presuming they'd been able to justify breaking the patents) such that CPU's would have had to be coming out in the gigahertz range in the middle 90's, but now they got to stage it out at the same rate DEC already had planned for the Alpha.
As a consumerI refuse to be a pawn in that game. I was keeping up on my research, I knew what Alphas and Pentiums could and would be able to do, so instead I sat down and looked at my computing needs, and determined what balances of CPU speed with other factors like speed of the bus, speed of the glue chip, and for networking situations, bandwidth of the network etc. I'd really need.
I determined that for 99% of all *server-side* applications, that when factoring in the speed of a 10Mb ethernet, that a 300Mhz processor would handle most demands for most applications, and that a 600Mhz would handle most demands on a 100Mb ethernet... and *that* was being uber-generous for long-distance networking situations, where the aggregate bandwidth rarely if ever gets up to that (your home/office LAN is probably a 10/100 ethernet, so at home or in the office you get those speeds between machines, but as soon as you venture out over the net, you run into bandwidth bottlenecks).
I also calculated that for workstations (aka client-side) computing, it would be something in the range of a 700-1200 Mhz processor that would handle most applications, given other constraints like bus speed and the speed of the glue chips and disk I/O etc.
So... I sat there with my Atari and my Amiga (Issa luffAmiga... so smarta designa stilla are they), running an ST640 terminal emulator when needing to connect to and work on a server, and plunked away, biding my time while others ran around in a panic wondering how they were going to afford all the upgrading.
The Pentiums eventually got up to the 600 MHz range, and so, when the 1.2 GHz units started coming out, I let it be known I'd consider picking up their "old" units, and I'd check them out to see which ones had been designed with thoughtful engineering and built with good parts, and those I would score, and from those I built a real sweet hosting little operation at an excellent cost.
And to this day I've still got some of those puppies running as servers, still happily serving up everything the users want and need, still able to swamp a LAN if called upon to do so, and still sitting there with processors idling 90% of the time. (The key to extending the life like that is first to make sure they are well designed by thoughtful engineers and built with good parts, and the second is to never turn them off, because the way the manufacturers artificaly age a machine to get the mean-time-between-failure measurement is to turn them on and off, on and off, in order for it to heat up and cool off, heat up and cool off, in order for the parts to expand and shrink, expand and shrink...)
Furthermore, what with the advent of Beowulf clustering and subsequent incarnations of various forms of cloud-computing, I found I could even backpeddle a bit to the 300 MHz units and still get excellent results... all based upon making sure the original parts were intelligently engineered and well built.
So, for server-side computing, I definitly did/do *not* play the early adapter game, and that philosphy has served me well, so don't feel bad.
On the workstation client-side, I underestimated the CPU requirements a bit - I figured 700 MHz would cover most everything, but actually you'll probably need 1.2 MHz for 99% coverage - but in my defense, it's because I didn't anticipate the extent to which Microsoft would allow MFC, the Microsoft Foundation Class library of C++ classes - the class library that became a standard for so many third-party developers - be hammered out in such a mad-panic that it wasn't put through normal development review, and became an abomination. Applicatons built with MFC take a lot of computational overhead to run right, and it's not necessary if you know how to write your own classes, but most people are going to be buying a third-party app sooner or later, and odds are high that it was built with MFS, so...
Anyway, people who knew me thought it was odd how I was hanging back with an Atari and an Amiga, waiting to buy while they were upgrading from 90MHz to 150Mhz to 266Mhz to 600Mhz in a panic, and now they can't figure out why I'm hanging *back* with my array of beuwulf clustered 300-700 MHz servers, surviving a NASDAQ collapse and a near economic meltown while they go bankrupt, but I *did my research*...
BUT WAIT.... THERE's MORE!
So far I've just been talking about hardware, however there's also the Applications, and I can *tell* when applications are still in the process of settling out and converging.
All dealings with hardware I base on hard-core research done with a calculator and manufacturers white papers, which is doable because hardware is scientific, but Applications are culturally psychosociological, and I have my own personal instinct for those.
Of course it's easy to see when applications are being released at a high cost in order for the developer to recover the cost of R&D, and it's not hard to see when little upgrades are being trickled out for marketing to squeeze a maximum dividens for shareholders, but there's something else, to do with the fact that whereas hardware is pure science, and operating systems are mostly a case of pragamatcs, the applications themselves - the stuff that people reallty want and what the hardware and operating systems are for - are a socio-psycho-cultural phenomena, such that one has to use their common-sense (women call it female-intuition and men call it gut-instinct) and mine says that for so much of that stuff, it's just not quite the right time yet.
Sure I have a cell phone. A simple one I bought years ago and it does everything I need a phone to do, but for the rest of it... call display, speed dial, voicemail...
But there's going to be a total merger of what we get from ipods and blackberries and transistor radios and cell phones etc., such that one unit will snag and mp3-encode tunes from the air and have little qwerty keyboards to pop out to do texting and automatically sniff out wireless internet connections with a little browser window and make phone calls etc. etc... and they're just not quite there yet, so I'm waiting.
Likewise, I haven't bought into tweeting yet, because it's just not quite defined yet what the real fundamental useful value of it is going to be, but I know that someday such knowledge *will* be established, and then, yes, I'll plug in.
But please, if you love always being the coolest guy with the latest gadget, enjoy, because if early adapters don't have fun, then there's nobody to pay for the costs required to eventually lead to the universal kinda device I'm waiting for, therefore... if you're into it... ENJOY!
I just answered a very similar question about how our lives would be different if we didn't have all this technology controlling our lives. I use computers and my iphone to work a lot but I sure feel the burden of it too.
I know how convenient it is now to have all of these gadgets but I crave a more simplistic life most of the time. I feel the technology controls us. We almost have to check our email constantly don't we? Everyone expects their emails to be answered so quickly and they expect you to respond to texts ASAP so if we aren't always keeping an eye on all our gadgets then it can create some major issues in certain relationships. I find it exhausting.
http://www.mclibrary.duke.edu/about/news/books1.gif
I would definitely love to crawl up with a good book more often. I love to write and would love to spend more time developing some of the ideas I have in mind but the tv is always on at my house and the noise is so distracting that I don't have a quiet space to work. I think we pump so much noise into our lives these days. I find it too overwhelming. I crave a quieter and slower paced kind of life. I think a lot of our creative juices are dulled by all of these distractions and interruptions that come in the form of the phone ringing, tvs blaring, computers, and radios, etc.
http://englishinguiaavanzado.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/writing1.jpg
I would prefer to have long conversations with friends in person instead of one sentence facebook chat messages. I don't even watch television without a computer in my lap. In fact, my husband and I both sit on the couch together and watch tv with laptops while we search the internet and catch up on emails. It would be nice to actually spend quality time together talking without having our computers to check all the time.
I think families knew each other more back in the day because they had so much more quality family time.
There are pros and cons to the technology that we enjoy these days. I guess we have to choose how to control the hold it has over us. I know that I need to work on managing it more.
I vote for sitting on the porch drinking sweet tea and enjoying a good book
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2241/2183753116_ba47abab4f.jpg
I know how convenient it is now to have all of these gadgets but I crave a more simplistic life most of the time. I feel the technology controls us. We almost have to check our email constantly don't we? Everyone expects their emails to be answered so quickly and they expect you to respond to texts ASAP so if we aren't always keeping an eye on all our gadgets then it can create some major issues in certain relationships. I find it exhausting.
I would definitely love to crawl up with a good book more often. I love to write and would love to spend more time developing some of the ideas I have in mind but the tv is always on at my house and the noise is so distracting that I don't have a quiet space to work. I think we pump so much noise into our lives these days. I find it too overwhelming. I crave a quieter and slower paced kind of life. I think a lot of our creative juices are dulled by all of these distractions and interruptions that come in the form of the phone ringing, tvs blaring, computers, and radios, etc.
I would prefer to have long conversations with friends in person instead of one sentence facebook chat messages. I don't even watch television without a computer in my lap. In fact, my husband and I both sit on the couch together and watch tv with laptops while we search the internet and catch up on emails. It would be nice to actually spend quality time together talking without having our computers to check all the time.
I think families knew each other more back in the day because they had so much more quality family time.
There are pros and cons to the technology that we enjoy these days. I guess we have to choose how to control the hold it has over us. I know that I need to work on managing it more.
I vote for sitting on the porch drinking sweet tea and enjoying a good book
source(s):
personal opinion
personal opinion
Related questions
140 characters left
ask any question
