Skip to main content

Responding to Mencia About "Outdated" Technology

I wasn't planning to write this, but a quick segment on Mind of Mencia made me want to say something about his piece on tonight's show. It was a rerun, of course, but I don't get to watch the show regularly, although I am a fan.

Carlos Mencia blasted some technologies he deemed as outdated and berated anyone who still uses them. I normally enjoy anything he does, having been a fan since before his currently popular show. However, I just had to say something how much I disagree with him on all but one of these technologies.

  • Corded Phones
    Yeah, I can't go without a cordless phone in a large-ish two story home, but sometimes you can't beat a five dollar phone that you can't loose between the couch cushions.
  • Nintendo 64
    Retro gaming. I don't have to say more.

  • Fax Machine
    I hate fax machines, but the gas company won't let me e-mail them forms because, like it or not, its still easier than e-mail to get from deadtree to deadtree across long distances in a few minutes.
  • Pager
    I've actually considered getting a pager instead of a cell phone. There are times you must be reachable, but must not be interupted. A device that takes away the desire to answer it, because you can't, can be a limitation from more than technology (its limitations original source) to a limitation for convinience. Technology can be a burden, and sometimes we must dial back to reclaim our lives.
  • Cassette Tape
    The one thing I'll agree on. I probably have a few tapes left laying around, but if you dont replace or migrate the content soon, they'll degrade and be lost anyway, so its time to leave them behind.
Technology moves forward at ever-quickening paces, but if we turn our back on it, we loose more than just brick-sized car phones.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Interrupting Coders Isn’t So Bad

Here’s a hot take: disrupting coders isn’t all that bad.

Some disruptions are certainly bad but they usually aren’t. The coder community has overblown the impact. A disruption can be a good thing. How harmful disruption might be a symptom of other problems.

There are different kinds of disruptions. They are caused by other coders on your team, managers and other non-coders, or meetings throughout the day.

The easiest example to debunk is a question from a fellow developer. Imagine someone walks over to your desk or they ping you on Slack, because they have “one quick question.” Do you get annoyed at the interruption when you were in the middle of something important? You help out your teammate quickly and get back to work, trying to pick up where you left off. That’s a kind of interruption we complain about frequently, but I’m not convinced this is all that bad.

You are being disrupted but your team, of which you are only one member of the whole unit, is working smoothly. You unstuck …

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

How To Care If BSD, MIT, or GPL Licenses Are Used

The two recent posts about some individuals' choice of GPL versus others' preference for BSD and MIT style licensing has caused a lot of debate and response. I've seen everything as an interesting combination of very important topics being taken far too seriously and far too personally. All involved need to take a few steps back.

For the uninitiated and as a clarifier for the initiated, we're dealing with (basically) three categories of licensing when someone releases software (and/or its code):
Closed Source. Easiest to explain, because you just get nothing.GPL. If you get the software, you get the source code, you get to change it, and anything you combine it with must be under the same terms.MIT and BSD. If you get the software, you might get the source code, you get to change it, and you have no obligations about anything else you combine it with.The situation gets stickier when we look at those combinations and the transitions between them.

Use GPL code with Closed S…