Remember this?

“Memory revises itself endlessly. We remember a vivid person, a remark, a sight that was unexpected, an occasion on which we felt something profoundly. The rest falls away”. What Gordon Bell essentially hopes to do, as demonstrated in Wilkinson’s article, is to create what he calls a “personal-transaction processing system”; a technological invention that is capable of tracking and recording our everyday activity in order to “enhance our memory”, provide us with truthful and “real” records and prevent “the rest from falling away. He of course, acknowledges the fact that the archive would not be perfect because it too has it’s own “memory” and will overemphasize certain events, places, and peoples. The “limitations of memory will intercede” for both humans and the computers but Bell believes that the two combined will create more accurate representations of who we are. Working on a similar project, Microsoft guru Eric Horvitz says, “It comes to understand your mind, how you organize your memories, by what you choose. It learns to become like you, to help you be a better you. Computers are going to become tools we work with and trust, rather than merely appliances”.

My response to the proposals set forth in this article? NO WAY, PLEASE NEVER, STOP!!! I do not want, nor need, a computer to help “me” become a better “me”. Our ability to remember was designed a certain way. Certain realms of technology can be used as aids to help us remember what we want to remember, whether it be photography, videos, sound recordings, etc but this idea of a continual surveillance and tracking system seems ridiculous. People can achieve self-awareness without the help of technology. This entire concept is analogous to the issue of couples genetically engineering their future children so that they are of a certain sex, possess particular qualities and have a specific appearance. Some things are just meant to be left alone, even if technology has the potential to be advantageous.

There are two specific incidences in the article to which I would like to draw attention, as I believe they embody my fear of technology taking over our lives. When Bell is presenting his personal archive to the author, an image of a boy pops up. Bell could not remember who this boy was. Why have an archive system that is supposed to “fill in the gaps” and serve as accounts of our life experiences if the images have no meaning to us? Another photograph appears on one of Bell’s screens and in this case, the photograph has two creases, from where it had once been folded. Do we really want to replace tangible images and objects with two-dimensional, computerized representations? Talk about eradicating sentimentality and value.

Perhaps I am being narrow-minded and am unwilling to see the benefits of such a system but to me it amounts to a world where people are stripped far too much of their own capacities and are forced to rely and interact with technology on much too large a level. Before you know it, we’re all going to be reduced to mere robots, situated at the mercy of computers and digital systems. I hope I’m not being too jaded…