I remember reading about the invention of the steam horse. It was quite a new technology. One concern was that of the speeds it traveled. Could humans survive or be able to function at those speeds? Thinking now that my car cruises on the highway at a mere 75mph, it almost seems farfetched that one would think speed is a factor.

            Moving on, I started to get the idea that information, whatever it is, can have no intrinsic value. Its like the importance is not in the information, but in the fact that we can obtain “information” as needed. I wonder if the readily availability of information via Google, Wikipedia, YouTube, etc have , what some researchers think, caused a degradation of memory in adolescences.  Why learn something when you can just learn where to find the information? While watching a video about technology called “Did you know; Shift happens” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljbI-363A2Q&feature=fvst  not only is the technology expanding exponentially by some accounts, that a week’s worth of New York times contained more information than a person living in the 1800s was likely to come across in a lifetime.

            I think the metaphor of “water everywhere and not a drop to drink” illustrates essentially the whole chapter. I think the only information I use from the news regards traffic and weather, after that, it only serves to provide prompts for dinner time conversations. Which makes me wonder, has the amount of information dwarfed the importance of it?

            With the progression from word of mouth, radio, print, and television, wouldn’t the pass less advanced mode of communication be obsolete? Did video kill the radio star? Perhaps that even with the loss in quality and information there is still underlying pieces of a general form of communication between people that have kept all these mediums intact. It’s arguable the extent to which these mediums have shifted.