Ann Helen Petersen , in her article “Big Mother Is Watching You”, describes the prominence that wearable tracking devices has gained, and the reasons behind this sudden change. She discusses the fact that companies are attempting to gather data about people in order to “improve” their lives. This improvement will be bought on by the fact that users wearing the devices will be able to analyze themselves in ways that they could not before. These people now have the power to dissect their own lives, and in a certain way have more control over their experiences. While I agree that the new wave of wearable technology does empower the user to a certain extent, I would like to propose the viewpoint that this technology is a two-sided sword.
The good comes from the empowerment. It is a great thing to be able to self test your urine to make sure that you are healthy, or to check up on your hear rate to make sure that you are not in danger of a heart attack. These are benefits that wearable technology provide. Our lives are made easier through the MimoBaby that allows the parents to maximize their child caring methods, while allowing the more tired parent to sleep more. It is beneficial to measure bodily food intakes and monitor weight among things, if one wishes to keep a healthy lifestyle. The purpose of wearable technology is good. The negative aspects come into play when one talks about the specific numbers themselves rather than their purposes.
While people are able to monitor their lives and check all the statistics of their day, they begin to pay more attention to these numbers, than the actions that they are doing. In our high-tech society , many people are constantly on their phones, and data-tracking gives them more of a reason to check their screens. I believe that we as a society will get to a certain point where we no longer perform activity simply for the pleasure of it/because we want to, rather because we feel the need to live up to the numbers that we are being shown. It is a possibility that parents will feed their child simply because a machine is telling them to, not because the parent has developed a bond that allows them to predict baby needs. Some may run and have a great time running, but will not get the full experience if they are solely worried about the numbers of the run. These statistics have the power to put the user in a certain mindset where numbers are the only important thing. I do not wish to sound apocalyptic in any way, but it is imperative that we consider how full disclosure of our life experience will affect our overall life experience . We need uncertainty in our lives; that is how we learn best. If one knew exactly what was going to happen in one’s life, would it be as much fun? This question can be applied here. Petersen agrees that the ability to rely on ourselves for better life improvement makes us feel more alive than relying on an app. Wearable technology does have benefits, but we must not let statistics distract us from living.
joswann
I like that you identify the need to balance attention to individual statistics with overall experience. There’s a great piece by the humorist David Sedaris that is at least partly about this.
The argument and phrase you used in describing the wearable tracking devices in regards to Peterson’s articles fit well with Isabel Pederson’s article on augmented memory and digital devices. In Pederson’s article, she examines augmented memory inventions and their possibilities and ideas as well as the rhetoric spoken by the inventors. She starts with a history of augmented memory before analyzing the “rhetoric of need” that is the popular discourse in augmented memory, involving the ineptitude of memory (suggesting that humans suffer from faulty memory and are basically not good at remembering), the need for memory to have surrogacy (that humans need another memory system to possess perfect or nearly perfect memory), and memory as a storage device (that augmented memory will allow us to easily capture and store memories) while also looking at some augmented memory inventions and culture references related to augmented memory.
Though improving our memory sounds great in many aspects, and will most likely improve our lives and give us a sense of empowerment, one must assess how augmented memory will affect our “overall life experience.” Having a reliable and easily retrievable memory offers possibilities for many day-to-day activities, from school to errands to work. The augmented memory inventions promise relief from poor memory and flaunt the idea of “total recall” in some cases, but others point out the benefits from human’s faulty memory; if we remember everything, our senses would be overwhelmed from the constant cataloguing and retaining, as well as other disadvantages such as possible less creativity and the ability to forget traumatic experiences. Overall, Pederson makes the claim that the idea of augmented memory involves a complexity of relationships and concepts, from media representations to stylistic inventions and declarations to cultural phenomenon. Much like the idea of the quantified self movement, the idea of augmented memory offers a realm of perceptions to be explored.