Choose Technology or being chosen?

Thoughts to the (The Technology within, Darren Tofts) reading:

It is intriguing that if we could actually do the mind speculative in a short story of Ray Bradbury’s prognostications about “Happy Life Home.” It seems that it’s not only control the equipments of occupants’ automatically in the house, but also react upon the basic of users’ mind. It may make technology more organic, considerable and emotional to fit people’s needs. However, is it really suit for people’s necessary? When someone could operate the functions of each facility at home simply by using their liberating thoughts and doing nothing, dose it mean the civilization of human beings actually being enhanced by the progress of technology? We may be controlled by technology to some extend with actual motivations or unconsciously being forced to achieve those actions by moving “certain muscles” such as being addicted to Internet, as Wiener asserts the example of picking up the pencil to write, explaining the cybernetics motivation of writing between human and machine. I mean, in the rapid growth of cyber cultural space we live in, although some of the technology could be internalized within our body as supplementary instruments like bionic ears or heart pace-makers whereas people could not see it but still exist inside also detectable, cultural technology is more immaterial and even harder to detect within our mind than we could imagine. Thus, as regards that technology has already affect human being’s external behaviors to certain aspects; it would be possible to affect the internal if that “Happy Life Home” actually being popularized which Sterling has pointed that technology is visceral, pervasive, under our skin and inside our mind. It reminds me of the memory in childhood that I always play games with myself in mind, when I ask my mom for any unreasonable requests, I always have the will and repeat what I want secretly. Even I do not have confidence of it but somehow it works! It seems like I could control others or machines by my will. However, when it could become possible after two decades, I suddenly realize that maybe technology could move its pace slowly otherwise that would be less entertaining when everything is follow your heart. Would it be too comfortable to be thoughtless? Imagining that people stick on the computer with their body lying on the bed without working and thinking, wouldn’t it be sad to being human?

Writing is a kind of invisible technology that we seldom use. In “within technology,” Tofts raises the problem that we take the writing as technology to disclose the fact that we have already taken it as granted as second nature. Yet we have been assimilating to be sort of illiteracy by overusing typing on keyboard to communicating with others. Statistics shows that it is apparent that the following generations are getting unfamiliar with writing, which means they somehow have no idea to write words by handwriting. When teachers and parents blame their children about their writing, do they really think about the consequence that does these children want to be or forced to be illiterate contributed to the technology. We may consider that words should not be vanished with the massive use of typing word as well as spoken word which are more intimate with when it comes to communicate, but do we really aware that we couldn’t pull ourselves out of this trap as we actually engaged in the situation for such a long time? Although writing cannot have the exactly meaning of what one's opinions, in fact, when we decide to text message or send email to someone, we have already made the choices with more alienated tool than writing as medium.