This Post Is Brought To You By The Number 0...And The Number 1...

Somewhere in my lifetime, we crossed over into the digital age.

The digital age has profoundly changed the way we live. For my generation, the digital age is THE technological advance that defines us, just as the television and the automobile did for prior generations.  The digital age has increased the speed of life. We get our news much faster, we find information and answer questions much faster, and we communicate to each other much faster, all because of computers, the internet, texting, etc. 

To me…the digital age is leading to the downfall of society. The world is going to hell in a hand-basket… woven with a series of interconnected numbers.

Don’t get me wrong…there is a lot about the digital age that I would not want to live without. I wouldn’t be writing if it weren’t for computers, I wouldn’t be into photography if it weren’t for the digital camera and editing software, and I wouldn’t have the flexibility in my music collection if it weren’t for MP3 files. But at the root of my enjoyment for all of those things is an appreciation that comes from my emotion…something that cannot be scientifically explained in a formula, or assigned a number and exactly replicated.

And THAT is what is behind the digital age…and it is phenomenal…everything is broken down to its smallest compound, and assigned a series of 0s and 1s so that that exact compound can be replicated by computers everywhere. In music, every note, and every instrument, is converted into a numeric sequence, and every device that reads that sequence produces that exact sound. That device known as Auto-Tune, which helps singers get more in tune? It’s an analytical tool that analyzes the numeric sequences of the actual notes sung, compares those to a predefined set of acceptance numeric sequences, and adjusts the output to those accepted sequences.

Every color has also been assigned a numeric sequence. Different shades of red, yellow, and blue (technically cyan), plus black and white have been assigned a numeric sequence, and the different combinations of those five colors create a multitude of exactly-defined colors. Then there are pixels -a pixel is a small dot. In a digital photo or even a digital video, the camera “reads” the scene, divides the scene into a number of pixels (for example, on a 12MP camera, a photo is divided into 12 million pixels), and assigns the appropriate numeric color to each pixel. Computer screens and high-def TVs and printers read the file, read the combinations of pixels, and projects that onto the screen.

Voice technology, weather forecasting, texting, etc., is all a computer-driven exercise of taking the subject, finding the smallest point of detail, converting it to a specific number sequence, sending that combination of sequences to another computer, and re-converting that sequence back to its exact original state. Even spell check numerically nose, I mean knows, when a word is spelled wrong, except when the wrong correct spelling of a word is used.

Subconsciously, though, we as a society have become more numeric even in our minds. Sports, for example, is so much more number- (and specifically statistic-driven) than ever. Every sports broadcast, analytic show, and opinion piece is all driven around statistical analysis. Some of the stats rolled out in a broadcast are so obscure that it’s almost comedic (to me), but yet that stat will then be used to attempt prove an opinion or make a prediction by a so-called expert. As in…so-and-so team wins 95% of the time when they play at home on a full moon night with a start time between 7:36 and 7:42 with the starting game time temp below 29 degrees and winds between W and SW over 12 MPH. SO…chalk up the W now! And then there’s politics, which more than ever is about polls and ratings and projections. This past Presidential election, the entire coverage, and there was a TON, was all driven about projections and exercise in statistical calculations. Television has been more about ratings than ever, and demographics (a statistical measurement). In all of these examples, we take a large picture, divide it into smaller pieces, assign or research a numeric value to assign, insert that into a series of formulas, and then make decisions and broad statements based on that numeric “opinion”.

What’s the big cliché about statistics? 98% of all statistics are all made up?

But, sports and political analysts (and I’m sure in other places too), whenever there is a statistical opinion that isn’t liked, tosses out this question:  “does he/she pass the eye test?”

Whatever happened to the eye test?

Whatever happened to an unscientific opinion based on gut? On personal experience? Instinct? Emotion? That is where I think we’re losing ground. The beginning and the end of the music experience – the performing of and listening to a song – is not digital even though the means of transport may be. How many times has someone said that a live performance is much better than the recorded one? The beginning and the end of the photographic experience – the inspiration of the scene being taken and the inspiration of viewing the photo – is not digital even though the means of transport may be.

And interpersonal communication? How many times has an e-mail or text been misinterpreted because the tone of the message wasn’t conveyed as part of the transport of the message? As a society, we much more dependent on digital communication more than ever, and we’re losing touch with ourselves and each other. And the interesting thing is this:  it seems as we feel that we’re in touch with MORE people than ever (that’s a numeric term)…but I’d argue that our quality (non-numeric) of our being in touch is greatly reduced. In other words…we’re in touch with more people, but it’s (seemingly) shallower. We count our friends on Facebook, and that number is there in our faces all the time. I have 245 Facebook friends. I don’t have 245 friends! I have 245 people who are all on the same computer site as I am. Some of them are true friends…some of them are acquaintances, some of them are family, some of them are co-workers, some of them are names from the past. I have friends who aren’t on Facebook (so I have MORE than 245 friends, ha!), and I admit that I regularly get caught up in following someone’s life based on what they put out there, instead of picking up the phone and having a real conversation. Well, if there was time…

…because that’s the other big issue: One of the advantages of the digital age is that since things have been broken down into numbers, which can be converted into exact computer calculations, and since computer processors have advanced to the point where a large number (!) of calculations can be done in a fraction of a second, the speed (!) of information (and distractions) has exponentially (!) increased (!). We are bombarded with more (!) information and faster (!) than ever. And because of that, I think (!!) that we are distracted more than ever. Our time (!) and attention (!!) has been divided to deal with things more quantitatively than qualitatively, and I think (!!) as a human race, we’re suffering (!!) because of it. 

NOTE:  (!) = a numeric term. (!!) = a non-numeric term.

We don’t stop to take the time to smell the roses. And I’m waiting for the day where smells are converted into numeric combinations, and our computers someday will be able to fill the room with the scent of the beach, for example. OR even soon, we can go into a room, hit a button, and be taken away to a virtual paradise vacation in Hawaii without physically leaving the house. Wait, I did see that somewhere…it was on Star Trek. This isn’t science fiction, though. Its science fiction turned into science reality. And our lines between fiction and reality are blurred more than ever. In the past, how did we know the truth from lies? Unless the lies are blatant ones, our non-numeric brains were our final judgment call centers.

We take things at face value (!) now. We don’t apply some sense of subjective analysis anymore. Everything said on the news is true until the news says it isn’t. One month, studies show that eating eggs is completely unhealthy. The next month, eating eggs is completely recommended. Everything on “official” internet sites is true until we find another internet site that says it isn’t. We in danger of losing ourselves. We’re becoming human robots…until a race of robots takes over the world. Science fiction? Drones. Computer-assisted driving. Computers answering phone calls. We’re well on our way…

It wasn’t supposed to be like this. The Jetsons lied.  ELROY!

On that train all graphite and glitter
Undersea by rail
Ninety minutes from New York to Paris
(More leisure for artists everywhere)
A just machine to make big decisions
Programmed by fellows with compassion and vision
We'll be clean when their work is done
We'll be eternally free yes and eternally young
What a wonderful world this will be
What a glorious time to be free
- “I.G.Y. (What a Beautiful World)” – Donald Fagen, 1982.

1982.  We had dreams about what the digital age would bring us…at least artistic dreams.  The computer age and the digital age were supposed to make our lives easier, and better, and in a lot of ways it HAS. But it was also supposed to make us closer, and happier…and I’m not sure if that’s the case. (Though, I’m not going to look up a bunch of statistics to “prove” that…)

There’s a very interesting premise, in my opinion (and not based on any published review or analysis of the novel that I am aware of) in the novel “Angels & Demons” written by Dan Brown. (Teaser here…there will be a future blog post about balance centering around Dan Brown’s DaVinci Code). Buried underneath the plot of the book is the subject of science vs. religion, and more specifically, whether science is trying to prove or disprove religion. It seems to me, that one of the points made in the novel is that religion must exist, as an explanation of things that science cannot explain, and further, science and mathematics could not exist without some non-scientific starting point. And finally, something that is actually deemed scientifically proven, was established as scientific fact by scientists all agreeing because at some level, the calculations (!) “make sense”(!!).

If I substitute the words “numbers” for “science” and “instinct” for “religion”, then I get this statement from above:  Instincts must exist as an explanation for things that numbers cannot explain. 

Have we gone too far in trying to prove everything down to the nth degree? Are we too busy trying to turn everything into a yes/no, true/false, right/wrong, black/white, 0/1 issue, with no grey areas, no wiggle room, no flexibility, no emotion? If this, then exactly that, no exceptions? Is there a line we’ve crossed? Is there a line we’re quickly approaching?

Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto, domo...domo
Thank you very much, Mr. Roboto
For doing the jobs that nobody wants to
And thank you very much, Mr. Roboto
For helping me escape just when I needed to
Thank you-thank you, thank you
I want to thank you, please, thank you

The problem's plain to see
Too much technology
Machines to save our lives.
Machines dehumanize.

The time has come at last
To throw away this mask
So everyone can see
My true identity...
- Mr. Roboto, Styx, ALSO 1982.

We cannot lose touch of our instincts or our emotions. We cannot let ourselves be inundated with the speed of the digital age. Slow down…don’t take things at face value (!) …take time to find the things and people that touch your core…and maybe this tale of science fiction will have a happy fairy-tale ending.

PS:  Word count – 2,000.