Vallor pointed out that technology has been part of the human story from its very beginning, and that from the earliest tools developed, our technological enhancements have had social and ethical impact. As Vallor put it, “The ways we use technology have always shaped our affordances for moral life.” She argued that “it is absolutely incoherent to be anti-technology and to be a human being”—but no, she is not a tech-infused-Silicon-Valley-apologist; she is adamantly opposed to what she calls “technocratic disengagement from human values other than efficiency, productivity, and innovation for its own sake.”

"New technologies are easily dismissible. And so an optimism and faith are critical to using emergent products. You must believe in what the thing might be moving toward, not what it is."

Tech­nol­ogy keeps im­prov­ing, thereby ex­pand­ing pos­si­bil­i­ties for us. So we have a choice. We can ei­ther ig­nore those pos­si­bil­i­ties, and merely ac­cept what tech­nol­ogy of­fers, which will ul­ti­mately make us lazy. Or we can ex­plore those new pos­si­bil­i­ties. But to do that, we need to ex­pect more of ourselves.

Another debunking of the "NO CAN LEARN WITH COMPUTERS" nonsense.

the "Turkey fallacy," and why "it hasn't happened so it won't happen" is wrong

Beautiful point-counterpoint.

There's been a lot of really bad "research" purporting to demonstrate that screen reading is automatically inferior to paper reading. This post demolishes it.

When culture and technology mix... as they inevitably do. Thoughtful.

All human-made things are tech.

Why some segments of genre publishing are -- to put it politely -- fucked. And why they damn well should be.

Wanna be a reference librarian? Better know yer tech.

"When a company or industry is facing changes to its business due to technology, it will argue against the need for change based on the moral importance of its work, rather than trying to understand the social underpinnings."

An allegory on media-technology obsolescence.

Number of times the word "book" appears in the ALA Code of Ethics: 0.

Let's teach children that computers have no place in libraries! YEAH, THAT'S THE TICKET.

Better than the Memex!

Nice contrast to the "computerators" abstract.

"A tool addresses human needs by augmenting human capabilities."

'The reason to teach computer science isn't to turn everyone into a coder. It's to share the insight that today, more than ever, the world can be shaped by good and rigorous ideas hatched by "mere" teenagers or other outsiders, and that these ideas transcend technology.'