DTC 101 – Spring 2013

In Progammer or be Programmed, by Douglas Rushkoff, the last four chapters seems to be explained for people who fall into the digital divide. The seventh command, Social, talks about social connection through Facebook and Twitter and all the other ones they have to offer. For people that fall in the digital divide don’t really get that social connection like the average teenagers would through social networks. “Digital networks are biased toward social connections, toward contact,” (99). Instead of them having notifications that their tweets or likes are new, they settle for more of contact face to face. Rushkoff’s 8th command is Fact, which is that the internet is mostly truthful. For a limited time, people can post whatever they want whether it is true or not, being that it is a ‘fact.’ It can only be a fact for so long until it is validated or dismissed. For those who fall into the digital divide have no access to the internet so they get their facts right from the source. The 9th command is openness. This command states that the internet is “biased toward openness” and that we should share our creations, (121). It is basically like writing a paper and plagiarizing. They can only share and create so much to the point where they realize it is plagiarism. The last command is Purpose. Rushkoff suggests that we, even those who fall into the digital divide, should know coding so that we can create programs with meaning. He suggests this so that we don’t just take credit for what the internet found for us. For those who fall unto digital divide can’t create this if they’re stuck on ‘face to face’ contact.

@chrisdtc101

In Daniel Rushkoff’s “Program or be Programmed”, he gives four commands in his last four chapters to us. The commands are, Social: Do Not Sell Your Friends, Fact: Tell The Truth, Openness: Share, Don’t Steal, and Purpose: Program Or Be Programmed. These four commands are very critical to anyone who uses technology on a regular basis, but what about people who don’t have or use a computer? Are these rules still applicable to them? I say they are… in a way. Even if they are not being directly affected by technology themselves by not using it, they are being affected by the people around them who are. Certainly, they are left behind in the digital divide. What’s more, communication is even harder for them than it used to be thanks to the people around them always being plugged into their technology. I have several friends who rarely answer their phones anymore if someone calls them, and those kind of actions – cutting off the means of communication someone in the digital divide may have – are extremely detrimental not just to the individual but to the society. The command of Program Or Be Programmed, to “learn how to make the software, or risk becoming the software” (Page 128), is an incredibly important one. If everybody who uses technology fails to follow this command, where will those in the digital divide be left? They will be isolated from a society that they can no longer communicate with and be left to fend for themselves by themselves.

@ObergJustin

For someone living in the modern world in the digital divide, where access to a computer is difficult, Rushkoff’s commands would have a very different affect on them than those with digital access. Those in the digital divide might not be affected as much as someone who is constantly interacting with digital media, but they also have no control to program or make a change in the digital world. For instance, in Rushkoff’s first command he states, “digital networks are biased toward social connections-toward contact” (Rushkoff 91). Now someone who does not participate on the digital network will not have to experience all of the seemingly meaningless social contacts that go on online in the form of messaging or spreading memes. However, many times what is created on a digital network leaps to the actual world such as political ideas that stir revolution. In these cases those with digital access are actually changing the world and those without have no opportunity to add their voice to the conversation. When it comes to facts, those in the digital divide are never influenced by the overabundance of false information that floats around online, but they also miss out the access to all of the relevant true information as well. “Digital networks were built for the purpose of sharing resources, technologies, and credit on order to create it.” (Rushkoff 118) Someone could be very talented at something and want to share it with the world but still live in the digital divide. They are at a severe disadvantage because more and more people are choosing to spend their free time looking and buying stuff on digital networks as opposed to the real world. Finally Rushkoff make the point that “we must learn how to make the software, or risk becoming the software” (Rushkoff 134). Even though someone might not be on a digital network, they can still be programmed by it just from the amount of change to our culture computers have caused in the last few decades. However, those in the divide have absolutely no way of learning how to make the software and thus can never program and will always be those who are programmed.

@cougar_sean

As time progresses, society becomes more bias towards contact, Rushkoff’s seventh command. He states, “our digital networks are biased toward social connections [… and] any effort to redefine or hijack those connections for profit end up compromising the integrity of the network itself.” Here it is clear: there must remain a true and honest motivation to connections. If society feels as though the reason for contact is personal gain, the system destabilizes. This naturally leads to his eighth command, fact. If someone lies on the Internet, it is found out very quickly. Everyone becomes a sleuth when they access the Internet and they share information with each other to verify statements. Lies do not last long on the Internet because, as Rushkoff says, “the more valuable, truthful, and real our messages, the more they will spread and better we will do.” “Digital technology’s architecture of shared resources, as well as the gift economy through which the net was developed” (Rushkoff) has created a need for openness, the ninth command. Openness continues along the natural path of the last two commands. Social connections seek honest, true relationships and that relationship must be open. Sharing is what the Internet was originally created for. When something is not shared with everyone, society gets angry. This ties directly to the motivation or purpose (command ten) of the connection. Purpose is all about making change. If we cannot learn to make change ourselves, then we are helplessly at the mercy of those who can. We must learn to “program or be programmed.”

I would imagine that for someone who lacks a computer and learns about the Social command, they would perhaps reconsider the friend values they have in real life and not take it for granted as some do. Whether its being more connective or simply taking the time to talk in person instead of over Facebook. Telling the truth is something that someone without a computer should hopefully do as it is! As Rushkoff states in one of his closing lines, “the more valuable, truthful, and real our messages, the more they will spread and better we will do.” A non computer owner will hopefully already understand this moral.  Command 9, openness, talks about sharing instead of stealing. This command would probably reflect on everyday life, which would take it out of the context of media and of course would encourage the contemporary man to share, not steal. With purpose, I think that the contemporary man would find himself confused. In life, the struggle to program or be programmed is simple. Its called adapting to your environment. The non-computer man would most likely see this as a reality check and re-evaluate where he stands in life and who stands above/below him. I believe the significance is that everyone falls victim to this. He clearly states that doing nothing is another way of being “programmed.” I personally see this entire book as a persuasive speech with a call-to-action at the climax.

@alweyman