A Totally Simple Perspective on Cybernated Technology


Humans have, over time, matured to monumentalize experiences, celebrations, and general episodes in life by storing data of visual evidences or what I like to call: declarations of being able to re-experience those felt emotions, feelings and reactions back in time and again. Having the capability to store such data, that one day might not even matter to you, and that when you’re uncompromising to any means of affection and sensation, you’re already in denial of everything you’ve ever accomplished which fades out of your mind and what you’ve seen, liked, commented on and shared with others cease to exist at all.

What’s the point of cybernated technology when, for your future self, it doesn’t have to be of any value to what your socially active lifestyle or hippy Instagram photos or quirky yet intelligent Facebook shares stood for?

This is a totally simple perspective on cybernated technology. This is how and when one mind meets one technology that’s so diverse, intensified and anarchic that it completely, definitely and unconsciously blows up certain pre-defined paradigms to life, knowledge and existence. This is the discovery of technology and everything humans are in soft alliance with thinking that it symbolizes something or it leaves an impression of an idea, thought, a material or even illusions. The way I see it, the bigger questions or the “controversies” are a part of the trigger of a much simpler predominating shadow that we persist over ourselves. The truth is completely overshadowed as much as it is forced in place of someone’s opinion, perspective and experience. There is a serious possibility that my truth may not be yours.

But, what’s the truth got to do with cybernated technology?

Three points how cybernated technology begins with the truth and ends with something in replacement of the truth

  1. Isn’t how we surf/scroll/obsess over the internet subjected to how/why/when we want to perceive the gathering of words on a singular topic?
  2. Where is the truth when the information/material knowledge/controversy is build by and for human mind and understanding?
  3. Is the truth well defined and away from becoming someone else’s figment of perception, convenience, comfort and/or imagination?

Clearly, defining the point is not rudimentary to making it. Again, what is my truth may not be yours. If we broaden the scalability of truth to relate to how humans understand, react, think and function on a daily basis is as obvious as saying that if you’re looking up at the night sky, you’re not going to deny that it’s after dark.

But, where’s the evidence?

Where does the evidence lie amidst many truths that are measured through likes, shares, and comments?

The definition of prolonging your cybernated-self in front of your real-life self can only be declared if all of us start imagining both of our versions positioned parallel in alternate habitations, much like how the earth is, only in one of them the scope of discoverability is more profound and extensive than the other. The truth of the future can only be set apart and negotiated in terms of difference and similarity between those two worlds. Then there will be war, there will be digitally augmented noises that will break your existing paradigm of truth; they may even break yours as quickly as they will form a new truth in place of it. If today, cybernated technology is all about the truth, it perceives truth and wants to harness it, these tiny and irrelevant pieces of evidences bundled together to form experiences and adventure will soon obliterate into darkness and the moment when one mind meets one technology will forever be destroyed and with it the meaning of perception and what sets it apart exclusively. So, instead of searching for the truth, the meaning and the purpose of cybernated technology, delve deeper into the pools of what it does for you. Lose yourself inside the vast, great depths of personality that it offers and see how many you mask. If all were masked to become one truth, you wouldn’t be thinking how it would be like to see your own cybernated-self in a world where discovery and knowledge go so close in hand that materiality feels like a drug. Humans aren’t made to live one truth, especially in the cybernated technology; they’re meant to live many, endless and unimaginably colorful truths.

Against All Odds With The Internet

The essay, User Behaviour published on Aeon speaks about how designers, websites, and apps have more regiment over users who are curious and seeking to find more and more information to share, buy, sell and exchange with other users. The matter at hand is whether if the internet is addictive and if it is, shouldn’t the internet be put under digital supervision and moderation for its regimen and conventions? Michael Schulson wrote the essay to verbalize the praxis behind clichéd ‘infinite scrolling’ digital graces of users on websites and apps designed woo and impel users in ways to turn on to consumer data and money-making that ultimately siphons the entire foundation that the internet was built upon.

In the beginning of the essay, Michael, very smoothly illustrates how a simple pigeon experiment conducted by Skinner is, in most cases, knitted together with our contemporary digital etiquette of giving websites like Facebook, Twitter and other interactive feeds the power of persuade or even “coerce” us into getting hooked and addicted to how digitally we’re empowered by communication and information. Currently, psychologists have no way of figuring the veritable and descriptive list of how a user suffers from internet addiction and whether if it’s even a real phenomenon. As noted in the essay, I strongly believe that the internet has a profound level of utility for users to exhaust and grow with, but such kind of utility is not for everyone as much as it is unique to each user’s psychological awareness to it. What this means is that grace of surfing the web for one user may be more productive and useful than the seemliness browsing for any entertaining and distracting purpose for another. The brain wave of how conscious a user is towards the internet is linked to how disputable it is to say that internet addiction is conveyed by triggering users to react and re-react consistently in a controlled digital environment by designers to ends that satisfy both the internet-creators and users. That’s addiction, but that is only confined to one user’s psychological habits.

Comparing the internet to institutions that require assured regulation like casinos or drugs is inevitably biased because moderating the internet would be an alternative and ultimately a license that users may or may not prefer. Casinos, on the other hand, are neither privilege nor preference; it is an outcome of human behavior’s drive to mismatched lawlessness and chaos.

Read the essay here.

If a user wants to exercise willpower, responsibility and self-control with the help of websites like Facebook, Twitter, and other gaming companies to alert them when their usage patterns resemble any psychological problematic behavior, it will be a choice, not a complete regulation by itself. Users concerned to keep track of their digital graces will have already gained the conscious nudge of alertness and guilt when browsing websites and apps. They will stop when they’re obligated by themselves to do so. Most of the times, users don’t like to be told or consistently notified how much they should or should not browse any kind of information and while this remains unbiased and probable, regulations for the internet remain ungovernable and they will not shake the influence away from websites and apps to users conscientiously. If anything, regulation of the internet will discover new, twined and mind-boggling tactics and strategies that users will again spoil for. 

What is your take on this? Do you think the internet, in general, requires any sort of regulation or enforcement to alter the way users interacte and utilize the internet? Share your opinion below.

Feature image extracted from Aeon by Bettmann/Corbis.