I treated myself to a budget smartphone a week or two ago, which is running the Android Operating System.  I have to say, that it’s been a very pleasant experience so far.

With this in mind, I’ve been looking around at various Tablet computers and realising that the whole way we compute is about to change forever.  The IPad has started a ball rolling, and while I think it’s pricey for what it is, I do accept that it’s an idea whose time has come.

I have been able to write and answer emails, browse the Internet, test write a draft for this website and even perform simple network diagnostics from my phone.  The phone even has GPS and there is a free GPS suite called Skobbler that’s well worth a look, I’ve also found that the location aware services are eye opening.

With access to the Google Apps suite and a decent size screen, I would have less reason to use my laptop PC.  I honestly can say I think Android is going to overtake Apple’s IOS, and I can genuinely see cheap Android devices sparking a revolution in the way we do mobile computing.

The future is looking very interesting!

The slow changing of the way of life we take for granted here in the West is proceeding relentlessly.  Along the way it’s turning out to be fairly instructive to watch the politics and the posturing.  Quite a few of our leaders can be seen clinging to the old ideas, the old paradigms.  They’re trying to defend a status quo that is, at least partially, undefendable.

It seems to me that the logic used to do this defensive work is often that of duality. For example they put forward the idea that it’s “growth or ruin”, or in terms of transport that it’s “oil power or green tech”.  The list goes on and I imagine every reader could add an example.  All of this is presented to us in a very “good vs evil” dualistic way.  We are reassured by the simple plain views, the clear easy choice, but are these choices really that clear cut?

Take oil power or green cars for example, why no mention of a boost in public transport and the creation of walkable cities?   Also, economic growth vs deflation is presented with a few assumptions about which is best, but with no mention of the steady state society.  Also no mention of the fact that future growth might be very constrained.

I’ve come to the opinion that the point of this sort of thing is to prevent a real debate on the very important issues.  We are steered onto desired courses via a ‘false dilemma’ fallacy, presented with two choices chosen from a larger set with the aim of blinkering us to the possibilities. The whole aim of this seems to me, to be to present a series of false choices that defends the status quo to the bitter end.

We need our capabilities of skepticism and critical thinking more than ever.