Proactivivity vs Reactivity to the Future of Communication

November 30, 2009admin 328 Comments »

The future of communications will rear its unpredictable head in the next couple of years.  We will be lucky enough to be part of this transformation into a world we never thought was possible.  And instead of being part of history, I want to be part of the future.  Having said that, I feel that the future of communications will entail a lot of “hands – off” approaches to new technology.  I think that we will have a lot of approaches to doing the least amount as possible in order to communicate our messages to each other around the world.  What if it will become possible to merely strap on a head set and speak into the computer?  I predict that the future will allow us to speak into the computer and give voice activated demands to what exactly we want done, we may be doing away completely with the mouse, and the keyboard.  We can simply speak into a microphone and say, for instance, “start computer” and the computer will turn on with the command and voice recognition.  This could be possible, as well as the inevitable divide between those who are, as stated in the lecture,  from the fancy colleges with the degrees and those who are the inventors of quicker and easier communication devices.  I agree with Dr. Halavais’ observation in the lecture, when he stated that long term trends in communications can only be understood by inventing the future.  In so many words, I believe that being proactive, as opposed to reactive in the forever changing communication world, will put you above the rest.  It will give the competitive advantage over those who are simply doing day to day tasks to make a pay check, the possibilities are limitless. 

In order to refrain from being part of history, be sure to keep up with the crazy world of communications and explore the being part of the future!class




I have included a pretty interesting historical view of how communications have evolved, its only 5 mins long so take a look!


328 Responses to this entry

Join the discussion