jump to last post 1-1 of 1 discussions (4 posts)

The One Button Scenario

  1. profile image0
    Ben Blackwellposted 3 years ago

    So I was just thinking of something -

    Generally, simple technology is created for general or simple purposes.  A hammer is used to hit something - one strike is equal to one command, or in this scenario, one button push.  Now, an advancement could be a hammer with a nail built into it.  One command is equal to a hit and a nail insertion.  As technology gets more advanced, conjunctions such as this become possible.  Instead of pushing a button to turn the lights on, and then another to turn the computer, one does both.  Then, that button can also trigger a computer to print when a job is sent.  Eventually, it may (or may not) be feasible that we will advance to the point where only one button is required for everything in the world to function correctly.  One person will push that button, and everything is taken care of forever from that point.  You could say that the one button leads to more buttons that are pushed automatically (which we wouldn't have to worry about).  However, you can't reduce that one button to zero (you must push it or trigger it in order for it to function).  What does that mean to you?

    1. Silverspeeder profile image61
      Silverspeederposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Choices are multi faceted, why would you want the computer on if all you really wanted was just the light to come on?
      As for your hammer and nail analogy there is already something that does exactly that, its called a nail gun (I think). There has been much automation in the manufacturing industry and yet there is still more than on button needed to ensure quality. Quality will only come from informed choices, one button for everything will take away those choices.

      1. profile image0
        Ben Blackwellposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        You are right about that, but for this scenario, let's just say that everything, after pushing that one button, is automated in a way that our choices are not taken away.  My question is, what is the significance of the fact that it cannot be reduced from one to zero?

        1. Silverspeeder profile image61
          Silverspeederposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Each action has a reaction. the use of the button we presume would give a positive reaction therefore reducing the initial action to inaction could only produce a negative.

          Therefor there has to be a button for use not to use it so it could be reduced to zero as an option.

 
working