"Leave Me Alone"

How many emails do you get every day? How much of your working day, or your leisure time, is spent dealing with email -- sorting it, deleting it, answering it, or putting it off until later?

For some people, it's gotten to be just too much.

Last month, venture capitalist Fred Wilson drew a lot of attention on the Internet when he declared a 21st century kind of bankruptcy. In a posting on his blog about technology, Wilson announced he was giving up on responding to all the e-mail piled up in his inbox.

"I am so far behind on e-mail that I am declaring bankruptcy," he wrote. "If you've sent me an e-mail (and you aren't my wife, partner, or colleague), you might want to send it again. I am starting over."

College professors have done the same thing, and a Silicon Valley chief executive followed Wilson's example the next day...

Those declaring bankruptcy are swearing off e-mail entirely or, more commonly, deleting all old messages and starting fresh.

So, is email making your life easier and your work work more efficient? Or is it just the opposite?

E-mail overload gives many workers the sense that their work is never done, said senior analyst David Ferris, whose firm, Ferris Research, said there were 6 trillion business e-mails sent in 2006. "A lot of people like the feeling that they have everything done at the end of the day," he said. "They can't have it anymore."

So some say they're moving back to the telephone as their preferred means of communication.

"From here on out I am going back to voice communication as my primary mechanism for interacting with people," wrote Jeff Nolan, chief executive of the business software company Teqlo, in his blog announcing his e-mail boycott.

These excerpts are from a Washington Post article titled E-Mail Reply to All: 'Leave Me Alone'. Similar observations have been made about the expected transition to 'paperless' offices promised by email proponents. We all know that never happened.

It might make you wonder if the touted benefits of molecular manufacturing will really be as good as they sound. It could be that not everyone will want to have a desktop nanofactory, or if they do, they'll find out that it's more trouble than it's worth. Is that even remotely possible? Or am I just being extra curmudgeonly today?

Mike Treder

Tags: nanotechnology nanotech nano science technology ethics weblog blog

Comments

[Nato Welch]

I have actually doubted for months now that the model of a desktop nanofactory as common home appliance is a feasible one - not for technical reasons, but for social and political reasons.

The technology is certainly plausible, as is the proposed timeline for it's development (10-20 years), but I simply can't believe that the architectural //implementation//, the design, and the deployment details inherent in the elevator-pitch of "desktop nanofactory" seem way too threatening and dangerous to too many powerful incumbent interests to be allowed to develop in such a form.

[Karl Gallagher]

Of course it's possible--even probably. Our current stereotypes of cell-phone-avoiding oldsters will be replaced by the grandmother who has a teenager making deliveries to her house, getting tipped well for making the free nanofac on the corner produce what she needs.

Add in tabloid headlines about hackers modifying a popular shoe design to blow off people's feet, rumors of cancer caused by gusts of vacuum from the nanofac, and actual injuries caused by badly designed products, and you'll have a lot of people staying the hell away from the things.

I'm planning on waiting for version 2.0.3 before getting one for the house myself.

[JDM]

I'd like to say I agree- too much time online with too many emails is far too disconnected from the point of source. And its become far too automatic (and sloppy). I applaud those who return to a more personal approach using voice contact. If there's ever going to be a future for this kind of idea (MMT) it's going to require a lot more of human beings taking the time to TALK to each other!

There are things I like email for, especially longer, more thoughtful communication- but I'd MUCH rather hear someone's voice!

As for the thought that the powerful will never let 'the masses' have equal access, I acutally work every day to fight off the cynicism that creeps over me in that regard. I completely understand the reasoning, and it's a very realist approach... but I believe it's incumbent on all of us to not only hope that we as a species can do better, but that we can all work individually and as a group to make the nessesary changes for the future. I know how naive that sounds, but that thought helps me cut through my own cynicism.

[Eric]

Ink jet printers (or other types) are incredibly cheap, to the point where they're often bundled in with a computer purchase. Yet, many homes don't have them. Of course, implicit in that statement is adoption of computers which is still not in EVERY home.

There will always be a contingent that will want to congregate to trade goods and interact. I'd much rather go on-line and BUY what I want. My wife loves to go SHOPPING. Having all of their wears out and immediately available to try, sample or test has a value (of varying degrees to different people.) I doubt this will go away.

Having said that, I can't imagine that the store wouldn't have their own MNT printer. How far down the chain the adoption goes will vary a lot.

[Chris Phoenix, CRN]

It's worth noting that, even though everyone can now own their own printer *and* copier *and* fax machine for $100 or so, Kinko's still survives and perhaps even thrives. And AFAIK, most books are still printed centrally and shipped to bookstores, despite announcements a decade ago about machines that could print books on demand. Maybe Amazon has one of those machines, but I doubt the local B&N does.

And of course, it may be that the nanofactory owners won't want to make nanofactories freely available, and that situation might persist for multiple years. (Look how long high-priced medicine has persisted in the US!) Ironically, if the US continues to avoid developing MM, we may find we're still shipping most of our goods from China, years after China has developed nanofactories...

Chris