Godfrey Reggio Quotes

Technology is not going to be perceived by different classes of people in the same way.

I think there's a great homogenizing force that software imposes on people and limits the way they think about what's possible on the computer. Of course, it's also a great liberating force that makes possible, you know, publishing and so forth, and standards, and so on.

You know, I believe that technology is the great leveler. Technology permits anybody to play. And in some ways, I think technology - it's not only a great tool for democratization, but it's a great tool for eliminating prejudice and advancing meritocracies.

Most of our technology issues aren't partisan.

language is never neutral

All tools have intrinsic politics and technology is the tool of now.

All literature is political.

I don't even want to guess at what computer literacy might do to children, except to say that if cyberspace is considered a place, then there are people who are already in it and people who are not in it.

I'm not against the virtual world; it's fascinating, but I don't like the way they try to impose it on us. It's a thing imposed by rich countries.

The fact that we see some people doing what appears to be good civic-minded deeds may be because that is their true intention, and it may be that that is their best way to hold onto power in a setting where they have to depend on a lot of people.

Increasingly, I'm finding myself uncomfortable about how the Internet's developing, who's influencing its development, and who is not.

I would not minimize the digital divide, which separates the computerized world from the rest, nor would I underestimate the importance of traditional books.

I think that there are changes that have occurred in technology that make is that more people can have the same level of information that I have. My advantage is that I'm very good at interpreting the information.

It used to be that the only ones with access to cutting-edge technology were top government labs, big companies and the ultra-rich. It was simply too expensive for the rest of us to afford.

What business has science and capitalism got, bringing all these new inventions into the works, before society has produced a generation educated up to using them!

It is possible to think that the Internet will be a net positive for society while admitting that there are significant downsides - after all, it's not a revolution if nobody loses.

Technology produces a new division of haves and have nots.

Technologies are never neutral, and some are hurtful.

The existing system of Internet governance is a form of neocolonialism.

Politicians and bureaucrats aren’t benevolent or malevolent. They are just like the rest of us.

It should bother you that the Internet connections in South Korea average more than 4 times as fast as America’s.

Distributed technology does not necessarily lead to distributed economics.

One tech-related concern with religion is that it appears to be a positive feedback loop to the accelerating rich-poor gap, as the disenfranchised opt out of modernity.

It's not going to be true that every country has the same technological possibilities, but there is no reason why it might not be more or less true. Broadly, that the idea that the same technologies should be available everywhere seems to me very plausible.

Kids are growing up with a bombardment of information through technology.