While researching wearable computing fashion shows I came across this news clip from South Korea.
I am more than certain that wearable computer clothing will have a use-value in a variety of contexts, including for assistive technologies, extreme sports (as has already been demonstrated) etc.
But, a wearable that a mother wears all the time to alert her of the fact that her baby requires her nappy changed? C'mon... I can see how this would be vital if the mother did not have a sense of smell, as a light bulb lights up alerting the mother to take action. But still... there are more conventional ways of doing this as most mothers will attest to...
If we rely on technology to alert us to when we need to make decisions about certain actions to do with our children, then there may be some very ugly consequences looming.
Here is a sad story that I am sharing- not because technology per se was the cause of death, but it certainly played a part in redirecting the attention of the parents of this child.
"Earlier this year, a game-addicted South Korean couple was found guilty of letting their newborn baby starve to death while tending to a virtual child in the online game "Prius." The Associated Press reported, "The couple played at Internet cafes on average 10 hours every day and bottle-fed their baby only once a day, prosecutors said in an affidavit." Source here.
A wearable device alerting the parents that the child had to be fed, may have saved its life... but then what we are witnessing are computer "solutions" that require a layering of supplementary solutions. So we use product x but because we do, we need to buy product y, and then maybe down the track depending on our usage, product z. We could have alerts and triggers for absolutely everything, would that make us more productive? Or would this just lead to nested consequences. In short a chain reaction...