The Google Experience - Ceding Memory

The McLuhaneque idea that electronically based machines more than the mechanical ones not only radicalise the nature of information but also mould the human thought processes themselves is apt in understanding Google. Google's booking keeping all agendas, schedules, newscasts or interests, means necessary shift in concentration, behavioural changes individual and collective in relation to information and one's own thinking and contemplation. It is the question of cessation of one's memory to the electronic one. One is confronted with the problem that one is able to accumulate electronic information versus what one actually is able to do with it, whether one uses it or just disposes it off having an impact directly on one's behaviour.
The question of Google also confronts us with the routine notions of efficacy, immediacy and currency of information. A mythic importance is rendered to information, its utility and value. Most information is considered necessarily valid information on account of its facticity and currency. The myth is propounded on the basis of the rapid availability and churning of information.
Whereas information within the processes of the human mind deals with its long term ontological relation through interpretation, memory and history beyond the mathematical and statistical based notions of facticity. Human thoughts and ideas pertain to memory, dreams, collective consciousness and not the expediency of information. Google's ability to react with immediacy to electronic automation, collection, transmission and to say the least manipulation of information is largely akin to an inverted Taylorist instrumental logic - scientific and mass produced. Such Taylorist precepts are replete with the commodification, utilitarianist and efficacy of information which have deeper problematic in view of the ontological relation of information vis a vis the human minds. The functioning of time and motion and mechanical perfection of an inverted form of Taylorist information keeper such as Google is not necessarily the basis of knowledge production.
Two important problems underlying the principles on which the Google scheme is based. Google seems to operate on the principle of the market solution. An example which serves the market solution is the manner in which the scholarly community is affected by the notions of provision of information and its utility. The UCL studies demonstrate the 'promiscuous' nature of scholars relation to information seeking and 'consumers' of their own creative work. Otherwise known as skimming, this nature says the list about the manner in which the psychic and ontological nature involved in one's seeking of information. This view of information is based entirely on instrumental and mathematical logic. The studies themselves which monitor how a scholar applies a rationale for viewing information online are not critically examined for their own methodology and computer generated models. Secondly, a deeper problem of surveillance ensues. Google maintains various tools to retain the researcher's information habits and information sought which in a country like China, it works hand in glove with the Government to obtain and retain this information against its very own citizens. Hence there are challenges to the furtherance of democracy and one's rights.
I veiw Google in terms of the ontological cessation of memory, market solution and surveillance.