I agree. If anything, the people who rely upon technology will certainly blend into the technological society better than those non-techies, but at what cost? The ability to look up information easily will probably mean that at the same time, they are loosing the ability to remember things (because they don't have to). People may be changing becuase of technology, but it's not necessarily beneficial, as the article seems to suggest. It's simply gaining one skill at the expense of another.
Evolution would occur if tech-savvy was selected for somehow. However, it's not! In the US the selection process favors idiots. Smart people are hard to control, and nobody 'In Charge' likes them. No, idiots get all the benefits, while the smart ones are taxed to ribbons. After all, uncritical idiots can be counted on to vote predictably. Wait a few more days, you'll see it in action.
Evolutionary change results when natural selection takes place... since the internet has not been with us for a single generation the statement that it is causing evolutionary change is somewhat premature, about 10,000 years premature. I would like to see the evidence that shows not using the internet can reduce your chance of reproducing.

The change induced in our brains by technology is developmental because neurons grow depending on how they are used, that is not the same as evolutionary change which results in a change of genotype. 

The acid test is that this kind of development is not passed on genetically, it has to be reacquired by each generation in a process of experience and learning.

What the author is saying is that people who use computers become better at it, which is really stating the obvious, but someone has to do it. By using the word evolution innappropriately however he confuses everyone and sells more books by exploiting the fear of inadequacy. 

Which helps.... not a lot.
Well, the whole purpose of evolution is survavial of the fittest, a process which we long forsake as a species. It is irrelevant that a techie will evolve faster and have two kids to prolong the evolved species since your garden variety redneck will still marry his cousin and have 12 children. I strongly recommend a movie "Idiocracy" as a more plausible alternative to StartTrek vision of the future.
I agree. If anything, the people who rely upon technology will certainly blend into the technological society better than those non-techies, but at what cost? The ability to look up information easily will probably mean that at the same time, they are loosing the ability to remember things (because they don't have to). People may be changing becuase of technology, but it's not necessarily beneficial, as the article seems to suggest. It's simply gaining one skill at the expense of another.
Evolution would occur if tech-savvy was selected for somehow. However, it's not! In the US the selection process favors idiots. Smart people are hard to control, and nobody 'In Charge' likes them. No, idiots get all the benefits, while the smart ones are taxed to ribbons. After all, uncritical idiots can be counted on to vote predictably. Wait a few more days, you'll see it in action.
No thanks to you inq, My brain hurts.

I hope your proud of that.

(you should be)
Evolutionary change results when natural selection takes place... since the internet has not been with us for a single generation the statement that it is causing evolutionary change is somewhat premature, about 10,000 years premature. I would like to see the evidence that shows not using the internet can reduce your chance of reproducing.

The change induced in our brains by technology is developmental because neurons grow depending on how they are used, that is not the same as evolutionary change which results in a change of genotype. 

The acid test is that this kind of development is not passed on genetically, it has to be reacquired by each generation in a process of experience and learning.

What the author is saying is that people who use computers become better at it, which is really stating the obvious, but someone has to do it. By using the word evolution innappropriately however he confuses everyone and sells more books by exploiting the fear of inadequacy. 

Which helps.... not a lot.
Well, the whole purpose of evolution is survavial of the fittest, a process which we long forsake as a species. It is irrelevant that a techie will evolve faster and have two kids to prolong the evolved species since your garden variety redneck will still marry his cousin and have 12 children. I strongly recommend a movie "Idiocracy" as a more plausible alternative to StartTrek vision of the future.