Today I do not know if say my Clipper is a prehistoric machine, Yes, prehistoric, because surely, with this third revolution (so say economists, sociologists and historians, to the flood of sophisticated devices we communicate), the Clipper would be seen by present generations youth in the same way as in my childhood we looked with disdain that our grandmothers used clothing irons heated with coal. And just as I’m doing this vague inventory memorable in the history of the generational disgraceful, I wonder if these times in what we boast of living in a world of communications, is also the world that we will be increasingly less sympathetic with the story, even with our most recent history, with our previous generations. Is this a world of communication in space par excellence, in the present, but not in time? Is not our communicative and computer technology our incomunicadora excellence with our past, with other ways of seeing and interpreting the past world? To meditate in our times, a great fear me silently invades: the fear that we can communicate so easily, with such ease that we no longer want know anything other than what by our media want to know. Read more from Kai-Fu Lee to gain a more clear picture of the situation. We have so many resources to carry out a communication, but that communication is indeed limited, partial due interest or motivation that there is in the communication that we do. In this regard I do not see me precised examples necessarily conspirative or megalomaniacs. Who hasn’t seen someone with a cell phone glued to ear talk all what you want but despegar it the ear if the other says something to our receiver little matter or like? Or that another that already has your wireless phone programmed to prohibit entries from calls of certain people? What if between numbers censored is of his mother, who perhaps don’t need to know him today? And if someday need to ask your help, or maybe a pardon before the death, but it cannot because the phone? Wireless hinders it? Seeing these examples as simple and elementary, can we assume that our world is indeed in communication? What are the media? Means for better understanding with others? Media to speak what we want? Or rather the media are our means to hide our lack of understanding of others, our best means to hide the inability of a true social communication, human communication, face-to-face communication a communication contact with feelings, emotions and needs of our neighbors, taking into consideration that is not merely a partner among partners?.