People have become overdependent on technology

I would first like to note that my argument on the second point can be found in the comments -- a technological error prevented this from appearing in the standard argument. However, Con has conveniently ignored a new comment appearing on his own debate. I'll reprint it here:"Therefore, I say that the use of cell phones or other devices for communication CAN become a bad thing in the future, unless we take precautions against this."This is a debate about whether we as a society have become over dependent on technology, not on whether the use of it in the first place is negative.Now, to my argument..."contrary to what my opponent seems to believe, I still see books in circulation, mailboxes on front lawns, and people meeting face to face....."This is an absurd argument -- it's like saying that there is no more death because you know people that are alive."Today's kids being familiar with our current generation's technologies in no way shows us becoming over dependent on technology."If one describes the statement using such broad strokes, it appears true, but this is not the point I am making. I am attempting to say that children, especially very young children, should be heavily monitored in their usage. This is such an issue that in 2008, the French government banned television networks from creating TV shows aired at kids under the age of three. A ruling read "Television viewing hurts the development of children under three years old and poses a certain number of risks, encouraging passivity, slow language acquisition, over-excitedness, troubles with sleep and concentration, as well as dependence on screens,". This kind of evidence only further proves the theory that an early exposure to technology in the way we view it can have a negative psychological effect. [1] "'This is a debate about whether we as a society have become over dependent on technology, not on whether the use of it in the first place is negative.' However it seems to me that he is the one taking refuge in the negativities of technologies and their effects on kids..."Children are a reflection of the habits of the parent generation. Their reliance on technology and our quickness to cater to them shows a frightening reliance on it. "However, contrary to what he/she believes, the point that was trying to be made is that we HAVE to be dependent on technology to a certain extent in order to survive in today's world. This does not mean that we are OVER dependent on them."He, by the way. Anyway, by writing this statement, Con works to imply that an overdependence on technology is impossible -- but I argue that at this point, if the power grid were to fail, many of the records and operations required for many efforts of corporate, governmental, and private lives would be shunned out of existence. Mass blackouts have occurred on multiple occasions throughout history, and who's to say that a catastrophic one could not ever occur. If one were to happen, it would prove a lack of preparation to complete tasks without technology. "For example, our memories are not reliable, so therefore we need computers to store information that we can rewrite if we choose to, and view it at any time. This is one of the reasons that justify why we need it, and so we use our computers. We need to communicate with others, but are not always able to meet them, so we invented the telephone."This statement would do well if this was a debate on the existence of technology in the first place. At no time in my arguments do I imply nor outright state that developing technology is a bad thing -- just that it should be carefully examined in its influence in our lives.ConclusionI, like Con, have no strong views either way on this issue.To all prospective voters, it must be noted that my opponent never, at any point, used any sources to back up his statements, and on multiple occasions used arguments more suited for an entirely different debate (on the usage of technology, not the effects of technology). Sources:1. http://www.cbc.ca...