We are too dependent on computers

I will start off with rebuttals, in this round. When you said, "there are many teenagers across the world who do not have access to computers" are you essentially saying that they do not have access to hospitals?Again, I said that they do not have access to the internet. The entire debate is about proving whether or not humans have become TOO dependent on computers. You will have to prove whether or not having access to hospitals is an excessive dependency.If so, I am pretty sure this is false, as these places certainly do have at least one manifestation of computers.Again, you have to prove how this is an excessive dependency, if it is simply a reasonable dependency, then it goes against what you are trying to argue, because being "TOO dependent on computers," means that the dependency would have to excessive, and unnecessary.In my previous argument when I said "almost all teenagers have some sort of computer", I was indirectly referring to developed countrieseBut developing countries must be taken into account, because they make up the majority of the Earth's population.My opponent states that schools require students to use computers for essays, assignments, powerpoint presentation, spreadsheet etc. You have not provided any evidence for this. There are many schools that don't require any of this. In fact, unless a school has a specified technology program in which having a laptop is a requirement, there is always an alternative to using a computer. While schools may use computers for grading certain tests, most schools do not use them to grade the majority of tests, and don't use them at all when grading exams. When you say that schools use computers to check for plaigarism, I'm assuming you are referring to turnitin.com, which again, requires the internet, and as I showed before, the majority of humans do not have access to the internet. In my entire life as a student, I have used turnitin.com and applications like it, a total of 1 time, and I have never in my life heard of an application called "moodle." So no, schools do not require the use of computers, and they do not use them regularily for grading assignments.Without computers, schools would be completely lost. I am not only talking about America but virtually every school in the globe; all use some sort of computer and rely on them.Again, this is an incorrect statement. My opponent provided the following source at the end of their argument,http://www.brookings.edu...the opening paragraph of this source states the following."The American education system has a remarkable resistance to innovation and the classroom experience has changed very little in the 100 years since Edison's prediction."The source that my opponent provided shows that American education system has resisted innovation and has not changed very much over the years to accomodate technology, so it's true that the education system does not require technology.A study shows that teachers in economically disadvantaged schools(such as the schools in Africa) are as likely to report that their students use computers on a weekly basis as are teachers in more advantaged schools.The students are using the computers, but you don't show that the schools require them to use it. It would be an excessive dependency if the students were required to use them, and the curriculum depended on the use of computers, but you have not shown this, you've simply shown that they use computers. if they were suddenly introduced to computers, then obviously they would rely on them. People 30 years ago could also do work without computers but ever since they were introduced to them, they became more and more dependent on them. People are simply using the machines that they invented. This is not an excessive dependency, and this does not prove that people are TOO dependent on computers. It's a reasonable assumption that when machines come along that will make work easier, people will use those machines, because it is very reasonable to have a desire to make your work easier, and this is not an excessive dependency at all. You state that people became more dependent on computers once they were introduced, but this does not mean that they can't do work without them. It's given that people who have been trained with computers to use computers would not be able to do their work without them, but if for some reason all computers disappeared, it would not take long before the human race adjusted back to a time before computers were necessary.It is unclear what you are asking: " I also ask my opponent to prove how relying on computers as storage for information is an excessive dependency. "Are you talking about physical RAM? or information from the internet?Both. Since the entire point of this debate is to prove that dependency that humans have on computers is TOO much, I ask my opponent to prove how using computers as storage for information is an excessive dependency.Throughout this entire debate so far, my opponent has not proven how any of these dependencies on computers are TOO MUCH. I'd like to remind my opponent that the entire point of this debate is not to prove that humans are dependent on computers, it is too prove that they are TOO ependent on computers. The difference is, that being too dependent on computers means that we are dependent on them excessively, and above a reasonable amount. I'd like to remind voters that the burden of proof is on my opponent to prove this, and so far they have not.