Oh, what the difference of a few months makes. Or, rather, perhaps its just the pull of a web magazine, like Slate. Most recently, Slate has come up with an article heralding the death of email, in the face of a generational shift in communication methods.

Translation: kidz luv IM.

And texting.

And yes, there’s a lot to be said about what the medium means, irrespective of the message.

Which is funny, however, given how this past June Fred Wilson was raked over the coals for talking about how it was easier for digital natives to see and take advantage for the future. I think a lot of bloggers were particularly sensitive over the post, and while yes, age doesn’t matter, in a very real difference, age *does* matter.

(which I discussed over here about 6 months ago as well).

There’s a generation of individuals that are using technology in a way that is completely foreign — even to folks who are “only” 5-10 years their senior. And there’s *another* digital generation that are 5-10 years *their* junior who are facile at using another kind of technology that teenagers aren’t quite as ‘hip’ to — virtual worlds a la Club Penguin.

I could also make hand-waving arguments about how these kinds of interactions might _also_ actually have profound effects on brain development, in the way that both generations interact in their interpersonal relationships, and in so doing, provide a vague (but possibly substantial) argument that there is a real organic impact on these folks.

Which makes, in a round about way, Fred Wilson right: there is a generation of people for whom email is a bit of a relic.  Some older folks have made a similar leap, but by and large its a generational *thing* (see Mat Ingram’s interactions with his own kids), that will allow some of them, by and large to see things that other generations won’t.