Ever considered how much of our vocabulary is here as a result of technology? “Rewrite,” “unzip,” and “surf” have all been assimilated into our everyday lexicon. French electronica group Daft Punk often experiment with the idea of humanity and technology (they perform concerts while dressed in robot helmets) and released the single “Technologic” in 2005. The single’s lyrics are repetitive, robotic read alouds of these technology terms (their original music video is here – a bit creepy). YouTube animator hungning played around with the first verse of Technologic and came up with this:
And along the same lines, here’s Norwegian music group Royksopp’s take on everyday technologies in their 2002 infographic music video “Remind Me”:
Papyrus News 
This is an interesting topic. It’s arguable that ‘much of our vocabulary is here as a result of technology’ – but I wouldn’t put it like that myself 🙂
Let’s remember that we humans, having invented language – itself one of our major technological achievements – (‘technology’ = ‘technical solution to a human problem’, eg communication) went on to name the things in our world so that we could tell one another about them. Then we invent new technologies (spear, basket, book, telephone, rocket) and – lo and behold – we name them too. But let’s be clear – it’s us, and not the technologies – that’s doing it. To imply otherwise (vocabulary being ‘here as a result of technology’) is to give, at least by implication, linguistic agency to the technologies, rather than the humans where it belongs!
And interestingly your examples, rather than being true technological neologisms, are actually new metaphorical uses of already existing words. So too would be ‘memory’, ‘bit’, ‘platform’, ‘file’ etc. Even ‘Windows’! So another interesting line of thought is our metaphorical adaptation of existing words to accommodate our new technologically enriched reality, and the process of reification whereby our linguistic sign becomes taken to be the thing itself (does my computer really contain ‘files’?)
To expand on the linguistics of technology, I have been fascinated with the word techne since its meaning was first explained to me. Techne which means craftmanship or art has led to the fairly modern word, technology. Techne is new in its use for engineered invention. In the middle ages, artisans and craftsmen practiced technologia (pardon my butchered greek). Da Vinci is a great practitioner of techne.
I would thank Linda Strauss for her lessons on this word origin.
I believe that digital storytelling and other digital art are reconnecting with this earlier meaning of techne.
I agree with Tony that this is an interesting topic and that the credit goes to the ‘innovators’ rather than the innovations. However, given the context here, it seems to me that the opening question is simply aimed at starting a dialog about ‘new’ vocabulary growing from the expansion of technology. In my view, heightened social awareness of emerging technologies brings the terminology into general use as ‘new’ language. While this new language is oftentimes based on established vocabulary, it has the potential to expand or replace meanings, or simply fade into obsolescence. In any event, this entry was effective in bringing forth some interesting discussion based on the very point of topic – technology (in the form of multimedia music video). I’d love to ‘hear’ more discussion about the important theoretical concepts that Tony mentioned here as they apply to the evolution of language. In particular, I’d like to know if there are any interesting opinions about technology language and cultural barriers… and the broader implications of technology literacy and globalization.