One thing is certain about new technologies: The first uses to which they’ll be put are replacements for older technologies. The truly innovative uses come later, after people have been using the tool for a while and discussing its possibilities.

Computers are a good example. When the first PCs were offered to the public, they were used primarily as replacements for typewriters, calculators and slide shows. Back in those days, it was all but impossible for anyone to envision the way people use computers today.

Another good example: television. The first broadcasts were essentially radio with visuals. Programs successful on the radio were simply ported over to TV with cameras fixed on the stage where Milton Berle or Jack Benny performed. Only after TV had been around and its merits and potential discussed did the likes of Edward R. Murrow, Paddy Chayevsky and Rod Serling begin probing the ways television could be used.

These days, it seems we’re too quick to dismiss conversation about emerging technologies and even old tools. Two cases in point:

First, the terrific Aaron Brazell—known to followers as Technosailor—posts that we need to stop talking about Twitter: “Twitter as a tool needs to become that tool and not the topic of conversation,” he writes. “Twitter is dead as a topic of conversation. It is dead as fodder for blogs. It is dead as a startup that is revolutionizing our way of lives.”

Most of the comments to Aaron’s post support his viewpoint. “Most communicators knew this ‘new media’ was just a new channel to do what we were already doing,” writes on commenter. “It???s (a) tool to do exactly what you said…perform our jobs better.” And I saw a tweet today that argued Twitter is nothing more than infrastructure and shouldn’t be a subject of conversation.

Aside from the fact that most businesses are still struggling to wrap their minds around even the most basic uses of Twitter—something you know if you attend conferences or have clients in this space—the fact that so many people see Twitter as “a channel to do what we were already doing” leads me to argue that we must keep talking about it if we’re going to find the next level of uses for Twitter.

The evolution of Twitter beyond that initial phase is underway, but it’s still being used mostly for instant message-like conversation, distribution of news releases, emergency notifications and the 140-character versions of what many people used to post to blogs. There’s nothing wrong with these uses—I heartily endorse them all the time—but they are the equivalent of early word processing as a replacement for the typewriter.

Conversation about the medium sparks thinking about what else it can do. (I’ve always found it easier to brainstorm in a group than by myself.) So, while I understand and sympathize with Aaron’s frustration that everyone’s still ga-ga over Twitter, the conversation will pay off. For example, Aaron suggests we stop having “tweetups” and simply get-together. But companies that never thought of organizing get-togethers over a channel like this are motivated to try it when it’s labeled something new and exciting, like a tweetup. That’s what led H&R Block to have tweetups with tax advisers before tax season this year, and for San Antonio to record a record number of first-time blood donations resulting from a blood donation tweetup.

Second, Jeff Jarvis tweeted yesterday, “How can I tell flacks that I don’t open ANY of their press releases. The press release is dead, folks.”

Again, shutting off conversation about the press release is a rejection of discussion about its the medium’s possible evolution. Press releases may be dead to Jeff. They may, in fact, be dead (or in grave condition) as a tool for obtaining media coverage. But, as research from the Society for New Communication Research affirms, they are far from dead in general. And recent studies confirm that the social media release is gaining traction and producing exceptional results. Press releases are not dead. They have simply evolved; they are being put to new uses, such as search engine optimization and direct reach to customers.

(To his credit, in response to Sally Falkow—who pointed to an Outsell study that showed press releases beat trade journals as a source of information for knowledge workers—Jarvis tweeted, “Press release as resource of source info (aka, web page): OK. Press release as unsolicited wasteful irritating spam: Not.”)

My point is, rather than proclaim things as dead or not worth discussion, let’s encourage the conversation. You never know what the collective brainstorm might produce.