11. Extra credit: student under surveillance

from week of 11/26 and the article http://www.infowars.com/preliminary-injunction-sought-in-school-rfid-tracking-badge-case/


-->

As a society we have reached a crossroads. Will we embrace technology as a tool to manipulate each other or will we use technology to help move the society forward? This question is not really aimed at the general public because most people have no say in this decision. This question is aimed at the government and at the companies who possess the technology, which will direct the society into the future. This is a question that asks whether or not we as a society can overcome the few greedy people at the head of companies that would use all of the new technology for complete surveillance and control. This topic comes into view because of a recent event at a school in Texas. The school requires all students to where badges that contain location devices so that the school may track all students. The general idea is to increase attendance in order to receive money from the state government for having good attendance. This initial goal seems reasonable and beneficial until on looks at the consequences of such an action. The students are being taught that being under surveillance at all times is something that is perfectly normal. The school is essentially taking away many of the rights of the students as soon as they step on the school’s campus. While all school essentially takes away rights from students in this way, this is on a new level that is on the same level as trapping the student on campus. How are student supposed to learn if they feel like they are trapped on campus? Students will learn that being under constant surveillance is normal and they will bring this ideal into their adult lives, which will accelerate the current society to one that does not respect the rights of the people. The society will turn into that of the book 1984.

10, Extra Credit: Microsoft Kinect Surveillance

-->
from week of 11/5 using the article: http://www.geekwire.com/2012/microsoft-diskinect-freeloading-tv-viewers/

Large companies seem to be now be putting out all of their surveillance technology towards monitoring the public in order to put forth advertisements catered towards the user. While this data is generally harmless to most people, as the monitoring reaches new heights a person’s freedom starts to come into question. Many users are downloading and watching movies for free illegally which can be seen as harmful to the economy and the entire social structure, I don’t this is the case any longer. As society evolves to become more open and free with these sharing technology new social norms have to be adopted. The surveillance technology released by these companies, the same that has cased an open technology revolution, is now starting to be used to watch and restrict the people. One of the main culprits recently is Microsoft and the possibility of using their kinect peripheral in order to identify media consumers. The purpose of this recognition technology is to monitor movie-viewing rights and to limit movie viewing for restricted material. The second purpose can be seen as a major plus for parents who let their children view their movies through an Xbox. The price seems to be though that Microsoft knows exactly who is viewing media at any given time through an Xbox. This is an enormous invasion of privacy. People are barely okay with companies using data about them that they input into a computer themselves. This could also evolve into someone always knowing exactly what you’re doing and where you are doing it. Companies will have a complete surveillance of your person. The government will of course want this information and suddenly the government has complete control of every person who uses any type of technology and the people have lost power. This seems like a problem that is far in the future, but why should we let anything that could so easily help achieve this vision come into existence.   

Copyright

Question: How is the length of trademarks determined? Especially for protecting the rights of company icons such as Mickey Mouse or Mario?

My standing on copyright and the related fields are that copyright laws should be strictly adhered to and enforced. However, revisions to the laws concerning remixed media need to be created in order to combat current trends.

Digital Divide

When I hear digital divide I think about a sort of wall between those who are knowledgeable about technology and those who aren't. This wall exists in several different ways, first in between groups in a certain society where some of the population has opportunities and some doesn't, this is present in 1st world countries where a group of minorities may not have the means to have access to technology. The second way this wall can exist is a difference between 1st world and 3rd world countries where an entire country may not have the means to provide the technology while the 1st world country has the power to deploy these technologies. 

What I found interesting about the video was that the community had more pressing matters such as clean water that were not being attended to while a computer was brought in. I also thought that with the professor only coming back after long intervals who would check on the computer and see if it was still performing correctly? What would happen if something went wrong with the computer?

speaker series: Digital Media Design, Gender & Games

From the week of 11/5

Speaker: Yasmin Kafai

As technology ages a need for collective understanding arises. Computers and technology have become so widespread and such an integral part of society that it is no longer enough that only a few people know the ins and outs of technology. How is society supposed to go about educating the public and developing an overall wanting in the general public to learn how to use technology? The idea is to combine aesthetics, design and technology into a single entity. By creating this combination then I believe the fear of advanced technology and coding will disappear and people will want to learn about technology. Many companies have done already with their products in order to make them seem more accessible to the general public. Companies like apple, Google, and Microsoft are designing their newer products to be simple. Learning technologies need to start being designed this way. People don’t want to learn how to code if they are only building boring products and their coding environment is technical and hard to understand. Once technology and aesthetics are combined then the entire public will have the opportunity to become advanced with technology.
    Another question comes in this educating process. How do we bring women into computing and technology? This question is rooted deeply in a social aspect, which we as a society have pushed on ourselves for thousand of years and can’t seem to completely abolish. This social aspect of course is how women are thought of and treated. This idea is something that has been ingrained and will not go away with just equality in the work place. Women and men are thought to be different when referring to technical and artistic skills. Women have always been thought of as more artistic while men have been thought of technical. The idea that men can’t be artistic has slowly disappeared and is now completely gone, but somehow the idea that women can’t be technical won’t seem to go away. Slowly women are becoming more engaged in engineering and technical projects. The way to engage women and get them more interested in working technically is to not only combine aesthetics and art with technology just as I stated above, but also to stop the separation of the two genders completely in work, learning and stop stereotypes when the girls are young. The idea that girls shouldn’t play video games or design using Legos is absurd and the continuation of the idea that women should be left only to artistic jobs. Once we stop this early implantation of stereotyping ideas in the children than women can thrive in a technical community. They will want to be part of the community rather than not learning technology early because they think this isn’t right for them.

Music & digital media: moral standing on music sharing

I have no qualms with sharing music online. I feel like all music should be available to everyone for free no matter what and money for the artist should be made through concerts and exhibitions. I feel this way because buying music is much too expensive, I would stream all of my music before I would buy any of it. I find pandora to be an extremely useful music resource because I listen to music that I would have never discovered without it.

9. extra credit: me & my shadow

-->

From Me & My Shadow from week of 10/29

https://myshadow.org/#

We live in an era where everyone is tracked all the time and his or her information is constantly being recorded despite whether or not that person wants anything about him on the Internet. The only way to avoid this of course is to never use the Internet, use a cell phone or any other device that accesses the Internet or uses any outward communication in any way. Many people nowadays are asking if we should allow these companies to harvest this information and sell it without our permission. Technically they do have our permission, but most people do not know the extent at which the information is being used since they do not read the small print in the agreements. I want to ask if we should care. As long as this information is secure and not given to those who would use that information to steal from us then why would be care? Yes the occasional annoying ad at the side your screen will appear with an item that you looked at the day before, but are any of these ads hurting us. Our information being sold to ad companies seems like a small price to pay for the use of an information and connection source that gives us access to anything we can dream of. The Internet has become an incredibly powerful resource, but one with a price. This price is something that fights against what humans have thought is only their right since the beginning of time. A person’s privacy being invaded goes against everything we know, but what if we didn’t ever know a time of privacy, then the internet would seem like a power without a cost. The other part of this privacy is that the information that is being used only goes to people who are trying to sell us things, this information is not going to the people we know so again why should we care that this information is being utilized?

8. Extra Credit: biomodd

From Biomodd from week of 10/22

http://www.biomodd.net/overview/artist-statement

The structure of technology and living organisms has always been vastly different and no real connection between the two has been really seen. The only real comparison between the two is that both use electrical currents to function. This difference has been because the technology up to this point has not been available and the need for a combination of the two has been nonexistent. We have finally reached an age where the combination of the two seems to be possible and desirable. Culture has evolved to find saving the environment a top priority and design has become seemingly more important as of late as a sort of counter to the hardness and coldness of machines. Even some houses have become organic in that they use trees and vegetation for the structure and power of the house. It seems ironic then that recent technologies have moved to a more organic style. Flexible displays and fiber optic cables are just a few visual examples of this transition. This transition may be the effect of move towards technology becoming part of the person. Wearable displays and electronics will become everyday. The hybrid between the organic and the technologic is not only as part of a movement for a future in technology but also as a movement for art. A group known as biomodd uses technology and plants to create art projects as a way to reuse old computer parts and show how plants can be used a power source. One example of a project that was created was a secondhand computer that was made of scrap parts that was powered by vegetation and played modded open-source multiplayer games. The entirety of the project was to show the potential of using nontraditional objects to build fully functional computers as not only art, but also as a way to become part of a natural creative environment to create and establish new ways to build.

war and technology quotes and conclusion

"we can't get past our age old need to destroy each other"

"World War II was the first war in history in which the weapons in use at the end of the war differed significantly from those employed at the outset."

"technology, more than any other outside force, shapes warfare "

Technology does not evolve because of a certain need. Technology goes at its own pace and war evolves along with it. Technology is now growing at such a fast pace that warfare cannot keep up in many areas, there is now a race to learn the technology and utilize it before something better comes out and they enemy can utilize it. Last, war exists now and always because humans have a need to destroy each other, but technology occurs because of a need to be creative and more forward for the sake of moving forward.

Beforehand: IT & War

The relationship between information technology and war has always been a race for the most efficient way to relay information to save lives. The technology has evolved to keep up with the needs of the military.

7. Extra Credit: Street Ghost and Privacy

-->

From: Street Ghost from the week of 10/15

Google street view has always been a part of one of the greatest parts in the fight of invasion of privacy. The rules about invasion of privacy though are changing. New technologies are said to be an invasion of privacy because they are unexpected and because of very specific aspects of what is seen through the cameras on Google’s cars. In order for a large number of technologies to move forward the rules of invasion of property need to be changed. The current view is from a time where people did not have any of their information out on the internet and they were essentially anonymous all the time. This view is now a barrier to technology because new technologies will not function in a way that is quick enough and convenient enough for the common person without their personal information stored beforehand. Most people nowadays are changing their view on privacy to be accepting of storing their information. The problem then becomes why is the information being used in ways that the user did not intent? Why are pictures being stored on servers thousands of miles away just because that person uses a certain site? Why can a person have their information shared or their pictures used without their consent? This is the crux of the privacy vs. technology war. Sites such as streetghosts are using pictures without consent because they feel that the artistic perspective behind their works is more important than that person’s privacy. This is another issue of convenience. The project itself is not bad or particularly damaging to the people whose pictures are posted, but why is the only way to complete this project to use pictures taken without consent? The project is banking on the people whose pictures they are using not to know of the project of that their pictures are being used. Invasions of privacy are now possible if the user does not know that their information is being used. This wrap around is why the privacy war has started.

6. Extra Credit: Augmented reality

From article: Improving Our Depth Perception in Augmented Reality from the week of 10/8

-->

The biggest question that we must ask ourselves about augmented reality is how will this affect the general public when this technology becomes widespread. Will the constant companion of virtual objects become so commonplace that people will begin to no longer discern the difference between real objects and virtual ones? Augmented reality will become the real reality. So far augmented reality has been used mostly for enhancement of sporting event and the uses in medicine and war can been seen as indispensable. The extra precision for doctors and the heads up information for soldiers provides a new era in accuracy and will prevent needless loss of life. This is an area where augmented reality should become the norm and will aid in nearly all situations. Should we stop here and only use augmented reality for these purposes rather than give headgear to the general public? Google is planning on releasing augmented reality glasses in the near future with the hope that they become everyday objects. As of now the thought that everyone would be wearing these glasses seems silly to most and in no way seems feasible. What if they do become as popular if Google hopes and everyone starts to where these glasses? I believe that these glasses will become a source of distraction more so than the cell phone. The attention span of humans is dwindling and is soon to be almost completely gone. With augmented reality glasses a quick notification in the peripheral view may completely deter the attention of someone during a conversation. Normal conversation will no longer be possible if all “engaged parties” are only paying attention the augmented reality glasses that all of them are wearing. This is a shift that humanity is already heading towards, but augmented reality for the common people could be the final nail in the coffin. Augmented reality is a danger to the human race, which we cannot afford if we don’t want productivity and human relationships to no longer become part of a social norm.

5. Extra Credit: Stuxnet

From Stuxnet: Anatomy of A computer virus from week of 10/1

The power of cyber warfare doesn’t come from the complexity or the target even though these are important factors. The power comes from the misunderstanding and abstractness that viruses and most software has from the average person. An average may not be particularly complex or dangerous, but if someone who does not have experience with computers is confronted with a possibility of infecting himself or herself with the virus then they are most likely going to become infected. How is someone who doesn’t have experience with computers going to deal with a virus. Nearly everyone on the planet does not have enough experience to deal with or pick apart a virus. This realization that is coming with extremely powerful and complex viruses is that there aren’t nearly enough people who have the knowledge to deal with and combat the viruses. Cyber warfare has become so prevalent that training to become knowledgeable about computers has become a top priority. Is this training enough? Training more children to be able to program and fight viruses is what the infrastructure needs in order for any country to survive in this new era of computers. With computers becoming the ultimate source or information, communication and now warfare the need for all people to be proficient with computers has never been higher. Groups such as anonymous are also becoming more important because they are showing companies how vulnerable they are to cyber attacks. Stuxnet has shown the world that viruses are no longer just for people to make money off of stealing identities or for recreation in destroying other peoples’ computers. Nuclear interference and power outages are now the greatest threats. How soon until people are dying directly from the effects of computer viruses? Cyber violence is so much more dangerous because of the anonymousness. We have reached a new era where everyone must be proficient on a computer if they want to survive.

4. Extra Credit: Crow Sourcing

From Crow sourcing from week of 9/24

The Internet has become not just a collective knowledge base, but also a collective base for jokes, idioms and general human observation interactions. I am referring to the explosion of the usage and popularity of the meme. The meme has become a tool to point out an observation to everyone around him or her. These observations can be anything from the general lateness of a bus at a college bus stop or an observation of the tendencies of a prominent political figure. These memes have opened a doorway to a more casual Internet usage and a feeling of closeness with people with whom you encounter on the Internet. This closeness resides in the fact that memes provide a common ground of perspective and hilarity between people. This recent development has opened an avenue for people to converse and build a knowledge base concerning topics that really do not matter in the scope of everyday life, but may provide a mutual interest. An example of this is crow sourcing. This name is a play on words from crowd sourcing, this site has people exploring and inventing idioms based on common animals. The content of this site is not the most important part of its existence despite exploring a topic that is not usually explored. The important idea is that people are coming together to build knowledge bases (crowd sourcing) about any topic even if it is very extract. The idea of collaboration is important in the fact that knowledge bases can be expanded quickly and include large amounts of information without bias, but also because this this idea is likely to spread to scholarly ideas and really any type of work. This is exciting because the volume and accuracy of works will increase. As this idea evolves many problems arise however. Who moderates to make sure that the information is accurate and genuine? This problem has already arisen with wikis. Who should have the power to edit and add information? Will collaborative works ever become possible let alone popular if these problems cannot be solved?

Virtual Reality Questions

 Initial Understanding: Virtual Reality is created by screens or helmets around the eyes and something to allow the user to interact with the world that they are seeing through these screens. These worlds can be anything.

From A Brief History of VR
1. Would the introduction of useable (inexpensive enough for public use and immerse enough that a people are fooled by the reality) VR be such a major shift that society couldn't handle the transition? What would happen to the morals of the people?

2. Are people ever going to be completely content by the current technology?

3. Would virtual reality world have to be monitored for illicit behavior in order to keep the minds of the public on track with the law in the real world?

Privacy and Security Questions

From the Transparency Grenade
1. Would a fear of information leaks lead to companies and governments being more open about their policies and actions?

2. Are companies only successful in many ways because they have secrets?

3. Would a concept like the transparency grenade ever become popular in multiple companies and governments?

From Device identification in online banking is privacy threat
1. Is there any way to fight privacy issues such as device identification when all banks use this technology?

2. At what time frames would banks have to terminate information about users in order for users to feel safe?

3. Is privacy or identity theft a more prevalent issue?

Open Source

Questions from Open Source vs. Proprietary
1. Will open source software ever become as popular as proprietary?

2. Is open source software promoting an interest in learning programming?

3. Can new open source software be trusted? Are bugs and the fact that the development team has no responsibilities reason enough to make open source not an option for most people?

Videos
1. The idea of free software is good because people get software that they can modify themselves for their needs, but can this idea be applied to all forms of software?

2. Is open source software the ultimate way of creation?

3. Is a certain degree of censorship and rules required for the internet to work properly and be useful to everyone?

Rheingold and Virtual Communities

Questions for Life on the Electronic Frontier
1. Has the age of true intellectual communities been lost now that all people have access to the internet?

2. Will there ever be a time where social interaction only happens through the internet?

3. Is the entity of television disappearing to be completely replaced my media consumption on the internet?

Question for Virtual Community
1. Will the internet ever truly be considered a formal meeting space?

2. How has the internet changed social behavior? Has it created split personalities?

3. Would the internet have ever become popular if it didn't apply visual appealing interfaces and dynamic interactions?

3. Extra Credit: Google and its power

Article: U.S. Government Requests For Google Users' Private Data Jump 37% In One Year, from the week of 10/1

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2012/06/17/u-s-government-requests-for-google-users-private-data-spike-37-in-one-year/

-->

Google has become more than just a software and search engine company. With the data sets based on users of their content Google has become one of the most powerful entities in the world. With the United States government now requesting information for undisclosed reasons and Google having the ability to deny this information shows a power shift. Google now has control over information that the government has no way of retrieving and is increasingly worried about getting. This power shift does not only apply to Google, many of the large companies (most of them making or distributing technology) have a certain disposition and control over the common people that the government cannot hope to have. This control is fueled by a more modern knowledge of the working of current day situations and people as well as an obvious expertise on current technology and a loyal following of people. All of this power the government wants access to, but as Google has shown with its denial of access to private information, the companies actually hold an incredible amount of power. These companies also have access to large sums of money. The combined power of these companies is similar to Rockefeller and the power his empire held in the early 1900’s. The government is currently in a huge amount of debt and these companies could hold the key too a door out.

            The data that Google hold is also invaluable because of data sets and holds on user posted content because other countries want access to this information. Users can post political ideals and comments on Google without fear of these being taken down because that would violate free speech in America. Therefore people can post political comments and spread ideas without fear of their own government. The data sets on other countries are powerful agents against enemy states and this information is collected at a civilian level without regard to that country’s government. The article mentioned a case such as this when Google used information of China in an investigation.  

Data Mining Reading Questions

Reading: A Deep Dive into Facebook and Datalogix: What's Actually Getting Shared and How You Can Opt Out
1. Are large sample sizes a way for companies to bypass security and privacy concerns when collecting data?

2. Should a company following and collecting data from random people without them knowing be illegal?

3. What kind of rules should be in place to stop a company like datalogix collecting data on individual people?

2. Extra Credit: The transition of Social Interactions

Article: Are You A Psychopath If You Don't Have A Facebook Account? We Don't Think So, from week of 9/17

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/07/facebook-psychopath_n_1752993.html?view=print&comm_ref=false

-->

Humans are evolving because of protocols that they create, but the control structure of categorization has fallen behind. So many people are fighting the change that new alternatives to past activities are seen as unhealthy. For example a statement in the article says that face-to-face meeting is actual socialization is actual socialization while meeting and talking through social sites is considerate a passive unhealthy relationship. While I personally believe that face-to-face interaction are much more healthy, the idea that new ways of interactions are instantly regarded as unhealthy shows that people are not willing to accept change. Many people are meeting and socializing physically with just as many if not more people on a daily basis then their ancestors ever did because of new transportation and different types of work. On top of this physical interaction these people also interact with more people on the Internet. I think that a major problem isn’t that they aren’t socializing with people face-to-face, it is that each interaction is short and the relationship is not well defined. There is too much of an illusion that the people we interact with online are more important than the physical interactions. A simple chat on Facebook could be regarded as a successful social interaction and a true connection with that person so we no longer feel the need to physically interact any longer. Humans haven’t become completely used to the idea that a simple text message isn’t the same as a physical hello and shake of hands. As time goes on and everyone is connected through phones and the internet I think that people will start to realize that more is gotten out of physical interaction that from messaging. We are currently in a transition time and we haven’t had time to properly become used to the new interaction tools that technology has given us.

words: 309

1. Extra Credit: Advertising and Automation

Article: Newspapers getting outsmarted on mobile from week of 9/10
http://newsosaur.blogspot.com/2012/09/newspapers-getting-outsmarted-on-mobile.html

-->

As the race for complete control of media consumption begins the fight for privacy begins to look unwinnable. Smartphones now catalogue so much about their owner’s lives that they know more about the person and their habits then that person’s friends or family. The pros of having a device that offers almost anything you want within seconds seems outweighs any cons of having your information processed and given to people who just want your money. The world is no longer private and hasn’t been since the technology revolution. Children born into this age will not care about their privacy and won’t have the same worries that their parents did that someone somewhere is always watching and logging all of their activities. Was the ideology that people should have private lives ever necessary for human life to continue “normally”? Should we as people ask ourselves if privacy would matter to us if we had never known what privacy was? Is this the world that we want all future generations to know? There are still some positives with personal information being available to everyone. As the article said companies already know your preferences so buying nearly anything becomes quick and painless. Matches for potential employment could be found based on preferences and past tendencies/experience without actually looking and then “resumes,” submitted at the click of a button. The employers could also see your past experience and easily find the best people to be possibly hired at their company. This automation seems scary to current generations, but this automation will be normal in the future. The time freed by computers doing all of the mindless tasks will be enormous. Of course what happens if the systems fails? Someone who actually understands the system has power over the normal people to an incredible degree. Warfare between the people who understand the system will take place above any normal everyday life, this is already happening of course but as computers control everything the entire control scheme becomes exaggerated. When will the consequences of an automated world surpass the luxury of having everyday life automated?

  words: 349

Viral Reading Questions

Reading: Has Viral Gone Viral?
1. With viral media and social sites adding in the growth of other social sites will there be so many social media sites that usage of new sites will be nonexistent and impractical?

2. Many sites are receiving huge growth spikes early in their creation, will sites that grow like this lose visitors just as fast?

3. What dangers are present in sites that present social interactions with people that you don't already know?

It & Poltics Reading Questions

1. Is the unpredictability of social media important to how effectively it can be used?

2. Is the "anybody can be somebody" idea of social media allowing for protests to be organized more quickly and more effectively?

3. With political videos and pictures having the ability to go viral will governments have to be more open with their people because of a fear that secrets will be revealed and destroy the government?

Questions for Digital Art Readings - 10/15

From VisitorsStudio
Can the collaborative element present in visitorsstudio be extended into other elements besides media such as game creation with live feeds and comments or education with building media projects?

From conch
Is creative (abstract) entertainment ever destined to become more than something that is viewed a handful of tiems and then discarded?

from Ping Melody
Is experimental music and art becoming a more prominent and acceptable form?

Questions- week 10/8

The future of Videogames:
1. When games become an integral part of regular life do you think that productivity will drop because of the distraction or will increase because work is fun instead of being a chore?

2. When the line between game and reality becomes blurred that humans will lose their ethical obligations?

3. When artificial intelligence reaches a near human level do you think that relationships with real people will become useless if the relationships with A.I. characters are just as satisfying?

Does game violence make teens aggressive?
1. Do researchers have any power against these large video game companies and their lawyers?

2. If the same brain activity is present after any violent media is watched then can any one type of media be censored if all types of media are not censored?

3. If there is no long term effect on brain function then is there any real reason that this research is relevant?

My media Input

My personal network consists of friends who I meet with in person or chat with on Facebook or through texting, class acquaintances who I organize projects with through email of texting, and professors and other higher ups who I email or meet formally.

On a daily basis my media in put consists of social interactions with people through face to face in my dorm and at class, through Facebook, email, phone calls, and text messaging. The face-to-face interactions happen consistently throughout the day where I mainly focus my attention on my close friends that live close to me. I give these people most of my attention through working on homework together, playing games, talking, or watching television. Also, every day my friends and I make a point of all going to dinner together so that we all have a relaxing time to see each other. The relaxing component is especially important because we are all engineers. My other social interactions with people happen through my computer or phone where I converse with people, post status updates and look at other peoples’ posting and using email to formally answer professors and other students. On a daily basis my media input is taken up by a variety of videos, photos and articles comes from fun sites such as “I waste so much time”, “YouTube”, or “IGN” and serious news from BBC or yahoo news. Most of this browsing is only done when I have a few minutes to kill or don’t have any work due (very rarely). I will also watch a movie of episode from a TV show on almost a daily basis. The television I watch and the games I play are for stress relief and because I get to hang out with my friends while I watch or play. My media output on a typical day would mostly consist of status updates, but also posting pictures or videos that I’ve taken or found. Posting writing that I’ve composed either for a class or for fun.

            My focus throughout the day goes primarily to schoolwork and friends. However, almost every day I check my usual media sites and look at Facebook. When I am by myself, not online or working on schoolwork then I focus my time on writing and reading for pleasure and designing and coding video games. My focus during the school year is much different then what my focus is when I am alone, but school is helping me towards a life where my focus is on the things that I want to do rather than what I have to do.

Media input/output on Friday Oct 5:
Input
-music while walking to class
-posters on walls in room and hallways
-various photos and videos on Facebook
-photos on friends laptop
-video at astonaut presentation
-music in writing class
-comedian special on netflix
-south park on netflix
-you tube videos
-read two stories before writing class
Output
-Story I wrote

Questions week 10/1

The Net and the Web
1. If TAZ only exists through other objects then does it really exist?

2. Do you think that mapping TAZ is possible? What are some of the problems?

3. Does TAZ need to approach or reach its full potential to be useful?

The Attention Economy and the Net
1. Is an economy that operates in cyberspace required for a world economy?

2. As time do you think that attention will go down even furthur?

3. Do you think that as more companies vie for attention (through commercials) that people will start to become increasingly aware of the attention grabbers and fight to counteract this fighting?

Partner answers 2

Partner: Sam Carrothers

From reading: The Internet Revolution - What are the implications that there is "no single organization controlling the web?" Should we consider this a good thing?
-The implications of no single organization running the web is that the control over certain aspects of the web are not uniform. I would consider this a good thing because the discontinuity between the look and feel of different websites contribute to the creativity of the people and encourage them to design and create. If one organization ran the internet then I feel like creativity would not be encouraged or even possible in many of the ways that it is now.

From reading: The Internet Revolution - The article determines that "the web is a space and not a physical thing." Isn't it true, however, that it requires the physical infrastructure of servers? Does the ability to store (and analyze) data for and from the internet represent the next great market for investment and employment?
-I think that the market for storing data and manipulating it has provided a workspace for many people in a time when jobs are being replaced by automation. The job growth in areas such as data analyzing and collecting has grown to enormous height recently with opportunities to advertise to people using social websites.





From reading: Engineering a New Order: Military Institutions, Technical Education, and the Rise of the Industrial State - The article alludes to a notion of 'automated warfare.' Isn't it true that technological advances 'automate' nearly every aspect of our lives?
-Technology has begun to automate nearly every aspect of our lives. Automation extending to the military sector could have dire consequences. If war is fought with only machines then nations will be more willing to fight and take higher risks during war time because the loss of huan life is no longer an issue 

Questions week 9/24

Our weirdness is Free:
1. Do you think that groups such as anonymous hacking into websites and corporations in order to show holes in their security is beneficial or harmful?

2. Do you think that the spreading of memes and websites where people can anonymously post is moving the world towards a more social time or a more secluded time?

3. What a group such as anonymous ever have enough power to change the outcome of an election or ruin a company?

The Ethics of digital direct action:
1. The Deput assistant FBI director said that "chaos on the internet is unacceptable," is there ever a time when the internet is not in chaos? What kind of chaos is he talking about?

2. Do you think flooding a website in order to draw attention to that site is unlawful?

3. Do you think that hackers and members of groups such as anonymous are damaging to the political culture of the internet? What would you could as the political culture of the internet?

Cyberdeterrence and cyberwar:
1. Do you think that cyberattacks on enemy military forces will become a major strategy in the near future?

2. Should hacking be taught in the interest of using the ability to search for vulnerabilities and destroying enemy cyber infrastructures?

3. Do you think that laws against hacking would have any actual effect?

Reading Questions 9/17

Engineering a New Order:
1. If large numbers of young adults were trained specifically in military science could there be a potential economic downfall falling the end of a war and the start of peace?

2. The paper talks about the rapid advancement of military science and an inability within military forces to keep up with these advancements, if this is true then should people be trained in schools that take multiple years as opposed to quick on the job training?

3. Do you think that military science could become part of a regular study schedule in a regular university as opposed to only being taught in military specific schools?

The internet Revolution:
1. Was the switch from military to private backing of the internet in 1991 a major turning point in how the internet is viewed and used today?

2. All of the same terms that were originally introduced for the internet are still in use today,  do you ever think that these terms and identifiers will become obsolete?

3. Many companies are valued based on the number of users and their potential, is it safe to have a site be worth something if there are no physical assets?

Tools for thought (chapters 4, 5, 6):
1. Do you think that any of the inventors that were responsible for the first computers visualized using their computers for personal enjoyment rather than just research and calculations?

2. Has research been improved by the notion of working in teams or has innovation been sacrificed?

3. Have we already reached the age of true information processing or just a time when programs are just dynamic enough to proxy the true ability?

Questions 9/10

Some Tentative Axioms of Communication:
1. Why would classifying the aspects of communication be important?

2. Why would communication imply commitment? What would you classify as commitment?

3. Can mathematical formulas effectively be applied to human communication when we are an unpredictable species?

Cybernetics in History:
1. Do you think that the imperfection of human communication is what truly sets us apart from machines?

2. Would we ever want to design a computer that is designed to be like a human? Would that defeat the reason of a computer?

3. If nature's tendency is to be disorderly then why do humans attempt to create order even if there is no way to harness the chaos?

answering questions

Partner: Sam Carrothers

From reading: resisting technology - What are some examples in which do to technology, we have become commodities?
-As technology improves a person's physical body becomes less useful as the precision and speed of new machines overtake that of the human body. These machines will soon completely overtake the usefulness of the physical body leaving humans as only a thinking being. An example of a place where machines have already surpassed humans is the building of cars by using robotics.

From reading: architecture of participation - Is it more important (or equally so) that we measure the 'quantity of life' on the individual level as well as the collective.
-At this time period we have moved past a need for humans to think only of furthering the species to the next generation. We have entered a time when the individual is now seen as more important than the collective. These selfish ideals could lead to the fall of society. This is why it is equally important that people focus on both the individual and collective quality of life.

From reading: Some Tentative Axioms of Communication - The concept of quantifying communication interested me. Are unintentional responses deemed of lesser communicable value?
-Although I see quantifying communication as a useless exercise I would have to say that unintentional responses are just as important if not more so that intentional responses. Unintentional responses have more weight because they show the true side of a person, they are uncalculated so they are no just what the person wants everyone to hear. Unintentional responses are also important because their unprecise nature is more akin to human rather than computers.The separation between humans and computers is extremely important as technology moves forward.

extra credit - twitterland

Twitter has always seemed to be a joke. Telling an assortment of people who also supposedly care about what you are doing or thinking at any given time would have seemed ridiculous a couple of years ago, in fact it seems ridiculous now. The basic use of twitter still seems completely useless, but tweeting about meeting or for spreading ideas could be an incredibly powerful tool. Harris talks about using twitter to not just tell people about events, but also how to manipulate people using twitter. He spread a rumor across the Internet in order to rally people to his cause. Just imagine how quickly a rumor could spread through a school. Here is where twitter’s true power lies. Lies quickly spread to influence the decisions of a huge number of people. The other pillar of power comes from the fact that such tweets could come from accounts that don’t have obvious owners. There is no way to decipher whether or not the information is valid, yet people will believe anything. Rumors could even be spread multiple times by the same person. Harris admitted to change what name he tweeted from in order to dodge legal action pointed at his older twitter account. Also, multiple accounts could be used to not only spread rumors more rapidly, but also to attack certain ideas. Harris’s use of @Anti_Racism_Dog allowed him to easily and quickly deem an idea wrong by his standards and throw the first punch in a fight against anyone that he wanted, even if he himself didn’t want to personally fight the person. The biggest aspect of starting a fight such as this is that everyone who follows any of the people who are participating in the fight is watching. Such an enormous audience can ruin any person’s reputation with almost no effort. Twitter can become an incredibly dangerous tool.

Questions for Agarwal, Hopkins, and Shirky

Resisting Technology - Ravi Agarwal
1. At what time did Engineers begin to be required to take humanities classes?
2. If engineers did not know anything about the social aspects of the area in which their technology was going to be used then how could they design a piece of equipment that was properly suited to the area?
3. If many scientific experiments are not useful in building and developing useful technologies then why do so many universities and companies invest time and money in them?

In the Presence of Networks: A Meditation on the Architectures of Participation - John Hopkins
1. Could forceful participation destroy the social structure?
2. Is it really in a person's interest to use his participation energy to improve the overall standard for living, rather than live for just themselves?
3. Are social networks actually pooling the participation energy or are they separating it through preferred computer interaction rather than physical action?

The Political Power of Social Media - Clay Shirky
1. If social media has only been useful for rallying people behind a negative causes or tragic events then can social media really be used to gain support for a positive cause with no negative background?
2. With the speed and efficiency of social networks spreading political ideas and ads is there any place for political figures to directly address the people?
3. Social Networks are an informal way of spreading information, are social networks bringing an age of no privacy?

Bush/Reingold Questions

-Why didn't Bush have any predictions about wireless communication?

-Was optical media not invented yet?

-Why were computers originally thought of as only useable for mathematical calculations?