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
Showing posts with label Partners. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Partners. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Friday, September 14, 2012
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)