Homework #9 -- Is Google Making Us Stupid...I Think Yes!

According to the article Is Google Making us Stupid, “People have come so machinelike that the most human character turns out to be a machine. That’s the essence of Kubrick’s dark prophecy: as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence” (Carr). People have become way to dependent on technology in general and the Internet for information. People have the ability to find out information about anything in seconds. Because we are so dependent on the Internet, we do not depend on our own ability to know information; instead, we look information up instantly. This has made our society very impatient as we do not have to take time to find out information. Carr states, “It is clear that users are not reading online in the traditional sense; indeed there are signs that new forms of ‘reading’ are emerging as users ‘power browse’ horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins. It almost seems that they go online to avoid reading in the traditional sense” (Carr). As a society, we do not like to take the time to read long articles; instead, we skim the main points to get the idea. As technology is growing, we do not have a huge attention span, and depend on the Internet for everything. Google has made the Internet very accessible as their mission is, ““to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”” (Carr). This has made Google popular, as people go to it for everything. Essentially, human beings have become “stupid” because of Google. The quick information that we search is hardly retained, and we do not remember the information easily. If Google did not exist, our society would fail, as people do not have the attention span to look through books.  

Homework #8 - "Models of Authorship in New Media"

Authorship is a very unique term which can be confused with ownership. When hearing the word authorship, I think of who create a certain piece or art or work. The author is the mastermind behind the product who basically is responsible for all aspects of that piece. The concept easy to overlook is the additional help or insight an artist or author receives during the artistic process. One example discussed is how artists had apprentices who played a significant role in the production. Michelangelo deserves a lot of the credit for the Sistine Chapel but obviously many other painters contributed to the masterpiece. Musicians who sample beats or rhythms become very successful do not always acknowledge the original artists who created that specific beat. Remixing is very common in other forms such as software, photography, and artwork. Similar techniques are across all different industries and fields, but this is not technically stealing. I believe there is a grey area where individuals need to give credit where it is due, but it is acceptable to obtain ideas from previous artists. Collaboration leads to some of the greatest creations such as the iPhone and the internet. Revolutionary products and concepts are not possible without teamwork and creative minds working together.

Homework #7 Digital Divide..Not a Problem

A very unexamined concept of society is the rise of internet and the inequalities associated with accessibility or usage. Many individuals ignore how the internet benefits them but just utilizes the internet for its many benefits. When internet arrived, economic inequality created a similar technology inequality where whole sections of society did not have any access or exposure to the internet. Specifically, blacks and hispanics and older populations hardly used the internet especially in comparison to wealthier, white people. The author makes certain implications which I do not completely understand and disagree with in a variety of ways. All of these associations regarding economic inequality and internet inequality are results of larger institutional problems which are not causal or deadly as the author tries to claim. Typically, individuals with wealth are more inclined to adapt to changes due to economic and innovative abilities. I would like to introduce an example of two Joes who are both working men. However, Joe Smith works in a Detroit auto factory and supports a family of three. Joe Anderson is an executive at an auto company and supports two children. Joe Smith is concerned about putting food on the table, while Joe Anderson is trying to live a life full of new things and experiences. Both Joes are curious about the internet, but computers are 500 dollars. Who is more likely to buy a computer? This is a very simple economic problem where some consumers were willing and able to acquire technologies while others were either willing but not able, able bot not willing or neither. A lot of older people just refused to accept change and did not want to learn how to use computers. However, all of these issues are starting to change in contrast to what the author states. Internet is accessible through public libraries, public schools, and is incredibly cheaper than before. Internet inequality does not cause economic inequality in general as the author proposes, but is just correlated and changing.

Homework #6 - The Uncanny Valley

Throughout the article, "Uncanny Valley", Masahiro describes the importance of the resemblance of robot looking like human beings. At the beginning of the article, Masahiro describes a graph which exemplifies different degrees of moving or still humanlikeness linked to familiarity. Healthy people are at a high point or positive end of the graph; whereas dead corpse and zombies are in "uncanny valley" or the negative end of the graph. He claims that we are more likely to connect with the robbot rather than thinking that it is computerized. Masahiro states, "Human beings lie at the final goal of robotics, which is why we make an effort to build humanlike robots" (Masahiro). Even though the robots' built with metal material, the makers paint over the robot to give them human features. This allows us to feel more comfortable with the robot because it does not look too computerized. Masahiro talks about the importance of the features, "If programmed properly to generate humanlife movements, we can enjoy some sense of familiarity" (Masahiro). If the robot moves and resembles a computer than we look at it like it is just a machine and we are less comfortable with it. The author also relates the robots to handicapped peoples prosthetic arms or legs. We have come a long way with prosthetic arms and legs making them look completely real. This allows people without an arm or leg feel like they fit in with the rest of society. However, Masahiro believes that the prosthetic arms and legs fall into the uncanny category as they do not qualify as being healthy. Masahiro says, "So in this case, the appearance is quite human like, but the familiarity is negative" (Masahiro).This means that prosthetics may look real; however, it is still strange to society.