Final Assignment Post 2

One of things that I concentrated on with my paper is the use of technology in the classroom. In order to talk about technopoly, I would need to talk about how technology is affecting the classroom, and to see how it either contributes or detracts from the overall college and classroom experience. It is in this regard that I base my paper on, in order to see the effect of technology. And from there, I would need to see how much of this effect actually stems from the technology and from human decisions. In order to see technopoly, I would need to see much of the human decisions and human interaction is from technology and technological influence. That would determine the "dominance" of technology in our college cultures. It is in this regards, that my paper would be based upon.

Midterm Follow-up

Yeah, I know this is very late. Anyways, I found the whole critiquing Wiki articles to be very interesting. Wikipedia is something that we take for granted, as it is always there for us, and we use it without second thought. But based on a general group, and possibly class, consensus, Wikipedia is not a very scholarly source overall. Unreliable sources, facts, information, etc. makes wiki not that useful as a source for research papers or any other serious project. However, Wikipedia does seem to be a useful as a quick reference or a quick glance, as it does cover the necessity to learn a subject.

One of the problems that arise out of Wikipedia is that it lacks, at times up to date information, or neglect of certain articles or information. This can be reflected on technology in American culture in that some items are neglected because they are not mainstream. Also in addition, with the open source aspect of Wikipedia, it allows anybody to alter it. This user generated content, though at times seem useful, still contains flaws. There are people, “grief-ers”, whose sole purpose to cause problems. But, then again, there are always people like that, with or without user contribution. Regardless, with any new technology or new idea, there are always strengths, or weaknesses. In Wikipedia’s case, its strength is in the user generated content and easy accessibility, but the weakness include unreliability in sources and possible misinformation.

                This assignment, if anything, has taught me that not everything should be taken at base value, especially those we take for granted. Wikipedia, though as useful and resourceful as it is, lacks the reliability of solid sources.

Final Assignment: First Thoughts

                For the final assignment,  I plan on talking about Postman’s Technopoly book to answer the prompt: “Are modern-day college campuses technopolies?” The basic argument for this paper would be to discuss how technopoly is affecting higher education. For this, I would need to discuss what technopoly is, and also how higher education is regard in this country. The main point is to discuss the effect of technology on higher education and colleges. With that in mind, I would like to explore how technology has impacted college life and higher education, and to see if technology has affected the intent of higher education. Basically, to see how technology has advanced, and how it affected college life and college education. And to see if there is a technopoly that exists.

                For the paper, I would need to define technopoly and higher education culture. From there, I would see how technology is fitting into our college life and education. I would need to see the technology being used in colleges and those that affect students and their learning. From there, to see how much of it is used for education and to see how it is. I would like to speculate how if certain technology was not present, how it would affect our education. I would need to see how much of our education is based on technology.

Current Event: Dreaming Up Uses for a Giant Invisibility Machine

The current event article I looked up was an article from the New York Times website, under technology. It was published November 28, 2010. The premise of the article was that European scientists have found a way to tailor the flow of light around an object. In layman's term, the ability to make something invisible. The European commission is very eager to showcase this because it feels that Europe is behind on technological advances in comparison to the United States. Their inability to produce their own versions of Google, Apple, Facebook, Intel, and Cisco to rival US technological prowess is a concern to them. This new breakthrough is something scientists are excited about.
What the article is getting to is the application of such technology. Besides the invisibility, the research could also provide development of perfect lenses that would provide high-definition images through microscopes, advancement in laser designs, and devices that can "store" light artificially. However, skepticism on military application arose. However, they were supposedly thought on a broader term of application, specifically on the global economy. Here is where the article lost me, because I do not see how making things invisible can help the economy. Taken from the article, it said "That stack of Portuguese bonds? Poof! That bundle of Irish bank loans? Now you see them, now you don’t. Those Greek budget fudges? Gone." I do not see how making those things invisible can help solve the economy crisis, as they are invisible, not non-existent. The article also cites how for city beautification, they can make certain ugly buildings invisible, so that the place of interest looks more beautiful. Again, I see this as masking the problem, not really solving it. But what do I know. But anyways, it will be interesting if this technology was perfected.

Facebook Effect, David Kirkpatrick, Part 3

    Facebook has become a major impact upon  our culture since its introduction. Social networking has become a large part of our society now. Time spent on social networking greatly exceeded time spent by internet users on e-mail, according to the Nielsen Company research firm in March 2009. Time spent on social networks grew 63 percent in 2008 around the world. However, Facebook would greatly exceed this, as time spent on Facebook had grown 566 percent in a year. This just shows the very impact Facebook had upon our society and culture. Nielsen calculated that by the end of 2008, 30 percent of the world’s Internet users were on Facebook. In fact, the only service with more users than Facebook was Google.
    The idea of total domination by Facebook seemed like a joke, but the reality of it seems surprisingly close. Facebook had become globalized, in that Facebook was available to nearly every major nation in the world. In fact, the freedom that comes with Facebook greatly clashes with ideology of people and nations around the world. Kirkpatrick mentions how a father in Saudi Arabia caught his daughter interacting with men on Facebook, and killed her. Certain group arose throughout the world, and governments, in response to some, attempted to ban them. It is here that we see how Facebook has grew to encompass a global position in our culture. Facebook now effects and is effected by the world and the ideology that people have. Cultural differences would affect Facebook as well, as people of many different cultures would come to Facebook and interact with each other. Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen had supporters on his Facebook page. He used it as a way to connect with the ordinary voters. Obscure Colombian rock bands like Koyi K Utho found an audience on Facebook to promote concerts and albums. These are just some examples of how Facebook is being utilized in our day and age. President Obama had set up social networking pages during his presidential campaign as well, showing the impact Facebook had upon our society.