Blog Post #23

What role should government play in helping to overcome the digital divide? What role should schools play? Can you think of any other institutions that are important in helping to overcome the digital divide?

The government could revise the 'discrimination at a work place' policies. Being hired to be a receptionist shouldnt depend on your gender or the stereotyoe that women can type well, neither should being a computer mechanic. Yes, we live in a technologically advanced era but this is also the era where women, just like men, have the ability to do the same type of duty, and technology cannot be a factor that any gender, race, or other cant do what they want(or are good at)

Schools should stick to the traditional way of teaching. Put pen to paper and hands on books. I can see why in college computers and distance learning is necessary but what in the world could a kids from K-8th grade need any of that for? Introducing kids to computers and such could only further the digital divide because thats the crucial learning stage in a kids life and seeing that boys are better at computer video games and girls are good at typing will instill the childrens minds that they ARE different. I remember in high school I took a photography class where the girls were allowed to have digital cameras but the boys were given point and shoots.

I also think in science institutions there is a major racial conflict and these institutions could help us overcome the digital divide. A friend of mine is polish but is excellent in science and mathmatics but she says that a lot of the people that study hern field are Asian and are hostile toward her especially in the computer lab where you need to figure out codes and such and many dont think that thats her field even though shes just as good, or even better.

Personally, I dont think there much we can do about the digital divide but we should take it into consideration and begin sorting out whats discrimination and what isnt.

Blog Post #22

Have you ever encountered the 'digital divide' in your own lives? Give an example from your own experience (or one you have heard about).

Over the summer I was working at a library as a clerical assistant to my boss. Being that most of the positions were seasonal, I was in charge of hiring a new batch of people for the fall. My boss had explained the guidlines and criteria for every position we had available. For the most part I had to look at qualifications and formal dresswear, until we got the copy machine and clerical positions...For the copy machine she told me didnt want a female, because women could be of no use if the machine broke. "Its a mans job." For the clerical she specifically wanted a woman, because women were better with typing and telephones. "Thats a womans job."

The day of the interviews came. I followed her orders directly, until a woman came up to me with excellent qualifications for the copy machine. I tried to worm around the position by offering her clerical or bookstacker but she was set on having the position for the copy machine. I couldnt fine anything wrong with her resume or any reason to deny her the position so I signed her papers and gave her the position that she wanted. My boss wasnt very happy with my decision again citing that it wasnt a "womans" job and a few days later had moved the woman to the bookstacking position.

I rememebr I felt horrible that such a divide still existed, partially because of technology. It kind of makes me think that if years ago women were fighting for a right to vote and equality in a work place, now their struggles are even more complicated then they were because of constant advances in technology that promote men and demote women, thus prolonging the divide regardless of the freedoms given. I personaly see this technological division of gender as a cycle that will only expand with the coming years.

Blog Post #21

#21
Pick one sentence or phrase in the Mcluhan interview that you find interesting or important. Say why you picked it

"TV is revolutionizing every political system in the Western world. For one thing, it's creating a totally new type of national leader, a man who is much more of a tribal chieftain than a politician. Castro is a good example of the new tribal chieftain who rules his country by a mass-participational TV dialog and feedback; he governs his country on camera..."

Reading through the Marshall McLuhan interview, I found this statement to be "scary but true." I mean it really made me think, are we as a society truly goverend by television? Without this technology, would we truly be able to hear the message our president was giving? How strange is it to think that your president is governing you through a TELEVISION? I thought back to the time around the 2004 election of the president, and how I had followed very closly whatever was going on, and even watched the debate between Kerry and Gore on TV, and I thought to myself, I never once picked up the paper, or turned on the radio, my decision on who I wanted to be my presidnet came directly from the flimflim shown on BBC and CNN. What Marshall McLuhan said was a powerful thing to say, partially because its true and because it makes you realize that everything you do or your country does comes from a little white man on television. It also made me realize that I dont know any actual rules or laws or about any events other then the ones I hear about On TV, may they come directly from politicians or news reporters.

Blog Post #20

#20
Pick one media technology, and say how you think it has had an effect on our experience.

One media technology that I think had an effect on our experience is the digital camera. Last Christmas, my best friend upgraded me from the age of "point and shoots" to the digital camera. What a great invention...Until you have to print out the 2,000 something photos youve taken.

Ive always been quite passionate about photography, and have different sets of albums for different catogories. When I got my digital camera, I found much joy in previewing the picture Im about to take and getting a chance to retake it if the lighting or angle isnt right. I also found much pleasure in being able to play around with my photos, adjusting color, tone, etc. and print it out in the comfort of my home. No more film rolls with limited pictures, no more blurry photos, just crystal clear images as perserved memories of the good times youve had. Well guess what? A recent poll shows that nearly 60% of Americans dont print out their digital pictures, even though they own the printing equipment to do so. Why? It takes up too much time, and theres this knowledge that your photos wont "expire"(as they would with a regular film roll), they just exist in your memory card, some you go through, some you delete to make room for more, and out of the 500 that you've stored you only print out...3...

Pictures are memories, we have them to remind us of where we've been and refresh our memories of those we lost, but nowadays a photo album is a chip that fits in the palm of your hand(or is transferred to exist in your computer). Your memory card is literally your memory. This affects future generations, for we no longer have solid pictures to go back to. They just kind of exist and if anything happens to the little chip that fits in the palm of your hand, well then, youre screwed. I think we have taken pictures for granted, I for one have 3,000-something photos that Ive taken over the year none of which Id printed, and dont plan on printing anytime soon. Wheras before I could recieve all the pictures Ive taken for a mere $7.95, and place them neatly in my album, now all my memories exist in a chip or on my computer, both of which are so fragile they dont gaurantee to be the most trusted keepsake. Digital cameras are changing our experiences, in a a sense that we entrust our memories unto a chip or worse a computer, and although they make things easier, they tend to make us forget what taking pictures is about, and Im fairly sure that in a few decades when kids begin to ask what grandma looks like, we wont really be able to show them, for the black and white heirlooms that our parents treasured, dont exist in our world.

Blog Post #19

#19
After reading the Machado case, what are your thoughts on our responsibilities as 'online citizens'

I find "online citizen" to be such a strange term, especially because Im well away of the "communities" existing online. It really does seem like the "world is at your fingertips." After reading the Machado case, I immedietly remembred an incident that I had in chatroom that caused me to not go into chatrooms anymore.

I remember the day 9/11 had happened, I went home and that night went online into a chatroom. What had happened in NY was in everyroom and I had mentioned that I was from NY. A lot of people were asking me about what Id seen and what was going on and this one guy flat out said, "I fucking hate Amercians, you deserved 9/11 and its fucking funny how you fucking pricks cry out for your mommies." Most of the people in the chatroom sort of told him off but he continued laughing about the situation and pretty soon people started calling him a "fucking Arab" etc. After a few hours in the chatroom, people had actaully divided themselves into patriots vs. non patriots. Bashings of every aspect of the Muslim religion to the christian religion, from Americans to Arabs filled the chatroom. The whole time the guy was laughing and before signing off he was like, "Im gonna kill you, fucking NY'er." I didnt take him seriously but he angered me enough from all chatrooma ctivity, because sometimes thats where you find smallminded people.I though about my responsibilty in that situation, and I think that it was to just keep quiet and not instigate. The guys responsibilty was to be polite for the sake of tragedy. But at the same time would censoring what people had to say break the rules of free speech? Even if its something you dont agree with?

I guess its our responsibilty as online citizens to apply "constructive criticism" in the online world. Just be smart about what we say. But at the same time online is the only place where you can say what you really think, even though most of the time its just to make others angry. I personally dont think theres much we can do unless specific rules are made and enforced, btu that argues censorship. Its a no win situation.

Blog post #18

#18
Think of your own example of a 'conceptual muddle'. Explain your example.

I think a good example of a conceptual muddle would be cellphones and privacy. A few months ago, I had a rather unpleasant experience of somebody hacking into my cellphone, listening to all my messages, and erasing them, all the while using MY minutes. Because I hardly knew the person, but didnt feel like taking a chance, I decided to fill out a police report but ended up brushing it off because as the officer asked me questions, I felt stupid trying to explain technechalities I didnt even know. I mean, how do you define such a situation? Is it harrasment? Or is it identity theft? What do you say in such a case? My phone bill the follwing month was outrageous, but I decided it would be easier to change my number and just pay the whole thing off rather then bother pressing charges against something unidentifiable.This raises the question of privacy. My privacy was violated, but the only existing rule against cellphone usage is stalking, and certaintly I wasnt being stalked. My privacy was violated but there are no rules to prove that Im right. So how do you know what is a violation of privacy in regards to cellphones, when only one rule exists?

Blog Post #17

#17
After reading Talbott and Holdrege's paper, how much of a danger do you think biotechnology represents to our environment, and our lives?

Do you know think differently about this subject than you did before you read the paper? Explain why.

After reading Talbott's and Holdrege's paper, I think that bio technology can literally destroy us if we choose it over nature. It's something that I've always known, but until recently I haven't really done anything like recycling or conserving energy. There's a part in Sowing Technology called the Mad Cow, where it states that we feed the cows remains of itself, or other animals. It brings up the point that we gone as far as "violating an organisms integrity" in addition to creating diseases. I actually learned about this when I first became a vegetarian. Some cows are forced to drink blood mixed with hormones and lipids in order for it to gain weight faster.

In term of danger, basically, we're only creating more harm then good by choosing to go ahead with things like nuclear power plants whose, "Chemical spills can be cleaned up but there is no recalling the replicating genes we have loosed upon the natural world." Or genetically engineered food, or anything that isn't natural because although it can be cleaned up the effects are still there, and most of these effects are irreversible making biotechnology all the more dangerous. I mean I was watching the Oprah show and she was saying how every little bit helps and that if we get a "recyclable, energy-conserving bulb" rather the regular one then we've made a world of a difference. She also said we could buy minivans instead of SUV's, and replace our linoleum floors with "minoleum" which is totally safe and recyclable. There's a million of things that could be done but here's the problem. The "energy conserving" bulb costs $10 as opposed to the regular being $1, no one in their right mind would buy a van and get rid of their SUV, and that minoleom costs triple of what the linoleum would cost. So when I say that the dangers of biotechnology are great and irreversible that because they are. They aren't impossible but I don't thing that anybody would be willing to spend double the money for the sake of the earth when the poisons out there are so much cheaper and easier to find.

Blog post #16

#16
How important do you think it is to recover a harmony with nature? Do you agree with Talbott that today we have lost this sense of harmony?

Talbott writes in The Need for a Change of Mind, that "If today we merely draw a blank when we look at nature, it is because we cannot see what we cannot name..."

A few years a go, my best friend, who's been a birder for years and studies phenology for a hobby, took me and a friend out to the mountains. As a birder, her and her husband sat on that mountain watching birds and calling out names that my friend and I have never even heard before. To me and my friend, this was a bird and as glorious as it seemed soaring out in the open sky, the fact that it was just a bird left us both unfazed after a few hours. In fact, I was bored out of my mind by the 7th hour on that mountain. On our way back down the trail, she began naming all the things she saw and stopped to study them. My friend and I were so eager to get back to the city that we had marched hand in hand right in front of her and waited in the car while she got all that "nature" out of her system. You see, I was bored out of my mind because I had no idea as to what was around me. Its kind of like putting a non mechanic into a parts shop. After a while, the non-mechanic is bound to have his eyes wander around with the ticking hands of the clock, awaiting freedom. Anyway, a few years later after I had opened up my eyes a bit, and crammed my brain with basic knowledge of birds and plants, my best friend and I had gone camping. We went hiking and I found myself to be content sitting by a marsh making a list of all the birds I saw the day before, and just trying to identify all the different sounds I was hearing, crickets, bullfrogs, etc. I must've sat by that marsh all morning, just observing. And even now in the city, my senses are thriving because I never let a plant of anything that resembles nature pass me by, so I agree with Talbott's quote and certainly that we need to reconnect with nature because when you do, you stop taking things for granted.

I also think that now, we've been forced to pay attention to nature due to all the natural disasters occurring in the world. I've also felt like we had neglected nature and I've always viewed these disasters as a way of mother nature telling us that we need to slow down and give her a break from all the CO2 and other technological nonsense. It seems as if we need to find peace with our surroundings and cherish them because forests, like oil are finite resources. Just as we cannot expect animals to adapt to our terms, or just ignore extinction. Essentially the importance of regaining our sense of "harmony" with nature is crucial to OUR survival.

Blog Post #15

#15
Whom did you find to be most persuasive on the subject of cloning? Wachbroit or Kass? Explain your answer.

Although I am a firm believer and science and stem cell research, I must say the topic of cloning is a bit tricky. I found Robert Wachbroit's argument to be the most persuasive although I do lean toward the banning of cloning(Kass) a bit more, but not necessraily due to Kass. Kass argues that the banning of cloning would give us as people the right to steer our HUMAN nature into dignity, and that clones would only lead us into a future that isnt "human." From what Ive read, clones do look like the people they are cloned from but they do not carry the experiences and feeling as those people. Clones are mere genetically identical beings but in no way "artificial intelligience" types. Most arguments made by people who do not support cloning are really arguing general terms, such as "the child wont be loved" or "the child will expectations higher then the person he was clones from." Wachbroit argues a very good point which that most kids born now, have expectation that proceed them and there are plenty of kids out there right now whom arent getting love. Then there is the process of cloning. One of these processes ahs helped many couples suffering from infertility have children which is Vitro fertilization. Although not as successful in many people, it does help many others and the so called "test tube" babies live healthy normal lives and are perhaps loved more them many "normal babies." Then theres the medical reasons for cloning. If direct donor or blood match is needed in order to help a family member suffering from a terminal illness, then cloning is the perfect way to help, as in the case of bone marrow transplants. Also, as stem cell resreach, cloning could help pave the way to many cures from cancer and so on.

HOWEVER, although cloning promises great advancements, and although people for cloning argue great points and much more scientifically rather then generally as in the case of anti cloning groups, I have a few issues with cloning that I'd like to bring up. As much as I'd hate to argue the "what ifs" of something that has yet to happen, here it goes:

1)If cloning does become a reality, Im sure of the fact that it would be availble for a rich community first and foremost. I heard of a program where supermodels sell their eggs for $50,000 online. Do you not think if I wanted my baby girl to look like say Angelina Jolie, or Charlize Theron, that I would not pay ANYTHING to have a mere sample of their blood?
2)Take the example of the wealthy woman in Ohio who recently lost her cat. She had it cloned for $500,000, money that could pay for my college left and right was spent on cloning a cat because this woman cant understand the concept of death. Doesnt cloning defeat the whole concept of death? Yes, the person wont act like the person that you lost but they sure as hell look like them and isnt that what really matters?
3) And if clones would be for the sole purpose of donors and such, doesnt that make them really our lab rats? Thus we're treating what we argue to be "human" as if it werent. And what about all the first clones that come out with "glitches" AKA mutations, are they going to lead healthy, normal lives or just be poked and prodded in a labratory?

Basically, although cloning would be most likely responsible for many medical breakthroughs, wouldnt it also be available to only certain types of people and be taken advantage of?

See the movie Gattaca, it shows exactly where all this cloning and the choice to choose genes can lead to.

#14

Take a look at the privacy websites in Course Documents, week 8.

Pick an issue that you think is interesting or important, and write about it. (NOTE: you must pick a different issue than the one you picked for #13!)

Secret Code in Color Printers Lets Government Track People
Yesterday, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco consumer privacy group, said it had cracked the code used in a widely used line of Xerox printers, an invisible bar code of sorts that contains the serial number of the printer as well as the date and time a document was printed. The U.S. Secret Service acknowledged yesterday that the markings, which are not visible to the human eye, are there.
(Source: Privacy.org)

When I read this article I had found that to be a mind boggling issue because almost everyone has a color printer! Whos to say that is its in the xerox brand that its not in hewlitt packard? Marking not visable to the human eye isnt the only thing that worried me when I read this article but what do these people need to track their customers for? What the agenda behind this? To me, serial numbers and other bar codes that are used to scan pruducts shouldnt be in existence because the consumers whom are around them all the time arent even sure as to what these things are being scanned for. I mean theres what we're told and what there actaully is, the fine print so to speak. I guess barcodes and such we've become accstomed to because theres no second thought as to what being scanned but maybe things should be conducted in a manner that people can understand rather then lines and numbers. Maybe a system of just scanning the price but not through the barcodes, but the tag with the list itself would be better. Just something that people can understand. That company ought to be sued, stealing and possible storing information like that, whos to say they arent like a secret gang or robbers?

Blog post #13

What do you think is the most worrisome threat to privacy in our technological age? (Focus on a specific example)

Oh my, where do I begin? A few days ago my friend was able to hack into a camera stationed on 42nd. You could see everything and everyone, I found that to be very disturbing and it made me realize that alothough the internet poses as great threat I view the hidden camera as a much bigger threat frankly because on the internet you may find numbers and contacts related to me but with a camera you could see what I do, where I am, and basically know my identity, which I consider to be my face, not my social security number.

In the past decade, hidden camera's have gotten smaller, better disquised, and available to anyone. I did some research and found a site who's starting line is, "Sure, it would be nice to think that you can trust your employees, your nanny, your spouse or your children, but that's not always the case."(http://www.cornerstonesecurityservices.com/) I find it to be very, very,scary that my boss or fellow employee, or neighbor can set up equipment to keep on eye on me and what I do, especially knowing full well that in this day and age it could be done for the wrong reasons. Recently, controversial issues such as whether camera's should be allowed in dressing rooms has come up and the shocking factor is that THERE WERE camera's there for a long time without our knowledge and only now is the issue being bought up in courts. Surveilance camera;s at the entrances of major hotels and business buildings is understandable, but street cameras? Store camera's on every corner when u already have them at entrances plus metal detactors? Isnt that a bit extreme? "Nanny cams?" Im a babysitter and if a parent isnt comfortable with the sitter then why not just look for another one? Why in the world you need a machine to confirm your gut feeling is beyond me. I for one am NOT comfortable with cameras and am disturbed that they are available to anyone. Whos to say your dentist isnt an obsessed freak who takes home taped of you on his chair and rewinds them over and over? And what if your corner shoe salesmen has a foot fetish and stalks you after viewing tapes of you trying on different shoes? Theres strange people out there and I dont trust the power of surveilance/hidden cameras in just anybodys hands. And the most threatning thing is that its not considered that big of an issue. It like a hidden camera is secret weapon that no one really considers thus giving more power because its overlooked.

Blog Post #12

#12
Try to explain ONE of the concepts below (from Heidegger's essay) to your younger brother or sister.
Remember, they are only young, so do not use any big or complicated words! Examples will help also.
1) Revealing (or aletheiea)
2) Bringing-Forth (or poiesis)
3) Enframing
4) Standing Reserve
(Remember, you only have to explain ONE, not all of them!)

Little Virginia comes up to me and asks me, “Tonia, my teacher mentioned revealing today, also known as aletheiea, what does that mean?”

“Well little Virginia, from my understanding, aletheiea is Greek word that means revealing, or truth. Revealing in our words means to uncover, come out, or tell the truth of, as in you “uncover” the secret of Spongebob Sqaurepants square shape, it is a truth that you revealed. Anyway, a long, long time ago there lived a man named Martin Heidegger, whom studied the Greeks and applied what they knew to our time. Greeks revealed a lot of things but sometimes certain things reveal themselves to us. Do you remember a time when you saw your first rainbow?”

“Yes.” Answers little Virginia.

“Well think of what that rainbow showed you that nobody else did.”

“Colors, it showed colors.”

“Well these colors, revealed themselves to you. Thus the rainbow showed you a truth of what it looks like, meaning that sometimes we don’t have to look for the truth, the truth can come and find us. If Spongebob spills a cup of milk and his mother doesn’t know, his milk mustache will “reveal” to her that he was the last to drink that cup of milk without Spongebob telling her. So sometimes you don’t have to “reveal” a secret, because that secret will “reveal” itself.”