Writing the Paper Part III and Class Conclusion

Well, the paper is all done. It was a struggle but I got through it. Just as I thought would be the case when I started to get to work on the paper, maintaining a clear focus throughout the paper was a little tough, but not impossible. Postman's style is all over the place; he incorporates lots of good information and statistics, but they don't always seem to be tied together well. Because of this, in responding to Technopoly, as a writer, I had to make sure I didn't address too many of his points, otherwise my paper would've have lost focus and its argument would be diluted. But I think I wrote a quality paper, maintained a clear voice and argument throughout, and brought good points and evidence to support my thesis. I only hope that I'm right, and that, assuming today's college campuses are not Technopolies, we're not headed in a direction where technology takes over our lives and causes us to lose touch with the things we value the most.

This naturally brings me to reflect on the class as a whole. This was one of the most interesting and intriguing classes I've taken at Rutgers in a long time. As a senior, I've found that the best classes are not always the ones that teach you the most information or answer all your questions, but are rather the ones that, on your way out the door and into the world, make you ask more questions - difficult questions, and this class was one of the best at doing that. The open discussions were always candid and evocative, often funny, and when discussing such important and relevant issues that affect my generation especially, it is vital to hear input from so many of my peers. I've found that technology truly affects every aspect of my life, and trying to understand it means trying to understand ourselves and our culture. Some of it is good; some technologies save lives, make us healthier and help us achieve our lives' dreams. Other technologies are down right scary, and make us worry about the not-so-distant future where the possibility of robots and bionic humans and cars that drive themselves taking over the world is very real. I don't think many of us want to live in a world where humans are basically obselete, but this class shows the possibility of these technologies. That's not to say any of us should expect technology to totally save or ruin humanity, but who knows where the possibilities end? I guess we'll just have to wait and see...

"The Social Network"

Over the weekend I went out for a lovely night at the movies with my girlfriend. The film we saw was none other than the new, trendy film “The Social Network,” a film about the founding of Facebook, loosely based on fact, and the book The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook A Tale of Sex, Money, Genius and Betrayal by Ben Mezrich. My expectations for the quality of the film going in were not extremely high, but that’s not to say that I thought it would be a piece of crap either. I must admit, however, that the story of the founding of Facebook is very intriguing. I began reading The Facebook Effect a little ahead of the class schedule 1) because I was able to get it for my new Nook e-reader and wanted an excuse to use my new toy and 2) the first few pages I sampled seemed very interesting; it was different from most college textbooks, probably because it’s not technically a textbook. Anyway, having a slight background of the movie plot, I was looking forward to seeing how it played out in the film.

I had heard and read that the films main focus is bashing Mark Zuckerberg and making him look like the biggest scumbag in history. While the film no doubt lives up to that description – in the film’s opening scene, the girl with whom Zuckerberg is on a date says he’ll never get a girl to like him because he’s an “asshole” – I thought the film, while in no way a pro-Zuckerberg work, really shows how Zuckerberg always had the best of intentions for Facebook and never meant to hurt anyone in the process. However, what is clear is how his devotion to the site outweighed the devotions to any of his personal relationships. He had a very specific vision for Facebook, and anyone that didn’t help him achieve it was cast by the wayside. To his credit, it seems as though Facebook became exactly what he wanted it to be. What he didn’t expect was the reaction to his ruthless treatment of those with whom he interacted while developing Facebook – whether legal, professional, or personal. Overall, the film portrays Zuckerberg not as a one-dimensional prick – which is what I expected – but rather as an abrasive kid who fell victim to his own ambition. He accomplished what he wanted as a website developer, but ironically, the social networking tool he created that came to define popularity left him virtually friendless. 

Group Project: Grand Theft Auto

Wow, what an interesting experience this group project has been. I was looking forward to this project, as I don’t think I’ve worked on a group project for more than one class period in my entire college career (I’m a senior). My group members – Jon, Alex, Chris, and JoJo – and I decided to audit the Wikipedia page for the Grand Theft Auto video game series. It’s a very controversial series that is ripe with bias; the list of groups that are in both very strong support of and opposition to the series is very long. So, we had no issues finding plenty to research.

Meeting mostly at Jon’s apartment on Easton to work, we had lots of fun while still being productive working on this project. Everyone in the group brought their own dynamic and we all worked well together, bouncing ideas around and delegating responsibilities according to each of our skills. Jon, Alex and I worked mainly on research and auditing the page’s references – more than 50 of them. It was amazing to see how many of the sources were unofficial, unsanctioned fan websites, blogs, and the like. There were some legitimate sources, but most of these had no information about the series itself, only about the controversy surrounding it.

The main aspect of our presentation was our Power Point slide show. Jo Jo and Chris worked mostly on this part. We all contributed content for slides based on the research we had done, and then Jo Jo and Chris put it all together in a great slide show, which I think the class really enjoyed.

I was very impressed with the effort of each one of my group members. Not one did not pull his or her weight or slack off, although we were all tempted to do so on more than one occasion. That was the most beneficial characteristic of our group: though on at least one instance each group member felt tempted to call it a night and quit working, the other members of the group were always quick to offer encouragement and suggest that we bear down and push through to get the work done. In the end it paid off, and we produced, what I think, was a great audit and presentation. I deem my first and only Rutgers group project experience a success!

Emily - The Robotic Life Guard

After sifting through the online “Technology” sections of many newspapers and news sites, I finally stumbled upon a story about Emily, the robotic lifeguard being tested on beaches in Malibu. Emily, an acronym for “Emergency Integrated Lifesaving Lanyard,” is, according to the article on CNN.com, “a four-foot-long robotic buoy” that is remote-controlled by a trained human life guard on shore. Basically, the lifeguards put Emily in the water, and control it similar to the way one controls an RC car – the controller itself looks like they took it out of a Toys-R-Us box and programmed it to work with Emily. To be honest, I expected the robot to be more human-like. Instead, it’s essentially a buoyant cylinder with handles which distressed swimmers can cling to until a human life guard arrives to provide appropriate care.

The benefits of Emily are quite obvious. Emily is stronger and more agile in the water than humans, and can reach distressed swimmers “twelve times as fast as human lifeguards.” It can maneuver through dangerous surf and rip tides, and, obviously, one never has to worry about Emily drowning – maybe only short-circuiting. Still in its developmental stages, the latest version of Emily “boasts a microphone and speaker acoustics system, enabling lifeguards to warn beachgoers of danger zones or calm panicked swimmers. And… it won't be long before Emily will be able to scan ocean depths for human bodies or ship wrecks using hyperspectral imaging technology, which measures underwater rays of visible light to distinguish between different materials. It can also save beaches money by not having to pay salary for another lifeguard.

The article does, however, acknowledge some drawbacks to Emily. Primarily, it could never replace the real-time, emergency response instincts that human lifeguards have. The article points out that “a robotic floatation device -- no matter how nifty -- can't save an unconscious swimmer.” Emily does seem like a step in the right direction for swimmer safety at America’s beaches. It is quicker and stronger than human life guards, and reduces the risk life guards themselves face when rescuing swimmers. However, as with any new technology, caution must be taken to ensure that we don’t become dependent on robots like Emily so that those with whom we trust our lives don’t become lazy and inattentive in case of true urgency.

Here is a link to the article on CNN.com, which includes a cool video of Emily in action!

http://money.cnn.com/2010/10/25/technology/robot_lifeguard/

Writing the Paper Part II

I’m about ready to start the paper. This should be a bit of a challenge, mostly because I’m having a little difficulty organizing all my thoughts. I am finding good arguments for both sides of the issue. I want to believe that college campuses are not Technopolies, but some of Postman’s arguments are quite convincing. However, I’m going to stick to my guns and argue why college campuses are NOT Technopolies.

There are plenty of instances while reading Postman that his arguments seem lost and confused, and times when he seems to contradict himself. This can be quite angering as a reader, especially considering how passionate he is about his ideals and beliefs. I find myself getting frustrated sometimes in trying to think of counters to his arguments because lots of times they just don’t seem to make sense or to be relevant. When trying to form logical and scholastic arguments, getting frustrated is never good, so my goal, of which I had to keep reminding myself was to keep the paper as scholarly as possible and avoid personal sentiments which would have been too easy to include.

I must admit that, at times, I considered switching my stance to argue that college campuses ARE Technopolies. It would have been much easier, and finding quotes and passages to support that side would have been much easier than trying to find passages in Postman’s own work to disprove his theories. However, I still feel confident that I can construct a pretty solid argument against Postman’s theories. Now to get to work!

Writing the Paper Part I

I have decided to write my final paper about Postman's Technopoly. "Are modern-day college campuses technopolies?" This question to me is very intriguing, and seems like a very relevant issue in today's culture. In places where America's leaders are being formed and are preparing to enter the "real world", which college campuses are, wondering aloud about the effects that technology has on them is important to do. What I'd like to think is that a Technopoly is not something that actually exists, and is more just a misguided theory than a real issue, but the issues raised are pertinent. 

The reality is that today’s college student relies very heavily on technology. Students email professors more often than they visit them in office hours. Grades, syllabi, and even dining hall menus are all available online. Students need only a few clicks to find if school is having a snow day, or when the next campus bus is coming. At Rutgers, the only practical way to register for classes is online. Many professors do not even ask for physical copies of essays anymore; they ask only for electronic submissions. And this doesn’t even take into account how often technology is used for social and entertainment purposes.

Postman argues that this heavy use of technology is ruining our culture, eliminating our identity and sending our culture into a dangerous downward spiral. It is an interesting prospect, but one that I’m not quite ready to accept. Struggles between the practicality and morality of technology have existed since the dawn of man, and are not new to this age. However, if anything, this immersion in technology is building our culture, making access to the rest of the world easier than ever. If it is true that our culture is being destroyed by technology, it is only because we are using it to create a vaster, global culture which everyone on Earth is a part of.

The Good Side of Technology

So far this year, especially during the current events presentations in class, we have talked a lot about how technology walks a fine line between helpful novelty and immoral invasion into many aspects of our lives with which many of us are simply uncomfortable. Things like robotic life guards and cars that drive themselves are exciting and make us hopeful for innovations to come, and yet even these seemingly uncontroversial technologies bring new issues to the table that need to be discussed. And these discussions often make people concerned about where technology is leading us and how it is affecting our lives. We've also heard this year about bionic professors and GPS chips that are embedded in children. Technologies like these make us fear technology.
However, the reality is that there are limitless technologies and innovations that we use every day to our benefit as Americans.

Mobile Information Apps: Poynt, Places - These apps are useful tools for smartphones of all kinds. They use the phone's built in GPS system to determine the location of the user and then provide information about the world in their immediate vicinity. For example, if a user were in New Brunswick and wanted to find the nearest Bank of America branch, sushi restaurant, hair salon, or anything else, he or she only has to launch the app and perform a search. The app then lists all its matches, usually beginning with the one closest geographically to the user. Apps like Four Square, while serving a different purpose, work in a very similar way.
Social Networking/Dating sites: E-Harmony, Facebook, J-Date - These websites all allow for some sort of online social networking. Sites like E-Harmony and Match.com pair singles who sign up with the site to make finding and meeting people to date much easier and less formal and pressure-ridden. J-Date is such a site tailored specifically for Jews interested in dating only other Jews. Facebook is the now-iconic social networking site that allows individuals to connect with anyone and everyone in their life with a Facebook profile through the sharing of stories, personal information, photos, and comments.
Travel Sites: Expedia, Travelocity, Orbitz, Kayak - As travel becomes increasingly expensive, Americans turn to these websites to find the best prices on airfare, hotel rooms, car rentals, etc. They help users by saving them money while also increasing revenue for the airline and hotel companies.
Health/Medical Sites: Web MD, Exercise.com - These sites provide health tips and information for those who wish to lead a healthy lifestyle. Many of these sites even offer minor, non-professional diagnoses for those who are injured or feeling ill.
Pedophile/Sex-Offender Protection sites - These sites aim to identify and find sex-offenders and bring them to justice. Some of these sites act independently to identify these people, then turn over their evidence to the police who then handle the situation. Other times, a police officer will enter a chat room of some sort to try to lure the would-be sex-offender into blowing his or her cover for the cop.
Information Sharing: Wikipedia, Wiki Leaks, Urban Dictionary - These sites are unique because they are all feature user-generated content and rely on consensus to "edit" the information on the pages. On these sites, people can share whatever they wish on a given topic, and their contributions will be seen by all who visit the site. This affords them a practically unlimited audience and the unprecedented ability for the average person to connect with people they may have not even known existed. However, anything these people post is subject to the scrutiny of these same people, and anything that is not widely approved of is shoved aside and lost in the vastness of the internet.

These websites and applications are all available and utilized by many people every day, and represent the positive aspects of technology. These all enhance life for users, or at least make life a bit easier. There are some technological innovations that understandably raise red flags, but we can rest assured that technology, in general, will continue to benefit Americans for ages to come.