Final Paper Ideas/Progress II

      Right before I was about to start my paper, I turned on the television and discovered that Wall-E was starting in 5 minutes. Not only was this a great way to further procrastinate doing school work, but it was also relevant. The movie further helped me decide on my side of the argument. As silly as it sounds, Wall-E shows what we will become if we don’t starting moving towards putting the green movement into effect and become fully dependent on technology. We are so consumed by technology as it is, and with new things emerging so rapidly, it is hard to not get distracted and take a moment to appreciate the real world around us.
      So far, I have picked out a few points in Slade’s work that I would like to cover or mention to help back up my argument that society is not moving towards change and we will continue on a path of destruction. I feel as it many of the points explain the same thing, though, but I did not want to include history in the paper, as Slade covers that a lot in his book. I found a few articles on companies investing in ways to generate more efficient energy, but am having trouble relating it back to my paper, as they help support the opposite side of my argument. I am also finding it difficult to keep my opinion out of this paper as this is such a controversial topic. There are so many directions to go with this paper, I just have to find where to start.  This assignment will certainly be a challenge.

Final Paper Ideas/Progress I

      While both topics given to us for the final paper are very relevant and intriguing, I think I am going to choose the second option, regarding “Made to Break” by Giles Slade and the green movement. “Going green” refers to the sustainable management of resources and is an idea that is progressively growing in society. As many individuals have always been interested in doing what is best for this planet, it seems that this idea is fairly recent and companies and organizations are jumping on the bandwagon.
      Not only have I noticed that “going green” movement is greatly expanding, but it is also becoming a trend, in a sense that it is “the new cool thing”. Young “hipsters” are constantly looking for the next idea to put into practice before it becomes too popular. It would be interesting to see how certain individuals balance the challenge of staying green in a world that has succumbed to technology.
      Although we see increasing amounts of companies slowly making changes to become part of the green movement, I wonder if it is for increased profits and to hopefully make the consumer feel better about the product they are purchasing, or because it is something they really believe in.
      I have had the same phone for around 4 years now, so I believe that I am not a victim of technology’s trap. Personally “green” turns me towards a product, but many others simply do not care, resulting in landfills full of cell phones, computers, televisions, radios, and so on.
      I believe that it is important to raise awareness of how we can help save our resources and environment. I find it interesting that Slade’s work discusses how society’s “throw-away” culture is creating the exact opposite effect on what many people are trying to accomplish by going green. I hope to discover if individuals in society are even aware of the disposable culture we are creating through technology, and to research what technological companies are actually making an effort to go green and help decrease the horror Slade’s describes to us.

The Facebook Effect: The Inside Story of the Company That Is Connecting the World (pt. III)

      In the last selection of “The Facebook Effect”, Kirkpatrick still manages to keep readers enticed. As we have seen in previous chapters, Facebook’s new ideas and tools lead it to keep getting better and in return, more successful. The introduction of photos and social events, even in its beginning stages, was an addition to Facebook that further separated it from the other websites. The new features enabled the website to create a “social graph”, a term Zuckerberg coined himself meaning that the core value of Facebook is in the friend connections (217). Whatever you did lately, if you posted it on the website, Facebook told your friends. Everyone was able to know if you went on vacation, broke up with a significant other, had too much to drink last night, etc. Now, Facebook’s features are used document our events, plan our events, and let everyone know how successful it was. There was very little that Facebook couldn’t do (technology/internet-wise).
      We are seeing companies and organizations create their own Facebook pages more and more to help promote and advertise their products, improve business, or just spread the word about a cause (263). Although this allows for open and honest discussion, as the company has little control over what users could say, many companies utilized the feedback from this new tool to the fullest. An example of this was recently seen when Gap changed its logo. The Gap clothing company decided to change its logo and revealed the new design on Facebook. Within minutes, the site got multiple responses from users and customers criticizing the logo and explaining how they wanted it changed back. Needless to say, the logo lasted for a few days due to the immediate and chaotic feedback from Facebook users.
      Relating to this issue, Zuckerberg believes that Facebook can help create transparency (287). Because it allows for more openness and lets everyone express feeling very quickly, he thinks that this makes organizations and companies more trustworthy. This is something that I slightly disagree with, business-wise. I think it is important to take into consideration that companies are essentially interested in profit and promoting good will for the companies. Therefore they may only put positive things up on the internet about them and censor what others post. On a social level, I think Facebook opens new doors to compliment others and be ourselves “in front of them”. Although we can always do this in person, the electronic neighborhood gives us more access to individuals and opportunities to build upon relationships (288).
      But what is the future of Facebook? Facebook is increasingly getting more popular each day. Kirkpatrick mentions Facebook’s ability to collect data from its users many times, and while this has its benefits such as personalized ads and suggestions and even potentially profit for the company through personalize advertisements, it is a very scary thought (267). Facebook has previously experienced problems with some applications stealing information from its users, and it still seems to be a concern now. Recently, popular applications such as Farmville, Mafia Wars, and Café World have been accused of leaking information to other sources. Are we oblivious to the repercussions using a simple website would have? Is our information eventually going to be sold? And although there are currently no plans to deploy Connect, if Zuckerberg ever decides to implement it, it will allow Facebook to gain even more information about users and not just what they put on Facebook (307). Is this a breach of privacy? Are there other things we aren’t considering when using the popular website?
      Although I believe that there are concerns regarding Facebook, the website is doing much more good than harm for our society. Facebook is not only creating rapid and more efficient communication in a world in which increasing and overwhelming amounts of information is surrounding society without choice, but it is connecting and uniting the world (330). It helped create intimacy when the internet was taking that away from us so very quickly. It is a tool that helps empowers us, as we control and build our own identity, social web, and memories.

The Facebook Effect: The Inside Story of the Company That Is Connecting the World (pt. II)

      It is quite clear that Facebook’s popularity and success grew at a rapid rate, and the second section of the reading helps exemplify that acceleration even more. Within a short amount of time after the Facebook was launched, there were many people interested in making investment deals with Zuckerberg and his team. Soon, it began time for the team to make big and tough decisions. Zuckerberg was faced with choosing a company who would make him a great profit and a company who he trusted and believed would steer the company in the right direction. Zuckerberg chose money (125). In the beginning, one of Zuckerberg and team’s main issue and concern was money. They simply did not have enough of it to not only stabilize Facebook, but further it. With this problem now taken care of, they were able to hire more people and becoming something more than a group of friends with an intense hobby. The boys were smart in their decisions throughout Facebook’s growth. At such young ages, it is incredible that they were not taken advantage of earlier. One wrong decision could have left them with nothing. They were on their way to building an excelling, multi-million dollar company.
      Another great decision made by the team was “targeting” advertising (142). This type of advertising personalized what appeared on each users screen. This not only made Facebook more appealing to its users, but it also sparked an interest for more people to use it. Facebook was becoming a new form of communication. People were able to adapt and adjust to it so quickly and use it so frequently, it eventually making not only hard to fail, but hard to get rid of. In 2006, the team and the rest of the world were beginning to realize the impact the website was having. Facebook was not just another website, but a way of life. It was quickly changing the way we communicate and interact with one another.
      A common topic of the internet is privacy, and it was only a matter of time before Facebook had its own issues regarding the concern. Facebook great success is due to the openness of the website. Because “nothing on Facebook is really confidential”, if you post something, even if it is a mistake, it is fair ground, and this truly made Facebook unique and unlike any other website (204). When Facebook decided to add high schools to the website, they began to change the privacy settings to accommodate not just the new younger users, but other individuals with careers they wanted to protect.
      It is interesting to actually gain insight to the steps Facebook took to become what it is now. The addition of a photo sharing feature and a “news feed” were almost afterthoughts to Zuckerberg, and they are probably the most essential part of Facebook now (193). Many of us utilize Facebook just these uses. We use it to document our events and the snapshots we took at them. We even communicate with some friends only over Facebook. These features allow society to be intertwined into each others’ lives. From just reading the examples Kirkpatrick gives audiences about how much of an effect Facebook has had on random people’s lives, one can wonder “what we would do without Facebook?”

Auditing a Wikipedia Article: Midterm Follow-up

       Whether is it for academic reasons or to gain a brief understanding of a topic, Wikipedia is a primary source for many people. While Wikipedia is very useful in finding out the basic idea of a subject, it should not be used as a scholarly source. Anyone can publish information, which can serve as a good and a bad thing. Since people are able to post whatever they want, there is the potential that people may post opinions which can create biases on the website. Also, unless someone is updating the information constantly, information may be false or outdated. On the other hand, the website gives many aspects of one subject. For the most part, it is easy to gain an understanding of a topic with just a quick glance. Users may also gain other references and sources from the website. It also shows us that people are interested in helping others. These articles are edited by choice.
       Wikipedia is an example of how things are becoming increasingly easier. The website is so commonly used. The tool is readily available which may cause people to not search further. Also it is important to consider that many of the sources are other people’s opinions and it is important that we form out own.
       While false information may not always have a great impact on individuals’ lives, in this case, the misinformation is very important to consider. Our Wikipedia article (Decriminalization of non-medical cannabis in the United States), in particular, can have a serious impact on our culture. The topic is about a controversial issue involving law. We determined that this article takes a pro-marijuana stance. When readers are given more benefits and consequences, it is more likely for us to form a supporting argument. These misguided opinions may lead to ignorant decisions, such as using cannabis in general or without proper knowledge.
       Another thing I noticed was this article is missing a lot of information about the health effects of the drug. The article simply states that cannabis can have a “pernicious effect” on health, but claims that many of the effects are uncertain. It also says states that long-term use of cannabis can be compared to long-term use of alcohol or tobacco, but these effects are not listed. Readers would also not be able to gain a complete understanding of the law from this article. This could potentially cause readers to take more risks as they do not know if possession is considered a felony or a misdemeanor. It is easy to forget that regardless of the possible positive outcomes listed in the article, cannabis is still illegal.
      I found that I am much more skeptical when searching for information on the internet.  Since the emergence of Web 2.0, internet users are able not only able to read information, but write it as well.  Now that the internet is created by almost anyone, it is important to consider where this information is coming from.  In the future, I will not be so reliant on Wikipedia.

The Facebook Effect: The Inside Story of the Company That Is Connecting the World (pt. I)

       The most anticipated book of the semester, The Facebook Effect, tells the story of creation of the famous website and the impact it is having on society today. David Kirkpatrick manages to keep readers intrigued and overwhelmed with anticipation. Within this first section of reading, I found many things striking – and it was only the first hundred pages of the book.
       Facebook is a new form of communication. It changes how people communicate and interact, how marketers sell products, how governments reach out to citizens and how companies operate. Facebook is used as a tool to help companies inform the public about their product and to help campaigns inform people and spread the word. Facebook keeps people over long distances in touch with each other and it helps people organize themselves through groups. It helps individuals connect through common experiences, interests, problems through groups, threads, networks and events. Social networks are a place of common interest, rather than common location (66). Facebook is leading to dramatic changes in society.
       The creators of Facebook claim that the website was never intended as a substitute for face-to-face communication, but should rather be used to enhance relationships with people you already know (12). Zuckerberg wanted to improve people’s lives, especially socially, and I think he succeeded in his goal (35). It is clear that the device to make communication easier. Just by accepting a friend request, you have already made a connection with someone. Then, in just a few minutes, it is easy to gather basic information about that person through their pictures, interests, likes, the groups they’ve joined. The basic ice-breaking questions are already taken care of. While this device is clearly helps sustain and develop relationships, I think that it is affecting the way we communicate and is having an consequence on face to face communication. I believe, in many ways, we are taking advantage of this tool. It has become much easier to maintain relationships. You can stay in touch with someone by writing on their wall instead of going out to get coffee with them.
       Zuckerberg was found using the word “dominate” a lot when describing Facebook (51). While this word is very extreme and off-putting, he was justified in his word choice. Facebook has done just that. Dominate the internet. Although Kirkpatrick provides many examples as to how it spread so fast – Zuckerberg sent it to a few friends, who then sent it to some friends, who sent it to more friends and so on – it still baffles me that this website was only created a few years ago. One thing I found extremely interesting in this section of the reading is the statistic that if the growth rate of Facebook and the internet continue at the steady pace they are at, by 2013 every person online worldwide will be on Facebook (16). That is less than three years from now. It is remarkable that a company can spread that fast and have that much of an impact on our society. Has our culture every adapting so easily and fast to a product such as Facebook? Although the book says it is likely that this well ever happen, it is still an intriguing point to reflect upon.
       Similar to most inventions, Facebook was a mixture of previous ideas and websites before it. Zuckerberg borrowed aspects from other websites, such as Friendster and his previous successes, Course Match and Facemash. By building off what was already out there that people were enjoying, helped ensure that this website would be better than the ones before that.
       Facebook also owes much of its success to good timing, good planning, and the right location. College was an essential factor in Facebook’s growth (39). College is a time when social networks expand rapidly. Students are exposed to so many new people, activities, and entertainment. At a time of adjustment, it is inevitable that their social lives increase just within one or a few years.
       Harvard, in particular, helped Facebook gain the popularity it did. Harvard is a school that is obsessed with letting everyone know why they are important (40). Therefore, it’s almost expected for people to want to publish and post their achievements for all to see. Facebook allowed the students to do this. Not only did they get to display their image and status, but the website was exclusive.
       One brilliant aspect of Facebook is that we create our identity. Users of the website post their own information about themselves. Individuals are given the choice to expose that they want to display and portray online. Zuckerberg also made it important that every user be a real person. Originally, in order to sign up for Facebook, an individual had to have a specific email address. This guarantees that people are who they say they are, something that was not certain on other social networking websites. He wanted a website where people had their genuine identity online. Not only did having people volunteer their own information help Zuckerberg stay out of legal issues, but it was able to do something that no other site did (28). The creators discovered that people’s identities were being formed through their passions and issues through the day (6). Facebook gave people a “haven” to express their feelings and thoughts.
       It is unbelievable to think that a young man, in his pajamas or jeans and originally with no business imperatives, created something that is now known worldwide. By learning from others’ mistakes, having the right circle of friends, and having perfect planning Facebook has turned into, not only a billion dollar business, but a culture itself.

"The Web as random acts of kindness"

      In the TEDtalks video that we watched in class, Jonathan Zittrain discusses the helpful and useful things that have come out of technology and the internet. The internet had no business plan. It was not created to make a profit or to gain fame, but as a way for people to share information with each other. Now people are putting so much effort into expanding this information on the internet, ideas and new, innovative websites are growing at a rapid pace. Zittrain even claims that there are more people wanting to solve problems than there actually are problems. But some of these ideas are changing our experiences on the internet.
     After the activity we did in class, I realized that I really never think twice about using these tools that someone created out of generosity. I was overwhelmed with so many new sources. Some websites I thought of during this exercise were:

Webmd.com
WebMD is a great tool that helps people becomes more aware of health issues. Though they strongly advise that this website cannot take place of a doctor, WebMD can help people recognize symptoms and give advice for how to go about gaining treatment for these symptoms. The website also gives tips about how to take care of yourself and stay healthy.

Etsy.com
Etsy is e-commerce for crafts. It is a website where people can buy or sell their art, jewelry, clothing, photographs and so on. It recognizes talent and evokes creativity. I think it is important to support artists and it is always better to buy something from someone who put his or her heart and soul into a project than something that was made in a factory.

Noh8campaign.com
This campaign would not be able to make such an impact without the web. The campaign is a silent protest against Prop 8. The NOH8 campaign uses photos to inform society just how many people have the same belief and support this cause. The photos are featured all over the digital world. The campaign has really managed to utilize the internet in a helpful and positive way, allowing people across the globe to have access to it and become informed about an issue that many people still find taboo.

Rentafriend.com
I recently heard a morning talk show discuss this website and I was astounded at what I heard. Rentafriend allows individuals to get paid to “be a friend” or you can use it to “hire a friend”. The website advertises that renting a friend can be useful if you are in a jam and you need a friend to attend a wedding, party or some other type of social event, if you are interested in moving to another town and need someone to show you around, or if you simply want company to go out to eat or see a movie with.  Although I find this website very strange, it is also very interesting. I guess this is a great way to meet new people and expand your social circle, or learn new things from your “friend”.

Musicnotes.com
Musicnotes has an array of sheet music ranging from guitar tabs to musical theatre songs. The vast selection allows individuals to purchase a digital copy of just one song or even a book. Although there is a price to downloading the music, once it is downloaded, users can change the key, the tempo, etc. that the music is written in, making it a great tool for anyone who is interested in music.

Made to Break: Technology and Obsolescence in America (part III)

     In the final reading from Made to Break, we see how examples of obsolescence can be seen not only regarding physical objects, but also intelligence and skills. The first chapter of this section reminded me of part of a clip that we watched in the beginning of the semester. The clip gave many facts about technology and the impact it is making on our culture, one of them being that after just two years of schooling, your education will be outdated. I found this similar to what Slade was referring to when he discussed how knowledge and skills can now be outdated. New versions of video games, word processor and other applications are being constantly updated, which requires users to be continuously learning how to use these new products. Slade’s discussion of video games proves to be a great example of just how fast these technologies move. At one point, there were so many video games available, consumers were overwhelmed and chose to simply not buy any (221). We are advancing at such a rapid rate, that it is becoming very hard to keep up. As individuals gain more information, products become outdated as new ones are created, and then society is forced to learn to adapt and gain more knowledge on how to utilize these new tools. It is a vicious circle.
     Arriving to the second chapter and finding the word “weaponizing” was quite surprising to me. Referring to obsolescence as a weapon is a bold statement and I was unsure as to where Slade was going with this idea, but after reading this scheme that Slade uses as an example, I gained a better understanding and was surprised to see that American society, in some ways, seems to be unchanging. Slade describes how during the Cold War, the U.S. used obsolescence as a tactic to help gain control over the Russians. The U.S. knew that the Russians would try to gain power by taking the technologies that the U.S. had, and so by creating a technology that they knew would purposely fail and hurt the Russians, the U.S. managed to put a short halt to the Russian’s progress. This is clearly a very different type of obsolescence. Although it is not used to make a profit, it is easily seen that obsolescence is used to gain advantage. As mentioned early, we are a culture of instant gratification. This is obviously not the most moral way to gaining an advantage on one’s opponent, but as history shows, American culture is predominantly about doing whatever we can do to get what we want and as fast as possible.
     Slade ended his book with the discussion of cell phones becoming our biggest downfall. I definitely found this section to be the most relatable. Personally, I am content with a cell phone if it is able to make and retrieve calls as well as send and receive text messages, but many of my friends feel the need to have the latest and greatest phone that can do much more than their previous device. Now, many cell phone contracts have a “free upgrade” every two years or so. This concept of an “upgrade” makes people feel obligated to get a new cell phone when they don’t even really need one. It seems as if until a change is made and people are informed that their actions are leading to severe consequences, new strategies of planned obsolescence will continue as a theme in American society.
     This book definitely had an impact on me and left me thinking what I can do to help save our environment. America’s consumer attitude and approach is harming our not only our country, but countries around the world. We do not realize that technologies are made from things that are extremely harmful to environment, and therefore do not think twice when throwing away our “junk”. Slade is not preaching that we all become environmentalists. Instead, he is giving us a warning. He is helping us recognize what our future holds if we continue to throw away. As technology increases at an exponential rate, so does this problem. There is no more taking care of the problem later as the problem is occurring now, and therefore Slade strongly advises that we consider the repercussions of our actions. Technological breakthroughs are increasing this idea of obsolescence. As culture that is so eager and willing to throw things away, our growing and improving technologies are only making it easier to throw things away. I think we have to consider if a new cell phone is worth harming our planet.

Made to Break: Technology and Obsolescence in America (part II)

     Slade uses the middle chapters of his book to delve into the history of this “planned obsolescence”. Using multiple and specific examples, he explores the strategic moves companies made to further market their product for an income. Society has become exceptional at adapting. Change is a key factor in planned obsolescence. Slade explains how in the 50s and 60s society basically discarded the fact that things were actually “made to break”. There were so many products available at the time that creativity and originality began to prevail over essential. Companies were growing and people had money to spend.  Companies should be building long lasting product, but they simply just aren’t.
     There is a lot of interesting information about how businesses went about developing products. Slade goes into much detail about the effects the radio has had on our society and two of its main innovators: Armstrong and Sarnoff. The competition between the two was intense (89). Sarnoff wanted to start a takeover. He believed emergence of television would cause radio to become obsolete. On the other hand, Armstrong saw potential in FM radio and sought out to help it gain popularity, making it new, exciting and trendy, increasingly creating a challenge for Sarnoff. Americans are greatly attracted to possessing whatever is shiny and new, which helped keep the radio popular. Eventually the addition of the transistor made the radio smaller and portable, keeping the radio business thriving.
     Some examples of obsolescence are not always centered on greed, but rather help benefit for economy. A section of this reading that I found quite interesting was Slade’s example of the creation of nylon causing silk to become obsolete very interesting (115). Silk was not only very expensive to produce, but a majority of it was being imported from Japan. Companies needed to find a solution and a way for them, as well as their consumers, to benefit. Nylon, a cheap and durable material, was the answer. They found that not only does nylon costs much less to product, but American could benefit as opposed to Japan. These change in material lead to silk becoming almost obsolete. There was no need for it anymore since companies had found a way to please consumers. What the consumers did not realize though, was that by using cheaper materials, the quality of the product quickly lessens as it most likely will not last as long, therefore causing people to have to replace them. But with prices so low, the appeal of the product raises, making it very easy for society to become blind to this idea of planned obsolescence. It is also hard to take the future and how many times items will have to be replaced into account. But then again, does it even bother society that the product will last very long? According to Slade, we will be purchasing an updated version of the item in the near future anyways.
     Like Postman, Slade explores the disadvantages of technology. Each author differs in what they find technologies downfalls are. While Postman discussed the many mental repercussions technology is having on society, such as our dependence to it, Slade looks at what we are physically doing. Although it seems that companies are manipulating and controlling consumers, it is clear that society is abusing the privilege technology has given us by being wasteful and materialistic. At the rate we are going it seems inevitable that society will continue this cycle of buy, use, and waste and I find it quite frightening to imagine where all this trash will end up and what Americans are leaving behind.

Made to Break: Technology and Obsolescence in America (part I)

     With each book comes a new perspective on technology. It is clear that we are consuming society who always wants the most recent thing available that is also better than the one before it. We are obsessed with the new and improved and many of us believe that we are characterized through what we own. We want to keep our status in society and make it known. When new technologies emerge and are released to the public, our first instinct is to immediately seek it out and see what the buzz is.
     I have mentioned many times before that society is attracted to whatever is easier, and I consider this to be another case. The introduction of this book discusses how everything is slowly beginning to become disposable. Disposability makes things easier. We began by throwing out razors and now it has led to throwing out computers. It was inevitable that we would adapt to society’s new inventions, but now we must take into consideration what this is costing us.
     I was astonished at the numbers that Slade threw out at us in the introduction. We see these changes in technology taking place, but we never think about the aftermath or where the old stuff goes. Slade discusses the conversion from analog to digital and how it would add more waste to the landfills. Many of these old technologies are not worth fixing or recycling and as a result, they are just thrown out. So what does this show about the American culture? We are leaving behind a bunch of junk. Are we to blame though?
     Giles Slade introduces the idea that companies purposely “manipulate the failure rate” of products (5). Society began to see the first deliberate acts for obsolescence when the automobile industry was at its boom. Car companies were searching for ways to make cars more efficient. Technological advances, such as the transformation from hand cranked cars to electric starters, were constantly giving newer cars greater edge than the previous ones. While inventions such as these had great potential to increase companies’ earnings and the demand for cars, companies were still looking for ways to expand and sell more.
     The second chapter of the book, Slade introduces the competition between Ford and General Motors (33). Each company’s primary goal was to gain market control, though they attempted this in different ways. Henry Ford was an honest man who wanted to make a made a model that was cheap and reliable. He wanted to build a car and stick with it. He believed that one should not change something if there is nothing wrong with it. Alfred Sloan (GM), on the other hand, was conniving but practical. General Motors was continuously trying to get on the same level as Ford. Sloan understood how society held material goods in such high esteem and took advantage of these attitudes that they held. GM played to people’s (particularly, women’s) weakness and began to make cars look more appealing. But soon, novelty eventually wears off. Which is why they gained profit by changing the appearance of their cars every so often, forcing people to buy new ones.
     Slade also elucidates the idea of “psychological obsolescence”, using the Academy Awards and Billboard as examples (54). I found this part to be very intriguing as I have never made this connection with popular culture before. Companies have the ability to tell us what is “in” and what is “out” for their benefit. Society is almost being tricked into playing this mind game of the newer, better, and more hip than yesterday.
     This section of the reading ended with the discussion of “planned obsolescence” (79). Although at this point in the book the term has not yet been used, its definition has definitely been seen in our economy. Planned obsolescence encourages repeat consumption by limiting a product’s life span. General Electric was one of the first companies to manipulate this idea. By adulterating the span of the light bulb, GE was able to increase its demand and prevent over production. Now that they have control over how long the product will work or last, they have the ability to dominate a majority of the light bulb market.
     For a society who is so infatuated with the new, we do not consider the repercussions of wasting. I find myself asking who is really at fault here. Although I think that society’s strive to be trend setters is its downfall, it is a combination which also includes a businesses’ greed. Companies will always have a need to gain profit. Many companies are run by a need to outsell their rivals. Does that make it fair to play on society’s distorted outlook of commercial goods?
     Furthermore, I wanted to add that I found the timing of this reading to be very ironic. My laptop broke a few weeks ago (after only purchasing it two years ago) and I was forced to go out and buy a new one. This really made me wonder if technology is moving at such a rapid rate, that it is hard to stay informed and keep up with what is out there. In addition, to being very thought provoking, this reading made me slightly frustrated by technology, as I found myself being trapped in its one form of deception.

Overreaction or Setting an Example? (Current Event Presentation)

     Since the internet has emerged, “privacy” has been redefined. Online privacy is very debatable. While some people share immense amounts of information about themselves on the internet, others are frightened to even put their full name on a profile. With new technologies and programs surfacing on the internet, it was only a matter of time before this issue became a dilemma. An example of this was recently seen regarding Google’s Street View. Street View is a technology that provides panoramic still images of buildings, streets, houses, etc. Street View is a useful and fascinating tool that is available in many countries, including the United States, Mexico, Canada, Australia, Japan and South Africa (to name a few). Google is planning to add Germany to that list.
     While Google is currently in the process of bringing Street View to Germany, several hundred thousand Germans are asking that their properties be removed from the site in fear that the technology will display too much information about people. Google has claimed that much of people’s fears are based off of misinformation (that the pictures are in real time), but with Germany being Google’s largest market in Europe, they determined that something had to be done about this uproar.
     Although Google states that the pictures they use do not breach any privacy laws and they abide by the cultural norms of the country the pictures are taken in, in efforts to ease Germany’s privacy concerns and abide by their privacy norms, Google, for the first time, allowed users the chance to request that their residence not be on the site before the site was even published. Rather than showing someone’s home, the users of Street View will now see a blurred image that serves no purpose to them.
     Of course, cultural norms differ around the world and traditionally, Germany holds their privacy in higher admiration than we do. It also does not help that Google worsened the concerns when they announced that they accidently collected information about citizens over Wi-Fi connections, causing the Germans to further worry and create a greater commotion.
     However, are the Germans overreacting or should we all be concerned and take precautions over what goes public on the internet? While I do understand that Germany has stronger privacy protections than us, I believe that their actions are slightly uncalled for. If it was something to be alarmed over, then I think we would be seeing more people (not just in Germany) requesting to have their house removed from Street View. But then, it could also be a possibility that this is not occurring because many of us are not informed that this is an option.
     While Street View can more likely help us than hurt us, I suppose I can see how there can be some potential problems that may arise with it. Street View shows people’s homes. An individual’s home can usually show someone’s financial status or what kind of neighborhood they live in. This could easily create targets for robberies and theft. Google also occasionally overlooks a license plate or a person’s face, leaving it unblurred an available to everyone who comes across that street.
     So, what is the significance of the Germans actions? It is bound to have an effect on the use of Street View. Will it cause so many people to “jump on the bandwagon” and take their home off of the internet, and therefore defeat the idea of Google’s practical technology? The internet has always been a place of vast information. If individuals are given the right to take away this information that should be public, then is it fair to say that now there is a lack of information available to us? I think that the internet will always be the favored source to find our facts and data, and the German’s reaction is just a bump along the way.


Many Germans Opt Out of Google's Street View

Meet Milo

     I recently rediscovered a video that I saw a while back. I forgot about it until hearing the many discussions in class about the advances of technology and the crazy things companies are creating. Kinect for Xbox 360, code name “Project Natal”, is a new system in video game entertainment that uses body, facial and voice recognition. The main selling point of this system is that no controllers are needed. The user’s hands are the controllers. Natal points out that there are no constraints as there are when using hand-held remotes, and therefore we are allowed to be more intuitive and less conscious that we are playing a game.
     Project Natal is currently in the process of finalizing a game in which users can “meet Milo”. Milo is a young boy, a character that Natal has created. Milo can interact with the user. He can distinguish specific facial expressions and inflections in the user’s voice. Supposedly, Milo can understand you. He is “fascinated about your life”. He remembers who you are and your past experiences together. According to Natal, users are “sculpting a human being”. Every Milo is different. Milo is created through the decisions we make while using the game.
     While this new game seems very captivating and entertaining, it also found it to be a bit disturbing. It is obvious that they are selling us a new experience. Users are able to establish a connection with this “boy”. Natal explains to us that we are now being noticed. Books and televisions cannot acknowledge out existence, but Milo can. As shown in the TED video, at one point in the game Milo is very upset after an argument with his parents and moving into a new house. It is our duty to comfort Milo. Users can then earn points for reassuring him that everything will be okay. I cannot decide if this is a constructive or poor aspect of the game. While it can teach younger people to be compassionate and that you can “win” for showing your concern and kindness for others, are they then going to want a reward when helping out someone in real life? It seems that this game can instill good morals into children and help them learn some communication skills, but I do believe that this game may have some consequences once it becomes available to everyone.
     It is quite obvious that this game is very intriguing, yet bizarre. What does this teach the generation who will be using this product? Has society forgotten (or will forget) how to make real friends using face to face communication? Children may lose the ability to talk in person with all of these new technologies allowing us to communicate over these various mediums. They may also feel no need to make new friends when Milo is secure and will always be there at their house waiting for them when they get home from school. But what consequences will this game have on children when the console suddenly breaks and they are left without their friend?
     Clearly, this product is still in its early stages as Xbox has not yet released it and there has not been much publicized buzz about it. I am looking forward to see how society will react to this product, and whether it will be accepted into the homes of young children or even adults.


("Milo" was also recently featured in a TED Blog.)
TED Blog - Meet Milo

The World and Wikipedia: How we are editing reality (Part II)

The World and Wikipedia: How we are editing reality (Part I)

                Ever since I began my academic journey, teachers have warning me and my fellow students of the “dangers” of using Wikipedia.  Fortunately, that has never stopped me from visiting the sites multiple times for its plethora of information. Designed to help others, Wikipedia allows for individuals to engage in not just consumption, but creation as well.  In The World and Wikipedia: How We Are Editing Reality, Andrew Dalby discusses this collaborative experiment and the effects it is having on our society.  Dalby, an avid Wiki editor, admits to finding mistakes (and even making some), but still argues the advantages of Wikipedia and supports the use of Wikipedia.

                While the evolution of computers continued, so did the evolution of encyclopedias.  Many problems arose from the beginning.  It was hard to find individual details in these collections of information.  It was hard to have all the information needed in one book.  Adding multiple volumes and sorting information in alphabetical order helped solve this dilemma, but with society continuously progressing, printed encyclopedia books began to get too big and to expensive to produce.  There needed to be a way to make this information easily accessible in an organized fashion, and thanks to the internet, a resolution was formed.

                The emergence of Web 2.0 allowed its users to not only search, read and retrieve information, but to publish their own knowledge to the web.  This internet advancement gave users the opportunity to disseminate information to an extensive audience (whether they want to find it or not).  Along with Web 2.0 came wikis, Wikipedia being the most common and well-known.  Wikis are an expandable collection of information in which each web page can be modified by a user.

                Like anything else that involves a collaborative effort, Wikipedia has stirred up some great controversy.  Although Wikipedia was created to be a place of factual information, with everyone in society as its editor, it is fairly simple to voice biased opinions and even false information.  Wikipedia can be easily controlled by individuals who choose to voice their opinions about issues, such as politics, turning Wikipedia into a place of debate, as opposed to a reliable internet resource (14).

                Wikipedia has been subject to much criticism for having misleading, wrong information and “embarrassing extracts” of poor article quality and structure on the website.  When everyone is an editor, everyone has equal power.  Educational background, work experience, recognized achievement has no precedence over who controls the information posted on the website, therefore allowing individuals to put false information on the website, creating “vandalism” to Wikipedia (10).  This not only creates problems for its viewers, but it makes it very challenging for the websites administrators as it becomes very easy to lose control over the information. 

                So why do we still use Wikipedia after knowing all of this?  Many times, as stated in the book, these falsehoods are corrected within minutes it is posted due to the overwhelming popularity and dedication that individuals have to the website.  Wikipedia gives people the opportunity to showcase and share what they know and are interested in.  There are no credentials necessary in order to create a wiki, allowing individuals with no recognized achievement to give out information.  While other wiki sites are controlled by “established” individuals, Wikipedia can be controlled by whoever wants to control it.  These other sites question society’s intelligence level and go through a process to select its editors to avoid falsehoods and keep their information “neutral”.  Although the credibility of the source is always in question, since when does having a degree exclude one from having his or her personal opinions on a matter?  It is close to impossible to not certain attitudes and judgments towards specific subjects, deeming this selection process as a waste of time. 

                Wikipedia’s quickly-gained attention created quite some stir with its “competition”, Britannica.  The two differ in that Wikipedia is free while one must subscribe and pay to use Britannica.  Also, Britannia believes that an individual needs to do something useful and memorable to gain a wiki page on their website; while to have a page on Wikipedia, someone just needs to have someone else think he or she did something worth writing about.  It is obvious that Wikipedia is much more commonly used than Britannica, but why?

                I am almost certain every individual who has used the internet has stumbled upon Wikipedia at one point or another.  Why is it almost always one of the first suggestions in a web-based search?  Wikipedia’s links to other websites could be to blame, or Google could secretly be working with Wikipedia.  The more we continue to use Wikipedia, the more prevalent it will become.  There is without a doubt a positive and enlightening side to Wikipedia.  Wikipedia will not only facilitate research, but always encourage interactive participation, as society is always enduring its “quest for communal knowledge” (51).

Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology (part II)

Postman’s opinionated views continue throughout the whole book.  Like the first half, he gives readers insight into his views and explains why he thinks certain things are yet other reasons technopoly is becoming predominant.  Postman does a really good job to point out how he feels about medical advances, symbols, and statistics, in particular.  He criticizes Americans for being so reliant on machines, especially when it comes to machines used in the medicinal world.  I understand that it can be seen as lazy or even brainless, but when it comes down to it, I do not see a problem with this as long as this technology is serving to help people and change people’s lives.  Postman also believes that we are forgetting the significance of symbols, tradition and myth, and that they must fight to stay recognized and keep their meaning.  I believe that technology has only furthered our curiosity and with information and instruments so easily available, we are able and more willing to look up and find more things out about these symbols and tradition which hold such value in our culture.

Another one bothersome of Postman’s is that society is infatuated with statistics and numbers.  He explains how everything can be turned and broken down into data.  Now, even intelligence can be determined by a set of numbers.  Postman views statistics as useless, for the most part.  He claims that the important stuff has become too mixed in with the inadequate.  In many ways, I can see where Postman is going with this argument.  An issue that is arising with technology is information overload.  With new technology comes new information, and too much of it, for that matter.  There is so much information to go through to find what we are really looking for.  Although I found Postman to come across as rather insistent and adamant, he raises some good points.  Postman believes that people hold computers in very high esteem and they need to take a step back.  Technology has been put on a pedestal, and for a very good reason.  It has been able to figure things out in minutes that would take humans days. 

It’s hard to realize the risks when there are so many great opportunities that coincide with using the internet, but Postman’s work has opened my eyes to the evil side of technology and helped me raise some questions of my own.  Society, especially this generation, relies so much on the internet, so what would happen if it crashes?  We have becomes extremely accustomed to and comfortable with using technology as a part of our daily lives, it is hard to imagine life without it.

Are we being overexposed?  Though it is our choice, technology can be blamed for the lack of privacy nowadays.  Whether we put it up there ourselves or not, there is a significant amount of readily available personal information on the internet.  This creates a somewhat daunting and potentially dangerous view of technology.

Also, could new technologies be making us less patient?  With easy access and in minimal time, we are able to gain so much new knowledge.  I think this generation’s attention spans are beginning to decrease.  Patience was needed for dial-up when using AOL.  Now, I find myself getting frustrated when I webpage takes longer than 10 seconds to load.  This generation has become all too familiar with the term “multi-tasking”.  As new forms of media emerge, we quickly adjust to using them along with what we already have.

What effect are social networks, emailing, texting and instant messaging having on face to face communication?  It now seems close to impossible to get in touch with someone without having access to these technologies, but it was clearly done before these inventions.  Facial expressions are being replaced by emoticons.  Feelings are portrayed through the amount of exclamation points one uses.  Building relationships is given a whole new definition.

Postman sees technology as dominating our behaviors and trusts that our captivation with technology making it too easy to become lost.  But Postman has given readers solutions to prevent of from succumbing to technology.  He believes that we must remain aware of these changes but also not taking them too seriously.  He requests that educators continue to instill learning of all areas, and that we should not take things for granted.  While I agree with Postman, in some sense, while still recognizing society’s achievements. We are given these tools and we need to utilize them.  Although I do not think that society has become subservient to technology, as Postman does, I do believe technology does have its downfalls.  But evidently, as times change, we must adapt.

P.S.

I recently discovered myself caught in the trap of an algorithm.  Recently, I was browsing through a selection of boots to buy.  I did not think anything of this, nor did I realize that this would have an effect on my screen’s sidebars for the rest of the day.  On almost every single website I visited after that, black boots, similar to the ones I was interested in purchasing, discretely appeared.  Although I have heard of using algorithms for sites such as Pandora, I have never thought of using them as a way to facilitate advertising and marketing.  This concept is very fascinating, but brilliant.  I like when choices are made for me.  I like that my computer can recognize my likes and dislikes.  I do not believe it hinders my creativity, but enhances it. Algorithms give the opportunity to explore things one may have never been able to discover before.

Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology (part I)

Technology has clearly made life simpler and more efficient, and because of this, Neil Postman believes that the consequences of technology have been hard to see.  Postman agrees with Swedin and Ferro in that change, from a technological stance, is growing very rapidly.  But unlike the two, Postman examines the effects technology is having on society and culture, in particular, the disadvantages of our technology dependence and how our learning abilities are being affected.

Postman does not necessarily dislike technology.  He does manage to acknowledge technology’s helpfulness in society, but because of his very radical stance and lack of insight to the positive uses of technology make it hard to agree with him.  Postman argues that society must look at the harmful side of technology.  We must examine in the burdens and not be so consumed with its benefits, which make it hard to realize the negative impact technology can have on a society.

Postman also explains how technology is altering conception of leaning.  He believes that televisions will be the cause of not needing school teachers anymore.  This book was written over ten years ago and society has yet to see such drastic and negative changes taking place.  One can argue that Postman is being a bit dramatic as well as pessimistic in his predictions for the future.  Some things cannot be replaced.  He also discusses how the meaning of words and our conception of reality is being changed due to technology.  Meanings change as we continuously gain new knowledge.  Society is constantly undergoing constant change, and although technology is one of the greatest advances in science, it is certainly not to blame for our changing perceptions and behaviors.

Postman breaks cultures into three types: the tool using culture, technocracies, and technopolies.  The tool using culture, defined as those who use tools to solve specific and urgent problems of physical life, or to serve the symbolic world of art, do not let tools change their beliefs, attitudes, traditions, or methods of education (p23).  In essence, tools have a very limited effect on a culture.  In a technocratic culture, tools play an essential role in the thought-world of culture, though they are not integrated into the culture.  Instead, tools attack the culture (p28).  Therefore beliefs, traditions, politics and so on must struggle to exist on their own.  Technopoly, or totalitarian technocracy, is when the entire society surrenders to technology in return, humans become worth less than their machinery (p52).

Postman basically thinks that there is technology has given us too much information and that there is no way for one person to understand everything there is to know and/or cope with that information.  He believes that with the appearance of technology, people will no longer be able to control memory or create meaning from their experiences.  Postman assumes that information must be controlled otherwise it is pointless.  Postman does not take into consideration that humans can choose what information they seek out and receive.  While some information may lack value to some people, it may serve as great importance to others.  Individuals may not be able to know everything, but with a communal effort, technology allows us to share what we do know. 

                Although Postman fails to mention technological advantages, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology does raise some thought provoking theories about society putting too much trust and dependence in technology.  It is interesting to see how these advances are changing culture for the better or the worse.

(732): I want Paula Dean to narrate shark week next year

Texts From Last Night creators, Lauren Leto and Ben Bator came to Rutgers this past weekend.  Although Leto and Bator spent a majority of their time reading a few of the thousands of texts from their new hit website, they did discuss how their fame and fortune came to be. 

TFLN, a website dedicated to posting your raunchy and disturbing texts from the night before, started as a joke between the two friends.  While Leto and Bator had spent much time hypothesizing and proposing ideas that could allow them to drop out of law school, they said that they never really 'kicked around' this idea around before.  This was one that they stumbled upon.  They claimed they began to forward the funny texts that they received from their friends to their other their friends, mostly to embarrass those who sent the said texts.  It quickly became a well-known and ongoing joke, so they decided to create a blog (on blogspot) to post the best texts that they came across.

Eventually, after getting much recognition on their blog, Leto and Bator  Once it was designed, they posted the absurd, immoral and funny texts and opened it up to the public.  Leto said she did not realize the extent of their success until around finals time when the site blew up due to procrastination at its finest.

Now, not only is there the ever popular TFLN iPhone application, but Leto and Bator have published a book filled with your favorite and never before heard/read texts.  They also managed to score a deal with MTV to create a television show. 

The launch of the internet has proved to be ground breaking advancement.  Now, people with internet access can not only share their ideas with others around the world, but use the internet to make money and create careers.  Texts From Last Night is not only a great example of how an easy and lucky thought (or just having inebriated and uncensored friends) can become a money making success.

Computers: The Life Story of a Technology (part II)

The latter half of Computers, discusses the modern and business savvy world of computers.  As computers continue to gain uses, their pervasiveness and integration into society begins to increase.  With more programming codes, more functions are put into action and therefore companies are continuously building and adding to computers.  It is very clear that this technology is growing at an exponential rate (p109).  We are able to see how computers begin as a luxury, aiding in business and some entertainment to now a necessity.

The materialization of personal computers allowed for computers to enter the household.  Because society always wants what is new, people were willing to deal with “long delivery times and other problems” just to be able to get their hands on a computer, even though its purposes were still limited (p87).

Apple broke boundaries discovering the many possibilities of a microcomputer in an office environment.  The commercial aspect of technology was beginning to advance.  Soon after, IBM recognized the potential and jumped on the opportunity to quickly create a microcomputer of their own.  “Their intention was to dominate the microcomputer market the same way they dominated the mainframe marketplace” (p93).  Companies were beginning to see how profitable and marketable this business would become.

Mac’s 1984 commercial (p99) changed the media market of computers.  The dramatic unveiling of the new computer not only furthered an intense competition with IBM, but it sparked much interest in consumers.  Airing only once during the super bowl, the commercial gained a great deal of attention and created buzz for personal computers.  Despite the unforgettable broadcast, Windows decided to create television commercials after finally gaining “astounding commercial success” with the addition of more memory and better writing software (p107).  Computer advertising begins to expand to mass media.

The emergence of new software for computers created a huge buzz among technology hobbyists.  Software has become an essential for computers, aiding students, business professionals, researchers and just about anyone who writes a letter or play a game.  Although many of these applications were created fairly recently, it is astonishing that we are already using new and improved programs.  Each generation is born with new tools.  One of the greatest tools that society has been given is the internet.

ARPANET was the world’s first operating “packet switching” network created by ARPA during the Cold War.  Predecessor to the internet, packet-switching is a communications method that groups data and sends it to its destination.  The information is then reconfigured on the other side.  With the Internet and the World Wide Web, surfacing some years later, available, linking and sharing information with people became around the world became easier than ever.

Although it is very easy to see the prevalence of computers, connecting everyone together is still a challenge.  The digital divide is the separation between countries that have internet access digital technology access and those who do not.  Most often, it includes countries that not only have physical access to resources, but also those who do not acquire the skills to take part in.  The digital divide proves to be a great example of how important computers really are.  Through the internet, we are able to share information and ideas with those who need it.  We can see the significance of this in the episode of TED Talks.  Christopher Makau, from Africa, has taught us that internet has an effect on the whole world.  Through the internet and its various innovative uses, he was able to learn ways restore his town.  He learned to grow plants and vegetables and is now able to feed over thirty families.  In ways, the digital divide prevents people from helping others around the world.  If internet access was granted to everyone, different groups and communities would be able to share information and we would be able to continue to gain knowledge through each other.

Computers: The Life Story of a Technology (part I)

Like most inventions, the creation of computers made things easier.  People are always looking for a less complicated way to do things.  Why would someone do something manually when one can create it mechanically and then have that machine do the work for them? 

In Computers: The Life Story of a Technology, Eric Swedin and David Ferro give readers an in depth review of the history of computers.  Computers tells the stories of the key inventors in which society can hold responsible for, for the great advances in the technology that we have today.  By focusing on these many pioneers, readers gain insight to not only how these inventions came to be, but why and how they actually work.  It allows the reader to recognize and appreciate the significance of the computer and the impact it has today.

Society has come a long way.  Before there were computers, or any form of technology for that matter, people relied on sticks and knots to help them with mathematics.  Around the world, different cultures created different methods for assisting them in completing calculations.  Because no one likes to do complicated computations without assistance, computers were invented.

A common factor between all of inventors and their creations was that much of the process required trial and error.  Some inventor’s plans were never even implemented, but their designs still had an effect on what society has today.  Another frequent pattern seen throughout the timeline of computers is that each inventor seemed to take something from its predecessor and build upon it.  For the most part, many of the people in the book started off toying around with ideas and expanding the work that others previously created before them.  Each invention was able to give something to society to help make a specific task easier.  One of the earliest forms of machinery, Charles Babbage’s Difference Engine, was able to complete basic math equations.  This machine made its contributions to the world of technology by giving researchers a basic structure for future computers.

In 1890, the census was looking for a way to collect and sort the data gathered about each citizen in a faster and more efficient way.  Herman Hollerith came to the rescue and created a machine that used punch cards to record information.  His Tabulating Machine Company which began as a way to promote his machines is now what we know today as IBM.

When WWII began, so did our reliance on computers.  The war played a pivotal role in the advancement of technology.  The U.S. Navy worked with IBM to design and construct a computer that would be programmable and able to calculate intricate tables.  The development of computers such as Mark I and Colossus are owed much recognition for helping end the war sooner.  Computers proved to be essential as the Mark I operated very quickly executing numerical results and Colossus helped crack the secret code the Germans had been using throughout the war.

            The emergence of the transistor drastically changed computers.  Instead of the vacuum tubes that not only took up a lot of space but also caused so much heat that it made working conditions unbearable, transistors were smaller, cooler and much more resourceful.  They also were rather cheaper which caused commercialism of computers to quickly follow, turning computers into a profitable market.

Countless years have gone into the making of the computer.   Thousands of intellectual ideas and numerous amounts research are to thank for what society has today.  Computers are evolving faster than any other modern technology.  We are seeing breakthroughs every few years as people are building upon what they are given.  What began as a tool for math is now used for entertainment, business, and research and so on. 

To Blog or Not to Blog

I have never thought of using blogs as a way to submit assignments via the internet.  When I think “blog”, schoolwork usually does not come to mind.  Teenage angst, recipes, controversy and Perez Hilton all enter my head before analytical criticisms do.    But in a course on technology and culture, it is easy to see why blogs are a not only a great use of internet, but an innovative way to collect, organize and share ideas within a classroom.

I have never had a blog before and have never desired to have one.  I usually am not completely comfortable with the idea of having my ideas and opinions out there on the internet.  Almost everyone who wants to can have access to the internet and therefore anyone can find whatever you post.  Most likely, if it was not required for this class, I would have never created a blog.  Only since we are using blogs as an educational tool, I think this will be a great way to explore the world of blogging.

Creating a blog is a great way to keep track of your work and thoughts.  It is also a very inventive way to generate class discussions outside of the classroom.  It not only gives freedom to each student to share his/her analyses on the material with his/her fellow classmates, but it also allows students to gain the feedback of others through comments. I am looking forward to reading classmates’ blogs. It will be interesting to see how the class interprets and analyzes the readings differently.

I’m hoping that by completing all of these blog assignments, my writing style and ability to critique improves.  I am also anticipating reading my blogs back at the end of the semester to see if any my opinions or reactions have changed throughout this course. 

Internet/Computer Reliance

Keeping a log of my internet use over the course of a few days really helped me realize exactly how dependent I am on it. I spend about an average of eight hours a day on the computer searching the web or with a computer in front of me. I discovered that starting my day on the computer has become a habit. I begin my internet routine checking my MyRutgers account, Sakai and the weather. Later, if I have enough free time in the morning, I continue my normal pattern and check my AOL email account as well as Facebook. I found it interesting that I go on my laptop and check the weather every morning. I never think to turn on the weather channel or check the newspaper forecast. Internet has made simple tasks even easier. I think having quick access to information for so long now has made me a little bit impatient. Having to sit through a television show and wait for your local weather to come on seems nonsensical.  I also noticed that half of the time I using a computer, I was busy doing something else as well.  I'd have a computer in front of me while reading for a class or while watching my shows.  Facebook would be up in another window while I was writing a paper.  Rather than diagnosing myself with a short intension span, I believe that access to the internet has made this generation much better multi-taskers.
While keeping track of my internet use, I spent a majority of one of my work days on the computer to do research for my boss. There was no way I could not complete this assignment without the internet. I mainly used Rutgers websites and Google to search for potential clients for a talk show that my place of employment is producing. With just a few clicks of the mouse I was able to learn about a specific someone’s educational background, research, job title and even address. Though I’ve always known that you can find out a little to a considerable amount of information on a person with just some searching, this kind of took me aback. The internet, for the most part, is public. Although I do not have an extensive resume and best-selling publications, it is still daunting to think that your information is out there for anyone to find.
During the time I recorded my internet usage down, I also realized that I definitely the internet for granted. I ordered my school books online this weekend. I printed out a coupon code for a store I went to the next day. I’ve used the internet to purchase the thousands of songs that I listen to each day. I watch the television shows that I missed the night before online. The internet has not only become a convenience in my life, but an essential.
I wasn’t necessarily shocked at how much I use the internet. A majority of my school work is done on a computer, I use the internet for leisure, to keep in touch with friends, and stay informed about what is going on in the world today.  I do believe that the internet has made things much easier for my generation.  Access to books, articles and research is right in front of us and available at anytime.  Contact with someone across the world can be made with the click of a button. 
Though I admit that I am dependent on the internet, this exercise made me wonder how it can be negatively affecting this generation.  For example, how is the internet affecting face-to-face communication?  Before the emergence of the internet, social networking, in particular, in order to reach someone, one would have to call them on a telephone or walk to their house.  Now we can just write on their wall.  While the internet is serving as a great tool for education, I wonder if it will eventually have its consequences.  Yet we still must adapt to society and with so many technological advances being made every year, it is inevitable that we become reliant on such advances.