Difference between revisions of "User:Shicks95/NMAC 4460 Journal"

From Students
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 91: Line 91:
  
 
==November 3, 2019: New Media Post 19: Is Humanity Ready for the ''Singularity''?==
 
==November 3, 2019: New Media Post 19: Is Humanity Ready for the ''Singularity''?==
It's easy to get excited about technological advancements we've read about in books or seen on television rather quickly becoming a reality. When I read about nanotechnology in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil Ray Kurzweil]'s "Reinventing Humanity", my mind immediately flickered to Tony Stark's nano-tech in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, particularly in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avengers:_Infinity_War Infinity War] when Tony uses his nano-tech to heal himself after getting stabbed by Thanos. Though real-life won't need nanotechnology to defend against alien invaders (hopefully), the potential life-saving implications of this advancement are ever apparent. The idea that humans will be able to stem the natural aging process, replace our limbs with stronger, neurologically functional parts, and eradicate chronic diseases from our DNA is mind-blowing. But I'm not so sure that all humanity is ready to accept these changes.
+
It's easy to get excited about technological advancements we've read about in books or seen on television rather quickly becoming a reality. When I read about nanotechnology in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Kurzweil Ray Kurzweil]'s "Reinventing Humanity",<ref>*{{cite web |url=http://www.singularity.com/KurzweilFuturist.pdf|title=Reinventing Humanity|last=Kurzweil |first=Ray |date=2006 |publisher=The Furturist |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv}}</ref> my mind immediately recalled Tony Stark's nano-tech in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, particularly in [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avengers:_Infinity_War Infinity War] when Tony uses his nano-tech to heal himself after getting stabbed by Thanos. Though real-life won't need nanotechnology to defend against alien invaders (hopefully), the potential life-saving implications of this advancement are ever apparent. The idea that humans will be able to stem the natural aging process, replace our limbs with stronger, neurologically functional parts, and eradicate chronic diseases from our DNA is mind-blowing. But I'm not so sure that all humanity is ready to accept these changes.
  
I believe that even if introduced gradually, these advancements will meet several barriers- particularly in western, Judeo-Christian societies. A Pew Research report noted that "Nearly two-thirds of adults (64 percent) who pray daily, attend worship services at least weekly and say religion is very important in their lives say gene editing giving babies a much reduced risk of disease crosses a line we should not cross, compared with 28 percent of people with a low commitment to a faith community." This also brings political implications, as these Christian views are a major part of the base the Republican Party and Christians make up the largest religious group in the world. How can we get laws passed that allow these technologies to be utilized to their fullest potential when we have a government that still politicizes and tries to control our bodies due to religious beliefs?
+
I believe that even if introduced gradually, these advancements will meet several barriers- particularly in western, Judeo-Christian societies. A Pew Research report noted that "Nearly two-thirds of adults (64 percent) who pray daily, attend worship services at least weekly and say religion is very important in their lives say gene editing giving babies a much reduced risk of disease crosses a line we should not cross, compared with 28 percent of people with a low commitment to a faith community."<ref>*{{cite web |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/07/26/u-s-public-wary-of-biomedical-technologies-to-enhance-human-abilities/|title=U.S. Public Wary of Biomedical Technologies to ‘Enhance’ Human Abilities |last=Funk |first=Cary |date=2016 |website=www.pewreseach.org |publisher= |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}
 +
</ref> This also brings political implications, as these Christian views are a major part of the base the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States) Republican Party] and Christians make up the largest religious group in the world.<ref>*{{cite web |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/05/title=christians-remain-worlds-largest-religious-group-but-they-are-declining-in-europe/ |last=Hackett |first=Conrad and David McClendon |date=2000 |website=|publisher=www.pewreseach.org |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}
 +
</ref> How can we get laws passed that allow these technologies to be utilized to their fullest potential when we currently have a government that still politicizes and tries to control our bodies due to religious beliefs?
  
Bill Joy's "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" raises some interesting moral questions about Kurzweil's futuristic ideals. Robots could become advanced enough that they learn to make their own decisions and humans are left at their mercy. There is also a possibility that humans will be able to main control of smaller, private machines. However, larger systems will fall into the heads of a small group of elites who will be able to wield more power than they do now due to advancements- the rest of humanity will be at their mercy. Both sound like realistic scenarios to me. Bio-engineering is another issue that's addressed in "Into the Body". What limits should society place on genetic manipulation, if any? Should all genes be able to manipulated at free-will or should we just use it to avoid passing on illnesses and diseases to our offspring. Another potential problem I find is that we live in a capitalistic society and I can easily see something like gene manipulation becoming subject to supply and demand like the pharmaceutical industry.
+
Bill Joy's "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" raises some interesting moral questions about Kurzweil's futuristic ideals. Robots could become advanced enough that they learn to make their own decisions and humans are left at their mercy. There is also a possibility that humans will be able to main control of smaller, private machines. However, larger systems will fall into the heads of a small group of elites who will be able to wield more power than they do now due to advancements- the rest of humanity will be at their mercy.<ref>*{{cite web |url=https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/|title=Why the Future Doesn't Need Us |last=Joy |first=Bill |date=2000 |website=www.wired.com|publisher= |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}</ref> Both sound like realistic scenarios to me. Bio-engineering is another issue that's addressed in "Into the Body"<ref>*{{cite web |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhOuADlf3Tg&feature=youtu.be|title=Into the Body |date=2003 |website=www.youtube.com|publisher= |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}</ref>. What limits should society place on genetic manipulation, if any? Should all genes be able to manipulated at free-will or should we just use it to avoid passing on illnesses and diseases to our offspring. Another potential problem I find is that we live in a capitalistic society and I can easily see something like gene manipulation becoming subject to supply and demand like the pharmaceutical industry.
  
 
I don't see the social, political and economical changes needed coming that will allow the fair, wide-spread use of these advanced technologies.
 
I don't see the social, political and economical changes needed coming that will allow the fair, wide-spread use of these advanced technologies.
Line 122: Line 124:
 
*{{cite web |url=https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/|title=Why the Future Doesn't Need Us |last=Joy |first=Bill |date=2000 |website=www.wired.com|publisher= |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}
 
*{{cite web |url=https://www.wired.com/2000/04/joy-2/|title=Why the Future Doesn't Need Us |last=Joy |first=Bill |date=2000 |website=www.wired.com|publisher= |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}
 
*{{cite web |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhOuADlf3Tg&feature=youtu.be|title=Into the Body |date=2003 |website=www.youtube.com|publisher= |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}
 
*{{cite web |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhOuADlf3Tg&feature=youtu.be|title=Into the Body |date=2003 |website=www.youtube.com|publisher= |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}
*{{cite web |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/07/26/u-s-public-wary-of-biomedical-technologies-to-enhance-human-abilities/|title=U.S. Public Wary of Biomedical Technologies to ‘Enhance’ Human Abilities |last=Funk |first=Cary |date=2016 |website=www.pewreseach.org |publisher= |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}
+
*{{cite web |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/07/26/u-s-public-wary-of-biomedical-technologies-to-enhance-human-abilities/|title=U.S. Public Wary of Biomedical Technologies to ‘Enhance’ Human Abilities |last=Funk |first=Cary, Brian Kennedy, and Elizabeth Podrebarac Scuipac |date=2016 |website=www.pewreseach.org |publisher= |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}
 +
*{{cite web |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/05/christians-remain-worlds-largest-religious-group-but-they-are-declining-in-europe/ |title=Christians remain world’s largest religious group, but they are declining in Europe |last=Hackett |first=Conrad and David McClendon |date=2000 |website=|publisher=www.pewreseach.org |access-date=3 November 2019|quote= |ref=harv }}
 +
 
 +
 
  
 
=== Citations ===
 
=== Citations ===

Latest revision as of 07:26, 4 November 2019

August 19, 2019: New Media Post 1

New Media is a form of mass communication that utilizes the Internet and computer technology to reach global audiences simultaneously. Examples include social media applications such as Twitter and Facebook, Internet browsers such as Google and Internet Explorer and video-hosting and streaming sites such as Youtube and Twitch. It has changed the way people receive and send information, a large part of which is due to the wide availability of smartphones and other mobile devices.

Factors that differentiate new media from traditional forms of media include:

  • User interactivity
  • Audiences have concurrent access to media
@Shicks95: Check your links. I explain how to link on the front page of this site. I helped with your formatting some. —Grlucas (talk) 06:42, 9 September 2019 (EDT)

August 19, 2019: New Media Post 2

After doing more research, I find my initial evaluation of new media while fair, to be shallow. I failed to acknowledge the academic study of new media and its broader applications on society as Professor Lucas does on New Media . Beyond digital applications and computer technologies, new media has "decentralized media control and production" in contrast to the tightly controlled access of old media such as film, television, print and newspaper industries. People are, for the part, free to create, distribute, and consume various forms of media at their leisure as we have seen on sites and applications such as Medium, Vine, Tumblr and Youtube. I look forward to theorizing about the societal and economical ramifications of this decentralization.

Lev Manovich's distinction of new media versus cyberculture piqued my interest. He describes cyberculture as "the study of various social phenomena associated with Internet and other new forms of network communication." Making that distinction is important because social networking is not only a big part of this digital era, but it has changed how people connect globally and share news and information with one another. For example, in June, there was a social movement on sites such as Twitter and Instagram that spread via the #BlueForSudan hashtag where users turned their profile pictures to show solidarity for protesters in Sudan who were being brutalized and killed by their government officials who simultaneously blocked off Internet access to avoid coverage of their atrocities. Blue was chosen because it was the favorite color of one of the victims. These atrocities were not previously covered on major news and broadcasts until after the movement started.

In New Media: A Critical Introduction, the authors introduce the topic by questioning how we define the 'new' in new media. What I took from it was that while mediums such as video, print and photography have obviously existed far before the new media era, it's more-so defined by progress: more access, productivity, and opportunity to create not only content, but new markets such as e-commerce and new technologies such as virtual reality.

@Shicks95: I also thought the point from the authors from New Media: A Critical Introduction about the definition of New Media was interesting. New Media is more about how easily accessible things have become thanks to new technologies rather than the technologies themselves. We have had the internet for awhile but now it is more accessible through our smartphones. MGray1196 (talk) 23:50, 8 September 2019 (EDT)
@Shicks95: Better here, but please cite correctly. Go back and have a look at my directions on the lessons, please. You will be building on these all semester. (And it should be "piqued my interest." 😉 ) —Grlucas (talk) 06:45, 9 September 2019 (EDT)

September 8, 2019: New Media Post 3- Foundations

This was a lot of information to absorb. The founders that our featured in this lesson were obviously men of great intelligence and foresight. They shared many of the same ideals, but they all saw a variety of ways to mold them. Before I get into that, I came to a realization while reading Cyberstarts and how it connects to the previous lesson in which we defined New Media.

The Enlightenment period is referenced as part of the inspiration behind Turing's universal machine. After reading this, I believe it is important to highlight how important the social aspect of New Media is. With old media, communication is typically one-way. An editor, advertisers, and studios have a message they want you to hear and feedback is not prioritized. I think all these inventors ultimate goal was for humans to connect more efficiently and provide the means for people to have access to and share knowledge. Bush's memex and corresponding essay "As We May Think" is one of the earliest examples of this and was a prime prototype for the World Wide Web, PCs, and Wikipedia.

I found another shared ideal among the foundational thinkers to transcend human limits. They sought to invent machines and computations that changed military operations, including improved communications systems between military branches and weapons development like the Manhattan Project. The Universal Turing machine is a computation model one of the earliest prototypes of artificial intelligence, its intended purpose to "mimic the behavior of any discrete machine" or even human behavior using algorithms. Douglas Engelbart, too, saw the need for augmented intelligence in a world that was growing more complex. Many of his theories came to fruition, such as his belief that the computer would be an essential tool in the future and that the advancement of computer technology would significantly accelerate societal growth.

September 8, 2019: New Media Post 4

What general idea that I got from reading "The Medium is the Message" is that it's how humanity utilizes technology determines its purpose or the message. One of the examples McLuhan uses is automation. It's one of the most ongoing social and political issues in our country that automation is taking away jobs from Americans. But it's not the technology itself that's the issue. This advancement was made because of the growing demand for mass production in a rapidly producing society and because of capitalism which routinely undervalues labor for increased profits- all societal issues.

Another example is smartphones which have a variety of functions, the most utilized one being to stay connected whether that's through social media apps, text messaging or phone. Yet, older generations see it people actually avoiding or missing connections. Perhaps this is true- but it doesn't really make sense to blame it on smartphones as they are useless when not in use by people. Take texting and driving. According to the National Safety Council, 1 out of every 4 car accidents in the United States is caused by texting and driving. The only party at fault the person who was driving while distracted with a text. The smartphone isn't the issue as drivers regularly use it for other helpful functions such as GPS and auto insurance cards. As with all technology, the way its utilized by humanity determines the message or purpose.

September 15, 2019: New Media Post 5

September 14, 2019: New Media Post 6

September 21, 2019: New Media Post 7

Accessibility is a key factor in both Revolution OS and this new media age because

September 22, 2019: New Media Post 8

September 28, 2019: New Media Post 9- Remix and Participatory Culture

Convergence culture is a cultural shift in which old media and new media have collided to shift entire industries such as journalism, create new industries such as social media, and sees the distinction of producer and consumer blur as consumers use new technologies to create and share their own content as they wish.

Participatory culture is a parallel idea of convergence culture with more emphasis on how young people seek societal engagement to share their ideals. With New media, not only do young people have access to more information, but they also have the ability to share their thoughts and engage a broader audience outside of their communities who make them feel supported enough to do so.

@Shicks95: I totally agree the industry always comes in conflict with copyright because i think people just don't that you cant just take someones things and do what you want without permission. Remixing it and making money off of it is totally wrong. Convergence definitely shakes the game up because it allows people to remix without the hassle. Remixing has been around for years and I think it's for the betterment of New media. VincentH81 (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2019 (EDT)

September 28, 2019: New Media Post 10- Remix and Participatory Culture

Remix and participatory culture sees consumers go from passively consuming content fed to them by media corporations and begin remixing and creating new content themselves. The consumers are able and willing to share this content to connect with a universal audience who will also share it and may remix this content for the same purpose. Consumers regularly come into conflict with the media industry with copyright laws as a result of remixing and sharing this content. This convergence also sees a radical shift of how we absorb earn not only pop culture, but news, religion, politics, and other societal aspects.

Culture is sharing. It is ideas in communities of various sizes, offline or online, being transposed with active participants who simply to share what they've learned with others. But as we see in the issue with copyright laws, the best way to go about sharing is still up in air. I personally agree that copyright laws stifle creativity and discourage participatory culture even though it is shown to help boost the offended party's profile. However. I also understand how important it is to not undervalue someone's work. That said, I would consider remixing stealing if it can be proven that value has been lost, as Universal was trying to argue in Stephanie Lenz v. Universal Music Corporation.

@Shicks95: You should see me. —Grlucas (talk) 10:15, 3 October 2019 (EDT)

October 6, 2019: New Media Post 11- Hackschooling

I found Nelsonand Mitra's critiques of the modern educational system to be very valid in that much of the curriculum is rigid and doesn't support creativity or engaged critical thinking. In relation to new media, I think they emphasize in different ways how important accessibility to computer technology is for being digital because knowledge is always at the tip of our fingers and it's important to understand how to find and discern that information. Mitra refers to the children in the Indian slums in his "Hole in the Wall" experiment whose potentials were realized when they were given access to a computer.[1] Nelson speaks about the design flaws of CAI, saying that computers merely replace teachers in leading instead of truly engaging students.[2] The hacker spirit is explored in reducing these barriers and encouraging students to explore and discover at their own leisure and pace.

I remember using a computer as young as 5 years-old. I cannot remember a single instance of my parents sitting down with me and explaining how to browse the Internet, reboot the system, etc. I can remember discovering how to copy and paste photos into Microsoft Paint, playing Pinball, chatting up strangers AOL chatrooms, and browsing the Internet whatever had my interest at the time (probably dogs and Power Rangers). I see the same, easy immediate grasp of technology with young children today with tablets. If a 1 year-old wants to hear "Baby Shark" for the 140th time that day, they what the replay button looks like or they might tell Alexa or Siri to play it again. Or they will unlock the tablet, open YouTube and go through video to video until they find it.

Learning by discovery is all children do to up until they go to school and then they are forced into this system that tells them what to learn, how to learn, how quickly they need to learn it and judges and fails them without taking into consideration individuality, differing learning styles, and potential social disorders like anxiety. Though I do believe some structure is necessary for learning the basics such as reading and writing. Kids need to be able grasp of proper English, phonics, grammar, sentence structure and punctuation so they can process the information they have access to.

@Shicks95: Please make a point of signing up for a face-to-face session. I'm requiring this for you. —Grlucas (talk) 11:38, 7 October 2019 (EDT)

October 6, 2019: New Media Post 12- Hackschooling 2

I was happy to see a few points I made in the previous post popped up in the suggested material. This generation of children is not only aware that the modern school system is failing them, but they also know how to fix it.[3]. They understand that learning needs to be more individualized not only because they all learn differently and at different paces, but because they have also have various interests they wish to pursue in these formative years. Participation culture also plays a big part in this reform in that this generation wants more opportunity to apply what they're skills and knowledge in the real world. They very much want to get involved in their communities and affect change and don't want to be stuck in a classroom all day taking tests that rely on memorization. Interestingly, despite being raised entirely in the new media age, these kids are not overly fond of online learning which gives Nelson's critiques of CAI more valid. They understand they need guidance, but they also want the opportunity to think for themselves and not be given all the answers.

Ultimately, as David Sax points out, there needs to be a balance.[4] I think society owes these children, our future leaders, inventors, doctors and artists to build a society that encourages them to be the best versions of themselves and I believe that with new media, the sky is the limit. Children are regularly creating and sharing their thoughts and ideas on social media and video-sharing sites. We should also encourage them to sit and write with pen and paper instead of stylus because that's always going to be a necessary skill. Or maybe just to write in a diary instead of Twitter or Facebook where many fall victim to oversharing for the sake of likes. And while how we use these things may change, we still need schools, museums, parks, concerts, bars and coffee shops. We need places where people can connect to one another without a screen because there's not a machine in this world (yet) that can replace the human connections that we've built our world on.

October 13, 2019: New Media Post 13 Cyberspace: Humanity Gets Digitized

I think it's amazing to see how new media gives people with little to no computing background the ability to create entirely new worlds through MUDs. I think it's even more interesting to see how people manage to encode humanity into these digital landscapes in many ways. In MUDS like SecondLife, people are able to replicate and do the same things they do in real-life. I think the added of appeal is that there are few, if any, barriers to living the life they want to live virtually. While I can't pretend to understand the appeal of cybersex, I do understand it as a manifestation of the power of human sensuality. I also see cyber-rape the same way I see real-life rape: it's about power as shown Mr. Bungle's case in "A Rape in Cyberspace".[5] Alter notes in her article that tests have proven that people have the same neurological and emotional responses to virtual interactions as they do in the same real-life interactions. People form friendships and even romantic relationships that they can be evolved even further into virtual marriages such as in the case of Mr. Hoogestraat.[6] Ultimately, I see these virtual worlds as an extension of the basic human desire to connect with one another and indulge in our most fantastical imaginations.

My own experience with virtual reality games begins and ends with the now defunct MyCoke as a preteen. For a few months I had my own place, made some friends, danced to pool parties in Mexico, partied on yachts in Miami and regularly went clubbing in New York. I had several boyfriends and I may have gotten married once or twice. I may have had a child at one point-- all by the tender age of 12. In my under-developed mind, it meant nothing. I knew nothing about the people I interacted with beyond what they told me as we explored these worlds together. I had a healthy balance which was easy as my schedule was dictated by my parents and my only access to MyCoke was on our shared family computer. I played when I could and didn't care when I couldn't because it was just a game to me.

October 13, 2019: New Media Post 14 Carving Identities and Digital Governance

Turker's article supports the idea that MUDders have psychological and emotional responses to this gameplay that have real world implications to their lives and psyche. In Julee's case, she was able to work through her emotional issues with her mother through role-playing. Robert's MUD experience kept him distracted from "suicidal thoughts" as his real life was falling apart. Peter found socialization in MUD easier than in real-life and also gained knowledge outside the bubble of his real world.[7] In MUDs, users are able to cultivate whole new identities for themselves in worlds without limitations. MUD's take "being digital" to the next level because users are literally constructing their digital selves who are able to live as they wish in digital societies cultivated by themselves and the advancements are only going to get more realistic. While reading over this topic, I immediately thought of "San Junipero", one of my favorite Black Mirror episodes, in which the two characters meet and fall in love in San Junipero, a simulated reality where users actual consciousnesses are transferred and they are able to live at any time in any place. The idea that could be a possibility one day is insane but exciting.

Because of this vastness and the excitement of what cyberspace and virtual reality could bring, I find myself agreeing with many of the points made in John Perry Barlow's "The Declaration of the Independence in Cyberspace"[8] and Flint Kinley's "Inventor of the Web Is Right: We Need an Internet Bill of Rights"[9] with some reservations. Barlow recognizes cyberspace as a libertarian landscape in which no government interference is nor should be invited due to the fact that cyberspace exists on a plane that doesn't call for regulation outside of the participants who know it best after constructing it themselves. The handling of the Mr. Bungle incident proves that this can be done. None of the victims felt the need to involve real-life government action for the digital violation and readily held open discussions with the entire community on how to handle it and further violations. However, the separation between digital and real-life gets muddled when applying real-life concepts with legal implications in digital spaces, such as taxation and currency. I think if users are earning money in these worlds and want to spend it in real-life, it should be taxed as income as that currency is real and thus the real-world law applies to it. If the currency stays within game, no government taxation is necessary. This is why a digital bill of rights is necessary: to establish solid protections for Internet users and find some congruence in these parallel worlds.

October 20, 2019: New Media Post 15

October 27, 2019: New Media Post 17: TikTok, Remixing, Participatory Culture & Hackschooling

In previous lessons, we discussed about remixing, participatory culture and hackschooling. While casually scrolling my Twitter feed on Friday evening, I came across content that combines these concepts in a really interesting way. Twitter user @nadiajaferey curated a thread of college and high school students on TikTok recreating historical moments throughout history using texts, symbols, contemporary music and soundbites from reality videos dubbed over the re-enactments. Some of the content includes the German Occupation of Belgium, the Great Plague, European imperialism, and the sinking of the Titanic.

This type of content both supports remix culture in that these students are using previously developed content to create a new version. The sharing of this content on TikTok and other social media platforms reinforces the students' commitment to participatory culture while the content itself shows how students are centering themselves in their education and using new media to curate an educational experience that they can fully engage with.


November 3, 2019: New Media Post 19: Is Humanity Ready for the Singularity?

It's easy to get excited about technological advancements we've read about in books or seen on television rather quickly becoming a reality. When I read about nanotechnology in Ray Kurzweil's "Reinventing Humanity",[10] my mind immediately recalled Tony Stark's nano-tech in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, particularly in Infinity War when Tony uses his nano-tech to heal himself after getting stabbed by Thanos. Though real-life won't need nanotechnology to defend against alien invaders (hopefully), the potential life-saving implications of this advancement are ever apparent. The idea that humans will be able to stem the natural aging process, replace our limbs with stronger, neurologically functional parts, and eradicate chronic diseases from our DNA is mind-blowing. But I'm not so sure that all humanity is ready to accept these changes.

I believe that even if introduced gradually, these advancements will meet several barriers- particularly in western, Judeo-Christian societies. A Pew Research report noted that "Nearly two-thirds of adults (64 percent) who pray daily, attend worship services at least weekly and say religion is very important in their lives say gene editing giving babies a much reduced risk of disease crosses a line we should not cross, compared with 28 percent of people with a low commitment to a faith community."[11] This also brings political implications, as these Christian views are a major part of the base the Republican Party and Christians make up the largest religious group in the world.[12] How can we get laws passed that allow these technologies to be utilized to their fullest potential when we currently have a government that still politicizes and tries to control our bodies due to religious beliefs?

Bill Joy's "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us" raises some interesting moral questions about Kurzweil's futuristic ideals. Robots could become advanced enough that they learn to make their own decisions and humans are left at their mercy. There is also a possibility that humans will be able to main control of smaller, private machines. However, larger systems will fall into the heads of a small group of elites who will be able to wield more power than they do now due to advancements- the rest of humanity will be at their mercy.[13] Both sound like realistic scenarios to me. Bio-engineering is another issue that's addressed in "Into the Body"[14]. What limits should society place on genetic manipulation, if any? Should all genes be able to manipulated at free-will or should we just use it to avoid passing on illnesses and diseases to our offspring. Another potential problem I find is that we live in a capitalistic society and I can easily see something like gene manipulation becoming subject to supply and demand like the pharmaceutical industry.

I don't see the social, political and economical changes needed coming that will allow the fair, wide-spread use of these advanced technologies.

November 3, 2019: New Media Post 20: Some Final Thoughts

Since these are our weekly final posts, I wanted to touch on an aspect of new media that I noticed throughout the course, but believe that this week's texts really emphasized. There is a stark contrast between old and new media that has become more apparent. I think that old media were created with these overall goals in mind: to inform, to entertain and to sell. New media has not only revolutionized how these goals are accomplished via the Internet, but new media goes a step further and also seeks to improve the human condition. We read about how children are able to utilize their natural curiosity and intelligence when simply given access to the Internet. We read about using virtual reality as a medium for therapeutic treatments. This week's texts discussed advancements being made in bio-engineering and gene manipulation that may stem the aging process or remove chronic diseases in unborn children. Improved cybernetics will give blind people the ability to see or allow people to think faster and recall more information or potentially remove that need all together.

The potential of new media, if utilized by the right people with good intentions in mind, is truly endless.

References

Bibliography

  • Lucas, Gerald (December 23, 2013). "New Media". grlucas.net. Retrieved 25 August 2019.
  • Manovich, Lev (2003). New Media from Borges to HTML (PDF). The MIT Press. pp. 13–25. Retrieved 25 August 2019.
  • Jenkins, Henry (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide (PDF). New York: NYU Press. ISBN 0814743072.
  • Mitra, Sugata (February 2013). "Build a School in the Cloud". TED Talks. Retrieved 4 October 2019.
  • Bush, Vannevar (1945). "As We May Think". theatlantic.com. Retrieved 8 September 2019.
  • Nelson, Ted (1974). "Computer Lib / Dream Machines". In Wardrip-Fruin; Montfort (eds.). NMR.
  • University, Singularity (2017). "6 Tips on the Future of Learning from Actual Teenage Exponential Thinkers". medium.com. Retrieved 6 October 2019.
  • Sax, David (2017). "Our Love Affair With Digital is Over". www.nytimes.com. Retrieved 6 October 2019.
  • Alter, Alexandra (2007). "Is This Man Cheating on His Wife?". www.wsj.com. Retrieved 13 October 2019.
  • Dibbell, Julian (2007). "A Rape in Cyberspace". juliandibbell.com. Retrieved 13 October 2019.
  • Turkle, Sherry (1994). "Constructions and Reconstructions of Self in Virtual Reality: Playing in the MUDs". web.mit.edu. Retrieved 13 October 2019.
  • Barlow, John (1996). "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace". www.eff.org. Retrieved 13 October 2019.
  • Finley, Klint (2014). "Inventor of the Web Is Right: We Need an Internet Bill of Rights". www.wired.com. Retrieved 13 October 2019.
  • Kurzweil, Ray (2006). "Reinventing Humanity" (PDF). The Furturist. Retrieved 3 November 2019.
  • Joy, Bill (2000). "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us". www.wired.com. Retrieved 3 November 2019.
  • "Into the Body". www.youtube.com. 2003. Retrieved 3 November 2019.
  • Funk, Cary, Brian Kennedy, and Elizabeth Podrebarac Scuipac (2016). "U.S. Public Wary of Biomedical Technologies to 'Enhance' Human Abilities". www.pewreseach.org. Retrieved 3 November 2019.
  • Hackett, Conrad and David McClendon (2000). "Christians remain world's largest religious group, but they are declining in Europe". www.pewreseach.org. Retrieved 3 November 2019.


Citations

  1. Mitra, Sugata (February 2013). "Build a School in the Cloud". TED Talks. Retrieved 4 October 2019.
  2. Nelson, Ted (1974). "Computer Lib / Dream Machines". In Wardrip-Fruin; Montfort (eds.). NMR.
  3. University, Singularity (2017). "6 Tips on the Future of Learning from Actual Teenage Exponential Thinkers". medium.com. Retrieved 6 October 2019.
  4. Sax, David (2017). "Our Love Affair With Digital is Over". www.nytimes.com. Retrieved 6 October 2019.
  5. Dibbell, Julian (2007). "A Rape in Cyberspace". www.juliandibbell.com. Retrieved 13 October 2019.
  6. Alter, Alexandra (2007). "Is This Man Cheating on His Wife?". www.wsj.com. Retrieved 13 October 2019.
  7. Turkle, Sherry (1994). "Constructions and Reconstructions of Self in Virtual Reality: Playing in the MUDs". http://web.mit.edu. Retrieved 13 October 2019. External link in |website= (help)
  8. Barlow, John (1996). "A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace". www.eff.org. Retrieved 13 October 2019.
  9. *Finley, Klint (2014). "Inventor of the Web Is Right: We Need an Internet Bill of Rights". www.wired.com. Retrieved 13 October 2019.
  10. *Kurzweil, Ray (2006). "Reinventing Humanity" (PDF). The Furturist. Retrieved 3 November 2019.
  11. *Funk, Cary (2016). "U.S. Public Wary of Biomedical Technologies to 'Enhance' Human Abilities". www.pewreseach.org. Retrieved 3 November 2019.
  12. *Hackett, Conrad and David McClendon (2000). www.pewreseach.org https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/05/title=christians-remain-worlds-largest-religious-group-but-they-are-declining-in-europe/. Retrieved 3 November 2019. Missing or empty |title= (help)
  13. *Joy, Bill (2000). "Why the Future Doesn't Need Us". www.wired.com. Retrieved 3 November 2019.
  14. *"Into the Body". www.youtube.com. 2003. Retrieved 3 November 2019.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19]

[20]

  1. New Media https://grlucas.net/grl/New_Media
  2. Manovich, Lev. "New Media From Borges to HTML." The New Media Reader. Ed. Noah Wardrip-Fruin & Nick Montfort. Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2003. p. 9
  3. New Media: a Critical Introduction, Second Edition p. 28
  4. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/303881/
  5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c539cK58ees&feature=youtu.be
  6. https://www.edgarsnyder.com/car-accident/cause-of-accident/cell-phone/cell-phone-statistics.html#targetText=General%20Cell%20Phone%20Statistics,caused%20by%20texting%20and%20driving.
  7. https://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativity/discussion
  8. https://archive.org/details/LawrenceLessigRemix/page/n45
  9. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFCLKa0XRlw&feature=youtu.be
  10. http://faculty.georgetown.edu/irvinem/theory/Jenkins-ConvergenceCulture-Intro.pdf
  11. https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2015/03/article_0006.htm
  12. https://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_build_a_school_in_the_cloud/discussion#t-1059721
  13. http://www.newmediareader.com/book_samples/nmr-21-nelson.pdf
  14. https://medium.com/singularityu/6-tips-on-the-future-of-learning-from-actual-teenage-exponential-thinkers-6231c4ec2dd2
  15. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/18/opinion/sunday/internet-digital-technology-return-to-analog.html
  16. https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118670164592393622?ns=prod/accounts-wsj
  17. http://www.juliandibbell.com/articles/a-rape-in-cyberspace/
  18. http://web.mit.edu/sturkle/www/constructions.html
  19. https://www.wired.com/2014/03/web25/
  20. https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence