Live with People not Computers

Today it is possible for a person to live at their computer.  A person can do everything from ordering food, reading books, shopping, and making "friends" on the internet.  The internet has made it so a person does not need to interact with other people face to face on a daily basis if they do not wish do.  When a person chooses to live their life in the virtual world rather than the real world they can end up losing more than social interactions.  A person who lives in the virtual world can forget how things in the real world really are.  They can lose anything from their job to their family.  People can keep touch in the real world by setting bounds on their usage of the internet or by setting rules for a minimum amount of time spent with people face to face per day.  A person must not forget to keep touch with others in the real world in order to keep their own life in the real world.

Internet Captures People

The internet can catch people just like any other net can capture its victims.  However, getting caught in the internet is more difficult to recognize because the internet's snare cannot be physically felt.  One who starts to become captivated by online material cannot feel the internet start to tangle around their legs.  As the person finally starts to notice the internet pulling them in, they believe they can still get out anytime they want.  While the person continues to deny that they are trapped by the internet they return to it, often becoming more tangled in its snare than before.  It is not until the person is completely caught and cannot get out on their own that they realize they have been captured.  Now the only way out is for the person to admit defeat to the internet's grasp and ask for help.  One must be wary of the addictive nature of the internet and realize that its ability to ensnare people is as real as a physical net.

Integration not Invention Revolutionizes the World

There is a misconception that the invention new technology revolutionizes the world by the mere fact of being invented.  This idea is wrong. A new invention that has the potential to revolutionize the world may never change people's lives if the invention is not accepted and used by society.  Similarly, a new, frivolous invention can revolutionize the world because that product is accepted by people and adapted into their lives.  It takes a change by people for a new piece of technology to change the world.

An example of this is society's acceptance of the Ipod as opposed to augmented reality. The Ipod does not really improve the everyday lives of people, but it has revolutionized the way people listen to music.  An Ipod can be seen everywhere from kids, to joggers, to businessmen.  This widespread use and acceptance of the Ipod is what allowed it to change the way society listens to music.  Contrast this to augmented reality which has the potential to improve people's lives and significantly change the way people live.  However, most people have never heard of this technology.  While others may have only seen a video of it on Youtube.  Augmented reality will change the world if people incorporate it into their lives.

This is one example of how the invention of new technology alone will never be revolutionary.  It takes people's use of that new technology to change the world.

Internet Censorship Bill

The Tycoon Who Cried Thief

The tycoons of today's media chose lawyers rather than innovators to further their business interests.  This decision has led to a decrease in innovation by creative individuals because the fear of being sued for copyright infringement by the media tycoons.  This is ironic since the tycoons have been using their power to steal the ownership rights of artists for years.  While these greedy businessmen cry thief so the government will protect their profits, the artist who is truly being robbed is ignored.  If this injustice is not corrected, today's media tycoons will continue to cry thief until innovation is extinct in both technology and artistry.

Computer Science Not a Profession!?

Professor Paul De Palma in his article "Women, Mathematics, and Computing" stated, "[Computer Science] is not a real profession."  His argument for such a statement is that there are no licensing requirements for entering the field.  There are no licensing reqirements for the men and women who wish to become business executives, journalists, and even university professors.  By Professor Palma's definition of profession, none of the previously listed positions are professions.  This makes absolutely no sense.  In fact, computer science is a better profession for not having licensing requirements for entry.  It allows for more competition in the industry, which would not be the case if there were licensing requirements.  Open entry to this profession facilitates the continual advancement of computer science.

Historical Information Made More Useful

Past generations have painstakingly kept records by hand. However, the information that they spent so much time and effort to preserve is often difficult to sort and organize.  It is even harder to take the information recorded by multiple people and compile it into a single, cohesive record.  This is where computer technology can improve the use of these handwritten records.   Computer technology can take the information that was collected by any number of people during any time period and create a digital record of the information.  Then this information can easily be searched and linked together.  This information that was difficult to search and link together can now be manipulated through several strokes of the keyboard because of the miracle of computer technology.

Increased Responsibility with Increased Technology

Technology has dramatically improved over the last 200 years.  Communication has moved from handwritten letters, to the telegraph, to the telephone, and now to the internet.  These advances allow information to move across the world in seconds rather than the months it took before the invention of the telegraph.  With these improvements comes an increased responsibility to stay informed.  The widespread availability of the internet makes limitless information available at the click of a mouse.  This increase in communication technology also increases the difficulty of one's responsibility to stay in touch with the real world outside of computers.  One can easily waste the day away on their computer without ever going outside.  It is important to remember with these improvements in technology there needs to be a greater awareness of its uses so it can improve one's life without completely taking it over.

Open Versus Closed Development

Open source software development relies on interested, knowledgeable users to update and fix a piece of software for free.  Closed source software is developed by paid programmers who do not share the source of their software with others.  When closed source software has problems or updates, the paid developers are the only ones who are allowed to change the source code.  This process can take a long time because the developers must diagnose the problems that need to be fixed and then fix them.  Updating closed source software can also take a long time because the developers of the software are usually not the ones who request the update, so they must first figure out exactly what the update should do.  Open source software can improve the process of updating and debugging software by allowing users to see the source code and attempt to fix the problems or add updates themselves.  This speeds up the process of putting out a new version of software which leads to better software faster than using closed source development.

Refusing Responsibility

    It can be extremely trying for an institution to accept additional responsibilities in difficult or adverse situations.  It seems logical that an organization would not want to take on the responsibility when the current climate seems bleak.  However, refusing to accept responsibility when things are not convenient can  have wide spread, detrimental effects because the situation that could have been resolved will continue to terrorize others. 
    An example of a difficult situation that is plaguing society is the problem of identity theft.  Since it is difficult for law enforcement agencies to find the portraiture of identity theft they often choose not to pursue the criminals that are terrorizing hard working people around the world.  The road to eliminating identity theft is expensive and time consuming, so it is understandable why cash strapped law enforcement agencies do not want to take on the responsibility.  However, until they start to take responsibility for solving the problem of identity theft, it will continue to plague society by destroying credit scores and ruining businesses.
    Taking responsibility for difficult situations is often arduous and usually not desirable.  The most important and influential actions require a herculean effort.  If law enforcement continues to refuse responsibility when it is inconvenient for them, society will never improve.  Today's society needs more institutions to step up to the plate to take responsibility even when it seems like the responsibility is too great.

NASDAQ Feels Stoll's Frustration

Just as Cliff Stoll spotted and followed a hacker who was looking for information by using his system at Lawrence Berkley Laboratory (LBL), NASDAQ recently had a hacker invade their system looking for information.  Just as the hacking began at LBL with a hole in the widely used GNUEmacs program, hackers first penetrated NASDAQ through a hole in a commonly used Microsoft's server system.  NASDAQ and Stoll both discovered the hackers through their normal means of monitoring of their computers.  Even though NASDAQ had the help of government agencies, they too had difficulties tracking down their hacker just as Stoll did.  Another similarity between the situations at NASDAQ and LBL is that even when the detected hole is patched, there are certainly other holes that the hackers will use, so a single patch will not fix everything.  With situations like these becoming too common, it is time to allow computer security systems to go on the offensive when a hacker strikes.  This type of solution to computer hackers could substantially decrease the number of situations like those that occured at NASDAQ and LBL.

Lawmakers Forcing People to Unplug While Outside

MSNBC reports that Lawmakers declare war on texting and walking.  The article states that two senators of the United States are trying to pass laws against texting while walking.  These senators also want to make it illegal for anyone to wear earphones in both ears while they are outside.  It seems absurd that Americans have become so rude with and attached to their technology that laws would need to be passed for their own safety.  However, you will not have to think back too far to recall the last time that you saw someone texting on their phone and walk through a cross walk without looking up from their phone.  Also, you probably do not have to think all that far back to remember the last time you saw a jogger with an Ipod that was completely oblivious to everything around them.  If Americans cannot learn to be safe while using their technology, perhaps it is time that the government makes a stand before a serious tragedy occurs.

The Race to Get Rid of Your Wallet

A new market is about to erupt, with many competitors in the race for a major share.  Within two years applications that make mobile phone payments will boom.  These applications could potentially end the need for your wallet because most monetary transactions could be done from your cell phone.  This boom is similar to the PC boom of the Eighties' and Nineties'.  The situation currently at Paypal is similar to the situation that existed at IBM. IBM was a mainframe manufacturer and started branching out to the PC market. Similarly, Paypal is an online payment company branching out to mobile payments.  A second similarity exists: just as Microsoft was a major winner in the PC boom because it provided the operating system that made many of the computers work, I believe that a major winner in this upcoming mobile phone payment boom will be a financial company that makes these transactions actually happen.  Also, as was the case of the PC boom, the biggest winner will probably not be the company with the best application, but will be the company in the right place at the right time.
Link to Article Read

Smallish Blog Post 1 - Technology is Ecological

Neil Postman said, "Technological change is not additive; it is ecological" in his article titled Five Things We Need to Know About Technology Change. By this he means that a piece of new technology is not just added to a small portion of the world, but that it changes the entire world.  At first, I thought Neil Postman's statement was exaggerated, but then as I pondered on the statement, I realized that he was right.  I applied the statement on a personal level.  Nearly every time that I learn a new technology, I end up using it in several different aspects of my life and not just for what I learned to use it.  As an example, I took the laptop computer.  At first, I thought that a laptop computer was just for doing school assignments and playing games.  Then as I learned the power and capabilities of it, I started to use it in more parts of my life.  Now I use my laptop computer in some way for almost everything I do.  As one reflects on Neil Postman's statement about new technology, they will recognize the truthfulness of the statement and perhaps realize new ways in which the technology they have can change their life for the better.