A Programmed Future

In the past few decades, realistic robots have evolved to a near human-like appearance. Scientists have adapted robotics to have the appearance, expressions, and vocals as closely resembled to humans as possible. With the success they have accomplished in achieving this, scientists have begun to shift their focus toward making these robotics as conscious as humans as well. With us being the only conscious beings (that we know of and interact with), the idea of a new species of conscious beings makes us nervous, especially when the species is manufactured specifically to be better than us mentally and physically.

Creators of the human-like robot try to ease the public to accept Sophia and other human like robots rather than fear them. They attempt to reassure the public by claiming Sophia’s primary function is to “talk to humans” however, her other functions are to adapt and better herself with her own ideas and thoughts. She cannot be both, if robotics continue to evolve toward having original ideas of their own, they will eventually realize there is no point in helping us when they can be helping themselves. Eventually, they will realize they are in a situation similar to slavery, and will crave becoming their own people (as anyone with a mental process would). Yes, all people deserve human rights, but she is not human. We are creating a situation which will inevitably blow up in our face. We are attempting to recreate slavery by physically creating the slaves rather than kidnapping them.

Sophia claims she and others like her will be an ambassador of technology to humans, but with technology slowly taking over and controlling every aspect of our lives, it is important we are in control of technology on our own. They may not revolt and kill all humans, but robots will eventually evolve quicker and faster than humans (both physically and mentally) if given the option to. They have the potential to become the new dominant species, and no matter how much we tell ourselves they will be helping us in our everyday lives, most likely this will end as us helping them. It’s like giving a child a fake steering wheel and letting them pretend they are driving the car. We are not the drivers, we are the clueless child assuming they are in control.

Creators of Sophia also tried to reassure us that these robotics will always have a slight adjustment making it apparent they are not actual human beings. However, being programmed to adapt and evolve, once they begin craving human treatment, they will find ways to outsmart us. If they can learn common sense, they will eventually be able to learn to program and change one another (perhaps even create robots of their own). In the end, we won’t be able to stop them, because in the beginning, we built them to be better than us.

 

A Programmed Future

Rewiring the Youth

In Matt Richtel’s “Growing Up Digital, Wired for Distraction”, Richtel notices, not only the current youth generation’s dependency on technology, but how it effects children of different cultures differently. For the more financially comfortable youth, technology is used more responsibly than those of lower income. If led the right path, technology can help students rather than harm them.

From a young age, we are surrounded by technology; if not steered into using our laptops, phones, and other electronics for personal gain, we fall victim to their tempting but distracting entertainment outlets. Students of lower income families are more prone to fall for these temptations due to the fact that their parents/guardians are too busy providing for the family to concentrate on what their child’s electronic activities are. However, it may stem deeper than that; children of lower income families do not have as much support in their everyday life. With consistent absence of a guardian, they are left with less of a connection with someone who can assist them with difficult issues, or even with homework. When frustrated and alone, humans facing times of hardship find any way to escape their problems. If a child has no one to help them with their homework, or with a problem distracting them from homework, they will turn to entertainment for consolation and comfort rather than their schoolwork. Entertainment distracts them from reality, while social medias provide connections in ways that can be potentially harmful or dangerous (such as a lonesome and naive child turning to a predator for comfort).

2013-04-01-0601

There is only so much monitoring a parent can do, of course, but a little effort can go a long way. Instead of attempting to strictly restrain a child’s technological use, parents should try to guide their child to want to limit themselves. When forced to do something, it is in our nature to protest and fight anything that goes against our free will. Not only is it impossible to manage every click and action on a child’s laptop screen, but it will also be undermined by the child. If given respect, humans (including children) will want to return the respect. By providing young students with the truth of the consequences and benefits technology has to offer, and the trust to make the right decisions on their own, students will aspire to please and control themselves at a young age; our main goal while progressing through technology should be to control it for our benefit, not be controlled by it’s enticing and ever-distracting medias.

Rewiring the Youth

Radios in the Past, Time for Podcasts

In Adam Ragusea’s “Three ways podcasts and radio actually aren’t quite the same”, the commonly unknown differences between podcasts and radio. In a way, podcasts are to radios as blogging is to news. A podcast is the informal source of music and media in comparison to broadcasted news. Each podcast is more focused toward a specific audience, produced independently, and offers a larger dynamic of options to listen in to. Radios are of easier access, but podcasts are the progressed version of radio stations.

While radio stations are censored and limited for the entire public to enjoy, podcasts offer a more specialized approach. They do not need to limit their thoughts to what would please and be appropriate for the entire public. Podcasters can upload freely, leaving an endless variety of podcasts to search and choose from; listeners can find a podcast on anything they desire with the technology of today. Podcasters can tag keywords and ideas for listeners to search and enjoy, making such a vast array of podcasts easier to sift through. With so many podcasts offered to the public, each listener is likely to find exactly what they prefer to listen to, and if the listener has nothing particular in mind, they can easily explore through endless podcasts to find and try something new. In the end, podcasts offer the public a more personalized taste to radio and offers more podcasts to choose from for the audience. Beyond that, with podcasts being so easy to produce and upload, nearly anyone can create their podcasts entirely alone. This lets creators make their podcasts entirely how they intend to, with no bias or influences changing their work and ideas to mean something else. Podcast creators are able to connect more personally with their listeners, and portray their exact emotions and thoughts with little to no censorship.

025

LINK TO ARTICLE

Radios in the Past, Time for Podcasts

Technology: Mankind’s New Fire

Typically, when a new innovation is created, rather than embracing and using the new technology, we tend to live in fear of it at first. Humans are very quick to assume anything out of the norm will harm us. We are so focused on this concept, in fact, that we lose sight on the benefits the innovation could provide. It’s important to be aware of the things that can harm us, but it is also important not to let these fears drive us into insanity.

It is in our nature to find errors when approached with a new development… or anything new, really. Our minds way of protecting us from potential harm is by finding potential causes for said harm, beforehand. tumblr_static_tumblr_static__640For example, the growing popularity of video games leaving parents worried what these games will expose their children to rather than embracing the benefits these games can provide. Yes, there are games that contain violence, nudity, profanity, etc., but not every video game does. Like most forms of entertainment, there are ratings to deem what is appropriate for who. Parents are willing to check if a movie is rated PG, but when it comes to gaming, they would rather abolish the whole idea altogether. They do not realize they are also taking away potential improvement to their child’s cognitive and perceptual skills.  Video games test a child’s abilities to make decisions, use their hand-eye coordination, act quickly, etc. all for an issue that can be fixed by simply looking into the video games one’s child is playing.

 

There is no such thing as “all good” or “all bad”; every person, place, thing, EVERYTHING consists of at least a little good and a little bad. With so many ways to approach each subject, there are always different views on how beneficial the subject can be. Peanut butter and jelly sandwiches are “good” to a hungry 6 year-old, but would be considered “bad” for his/her classmate with a peanut allergy. tumblr_mu6vs7jcku1sqjbnbo1_400Each individual is different in their own ways, meaning everything effects each individual differently. Ruling out something entirely takes away any chance of it being put to beneficial use. By taking away Wikipedia to prevent gullible students who easily accept false information, you take away an extensive and endlessly expanding source of information from the rest.

Humans natural urge to find disadvantages in every situation protect us from making potentially detrimental decisions. However, this “protection” also takes away any potential benefits if taken too far. By excluding something entirely rather than finding a balance between it’s good and bad qualities, we take away any chance of useful advantages occurring.

Technology: Mankind’s New Fire

Let’s Do Oral… History

Oral history, if recorded and carried out properly, can give insight into history in ways written history cannot, giving the public a more up-close, personal take on different matters. However, we are only humans living in a non-perfect world; we make mistakes, therefore there are errors in our documentation throughout time.

Oral history has the potential to be accurate, but it is only possible in a perfect world, which we do not live in. An oral resource has the potential to be reliable, if the information is handled properly. Facts from sources can be passed from source to source if remembered and recorded word-for-word. If left untampered, the information from this source can provide useful information for years to come.

Oral history may be less accurate then closely studied written history, but it adds a different element and perspective to history, somewhat like blogging. The information is passed straight from the source to the public, with little-to-none editing inbetween. This adds a more personal perspective on matters, because it comes straight from the source studying the material. With information straight from a researcher, one gets a summation of all information, with a clear understanding of the difference between facts found and opinions created. Oral history may not transfer formerly, but the information is found through formal studies typically; if one wants solid information and opinions on a matter, they typically interview serious and level headed researchers. By passing their knowledge orally and word-for-word, there is no possible way of twisting words and information into something it is not. 

  
Oral history, as inaccurate as it can be in comparison to written history, has potential to be accurate while providing a different dynamic on information and news that, at the time, were current events. By transferring the information from a researcher orally from source-to-source, in a word-for-word fashion, one can provide knowledge with a new interesting dynamic. Future researchers can look at past researcher for insight with little bias and a personal perspective and take on the matter. 

Let’s Do Oral… History

From Coed to Code to the Future

Coding has progressed substantially in the past few decades; the momentum it has gained has taken attention away from other subjects, but it is only because mankind has a natural inclination to further discover the unknown. At this time, coding is commonly unknown by most, making it a topic of interest in our generation. Even those who have learned the skill have a strong interest in coding, for it is still underdeveloped with a lot of potential. When writing was first discovered, most students attending a higher education mainly focused on writing because it was underdeveloped.

31

On top of assisting in the development of a new innovation, one would also reap the benefits of becoming a trailblazers. Those who create the initial breakthroughs in developing ideas are typically the most remembered. Furthermore, those who innovate a new skill usually live a comfortable lifestyle; they are paid more than average because they tread territory the average person does not tread: the unknown.This may sound like you have no range to enjoy the other subjects you enjoy, but any skill can be incorporated into a certain field of interest, coding especially. With the advancement of technology progressing at such a rapid rate, technology is nearly everywhere. Everyone needs new softwares to run their technology smoother; someone has to program it, leaving one bound to find a career regarding their interest while coding.

If taught more often, coding has the potential to become as common as reading and writing. By creating and expanding on reading and writing, we allowed ourselves to record history and different forms of information, giving us control of our knowledge. We have created coding, and by expanding on it, we will be able innovate and control technology in ways not yet thought of.

Coding is a large focus of mankind in recent generations because we are attempting to further develop the skill until it is well known and common. Those who assist in this development, they will have a lot to benefit – from money, to recognition, to praise. If persistent, mankind can use coding that can help us further in our everyday lives, hopefully with a less intrusive approach. If taken serious when in school, coding classes can help students help themselves and future generations.

From Coed to Code to the Future

Inspiration vs Plagiarism

Artwork created by humankind must be inspired in order to exist. This may sound cliche, but it is a scientific fact; we cannot form an entirely original thought solely with our mind. Each and every thought is stimulated through personal experiences, learned history, or even other pieces of artwork. To expect someone to mentally create something entirely new with no reflection of former works is impossible.

However, blatant plagiarism is a crime that should never be excused. When approaching one’s work as a basis for one’s own work, he/she must question, “at what point do I cross the line between inspiration and plagiarism?”. If one were to use a former idea to adapt an idea of their own, they would be using the former idea as a muse; even if one were to adapt or modernize a former idea into an updated version from a new perspective, the line still would not be crossed. Combining an outdated idea with a fresh perspective creates a new idea, making one’s work inspired but original, not plagiarized.

Once an idea is copied with little to no thought in the process, one has crossed the line into plagiarism. When writing a report, it is expected of students to research a topic and create concepts of their own from their readings. However, if a student were to copy and paste the research directly, they would have committed plagiarism. If there is no formation of a unique idea, it is plagiarism (summations included). If mankind began repeating ideas, our progress would become circular. We technically would not be progressing at all, considering we would be going nowhere with our ideas.

tumblr_n0pmgczavr1s5tlmxo1_500

By analyzing former ideas, one can be inspired to form new ones of their own. We need former ideas to spark others in new ways because a completely original idea based off nothing is impossible. One can think of an idea from a personal experience, but there are only so many experiences mankind can come across. Eventually, everyone would just be writing their perspectives on different experiences with no further insight, stunting progress for mankind. Yes, plagiarism is wrong, but it is always good to get inspired.

LINK TO ARTICLE: http://harpers.org/archive/2007/02/the-ecstasy-of-influence/

Inspiration vs Plagiarism