Blog #2 Final Paper

Okay, so I thought this was going to be an easy paper to write, but I am so wrong. There's a lot more research that must be done besides reading the book itself - although, Slade's book does have a great deal of information alone. The process of my final paper goes like this: 1. skim over the book and pick parts that are related to the paper 2. research online for information on where the e-waste ends up, solution to the extensive amount of e-waste etc 3. make an outline and follow it! 4. I found it easier to compose a research paper when I write it on paper first so I did that. So far, I've gotten 5 pages done and I have 5 more hours to go till it is due. I find myself ranting on and on about the topic using the knowledge that I have already gained so I have a lot of revising work to do.

Blog #1 Final paper

I've had a really terrible and busy week trying to cram every little detailed information to my puny brain, so it's Thursday at 1:31 PM - a day before this is due - and I can finally start my final paper. Yesterday, my friend got a new cell phone and I asked him how long the other one lasted.. he said, "7 months and then it broke down." In my head, I knew that it didn't really break down and even if it did he could've gotten it fixed... plus! the average cell phone user replaces their phones every 14 to 18 months, when cell phones are designed to last for 5 years... This conversation led me to think of Mr. Slade and his disgust in our society's rate of wasting away perfectly normal electronics. And it's the holidays and the season of giving so I'm guessing a lot of consumers out there are buying new gadgets for their loved ones... so I'm thinking, where would their perfectly usable gadgets go when they are replaced with better and more updated versions? Well, I'm about to do my research on just that. I have chosen the second topic of this research paper and before diving into the paper, I'm going to write an outline. I've found this awesome website called planetgreen.discovery.com which has a lot of information on where e-wastes go after they are recycled such as being exported to China and how to go green! It also leads me to think that our society's movement of "going green" is all just a propaganda but I won't talk about that in my paper since it's not an opinion-based paper.

the Facebook Effect part 2

In these chapters, Zuckerberg shows profound skills in leadership as he deals with multi-billion investors. Zuckerberg befriends Sean Parker, who worked for Napster and Plaxo, and the dynamic duo worked together to further expand thefacebook. Many investors were interested in thefacebook's growth in popularity as the ultimate social network website. Companies like the Post and Accel were willing to cooperate with thefacebook. Out of many investors, Donald Graham at the Post was one of the candidates that both Zuckerberg and Parker were interested in working with. However, Kevin Efrusy of Accel put in a lot of work into convincing Zuckerberg and Parker to take his deal. Although the duo was more interested in Graham's offer by the Post, Efrusy was not hesitant to give up. As Parker kept on turning down Accel's numerous offers, Accel finally made an offer that thefacebook could not refuse. When Zuckerberg finally made his choice to be partners with Accel, Accel brought in a few minor changes to the company by bringing Breyer to join the board at thefacebook. The growth of the company was expanding at a tremendous rate which only meant that thefacebook needed better equipment and a larger staff. The only problem to this was that many people were not willing to work for twenty-something year old college drop outs. Further, Sean Parker's shady reputation of drug use was another factor that made thefacebook hard to hire employees. Although Zuckerberg showed tremendous amount of loyalty to his friend and his partner, "Breyer thought Parker was a liability for the company well beyond his actions in North Carolina, whatever they might have been" (Kirkpatrick 147). The end result of this dispute left Zuckerberg with the total control of three board seats when Parker gave Zuckerberg his board seat after he stepped down from his position as president of Facebook.

the Facebook Effect part 1

In the first part of David Kirkpatrick's book, "The Facebook Effect," he talks about the background of Facebook's creator, Mark Zuckerberg and how Facebook came to be the number one social network website. Reading about Mark in the first chapter reminds me of the movie I saw for extra credit, The Social Network. It all started with a girl that Mark was hung up over and to keep his mind off of her, he created a small, "harmless" website called Facemash where the user has a choice to pick from two contestants based on their looks. This website became an instant hit, which led Mark to think of more projects that would essentially connect students online thus creating his own version of friendster, thefacebook.com. Zuckerberg soon realized that Harvard wasn't the only school that needed a social networking website, so he began to expand thefacebook elsewhere starting with Columbia, Stanford, etc. "So at Harvard, Dartmouth, Columbia, Stanford, Yale, and other schools, Thefacebook quickly became an essential social tool - a considerable advance over the outdated paper book" (Kirkpatrick 91). This type of expansion meant that he needed more money. Managing a website where the growth of its users were constant wasn't easy to do so he staffed his roommates. "In September alone they nearly doubled membership, to around 400,000. The number hit half a million on October 21, as growth began to accelerate" (Kirkpatrick 95). With constant popularity and traffic growing, thefacebook team desperately needed more money and funds. Thus, Y2M has made a partnership with thefacebook which placed ads on the website. This advertising income helped thefacebook team buy new equipments and servers to support the website's growth.

Current Event Blog

Oops, didn't know that we had to blog about our current event presentations.

My current event was called "Where's Jimmy? Just Google His Barcode" by Gene Koprowski.
I found this article on FOXNews.com.
Basically, it's about the creation and wide spread use of RFID (radio frequency identification) tags. I have first heard about RFID tags a long time ago and I have decided to do a follow-up research on them because I was so outraged by this when I heard about it. RFID chips are being embedded in people's hands, arms etc and these chips store personal information about the beholder such as credit card usage, bank statements, tracker of whereabouts, etc. It also can be used as your car keys - just wave your hand on the handle of the car. It's amazing what technology could do but I think the advancement of technology went too far with RFID. I mean, there's chips for your dogs just in case they get lost or whatnot but for humans?! This is far too creepy - I imagine one of those science fiction movie going horribly wrong. And if RFID chips are being used as tracking devices... who's keeping track? Certainly not yourself.... parents? Personally, I think these chips are an invasion of privacy and a barrier to our freedom if it is being used as a tracking device. “RFID tags make the perfect tracking device,” Stanley said. 


“The prospect of RFID chips carried by all in identity papers means that any individual’s presence at a given location can be detected or recorded simply through the installation of an invisible RFID reader”(Koprowski). 

The article goes on to say that the staff of Mexico's attorney general has RFID embedded in their arms to ensure the safety of information, trespassing of drug lords and etc.

"Already, the government of Mexico has surgically implanted the chips, the size of a grain of rice, in the upper arms of staff at the attorney general’s office in Mexico City. The chips contain codes that, when read by scanners, allow access to a secure building, and prevent trespassing by drug lords" (Koprowski). 


Questions I thought about when reading this article were:
1. What would happen if someone (hypothetically) cut off the person's arm to use their identification?
2. In what ways could this be advantages/disadvantages to society?
3. Who controls RFID? maybe a government conspiracy?!

Midterm: Wikipedia Auditing Process

It was very interesting to work with my team, Chris, John, Alex and Zach. For our wikipedia auditing midterm, we picked Grand Theft Auto series. The wikipage listed 46 sources that we latter came to find as either reliable or unreliable sources. As a group, we each part took in auditing the sources that were listed and we have come to the conclusion that news websites like ABC and CNN were deemed reliable whereas, fan websites and blogs were unreliable. I was pleased that everyone in this group contributed equally if not more - John: auditing resources, making/editing the powerpoint, research Devin Moore case, handout. Chris: auditing resources, making the powerpoint. Alex: auditing resources and finding real GTA clip. Zach: auditing resources and making the powerpoint. Me: auditing resources, create powerpoint (make it presentable), research Devin Moore case, and handout. After all the auditing process, my group has decided that Wikipedia page on GTA is not a scholarly source. Although, they have reliable information, there were many subjects where the facts were hindered by opinions, fan blogs, and bias.

Made to Break pt 3

When purchasing a TV, cell phone, or ipod, do you ever think about where these items will go after you no longer use or need them? "When e-waste is burned anywhere in the world, dioxins, furans, and other pollutants are released into the air, with potentially disastrous health consequences around the globe" (Slade 261). The amount of e-waste is growing exponentially in that people are throwing away perfectly useable products to buy newer and better ones. For example, cell phones are having the shortest life cycle of any electronic consumer product in the country. I, myself, am the contributing factor to this exponential growth of e-waste. I had 14 cellphones since I was in 6th grade. Most of them were either broken, lost, or perfectly normal but outdated. With an extra charge of $10 per month, consumers can get a warranty in which one can replace or update one's electronic devices. Phone companies also have a plan where you can easily update to a better/newer cell phone every year with the addition of another 2-year contract.
- So why does e-waste occur?
The main contributor to the exponential growth is due to the media and advertising strategies of manufacturers. "The average American, one analyst has noted, will have watched more than three years of television advertising by the end of his or her life" (Slade 265). That is a lot of time spent on watching manipulative advertising.
- So what happens to all the e-waste?
It is important as a consumer to understand the effects of e-waste on our environment. The universal problem has been compounded by fast growing technological advances, and a lack of resources to deal with the resulting e-waste. The waste that is left over from consumers' electronics consists of PCB's or polychlorinated biphenyls, mercury, lead, and cadmium. These are very TOXIC and studies have shown that PCB's may cause cancer. Our water and soil may become contaminated, which would eventually enter our food chain, if these wastes are not properly disposed of. Almost all of the e-waste is being dumped into landfills due to its hazardous toxins. From there, the e-waste becomes incinerated, recycled, and reused. Incineration releases heavy metals like PCB's into the air and ashes which can cause both ozone depletion and health problems through inhalation. Much of the remaining e-waste are being exported to developing countries where laborers, under unsafe conditions, are working to recycle the e-waste. 

- Is there a solution? 

Most people today upgrade after about a year or so and leave their old laptop or cellphone lying around abandoned until it's no longer any good to anyone. If people sold their one or two year old laptops, PCs, cellphones, cameras, etc as pre-owned, then the e-waste would be cut by a huge percentage... So why not people? Sell your "old" and "outdated" one or two years of used items and get money and save the planet. DUH. 

internet helps society?

Let's face it, there are a lot of websites (way too many) that are totally pointless yet many users are hooked/addicted to it. Most of these pointless websites are user generated like TFLN, urbandictionary, stumbleupon, postsecrets, fml, youtube just to name a few. Although there are many of these useless websites that cure boredom, there are also many websites that are designed to help or better this society or for me at least. Websites that help me are yahoo.com (e-mail), hotschedules.com (work), bankofamerica.com (finance), various rutgers websites (school), weather.com (weather), mapquest.com (directions), and many more.

Made to Break pt 2

What is death - dating?
Death-dating is a strategy for manufacturers to create a product that would essentially break down after three years of use.

My friend bought a MacBook in 2004 and recently his screen went blank and the battery went dead. When he went to the Apple store to get it looked at, the technician said that MacBook models after year 2003 has a warranty that insures buyers for a free tune up (or in his case, fix the MacBook entirely) because it was noted that those models were more susceptible to random damages. My friend's situation reminds me of death-dating in that manufacturers purposefully created products that would break down after few years of use. In Apple's case, they were nice enough to offer free damage control - which would regularly cost around a grand if there was no insurance.

So why would anyone create such a thing called "death-dating"?
Well, the Commerce Department in WWII set up a minimum requirement for a durable good at three years, which means that all goods must last at least 3 years. But why not more? Since consumers are 'trained' to have psychological obsolescence for style, they are constantly looking for the next better, cooler, updated models of technology. Once the durable good breaks down, consumers HAVE to get another good but a better one. Stafford believed that "purposeful design for product failure is unethical" (Slade 164). Although I do agree with him on this, because of obsolescence of planning and style has made society into materialistic fiends, I think it's uncontrollable at this point. I do believe that there is a cycle of planned obsolescence between the manufacturers and consumers. Manufacturers purposefully use death-dating as a strategy to have consumers keep buying new things which would increase their profits and income. And because manufacturers embedded the idea of "cool" behind new things, consumers have a planned obsolescence in buying new technologies.

But isn't death-dating hurting the industry's reputation?
Who would want to buy a product that would only last them 3 years? There's a new craze for e-books (Kindle, Nook, iPad etc). Amazon has already come up with 3 different versions of their e-book, Kindle. E-book competitors are constantly coming up with new innovative designs so it entices consumers to choose their product over their competitors. There was a recent news article that advised people on which e-books to buy and not buy. Amazon has introduced several different versions of Kindle in that the first version was merely a "test-run" to see if it would be popular, its durability, and its effectiveness in the product. Well it was certaintly popular, effective and a lot of readers took a liking to the product but was it durable? Did it last? Apparently not, since they have created new versions with better features. I feel that if a product from a certain company keeps on breaking, then no one would want to buy them. A key advice to fellow consumers is that to always get insurance on technologies because they tend to break or malfunction randomly!! Or in this case.. only last for three years :(

The Social Network review

I went to see The Social Network like two weeks ago. The concept was fantastic because everyone wants to know how this college student created an amazing social network website to become a billionaire. I thought Mark Zuckerberg was definitely portrayed as a blunt asshole even from the first scene with his soon to be ex-girlfriend. So hungry to be popular, yet doing it in his own way, Zuckerberg became a virtual God. He ruled the social network and he was making bank off his work. This movie actually got me so motivated to become a billionaire but we all know that's not happening. I also thought that the twins were being total pussys in that they were complaining about how Zuckerberg stole their idea.. Yes, he kind of did but he didn't use any of their scripts or codes and made it even better by going international! If they were prestigious Harvard students like they portray themselves as, then they would have sucked it up and moved on to a different concept - but nope, they just had to sue Zuckerberg for their share that they don't even deserve! On the other hand, I do believe that Eduardo got totally fooled into this whole thing -  there was some betrayal there. But at the pace that Zuckerberg was moving, Eduardo just couldn't keep up.. why would he go for an internship when there was an amazing project growing exponentially? so silly. Still, Eduardo definitely deserved his share.

Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. It was a little too slow paced for me but when things picked up it was great. And seriously, Zuckerberg is a genius and he should also feel guilty for a lot of people who are consumed by facebook - it can be SOO evil sometimes.

Made to Break pt 1

In Giles Slade's "Made to Break," Slade engages his audience in thought-provoking discussions of American consumer's relationship with disposability, style, innovation, and "obsolescence" in mass produced materials. Computers, TV sets, cars, and especially cell phones are treated as expendables in our society which turns the focus to why our society does not demand durability in material goods.

The introduction of Ford and General Motors' annual model change began in the early 1900s. These model changes persuades consumers to trade in their perfectly functioning cars for more up-to-date stylish models. Why did these modernized products fuel such a need for consumers to have the next nicer, better, and cooler designed goods? Slade explains that "in manufacturing terms, psychological obsolescence was superior to technological obsolescence, because it was considerably cheater to create and could be produced on demand" (Slade 36). Psychological obsolescence allows the consumer to focus more on the visual and design of personal items like cell phones, jewelry, laptops, ipods, clothing, and etc. For example, it seems like Apple has a new addition to their enormous collection of electronics every year. Apple has created a sleeker, thinner, and more featured design for ipods every year. From the very first generation of 10 GB ipod in 2001 to the expansion of four different types of ipods (nano, shuffle, classic, and iTouch), the iPod has evolved through almost 9 years of annual model changes.




I remember when iPods first went live and everyone went crazy. When everyone else played with their brand new toy, I stayed content with my Samsung MP3 player. The very first ipod had nothing against my MP3 player but after a few years, Apple began adding new features to ipods as well as changing the design of the products. Since Samsung wasn't making huge changes to their products, Apple won this competition and I finally gave in to the Apple craze. What made me change to Apple, you might ask? - this brings me to Slade's next point - "In a consumer culture, people size one another up continually to establish status hierarchies based on disposable income and taste" (Slade 50). Consumers no longer buy a product because it has been damaged or broken. People just buy so that they can look cool or to acquire better "taste." The consumer culture has skewed the meaning of style because having an outdated or old model is now looked upon as embarrassing and undesirable. Slade basically says that having the next best/new thing makes the person seem more well-off, more socially successful, and more desirable, which in this very materialistic culture definitely fits to be true.

In this giant craze for electronic toys, I feel that there are definite disadvantages. First, the over piling waste of perfectly nice goods can lead to mountains of garbage that would eventually bury us. Consumers are constantly buying new things then throwing them away and then buying more... so where do all these materials or "garbage" go?  Moreover, technology has made things that were once unimportant to our daily life evolve into something that people are obsessed over. And when I mention this, I mean crackberrys, iphones, droid, android, etc and the multitude of "apps" that are featured in these phones. Since when do we need a program that allows everyone to know exactly where and when you check into a place (foursquare)? That is down right creepy. And who really needs to count how many times you say the word "Um" or "You know" or "Like"? There is an APP for that! Yes of course, I believe that some of the apps that are provided within Droid or iPhone are awesome but is it really necessary? I feel like if I ever got any of these devices, my life would be consumed by this tiny thing that would never leave my hip and probably end up crashing into a car just because I was using a speedometer app on my phone.. stupid.

The World and Wiki pt 2

The Web 2.0 - free, fast-paced way to share information all over the world. Wikipedia allows Internet users to generate their own content, of course stating reliable resources. "In September 2009, English Wikipedia enjoyed 67 million unique visits." Tens of thousands of users are writing and editing Wikipedia's three million and plus articles at any given time and it has been known as a massive virtual community around shared interests. Anytime I Google anything, which everyone uses, Wikipedia is definitely one of top five results.

Because any volunteer can make adjustments and edit articles on Wikipedia, it is very critical to pay attention to the content provided on Wikipedia. For instance, if anyone ever writes something false about you or your foundation or cause, you need to know instantly when it happens and what to do about it. For most of the time, errors about important persons or subjects are often corrected instantly but if some information has been left falsified, it could cause major damage. Which brings to my next point - can we, as Web 2.0 users, trust Wikipedia's information? This is a tricky question and most of the time, teachers would prefer that students do not use Wikipedia as a credible resource. The anonymity of Wikipedia makes it even difficult to fish out errors about each subject and since there could be a lot of bias information given out, it is pretty hard to call Wikipedia articles reliable.

Problems in Wikipedia's reliability include; "weasel words" that can compose misleading pictures, inappropriate emphases, and outdated information. Also, there are possibilities that the citations used to make an article a 'credible source' may not even be a special reference to the subject in its entity. "You also don't trust Wikipedia because its 'reliable sources' rule demands secondary sources"(188). How can we, as researchers, consider an article of Wikipedia as a factually based truth and not a biased opinion? It's really hard to tell and simply because of this possibility, I believe that teachers wouldn't consider Wikipedia as a credible source.

"Wikipedia has sometimes suffered from the self-editing that is intrinsic to it, giving rise at times to potentially libellous statements. However inherently, I cannot see that what is in Wikipedia is any less likely to be true than what is published in a book or on the websites of news organizations..." (196). I totally agree with this quote. I think this sums up entirely why I use Wikipedia to gather vast information.  What makes a book/news websites like CNN.com and Wikipedia different from another? Nothing really except the reputation of its reliability of a book and a Wikipedia differs. There was no controversy behind editing of a book when it was first published because there was only one person writing it. Why not consider a vast community of volunteers sharing their facts on a webpage as a credible source?

World and Wikipedia pt 1

The World and Wikipedia: How We Are Editing Reality by Dalby explains the inner works of Wikipedia. The book starts off with examples of how easy it is for users to edit and change information on certain subjects. Warko sparked an article about an earthquake in Italy with his 2 lines of contribution. Within the next half hour he has revised the article several times and by the end of the day, the article has been retitled, 1000 words in length, and in both English and Spanish versions by other contributors. There are many advantages and disadvantages of using Wikipedia as a type of resource. The advantages are that it is a way for people to share information and to connect just like how people were aware of the earthquake around the globe in a matter of seconds.

The disadvantages are that people could easily deface and vandalize the website. Contributors like Keykingz13 created an account on Wikipedia for the sole purpose of vandalizing the site by re-editing various articles through grammatically incorrect English. It took careful notice from editors like Andrew Dalby to realize that there has been false alterations and information that have been spread onto the articles.

A lot of teachers have been telling their students that Wikipedia is not a credible source. I like to think otherwise. I use Wikipedia for a lot of things and I feel that it is definitely a legit source. To me, technology is an incredible source. The amount of data and information that can be found on Web 2.0 is amazing and overwhelming at times. To a lot of us, the Internet is the number one form of resource. I love to google everything so whenever I do, Wikipedia is always on the top 5 things listed. Technology like Wikipedia is neither naturally good or bad. It is really up to the user in how they attain and utilize technology.

Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology Part 1&2 Revised

In his book, Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, Neil Postman talks about how new technologies alter our understanding what is real. This book was fantastic and interesting. Postman's ideas are so subversive and it related to a lot of the things I've been thinking about lately. In this book, Postman writes about how technology negatively effects our society and culture. He believes that technology is both a "burden and a blessing; not either-or, but this-and-that" (Postman 5). His arguments are very one sided and there are no gray areas in this book. It was actually quite liberating to read his opinions on technology because I took this book as a call for society to be critical and detached from technology.

Postman fears that as cultures begin to embrace technology more and more readily, they would lose something of themselves. In an era that Postman coincidently calls "Technopoly," people will begin to depend on technology for everything. Basically, Postman says that problems will be created to be fixed with technology. Our society is progressively becoming lazy and more reliant on new technology. Think about this, how many of us spend x amount of minutes searching for the remote when we could easily go up to the TV and manually channel surf?

Throughout the book, Postman shares his opinions on how technology leads to Technopoly which is a kind of society that is obsessed with the benefits of technology to the point where everything needs to be measured and assessed on the basis of how 'efficient' it is. Postman mentions something called the "control systems" to manage information like statistics, opinion surveys, SAT and IQ tests which can be scientifically measured and stored. And because these information could be measured, our society becomes prone to believe that our IQ score is our intelligence and that opinion surveys are what people believe in. I interpreted this idea with the concept of SAT scores. SAT score is ultimately only a number and for some reason it has such a huge impact in education. Why though? There are clear evidences that the most brilliant people out there didn't even graduate from college, let alone even go to one.  I think it's ridiculous that the scores of a standardized test could determine the destiny of a student's success.

I think the main idea to take away from this book is that despite our obsession with information, more information and the desire to obtain more will not fix any of the real problems that we are facing today. For example, poverty will not be solved by more information, nor will war or global warming. It may be a contributing factor to help solve the problem, but in the end more information won't fix these worldly issues.

Side Note - Algorithms

So after our last discussion in class, I have realized a lot of algorithms. I've gotten so many e-mails from places where I have shopped online, mainly from Walmart. For the most part, I didn't even click on the e-mail because I'm sick of them sending me e-mails about what my interests might be. As a Cheesecake Factory employ, I had to recently invest in an iron and iron board from Walmart. Since then, I've been getting so many e-mails that were sort of related to those items that I've bought... so weird. It's true about these algorithms that convince the online consumers that they might need other materials that could be related to the recent items bought. This also goes for music. I use Pandora a lot because I get really lazy to put together playlists from my iTunes. Sometimes, Pandora is right on the money with the type of music I want to listen to but at times, it's SO wrong. It skipped from genre to another genre that was not related to the music I wanted to listen too. How does it go from classic rock to country? It doesn't make sense... 

Life Story of Computers... Part 2

First of all, thank you to both Steve Wozniak and Steve Jobs for creating Apple! Thanks.

The second part of the reading mostly dealt with how computers were not only being used by the army but by people in their homes. The birth of social networking began with the creation of Internet and Ethernet. During the Cold War, there was a need for a system that could exchange information between military computers. Advanced Research Projects Agency or ARPAnet, is a division in the military that created top secret systems and weapon during the Cold War. Charles M. Herzfeld, a former director of ARPAnet believed that the system of data exchange should not only occur within the military but for the people at home. In order for the sharing of information to work, a computer breaks its information into IP or Internet Protocol packets, which are kind of like digital envelops. Then, TCP or Transmission Control Protocol makes sure the packets are delivered from person to server. So, from ARPAnet the first electronic mail (e-mail) was created in order to send simple messages to another person across the network. Soon, the Internet Protocol software was being placed on every type of computer and this caused the birth of using in-house networks also known as Local Area Networks (LAN's). Keep in mind that Internet only connects remotely located computers by telephone lines. Ethernet, which is totally different from Internet is a system for connecting computers in a building using hardware running from computer to computer. Robert Metcalfe of Xerox promoted and created Ethernet using newly designed chips and wiring. The use of personal computers became very popular thanks to Metcalfe and the revolution of using the Ethernet to connect people became the most widely installed LAN protocol.

Life story of Computers.. Part 1

Okay, I'm finally ready to blog about this dense and dull book.

So, society has come a really long way from our first ever calculator, the abacus, to my 1 inch thick MacBook Pro that I am using right now and for almost everything!

The first part of the book explains society's need to find a way to count and to make calculations. Obviously, counting with our fingers and toes are not enough to make huge calculations like the orbiting of the planets, universe, and so on. So even before the existence of computers, it all began with the invention of calculating systems. Scientists now know that humankind have created early forms of 'computers' - for example, there are bone carvings of prime numbers. The next step was the invention of abacus, a calculation system using moveable beads and rocks. I've actually used an abacus before because my grandmother still uses it. She's still so stuck in her generation that she's more comfortable using an abacus to calculate things than using an solar powered calculator. It's very interesting that an apparatus using beads to make calculations eventually sparked an idea of the inventions of computers.

Then in the 19th century,  a really smart English dude named Charles Babbage started thinking about the high error rate in calculations in math tables. So.. by removing the human error factor, he created the two greatest inventions that he called, the Babbage Difference Engine and Analytical Engine (genius). Babbage proposed a machine that was able to calculate polynomials by using numerical method called the differences method. This machine not only calculated numbers but it also was capable of printing mathematical tables. Like any other great inventions, there were definite trial and errors. During the physical building process of the Difference Engine, Babbage thought up another invention which would be capable of major logical components and techniques for the modern electronic computer (Ferro 17). However this was never invented and only stayed as a proposal - this would later be considered the first realizable design for a general-purpose computer (Ferro 17).

The first fully electronic computer is born! During WW2, the army needed a technology that would calculate artillery-firing tables and the settings used for different weapons under varied conditions for target accuracy. So, John Mauchly and John Presper Eckert developed the Electrical Numerical Integrator and Calculator (ENIAC) computer. Completed in 1945, the ENIAC consisted of 49ft high cabinets, almost 18,000 vacuum tubes and many miles of wiring and weighed 30 tons (Ferro 39). This amazing technology was able to solve a ballistic trajectory calculation in 30 seconds while it would take a human mathematician 20 hrs to solve!

In memory of Ty

I am so deeply disturbed. 

I grew up with Tyler Clementi. I took classes with him for three years in middle school and high school and seriously, no human being deserves this. Tyler was a person, not a freak show. And just like everyone else, he deserved that privacy and the pursuit to his happiness. It breaks my heart that someone could be THIS cruel enough to hurt an innocent person. I don't understand how they could think this as a joke... How is that funny at all? It's sad to see that our youth threw away an education for the satisfaction of bringing another student down. It's unfortunate, but hopefully the justice system will do right by Ty and hold these two people accountable for the damage that they have caused. They targeted Ty because he was gay and different. I have seen how gay and closeted teens are treated in high school and now I doubt much has changed. It makes me so sick to my stomach just thinking about this heinous incident. He was only 18! and he hasn't even been in college for more than a month. His roommate didn't even really know him -  they didn't even have the chance to really know each other and already he was playing sick jokes on Ty, how dare he?!! AHHH gets me so mad just thinking about it. Poor Ty, probably thought he was free of that hateful shit once he got into Rutgers, one of the most diverse campuses in US.... instead he was used as an object for humiliation because of his sexuality. What a horrible thing for two people to do to a fellow HUMAn being. It gives me chills just thinking about it. Ty was a great person. He kept to himself mostly but he was so bright and had so much potential of being a great violinist/musician. Ty, you will be greatly missed. And hopefully, our society will learn from this unfortunate incident of cyberbullying. My prayers go out to the Clementi family. Rest in peace, buddy.

-----

Technology can be so evil! This goes without saying, yes technology is amazing and it revolutionized how our society communicates and shares information with each other. But when it comes to using technology to humiliate and ruin an innocent person's life, that is unacceptable. 

TFLN

Texts from Last Night is a website where any users can upload/share with the world the texts that they have received. It's completely anonymous and the only information that's provided in the text is the area code. The texts that people post up are categorized by; best, worst, and random. I've always heard of TFLN but I have never visited the website. After our class discussion, it intrigued me to surf through this website. It didn't surprise me that most of the texts were party/drunk/naked/sexual - based but it did surprise me however, that "texters" send out messages such as this :

(501):

So when I got her home I realized being a lesbian again isn't like riding a bike...

and this...
(305):

Honestly, I don't care if the only reason she gave me her beer was because she was bisexual and wanted to touch my vagina. Beer is beer.


and this.... 

(661):

I'm just gonna be the bigger person here and say I want you inside me

It's pretty funny reading all the texts. But I wonder why it's necessary for people to post up funny/random texts for the whole world to see... Is it because it's entirely anonymous? Is it   entirely for entertainment? 

I have had friends who show me some random people's texts from TFLN because their texts were relevant to our nights/situations... I think the reason why a lot of people visit these sites are because not only do they want a good laugh but most of these "snippets" of texts are relevant to many people's situations. When I say 'people,' I mean TFLN users of my generation - college/high school students.. I wouldn't expect people in my mom's age to be 'sexting' or talking about how crazy their night was through texts... if they do, that would be straight up weird. 

Internet uses

I use the internet for almost everything from school work, checking my work schedule, to stalking people on Facebook, and for boredom. The most popular sites that I constantly use is Facebook, Youtube, youtube to MP3 converter, Google, Yahoo, Netflix, Hotschedules (for work), and Stumbleupon. I have realized that it has become an unconscious habit of mine to automatically log onto Facebook as soon as I open my laptop. And whenever I do get off the computer, I go to check my Facebook on my crackberry (I call it that, because that's what it is). I feel like on a daily basis, I check my Facebook more than I check Sakai or Eden. Even when it's like super late at night and nobody is posting anything on Facebook, I hit refresh, and then refresh again, to see if anyone is on. Besides Facebook, I use youtube a lot, not to watch funnyass videos like "hide ya kids hide ya wife" but for music. I feel kind of guilty that I haven't bought a single song from iTunes or even bought a CD of my favorite artists. Youtube has so much power in itself - take Justin Bieber for example.. he got famous just posting videos of himself and somehow Usher saw talent in him.

I think that this generation has completely redefined ways of communication. Nowadays, it's all about networking. Networking is awesome because it's a global playground for people to connect and reconnect. However, all this craze and desire for the next better gadget is freaking me out. I mean, my friend's younger sister already has a crackberry and she's only in 5th grade!!! It's also really weird that some of my best friends' grandparents have Facebook and that I'm Facebook friends with them... although i hide everything from them. My roommate actually tried to give up Facebook for lent and that was an epic fail. I'm ashamed to say this but whenever my cell dies or if it's not attached to my hip, I feel completely naked and I don't know what to do with myself. Also, for last year's final I had to write a 15 page research paper and I spent 3 hours Facebook stalking and not even a single word was written on my paper (not even my name). So... it just goes to show - Hi my name is Joanne and I'm addicted to Facebook.