Reading Responses

“As We May Think”: a Reading Response

The reading is text heavy. The beginning of the reading is very confusing. It starts by talking about war and peace, scientists and physicists which makes the reader (myself) question what the text is about and how it relates to design. It is only when starting to read chapter two that the text becomes more related to design by talking about the creation of the machine and placing a time frame using mass production. This is when the reader realises that the text is older. Although the text was published in 1945 the author had quite an interesting and advanced view on the technology he is talking about. Coming back to the time frame of the reading, this clears up what the text is about which is, the production of technology such as for photography and type. That is not easy to notice at the start like I said before since technology is only spoken of by chapter two. In chapter two the reader is presented with photography and the different evolutions of cameras. By chapter three, the reading turns toward the technology of type. Therefore, typewriters are at the forefront. The next chapters, the author continues to talk about the advancements in machines that make it easier for people to work. The author puts emphasis on the fact that scientists create these machines. The author talks a lot of logic. The text shows a lot about human experience and history from the white man’s perspective who were the ones in the forefront of the invention and use of the machines created. A few things I found interesting in the reading were mainly about photography such as the invention of the camera and photography was to create a new way to record things other than paper or wax. Another interesting thing was that the other says that dry photography is sloppy which is funny since many love the aesthetic in this time. A question that arose when reading was since scientists have invented all these machines should we consider them designers as well? In conclusion, the author clearly had a lot to say about technology and machines for his time. He is a real intellect in the topic. Although, for the length of the text, the lack of in keeping the reader hooked. After a few chapters my interest faded. The most interesting part for me to be honest was about the evolution of photography because I love this form of art. Overall, the text felt too heavy with information that did not necessarily have to be put all together, in my opinion.

“Writing the History of the Internet”: a Reading Response

The reading was very interesting. The topic was something I had never heard about before and had never asked questions about but now I am left wondering. To begin with the essay argues that the origin of the creation of the internet, networks and computers are mixed. There are two different ideas of the origin which is one being to advance technology and the other to help communication. Yet, they are both linked which created an argument of creates for the invention of the networks. The hackers question the origin of the genius wizards who created it. The origins are hard to know since the story of it talks about the advancement for the military which is always ambiguous. Although, there seems to have been a lot of advancement for the military with the networks and computers for communication and defence systems. The military gave a lot of funding to have the technology for the cold war since there was thought of an apocalyptic end out of this war and America wanted to be in the lead. The machines made were for political advancement which brings the questions were societies supposed to have access to computers and networks or was it meant for the military only. Yet in another thought Western technology was meant to be inevitable and autonomous. This is why computer design was inevitable. Although, are computers and the internet really good for people does it really give freedom or it actually does the opposite. This lecture made me think about how the internet can be dangerous as well as freeing. Being behind a screen can give much power especially for hackers but for regular people there could be a feeling of being watched or listened to and being fed capitalist ideas. Yet, there is so much that can be done with the technology such as creating. The lecture was long and information heavy but it was worth the read. Therefore, in conclusion, in my understanding the internet origin’s are ambiguous and the prime use for it was military use and it probably still is today. Although, the military don't have all the power since there are more and more people with knowledge in the field creating the possibility for hackers to have a certain power that could be good but dangerous as well. Overall, the reading just caused more questioning for the reader in how the role of the internet plays in life.

The Great levelling: a video response

This 2010 one hour documentary is very interesting in how it delivers information to the audience but as well gives a view on how our society is not right. Although the documentary looks unbiased I believe it gives a bias stance since it keeps repeating how the internet was meant to be a way of freedom for the people to explore and express themselves without the constraints of the government or society. The thing that really stuck to me was how the wide web was meant to be for everyone to explore and have fun with to be able to bring in the talent and skills for anyone and everyone to use and out of nowhere Bill Gates just decided to change the concept and make it a business opportunity which in my opinion is very american. It is also quite selfish to profit off people's initial idea and take over a big majority of the industry platform. People creating softwares for free for people to use were doing what the initial creator wanted to give the world a way of changing everything to each other. Gates also brought in the issue of surveillance by businesses and by the government having content control as well this is unfair and worrisome for the everyday people using the internet for their personal use being afraid of being spied on. The documentary also showed how the liberty of people creating could be harmful. The internet gave access to anybody to make softwares that could pirate anything. In the film the main example is music which artists are not happy about their work just being listened to without being paid for. But here again, the project was meant for people to experience freely and with that, the pirating and all it becomes a question of money and capitalism. The internet could not escape this idealism which our society holds too dear to. The only thing that could escape was wikipedia but even now they are asking the users to donate money to them and for what since the information may not be accurate therefore, the service is not complete or false. All rounds back to the idea of capitalism this is why there is no possibility for the internet to be free and equal for everyone. It is also why companies and people will abuse the content and of people on the internet to profit and make money. This is when the wide web becomes scary and unsafe because you do not know what profiting people have access to and will do to get their money's worth. Therefore, all in all this documentary was very eye opening on how the internet can bring controversy.

Is Google making us stupid?: a reading response

This article is very interesting and touches on ideas and possibilities that not many think about and should be aware of. Although humans look like they are evolving with technology it kind of seems like humans are becoming more lazy and ready to be controlled. The article made me think about this question: Are humans becoming machines?. To begin with the author states how harder it is for them to read books and writings since the internet became much more available to them. Not only can one find anything they need on line but it has affected one's patience and attention. I have found that to be true for myself as well but I do enjoy reading books. The author then follows by talking about how the brain would learn differently though the different mediums of learning which makes so much sense to me. One who has learnt vocabulary will not have the same learning as one who writes by hand as well and reads. Going through time and the different learning periods with the different technologies was very interesting. A quote that stuck out to me was “the brain must be wired differently” or something similar to that phrasing since it is normal for one to have a different understanding of things depending on the level of hardness the knowledge was acquired. The more technology advances the more the human brain has less to do to get knowledge creating laziness of the brain. When the reading made me think that it was at that moment I understood the meaning of the title since google makes one’s effort of finding information so easy, effortless. The creepiest part of the reading was the fact that Google wants to install people's virtual brains or research databases right in the body. That is the scariest thing that could happen. The amount of control Google and governments could have on us would be devastating. People would just become robots, machines, numb beings controlled by capitalism and higher classes. No one would have a say since everyone would be brainwashed by all the advertisement in our heads going on 24/7. They advertise it as advancement but it is a tool of destruction of individualism and liberty of the persone. A weapon to silence the people. A weapon of manipulation. I think this is by far the best reading I have had in this class. It really got me thinking and worried about the state of the world and of where we are heading as a society.

Databuse: Digital Privacy and the Mosaic: A reading response

The essay Databuse: Digital Privacy and the Mosaic was a very long essay with a lot of information to deconstruct as a reader. As a reader the expectation of the text is to revolve around the idea of digital privacy yet the beginning which is very long, talks about the concept of privacy through time. It was interesting to see the comparison of privacy as property. The only thing that was underwhelming was that it was related mainly to US laws. The essay looked a lot at the amendments. The amendments were interesting and seeing the link with the property privacy but it was not very relatable. It got interesting when the essay went on with digital privacy since it talked about all the issues that people face. It also added some irony to the idea of privacy. I love how the author talks about how people do not mind getting advertisements in their emails even though they do not want to give information. The companies have information on the people with the acceptance of the advertisement to come to them. Therefore, it is ironic since people do not want strangers to go through their mail or anything but they open their email and the web for everyone to see. There is no more privacy coming onto the web. The essay just proved even more how companies abuse people's information to benefit themselves with sales. The main issue talked with digital privacy comes from the idea of capitalism entering our minds through this media and technology it is a problem. But it is also a problem with the surveillance aspect like they mention in the reading. The reading shows only an issue with government surveillance but if the government has access pros of technology and of the web can have access as well. The issue comes when it is taken for bad reasons. Therefore, it is normal and okay for people to be angry and unwilling to share their information freely. The internet allows for people to give their information unnoticeable causing people to agree to give what companies, government and dark web to have access to what they want and do what they want with it. Where it becomes dangerous is when those information can be used to put someone in financial, justice and social trouble. This essay was very informative but way too long to stay focused and let all the information be valued equally. This is not the best since it is important to get people informed about their information and where it goes and what it does with it. It is important for people to know the truth.

Everything is a Remix Remastered: a reading response

The short documentary Everything is a Remix Remasted from 2015 is very interesting and relevant to what is happening everyday all around the world. The film starts by itself creating a remix of itself. Coming back to what was shown before and creating a known part of it with the same information. I found that interesting and well played. I found it interesting that the documentary just decided to use the word remix when it is talking about issues of copyright. The first part of the film looks at remixes in music and shows how much the artists use each other's beats, lyrics, covers as inspiration. A big influential group the film talks about is Led Zeppelin not being shy to copy other artists and use it as their own. They had no shame in saying it was their original art when there was a lot of proof against it. Yet, there were no legal actions taken against them. For the second part of the film Hollywood is put under the microscope. The film industry has not been original for many years. They go with what works. Doing remakes as well as sequels and getting inspirations from comics and books to create films. They go with what works. Even when it comes to genre of movies they do not change much from the types and subtypes they are all similar. These two parts made me wonder how much people just consume the same thing all the time and they pay for it. People say they want new things yet stay safe with something similar to what they had before. The rest of the film looked at intellectual property and web property. Ideas were seen as things that could help the common good until someone decided it was property to have an idea therefore making it hard for people to copy but as well allowing to make a lot of money with an idea. Any idea becomes intellectual property. This caused people to be able to have lawsuits to protect their property; that is an idea and people could not copy it. This also caused limitation of artists since the inspiration they took from could be used against them if people decided it was copied. As for web property it made things harder to determine what was copied or not since ideas are so vague when it came to coding. Therefore, in question of web copyright it is harder to deduce what is and what is not copied. This documentary is really opening on if coping is bad or socially constructed to be bad. Shouldn't it be okay to copy an idea if it is for the greater good of people? Isn't it bad creating or coping for the simple reason of getting money? This documentary raises a lot of questions on people’s behavior and what is considered right.

The Yes Men Fix The World: a reading response

The Yes men Fix the World documentary is a masterpiece. It is an eye changing documentary about how the world is runned. It is a serious film although it has comedic turns which make it even more enjoyable to watch. With their comedic turns they are about to discredit the people they interview and oppose. It is crazy to me how people were not able to recognize them since they have been in the news multiple times. They were still able to make more hoax and make companies look stupid for not being more humaintairian. I found it a little unbelievable how the news made them look like the bad guys and how the people who needed help would hate them when the people who are affected were actually glad that people were paying attention to the issues they were living and were hoping that would make a change in how they are being treated by the companies and government. I think that the Yes Men even if they made some pain they were trying to expose years of wrong which is much better than all the companies and the government being in denial of the world's situation. The issue with the world is clearly money. Money is the one thing that seems to relate everything together. If there is a disaster there can be profit made therefore why try and prevent it. This can be seen with war and natural disasters. For wars countries sell weapons to the fighting countries. Arms companies make a lot of profit and investors as will. As for natural disasters, companies sell the land after it is rebuilt. Plans that were not approved can be approved because they have the money to make it happen. Capitalism is a vicious game. The system works for the rich so they can get richer while the poor stay poor and in misere. The documentary was good in showing the corrupt side of the capitalist system and was able to make fun of it at the same time which was very entertaining. It was also able to show the real issues that were happening and how it was affecting the people without being hard for the viewer due to the comedy they put into it. It was nice that they got the people that were affected to talk because they had a voice as well and it made it not only an activist documentary but a peoples’ documentary. The film is surely biased since the Yes Men are against capitalism and for global warming change and people activists. Even if the film is biased it provides a lot of information on behavior of the people in the capitalist game since they pretend to be official therefore we have the real reaction of people which is shocking.