Reed I

     The first few chapters of Reed struck me as very similar to a class I've taken at WSU already called DTC 356. The information provided about the lack of internet access worldwide would have struck me as more unsettling had I not taken the class previously.

     I think as Americans we have a cultural bias of what actually goes on around the world and even though we have access to this amazing technology we are still very centralized as a people. There seems to be a lack of knowledge on current event in the United States, or media is skewed to fit into some sort of demographic or media scheme.

    I digress, I would like to take a moment to reflect on what we spoke about in class around the reading of Ong. That discussion roughly translates over to the ability to record information and have that readily available is essentially power. With that said I think it is valuable for people to view the internet as a superb example of a codex of the modern world's technology and that this knowledge is seemingly innumerable in its immensity.

    Don't get me wrong here there is a lot of garbage on the internet but there is also information that could turn the studious into a master in no time at all.
   
     I guess what I would like you to take away from this post is a thought. What if the world shifted its focus on providing the underdeveloped world access to this technology? How far would the world come? How much would the world change? It's a crazy thing to think about, imagine if all the information modern western culture had at their disposable magically became available to the entire world.

     Oh the possibilities.

Tapscott II

     I want to focus on education past, present, and future in this blog post. Its weaknesses, its strength, and its importance in society. I want to examine why things were how they were, are how they are, and what the could possibly evolve into.

    Education seems to hit a point of stagnation, unless of course you are lucky to be in a privileged area of the country. It seems to take the most hits in government budgeting, and this can't really fly in the country now. There has been a radical shift in technology grow since even I was in grade school, and the education seems to be unable to keep up or they just choose not to.

     The environment most public schools provide for learning is in every sense of the word obsolete. Its an environment that almost absolutely discourages the use of technology, and provides education material from sources that would be deemed irrelevant in an area of higher education. With that said it can't all be bad there are a number of schools that are starting to break this old trend, but I believe it is still very far from a new education standard.

     Introduction of technology in the classroom seems to be the next step. Why is it so slowly being harnessed? I couldn't tell you for sure maybe funding, maybe reluctance of teaching professionals? All I know is that current education it isn't doing a good job of preparing students of what is to come or what to expect as the world and workforce continues to evolve.

    For the future of education I expect a paradigm shift, from analog learning to digital learning. It makes it easier to stay up on current information. The shift could ultimately change the amount of total funding required to update allowing schools to function of less money while remaining relevant. E-textbooks alone could radically alter the way school function today, cutting out lockers, backpacks causing issues for students and most important of all allowing material to remain relevant.

    In short why aren't we funding this? I personally don't understand. I think it could be done, and it could very well set a modern education standard in the process. Thoughts?

Tapscott I

       In the first part of Grown Up Digital Tapscott introduces the Net Generation. This is usually referred to as the Y generation, and is generation of people generally looked down upon due to their reliance on technology. This generation has been brought up surrounded by technology and naturally gravitate towards it and its uses.

     There is now a shift in the workforce as the Net Generation "comes of age". The way of working of the previous generation is on its way out and the Net Generation is coming in. It's a shift between the old get your hands dirty and work hard mentality and the all the information you need is a Google search away and optimizing efficiency "working easier".  Until recently this way of working has had a pretty negative connotation with the previous generation but it more and more quickly becomes the norm.

     In a very general sense the work of the Net Generation may be more or less viewed as lazier work. In actuality its just more efficient, as a shift in technology has happened getting things done has become easier, faster, and in some ways probably less personal. This may have lead to the criticism of this generation, which I can rule out as a misunderstanding.

     In short the Net Generation is just the next step in working. A shift from manual labor to digital labor. The introduction of a generation absolutely engulfed in technology is bound to cause a shift in the way we work as a whole. You can't expect things to stay the same when the world changes so rapidly. Old ways of working will surely stay around but will more than likely become the minority.

Baron I

     A Better Pencil attacks a problem that seems to happen every generation. That is the introduction of the next generations technology into the older generation. This problem is discussed all the time. When older people chastise younger people regarding there dependance on technology seems to be the most prevalent.

     This cycle of technological change always happens and eventually the technology becomes a widely accepted part of culture. It is true about nearly every change in the way we as people produce and consume writing. Each step was wondered about by the previous generation, writing to the printing press, printing press to the computer. Does it cause a loss in the meaning of the writing? Do works become a novelty due to the availability there is today. What will come next?

     All of these questions are valid to a point. At the end of the day adjusting to change is the hard part, not worrying about what will happen to the writing. Some people don't like using electronics, some prefer to get the news from the local physical paper, some use electronics exclusively. The important thing to remember here is that regardless of the method of delivery of the writing, the writing is still fundamentally the same. Writing may lose some of its majesty when it becomes so wide spread that it can sometimes be looked at as an annoyance, but at its core it hasn't change.

    These are just my thoughts on the issue of the evolution of our pencils. What do you think is the next step in writing? Where will things go? Do you even care? Me personally I think that as this generation is so heavily dependent on technology and some of the technologies we depend on change monthly in some cases, I expect a decline in the fear of technology as time goes on. In other words as the older generation is on its way out I think the new older generation will succumb less to tech shock.

Achebe II

     Technology is power. Or in a sense it empowers, and changes the outlook of the people who have acquired the technology. This is apparent in colonization by literate cultures. When a literate culture goes to an underdeveloped and oral area, the thought process is that the way literates are doing things is clearly better.

     When colonization occurs it really boils down to attempts to assimilate and if that doesn't work take what you want by force. I mean you have the tools why not use them. When someone sees an underdeveloped area they tend to focus on what is different. Therein lies a problem, people don't like things to be different, it makes things more difficult than if everything was the same. This is where assimilation comes in, as the more advanced of the two culture, literate cultures will try to introduce and convert the population to being the same. If that doesn't work or it is met with resistance thats when force comes in. When attempting to colonize an area there is no gain is leaving the unconverted and going back home, so you take what you think should be yours.

    With this said what comes to mind when I write the words "Technology is good"? I personally find technology is great, the creation of a more connected world is among its successes. Of course of the other hand when power takes over there is always bound to be drawbacks. Genocide, war, conversion to name a few. Just some food for thought, what do you think?

Achebe I

     Literacy changes a person's way of thinking. It causes a new type of consciousness for them their thoughts are dismiss-able after they are recorded. The stress of memory is lost in a literate society, and there is a emphasis on collect knowledge.

    A major difference between an oral society and a literary one is the loss of a communal sense. In an oral society the closeness of people is required to coexist and grow, but in a literary society like ours the goal is to be as unique and independent as possible. There is also a different sense of generosity in an oral society people are willing to help even people that may not be able to help back right away. In a literary society most people wont take the time simple because it may not benefit them.

     The difference in the concept of time is staggeringly different, time isn't exact in an oral society. In our society we measure everything with time and are essentially controlled by it entirely. In an oral society time is approximate nothing is concrete and it, people can put aside time to do other things with nearly none of the consequence we may have in out own society.

     With this said, what lifestyle resonant with you personally. Wouldn't it be nice to have all the advancement we have but enjoy a stronger sense of community. Is everything exactly how you like it.

I personally like the idea of advancement with community, but that could be regarded as wishful thinking.

Ong II

     Writing is a technology that has changed the world in ways that perhaps no other technology has or will be able to ever. The advent of recording information through writing revolutionized technological advancement to an unbelievable degree. The increase in advancement after writing is astronomical it allowed people to know more than they could possible know just remembering everything. Writing as a technology is a necessary requirement for advancement of a culture at least in a technical sense.

     The shift from memories to recordings allowed specializations among people. As people begin to specialize a culture diversifies. The big thing here is when agriculture became specialized it allowed for groups of people to settle. As specialists increase their ability knowledge of that act of aspect of life can grow and continue to be recorded as improvements are made. The recordings eventually allowed anyone who wished to read them access to the knowledge of a master without the time investment, allow continuation of development to exist.

     This is short and sweet, writing revolutionized the advanced world. Nothing we have today could possibly exist without it. It's amazing to think that the world as we know it would cease to be if writing just disappeared. It may be the single omnipotent tool necessary for advancing anything without conceptual limitations.

Insanity....