Mind Control

Weiss, P. (2005). Mind Control. In P. De Palma. (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 213-216). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 8, Article 46

Review by Kim Doyle

This article by Peter Weiss considers how advanced software is being used to alleviate chronic pain and restore motor function to quadriplegics. By inserting a device called brain-computer interface (BCI) into the brain, researchers are running clinical trials to prove that function can return to a paralyzed person. The article begins by telling the story of Matthew Nagle, a victim of a stabbing rendering him unable to use his arms or legs, paralyzed from the neck down. Despite his condition, he is now able to play Pong. He can because of microelectrodes that have been implanted in his brain that read neural activity. Processors read patterns associated with arm motions that are then translated into signals that control the Pong paddle. The device is called BrainGate, developed by John Donoghue, head of neuroscience at Brown University. Eventually Donoghue hopes to hook BrainGate up to stimulators that can activate muscle tissue, compensating for a damaged nervous system.

Some physicians are skeptical about the use of BrainGate. Fearful that not enough is known about the device, these medical professionals think it may have been premature to plant it in the brain of a human being. They claim less invasive options are available. Nonetheless, as soon as Matthew Nagle learned of the clinical trials, he begged his doctors to let him be the first subject. He is now convinced he will be walking again someday as a result of using BrainGate. Likewise, Donoghue is convinced that embedding electrodes in the brain of paralysis victims is the only promise at this point of restoring mobility.

Reaction

I think this is absolutely incredible. It is inconceivable to me that someone can be so brilliant as to think of something as revolutionary as BrainGate. What hope it will offer to those who have been victims of terrible accidents and are no longer able to move! Even though it may not accomplish everything its designer hopes it will, Donoghue is still taking a major step forward on behalf of those who cannot take a step themselves.

Kabul’s Cyber Café Culture

Majumder, S. (2003). Kabul’s cyber café culture. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 188-189). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 7, Article 40

Review by Kim Doyle

Sanjoy Majumder writes in this article, originally published in 2003, about the establishment of cyber cafes in Kabul. Just two years prior the Taliban banned the use of the Internet by anyone other than the government. Afghans are realizing, as are citizens in other developing countries, that the Internet is a way to catch up with the rest of the world. In Kabul, and elsewhere, Internet is accessed through a wireless broadband system – very fast with high-capacity lines. There is a high level of enthusiasm around Internet use. Afghans are keeping their newly established cafes very busy. The low cost, only $1 for an hour of access, is a primary reason for this high level of use. Sabir Latifi, hoping to be the country’s first privately-owned Internet service provider, is recruiting help from others that have become familiar with the Internet when visiting other countries. They have returned to Kabul excited about what they have learned and use the Internet extensively to keep in touch with contacts and friends they have met while visiting other places. Latifi’s hope (when this article was written) was to bring the cost of Internet access down and make it available for free to Kabul University students. Latifi also believes the Internet can play a crucial role in empowering the central government and bring the people together.

Reaction

Majumber creates an image of Kabul - dusty streets with kebab stalls, vegetable carts, curio stores, chaotic traffic…and Internet cafes. It does seem incongruous. Yet the Afghan citizens are clamoring to these cafes in an effort to become connected with the world outside of their own. This article was written in 2003. It could be assumed therefore that Internet use has increased. The Internet has become so commonplace in our country. We take it for granted and know that nearly any kind of information needed or wanted is available. It is difficult to imagine it being one’s only connection to the outside world. What an opportunity for a war torn country that has been under such oppression.

Why Listening Will Never Be the Same

Teachout, T. (2001). Why listening will never be the same. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 198-201). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 8, Article 43

Review by Kim Doyle

In 2001 the sale of pre-recorded compact dropped by 10% outsold by blank discs for the first time. While the author of this article may agree that this was a sign of an acute crisis in the recording industry, he also believed this to be an indication of a “radical and irreversible way we listen to music” (pg. 198).

This article was written in 2002 and by this time millions of Americans were using their computers to share music files by sending them over the Internet. Attempts were made to control this through legislation and by developing software that would prevent this from being possible. These attempts were unsuccessful. Teachout writes in this article that while recording industries saw this as a threat to their existence, there was another implication that was unexplored.

Teachout explains his position by first presenting a bit of history of the recording process. For most of a century records were made through a process known as analog recording. By 1976 this was replaced by digital recording where a computer was used to convert sound waves into a sequence of binary digits. In 1983 we were able to store music in actual digital form by a laser scanning process. The author describes this as the true digital revolution. No longer does the recording process produce a record album. When music is converted to numbers, it becomes an idea and leaves the realm of being an object.

How does this impact the way we listen? Teachout explains this by comparing the listening process to viewing visual art. Replications are frequently made of well-known pieces of art. Despite the quality of these replicas, there is always only one original work. By contrast, music only exists through performance. Even a recording is a performance in itself. It is its own entity. Therefore a recording does not have the same relationship to a live performance as does a replication of a painting to its original. Every time we hear a piece of music, it is an original.

Teachout’s analysis of this in 2002 was to suggest that the spread of computer-based listening would start to alter the way records were being made and marketed. Performers were feeling under pressure to develop recordings that offered something very different than a performance. All songs on a CD had to be very strong, not just a collection of unrelated selections. Musicians needed to take charge of their own recording decisions. The author predicted that artists would start making their own recordings and market them via the Internet. Managerial institutions would likely be created to facilitate this for musicians but the ultimate responsibility for the work would belong for the first time to the artists themselves. Teachout further predicated that record albums would go away as well as record stores. The triumph of the digit was at hand.

Reaction

The triumph of the digit was definitely at hand. As we know now Teachout’s predictions have proven true. He presents a perspective of this phenomenon that I would never have considered. I appreciate his doing so as it really brings into focus the direct impact on the individual artist.

Music in a digitalized format offers a great deal of choice to the listener. By shopping through iTunes we are able to create a selection of songs ourselves rather than purchase an entire CD. We can shuffle songs listening to them in any order. While these choices are appealing, it does take some control away from the artist. It makes sense therefore that artists would need to consider new strategies of making and marketing their music.

As a classical musician I have always been irritated when record labels chop up classical music, selecting a favorite movement from one classical symphony and another movement from another symphony for example. This is clearly not the way the composer would have intended a work to be heard and I find it very disruptive to the ear. It may work well for figure skaters but it doesn’t work for me. Unfortunately this is a process that can easily be done now that music is digitalized. The sad thing is that the great masters of music of whom I speak (Mozart, Bach, Brahms, Beethoven and many, many more) are no longer living to give permission to manipulate their works in this way. I have no doubt that if they were still living, permission would not be granted.

Regardless of how music is recorded and what new opportunities these technological advances may offer, we need to remain aware as consumers how best to support the artists.

China’s Computer Wasteland

Joffe-Walt, B. (2005). China’s computer wasteland. In P. DePalma (Ed), Computers in society (pp. 169-171). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 7, Article 35

Review by Kim Doyle

What becomes of the billions of computers that are retired each year? Benjamin Joffe-Walt, author of this investigative report, provides a bleak answer to this question. China has become the dumping ground for electronic waste (e-waste) and the United States is a huge contributor to this dangerous situation. Other countries, including Malaysia, Canada, Sweden and Singapore are guilty of this as well, but international watchdog groups estimated that the United States alone exported more than $1 billion worth of electronic waste to China in 2004. Companies like Hewlett-Packard, Dell, Sony, IBM and Apple all manufacture electronic goods in China as well. Products are sold to Western countries and China gets back the rubbish.

This waste is highly toxic and very dangerous to the Chinese immigrant workers who feel they have no choice but to “farm” computers. They cannot find other work and it is the only way they can keep their families fed. The author describes the trip taken to the rural Chinese town of Guiyu where workers are seen sorting through piles of e-waste looking for usable parts that can be sold or burning the rubbish causing noxious fumes that workers constantly breathe in. Dr. Chen, a doctor at a local health clinic, reports that there are many cases of lung problems. The burning releases pollutants that cause this and other diseases, heart attacks and pulmonary edema.

Joffe-Walt reports that China’s e-waste crisis is a byproduct of its unequal development. It is open to international markets and capital has enhanced the divide between urban middle class and the rural poor. E-waste sweat shops are located in secluded areas where migrant workers sit stripping wires or disassembling broken motors earning an average pay of $3 - $4 a day. Local residents who got rich doing this e-waste work are now the e-waste bosses getting rich off the migrants they bring in to do this work for them.

While there are some computer recycling programs available, this author reports that the United States is failing to step up and take responsibility for managing their own waste. Other countries have done a better job of this. In May of 2001, the European Union adopted a directive requiring producers of electronic products to assume responsibility for the recovery and recycling of their own waste and to phase out using hazardous materials. Until the US and other countries do a better job of this, China will continue to face the life-threatening dangers of exposure to this toxic e-waste.

Reaction

This comes as a huge shock to me and it really shouldn’t. Knowing how hard it has been to get rid of my own personal computers I no longer use, it should come as no surprise that this would be an enormous problem for our country. Where do all these old computers go? Now I’m aware of the sad truth and I’m ashamed that as a nation we are so negligent in the manner we dispose of our e-waste. I work for an agency I am proud to say does a good job of addressing this issue. We get maximum use of computers we buy, recycling them throughout the organization so that all those needing computers have machines consistent with their level of proficiency and use. Computers no longer needed by employees are made available to clients who may not be able to purchase one for themselves.

We need to take personal responsibility by supporting programs now available to deal with this waste. We must support proposed legislation holding businesses and computer manufacturers responsible for the recovery and recycling of their own e-waste. We must stop making our problem a disaster for the poor in other countries who feel they have no other option but to work amidst this toxic material.

The Level of Discourse Continues to Slide

Schwartz, J. (2003). The level of discourse continues to slide. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society, (pp. 164-165). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 6, Article 34

Review by Kim Doyle

In this article John Schwartz presents a critical perspective of the use of PowerPoint for presentations. Microsoft developed this technology 10 years ago and critics have complained ever since. Schwartz accuses it of being “deadening to the soul” (pg. 164). The use of PowerPoint is pervasive, even among young students who are using it for school reports.

A serious misuse of this software program cited by Schwartz in this article is that by NASA engineers when presenting a report on their investigation of the crash of the Columbia shuttle. Edward Tufte, a Yale University professor and expert on the presentation of visual information, published a critique of that presentation. He claimed a key slide containing information crucial to the shuttle’s malfunction was imbedded in the presentation toward the end. This would imply a lesser significance to this point than was actually true, as confirmed by an independent board that investigated the disaster. James McKenzie, an educational consultant, is quoted in this article as saying PowerPoint has actually damaged our culture.

Microsoft’s chief product manager, Dan Leach, expresses pride in the software package and says customers love it. He points out that the application is just a tool – a template for users to fill in the blanks. Others share his view and claim that the tool doesn’t control what users present or how it is used.

Schwartz claims that PowerPoint is here to stay and “not always for the worse” (pg. 165).

Reaction

This article caught my eye because despite the length of time PowerPoint has been around, I’m just learning how to use it – and I like it. I’m discovering it is far simpler to use than I thought and wish I had begun using it sooner. If I had, I would have better records of trainings and meetings I’ve conducted. I find myself often re-creating material that I shouldn’t have to because I haven’t kept things organized in such a way to access it when needed. I like what I can do with this program, and for the most part have not found presentations I’ve attended poorly done. I like being able to use handouts that are consistent with the slides and can make notes accordingly. It’s true that when presenters do little more than read the slides to an audience, one could take offense at this, if they even stay awake to do so. But again, this is a decision of the user. If someone is not effective at presenting, it probably won’t make much difference what tool they use to share information. It probably won’t be well done anyway. It’s shocking to hear that a team of NASA engineers would use such poor judgment as to present crucial information in the way they did. This is a gross mistake on their part. It’s not the fault of the application. I like PowerPoint and I agree with the author – I think it’s here to stay.

Why Spyware Poses Multiple Threats to Security

Thompson, R. (2005). Why spyware poses multiple threats to security. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 121-123). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 6, Article 28

Review by Kim Doyle

In this article Thompson warns us of the growing threat of spyware referring to it as annoying and impacting the computer experience in very negative ways. Thompson also informs us that it poses a very real threat to corporate and even national security. Spyware is software downloaded unknowingly and presents real and pervasive dangers that are not always known. They are also not very obvious. Spyware installs itself silently on a PC where it begins any number of unwanted actions. Among these are "phoning home", where information about a PC user and their computer habits are sent to a third party to use to spam a computer. Another tactic is to capture keystrokes a user types thereby accessing personal information, bank accounts, passwords, etc. While spyware presents this threat to security and privacy, it can also harm computer performance. The addition of spyware can significantly slow down a computer's boot time which if multiplied by the number of PCs used within an organization, can wreak havoc on productivity.

This article points out that thousands of spyware applications are downloaded every day in large organizations in which employees use the Internet. Some of these applications are undoubtedly intended to steal passwords and critical data. Thompson notes that despite its prevalence, it is probably the least understood espionage tactic used today. Also very disturbing is that spyware is used by terrorists to disable computer networks during crises.

Thompson offers some potential solutions. He suggests the first line of defense is education and protection. Anyone connected to the Internet must know they are part of an incredibly complex network. Spyware creators take advantage of this. Organizations such as COAST (Consortium of Anti-Spyware Technology), are being created to make users aware of the spyware threat. The second line of defense presented in this article is disclosure legislation. All applications should be readily identifiable by users prior to installation so that users know what is being downloaded to their systems. The third solution offered by Thompson is aggressive prosecution. Lawmakers should aggressively pursue those who use spyware to disrupt service and steal private information. The final line of defense is planning for spyware attacks and developing responses to them. It is important, notes Thompson, that businesses and government work together to address this issue and develop safeguards to protect the security and privacy of Internet users.

Reaction

I knew nothing about spyware prior to reading this article. It is quite frightening and leaves one with a feeling of being violated. It is a very uncomfortable thought to think that each time I log on to the Internet, spyware users may be accessing my personal information or tracking my keystrokes to tap into my bank account. It is particularly discomforting to learn that terrorists are using spyware to disable computer networks. It makes me want to discontinue posting articles on this blog for fear of creating an avenue for a spyware user to access my information. So I believe I will sign off for now and hope that Thompson's proposed solutions are taken to heart by those in a position to disable these insidious threats.

To Size Up Colleges, Students Now Shop Online

Carnevale, D., (2005). To size up colleges, students now shop online. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp.105-108). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 5, Article 24

Review by Kim Doyle

Destination-U is now one of the many online resources where students can go to learn about various colleges. College officials know their website is the first point of contact for prospective students and must make a good impression. So they are going all out to make their website as inviting and helpful as possible. Drexel University, one of the colleges cited as an example in this article, provides e-mail addresses of current students who have agreed to respond to questions from prospective students. Joan T. McDonald, VP for enrollment management at Drexel notes that the tricky part of technology is having enough staff to make sure that responses to student inquiries are pretty much instantaneous. Drexel officials have also done everything they can to make sure their institution comes up at the top of as many Google searches for colleges as possible. They do this by making sure they use the Meta tags, hidden descriptive information about Internet pages that search engines use.

The College Board offers one of the most popular college-match services. This is free to the public and officials report that on average, more than one million students use this service every month. Students fill out a questionnaire identifying what they are looking for in a college, location, etc. The search provides a list of colleges that match the criteria given by the student.

Gregory A. Pyke, senior associate dean of admission for Wesleyan University, says that colleges now need to be prepared for surprise visits by prospective students. Doing initial research on the Internet may eliminate the step of contacting the college in advance to set up a visit. Other officials are quoted in this article saying that despite the advantages technology offers in the college search process, admissions personnel have not given up on the personal touch. Most still develop glossy brochures and students will still want to arrange visits to get a feel for colleges.

Reaction

I don’t find this surprising. Given the expanse of the Internet and the information available at our fingertips, why shouldn't colleges be using it to market their “product”? I think this is a great way for students to learn about colleges and for colleges to make themselves known. Prospective students can become aware of many colleges and universities that they may never have considered or even known about. And, this process enables students to learn a fair amount about a college if a visitation is not possible. I’m glad that some of these services are free. As my kids approach college age, I’m sure we will be checking them out.

Making Yourself Understood

Dearlove, D. & Crainer, S. (2003). Making yourself understood. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 54-59). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit , Article 13

Review by Kim Doyle

"In the age of technology, writing skills are more important than ever" submits Stuart Crainer and Des Dearlove in this article (pg. 54). Business leaders have more ways of communicating that they have ever had before, including e-mail, text instant messaging, video-conferencing and much, much more. These executives no longer rely on secretaries to correct and filter messages before sending them off to their intended recipients. They are responsible for creating their own messages and deliver them instantly. Crainer and Dearlove suggest a downside to this. Messages can now be easily misunderstood if they aren't lost in the deluge of messages flooding email inboxes.

The authors state that, regardless of these digital options, writing is still a fundamental skill necessary for good communication. Some believe that multimedia technology diminishes the need for strong writing skills. Don Spetner, senior Vice President for global marketing of a recruitment firm believes this is a misconception. Writing is still a very important core executive skill. Executives are spending more and more time writing. Email is one attributing factor to this. Hours are spent each day reviewing and responding to email. Jeff Skill, former eBay president believes that despite this time spent on email and in front of the commuter, communication skills are declining.

Crainer and Dearlove continue by stating that the style of business writing is also changing. There is a growing need for executives to ensure their communication is clear, direct and when necessary, personal. No longer relying on a hierarchy to get things done, executives communicate directly to guide, state expectations, persuade and inspire.

Instant messaging is a sign that things could get even worse. At a time when written communication is becoming more important than ever before, we are faced with the challenges of interpreting oddly abbreviated language, misspelled words, jargon, poor punctuation and terrible grammar.

Many executives who are discovering the need to improve their writing skills are finding help is now available. Writing coaches, classes and ghostwriters are on hand to assist those challenged by less than adequate writing ability. Communication consultant Lynne Kearney says the explosion of electronic information distribution provides "enormous opportunity and an enormous amount of content to be digested" (pg. 58). Previously having worked with business leaders to develop writing courses, Kearney says they now receive calls directly from senior managers requesting highly customized programs with the right content and packaged to grab readers' attention.

As the authors state, it is necessary now more than ever, to have the "write stuff" (pg. 59) and an accurate self-awareness of one's ability.

Reaction

Writing is a necessary skill for my work. I write a great deal creating various types of documents. Many of these are instructional and serious consequences will result if they are not very readable and carefully understood. I am also critical of others' writing and become impatient when I do not understand something someone else has written. I believe the digital methods of communicating used so profusely do draw attention to the fact that writing is not a skill everyone has mastered. With email we are now recipients of quickly crafted messages that with a touch of a send button our sender has informed or confused. This article has presented a perspective that I've not given much thought. I agree however, that having the "write" stuff is essential.

Making Meaning: As Google Goes, So Goes the Nation

Nunberg, G. (2003). Making meaning: As google goes, so goes the nation. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 85-86). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 4, Article 18

Review by Kim Doyle

In this article Nunberg describes the factors that influence rankings resulting from Internet searches. Google, the largest search engine, estimates its index has more than 16 million pages and conducts 55% of all Internet searches. The author indicates that a high Google ranking has considerable value to commercial sites as well as to ideas and opinions. The primary factors influencing Google rankings are how predominantly the search term figures appear in the pages and the number of links sites have to other pages. When a common word is used for a search, the top ranked sites will be those that are linked to a high number of other sites also containing the search terms. A more specific search will align with the interests of groups that aggregate around certain topics. What this means, as we read in this article, is that the dominant voice or idea will influence the results of a search, even so far as to imply a conspiracy, as a friend of the author once suggested. This leads to the complaints of some that feel the Internet is not a reliable source of information and search engines are not working as they should. The other side of this argument is that search engines are doing exactly what they should by providing an avenue for those with a particular interest or knowledge of a topic to voice it. Nunberg refers to the Internet as "uniquely democratic" (pg. 85). The major sites with the most money and power will be the top ranked and, in the case of a specialized topic, the Internet will appear to favor those that care most about it or have the dominant voice. Nunberg cautions us to be aware of this and reject the assumption that what a Google search produces reflects the consensus of the "Internet community" (pg. 85).

Reaction

I agree with what the author is indicating in this article. I believe many rely strongly on internet searches for information on any topic and it is appropriate to be cautious of what searches produce. It is often radically opinionated or very inaccurate. I use the internet with discretion. I will often check multiple sites and other resources to verify information. As a graduate student I have come to utilize the Internet extensively. While I find it an incredible resource, I also know I must be careful to know that it can't always be trusted to provide valid information.

Back to School Blogging

Read, Brock. (2004). Back to school blogging. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 63-66). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 4, Article 14

Review by Kim Doyle

Blogging is helping new students enter college more confident and better prepared, as suggested by Brock Read in this article. Blogging has become a way for students to connect, ask questions, share advice or just get acquainted in a web-based environment. Nora Goldberger for example, whose experience was shared in this article, spent a great deal of time on a blog (group web-based journal) developed by Emily McRae, a sophomore at Davidson College. Nora, also preparing to enter Davidson College, received very helpful information about dorm life, meals and which courses she should take.

Web-based tools like LiveJournal, a free service, have made it possible for students to develop blogs where high school and college students can go to share information as well as to make social connections. Administrators agree this is becoming a useful tool for students and is actually helping freshmen become more self-reliant students. They are benefiting from the advice that upperclassmen are posting.

Leslie Marsicano, director of residence life at Davidson College, actually recommends the site to students and parents who call with questions about housing. Denying speculations that she has recruited upperclassmen to log on and mentor incoming students, she states that it works so much better if faculty and administrators stay off. College officials do have an interest in these online opportunities and suggest they can be better advertisement than a “glossy brochure”.

Brock says that blogs are also places where students go for socializing. Some blogs are more “chattier” and less focused than Davidson’s blog. Others form study groups through blogs and choose roommates. Whatever the purpose, this article presents blogs as a very helpful resource for students.

Reaction

I find this interesting. The skeptic in me wonders how safe these are and how accessible information might be to the wrong person. According to this article, however, blogs are not as accessible as other web sites such as MySpace and are therefore more secure. Obviously young students, especially students having just graduated from high school, have grown up with computers and it is natural for them to use online resources in this way. If they help students navigate the transition from high school to college and feel more prepared, academically or socially, then I guess that’s a good thing. Clearly they're not going to go away.

When Long Hours at a Video Game Stop Being Fun

Stross, Randall. (2004). When long hours at a video game stop being fun. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 48-49). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 3, Article 11

Review by Kim Doyle

In this article Randall Stross reveals the conditions under which entertainment software developers work to remain leaders in the industry. In 2004, when this article was first published, games for video consoles and personal computers had become a $7 billion-a-year business. But, as Randall points out, workers in the business are not happy with the hours they are required to work nor their compensation for doing so. Jamie Kirschenbaum, an employee of Electronic Arts, Inc. the world’s largest developer of entertainment software, filed a class action lawsuit against the company for failing to pay overtime compensation. Working an average of 65 hours a week, once necessary two weeks prior to distribution of a new release, has now become a regular occurrence. “Crunches” as they are called, used to also be accompanied by additional compensation but Kirschenbaum indicates this is no longer the case. Jeff Brown, a spokesman for Electronic Arts, indicated this was not unique to his company. He went on to say that they are interested in the opinions of their employees and conduct employee surveys every two years.

The International Game Developers Association conducted an industry wide “quality of life” survey in 2004 that confirmed that “crunch time” is a regular occurrence in the entertainment software industry. Furthermore, it warned young individuals just starting out how unlikely forming relationships and starting families becomes once working in this business.

Randy Pausch, a computer science professor at Carnegie Mellon University, after spending a sabbatical as a researcher at Electronic Arts points out how “young” the workplace is. EA had 3,300 employees at this time and reported hiring 1,000 new employees each year. In the past about 10% of its new employees were hired directly out of college, but the plans are to increase this to 75%. Among the reasons for this is the cost savings from lower salaries when hiring from a younger group. The company also realizes that younger employees are also the most “suggestible”. Professor Pausch said he hear managers refer to how “young kids don’t know what’s possible”. As Pausch further points out, however, “they will learn when they get their schedules”.

Reaction

My experience with video based games and entertainment begins and ends with solitaire. As much time as I spend on computers for work and personal use, I have no interest in remaining in front of the screen for recreational purposes. It is therefore quite surprising to me to learn that the industry of software entertainment is a multi-billion dollar industry. While I believe that no employer should take advantage of its workers in the way Electronic Arts and other similar businesses seem to be doing, as this article illustrates, it is ultimately the choice of the worker to remain. Even Kirschenbaum, after filing a class action lawsuit against his employer (EA), he remained with the company. I just can’t seem to muster up too much sympathy for these folks.

The New Gatekeepers

Lamb, M. Gregory. (2004). The new gatekeepers. In In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 24-26). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 2, Article 6

Review by Kim Doyle

In this article Gregory Lamb provides a brief analysis of the major Internet search engines, or Web “gatekeepers” as he refers to them, and what users should know. Our access to the vast amount of information available on the World Wide Web is controlled by Internet search engines, the three largest of these being Google, Yahoo and MSN (just emerging at the time this article was written). Steve Jones, a communications professor at the University of Illinois in Chicago and founder of the Association of Internet Researchers is quoted in this article stating, “Search engines represent information gatekeepers unlike any we’ve had before”. Jones points out that in the past, people, for instance librarians and newspaper editors, used to provide a service of helping others access information. Now Internet search engines make information far more accessible, literally at our fingertips.

As Lamb suggests, this access to information via Internet search engines is not necessarily a bad thing. Users should know, however, that information available is largely influenced by companies and advertisers that are willing to pay billions of dollars for space on search engines to ensure their companies are appearing at the top of search rankings. This has indeed become a multi-billion dollar industry. By 2008, Random Secrecy, a market intelligence firm predicts that search engines will generate purchases of up to $92 billion. Despite this, however, users have three primary complaints about Internet searches. They can’t find what they need. When they do they don’t know how to interpret the data they find, and they worry about the quality.

The Web is so big it’s hard to wade through all the information that searches produce says Duncan Witte, chief operating officer for BrightPlanet, a specialty Internet-search company in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Internet search companies are trying to make improvements that will make it easier for searchers to find what they need. Some companies are trying to specialize, some may be able to know where users are and localize a search and others will get to know a user’s searching habits and attempt to anticipate interests. These ideas are still in the future, so for now the millions of Americans searching the Internet each month must rely on the search engines to help them find the information they are looking for.

Reaction

I’ve been curious why someone would use one search engine over another. The comparison Lamb makes between search engines and telephone books helps me understand how search engines work and what influences search rankings. To test this out I conducted the same search on Google, Yahoo and MSN. My search was for information on “children and computers”. Google produced fairly generic information, i.e. articles about the pros and cons of extensive computer use by children, and other analyses conducted by professional early childhood organizations. Yahoo produced some of the same, but more sites providing information about computer games and other computer “learning” activities available for children were ranked near the top. The top rankings on MSN were exclusively about computer games and activities and the developmental benefits for children of computer usage. Hmmmm…

Brain Circulation:How High-Skill Immigration Makes Everyone Better Off.

Saxenian, A. (2002). Brain circulation, how high-skill immigration makes everyone better off. In In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 37-40). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 3, Article 8

Review by Kim Doyle

In this article Annalee Saxenian submits that the high numbers of immigrants employed in the Silicon Valley is a benefit, rather than a threat, to the American workforce. In 2002, when this article was first published, over a quarter of Silicon Valley’s workforce were immigrants. This has caused significant debate over U.S. Immigration Policy that focuses primarily on the extent to which the presence of foreign-born professionals has displaced American workers. The countries from which these workers come also believe this emigration to the United States to be an economic loss for their countries. Many assume that this movement of highly skilled workers benefits one country over the other. In this article Saxenien submits that those immigrating to the U.S. are actually highly skilled entrepreneurs that are starting new businesses in the U.S. and creating jobs rather than displacing American workers. Thanks to “brain circulation” as she calls it, this is a benefit to both sides.

In addition to creating new U.S. businesses, these skilled immigrants are also maintaining their ethnic ties by developing social and professional organizations for the purpose of professional and technical advancement. However, while the Chinese and Indian immigrants socialization is exclusive to their ethnic networks, they acknowledge that working with U.S. businesses is essential. Among the most successful are those that draw on their ethnic resources and integrate with U.S. enterprises. For example the links between the high-tech communities of Silicon Valley and Taiwan are resulting in benefits to both economies.

Saxenien points out further that these social and professional organizations linking immigrant entrepreneurs with each other also facilitate linkages with their counterparts at home. This creates transnational communities and provides opportunities to participate in a global economy. New transportation and technology communications allow even small firms to work within an international economy. It is, as Saxenian submits, a new model of globalization, a fact that U.S. immigration policy makers must consider as immigration laws are established.

Reaction

This article presents a perspective on this phenomenon that I have not previously been aware. I am among those that have assumed that employment of skilled immigrants has a negative impact on American workers. Outsourcing of technology is often spoken of within a negative context claiming it results in the loss of jobs for American workers. While I know this does happen, reading this article has broadened my perspective of this issue and its relationship to immigration law.

Whom to Protect and How?

Blendon, B., Benson, J., Brody, M.,Altman, D., Rosenbaum, M., Flournoy, R., Kim, M. (2001). Whom to protect and how? The public, the government, and the internet revolution. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 8-11). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 1, Article 2

Review by Kim Doyle

In this article, Blendon and associates address the impact the computer and internet revolution has had on American life and the difficulty the federal government has in responding to public requests for more oversight of the internet and specific content. This difficulty is due primarily to First Amendment rights and implications if content is regulated.

The rapid spread of technology has been striking. In the mid-90’s, at the early stage of the Internet revolution, less than one in five Americans had ever used the Internet. By 2001 (when this article was published), 92% percent of Americans under the age of 60 report having used a computer and 75% have used the Internet. The experiences over the past two decades have resulted in most Americans feeling very positive about the Internet and its perceived limitless possibilities. As reported in this article, over half of Americans believe the computer has given them more control over their lives. Additionally, Most Americans report being well served by the computer industry, including software companies and the Internet industry.

Despite these benefits, the Internet Revolution is leading to a broad range of concerns among the American public. These concerns include the possibility of danger to children through contact with strangers, the availability of pornography and the availability of instructions for making bombs and other weapons. Others report fearing a loss of privacy and unauthorized access to personal and confidential information. The authors of this article suggest that regardless of the benefits and the inevitable growth in internet usage, most Americans would support legislation resulting in more controls, specifically on content perceived as threatening and dangerous. Americans, says Brandon and associates, are more concerned about safety concerns than concerns regarding First Amendment Issues.

The government is “between a rock and a hard place”. An explosion of Internet growth is predicted to occur in the next decade and Americans will likely become more demanding of regulatory controls. The government, however, will find it very difficult to institute Internet controls given its globally pervasive use and accessibility.

(The article reviewed herewas first published in 2001 in the Brookings Review, Winter 2001, pp. 44-48. Survey results cited in this article come from several sources noted in this periodical.)

Reflection

I experience this conundrum on a regular basis. I have come to rely on Internet access in professional and personal contexts. I also have two teenage daughters who, through the Internet, have access to information that is threatening and highly inappropriate. While I attempt to monitor their usage of the Internet, there is a limit to the extent I can do this. This circumstance is not unlike that we’ve experienced with television viewing. TV programs are becoming more sexually explicit and show graphic details of violent situations. As a parent my efforts in addressing this have been limiting access, but more importantly to attempt to instill values that equip them to make good decisions for themselves. I would support legislation for more regulatory controls, but is it realistic to think the government can accomplish this? I don’t know. What I do know is that I can make choices for myself and be and teach my kids to make good choices as well. That is our basic right and responsibility.

Five Things We Need to Know About Technological Changes

Postman, N. (1998). Five things we need to know about technological changes. In P. De Palma (Ed.), Computers in society (pp. 3-7). Dubuque, IA: McGraw-Hill.
Unit 1, Article 1

Review by Kim Doyle

This article is an address presented by Neil Postman to New Tech ’98 Conference in Denver, Colorado, March 27, 1998. The theme of this conference was “The New Technologies and the Human Person: Communicating the Faith in the New Millennium”. With the 21st century drawing near, Postman suggests and validates existing concerns regarding the impact that technology will have on faith and how its advances will pose new problems. In this address Postman offers five ideas that, if concerned about cultural stability and balance, we should know about technological change. Here is a brief summary of those ideas.

First, Postman suggests that all technological change is a tradeoff – that for every technological advantage there is a corresponding disadvantage. Using the automobile as an illustration, Postman points out that while there were many advantages that came with this new invention, there were also disadvantages to driving these vehicles including the negative impact on air quality. There is a cost for new technologies and culture always pays a price.

The second idea Postman presents is that the advances of technology are never distributed evenly among the population. New technology benefits some but not everyone. While television has expanded opportunities for many, Postman was predicting that the television may actually lead to the end of some teachers losing their jobs as it would overshadow the importance of the printed word upon which schools were based. Postman further points out the irony of computers representing the “Age of Information” and yet regardless of the amount of information accessible to us through computers, we have still not been able to solve some of the most serious problems that challenge us.

The third idea is that embedded in every technological advancement is some type of prejudice or bias that can at times work for us and at other times work against us. There is a philosophy of technology that seems to suggest what is most importance is speed, immediacy, analysis and organization rather than embracing the value of the spoken word, reflection, emotion and intellect.

Fourth, Postman cautions that technological change is not additive, but rather ecological. Computers are not a form of technology that has simply added something to our lives; they have changed everything – the way we communicate, how we learn, how we are connected to, exposed to and influenced by others.

Finally, Postman’s fifth idea is that media tend to become mythic and that our enthusiasm for such inventions and their benefits becomes a form of idolatry. Postman cautions that technology is not part of God’s creation but a product of human creativity – something that should be viewed as “a strange intruder” that could control more of our lives than we would want it to.

In conclusion, Postman encourages his listeners to be alert to technological advances. We have responded to previous advances unaware of possible disadvantages placing ourselves at risk of being controlled by technology rather than controlling it. Postman offers this final word of caution; “We need to proceed with our eyes wide open so that we may use technology rather than be used by it”.


Reaction

I was unfamiliar with Neil Postman and his context. After a short bit of research I learned that he was an American Professor, also considered a cultural critic and old-fashioned humanist who believed there were limitations to the promises of technology. He lived from 1931 to 2003 having had a 40-year association with New York University.

I actually appreciate Postman’s cautions about technological advancements. While I may not agree with everything he says, I do accept his fundamental message that we must be alert users of technology so that we can use it to our advantage and not allow it to take over our lives.

Postman suggests that with every technological advantage comes a disadvantage. It’s a tradeoff. Just as the creation of the automobile resulted in advantages and corresponding disadvantages, so too has the rapid advancement of computer technology resulted in significant disadvantages despite its many wonders. The impact of computer waste has created a significant environmental dilemma for our country where recycling and disposable efforts cannot keep up with the pace of advances and upgrades. Unlike creations in the past that were used for fairly significant periods of time before replaced with “newer models”, such as the automobile or television, computers have become very disposable. New features are added frequently and tempt users to upgrade often resulting in the problem of what do we do with the old which may actually be very new.

Technology does not benefit everyone. This is the simple truth. Not everyone chooses to use computers and other technological instruments available to us, nor do we all have access to the necessary resources to acquire these tools. Yet it’s an implied requirement for all humans. I frequently hear those that rely on email for communication express frustration at not being able to communicate with someone who may not have a computer or an email address - as though using the telephone is no longer an option. And then, even more of concern, are those who feel that the onset and development of computers will eventually lead to loss of jobs. We must keep up or risk being left behind.

Computers and the Internet can clearly be a danger. How often we hear of “cyber-stalkers” luring young girls into dangerous and potentially lethal situations. I have two teenage daughters who have unknowingly put themselves in harms way by not fully understanding the degree to which they expose themselves when creating and visiting My Space pages or joining chat rooms. It’s frightening as a parent. One must be very cautious.

I can remember not having a computer. I can remember as a college student spending great amounts of time in the “calculator” lab completing assignments for my statistics class. I know I’m dating myself and certainly not suggesting that I haven’t benefited greatly from computers. I can imagine not having a computer but, if given a choice, would not give mine up now. But being alert and using technology to my advantage rather than allowing it to control me is sound advice.