Blog Post #12: Technology's Hold on Me 

  

   Technology, in my opinion, does more harm than good. Because of this I don't believe I have a good relationship with technology. While there are so many positive outcomes with it, it is also polluting our minds. As someone who works at a kids camp I constantly see how young these kids are already having technology change their lives. The same goes for us. While we might not have grown up using technology as much, it has altered our everyday lives. Every morning the first thing I do is grab my phone, because of this I have 268 pickups everyday. It is addicting to scroll through apps, check social media pages, and text people. Our whole lives are inside that screen. While this might seem harmless, it is taking a toll on our minds every single day. 

    Growing up, I was in third grade when I got an Ipod shuffle for my birthday. This was my first piece of technology, even through it was a tiny square that only played music, I thought it was amazing. Getting to sit down with my mom and pick out a few of my favorite songs to buy was so exciting. Flash forward to now through music streaming apps we can have any song ever made at our fingertips. Later on I got an Ipod Touch, an Ipad, and finally in 7th grade I got my first phone. This is when social media came into my life. The first social media that I used would have to be Youtube. While I never posted anything on my own I loved watching videos. Me and my friends would come to school everyday and talk all about it. Next up was Pinterest, this was 6th grade when I started using Pinterest and I would say that would be my real first social media because I could post too. I still use it to this day. These were all harmless apps until Snapchat and Instagram came into the picture. I found myself constantly comparing myself to everyone and it took me a long time to understand that social media is a highlight reel. People just post the highs of their day to day life. To this day I still struggle with social media and I constantly think about deleting every platform however, I am scared to miss out.

    When I was a kid and I was bored I would walk over to my neighbors house and play outside with them for hours. Nowadays, when I babysit it can be impossible to get off their Ipads and outside for even ten minutes. As I have said before I work with kids and it is crazy seeing how technology effects their lives at such a young age. I have six year old's with watches that they can call their parents on and play games as well as fourth graders who cant go a few hours without being on their phones. These kids are also getting on apps like TikTok at such a young age that they are being exposed to things that they shouldn't be learning at their age. 

    I don't think I have the healthiest relationship with technology, as stated above. As it does for so many people I think it takes over my life. My screen time is on average 4 hours a day, however, this is always fluctuating. People always have their face in their phones and that brings me into the video "Mad World" that we watched in class. This video was very eye-opening for me because we all get into a daily routine and forget how much we abuse technology. Seeing this video, it is sad but true. There was one part that stood our to me in particular when it was all black and white with sadness until she was recording herself the phone screen was full of color and she had a big smile on her face. This is reiterating that social media is all fake, we have no idea what is really going on behind the screen. 

    Lastly, I would like to talk about my online footprint. This is something that I have always been very aware of and picky about. My mom is a teacher and she has always told me about being conscious about what I put out on the internet and how I am viewed from the outside. That being said when my name is looked up not much comes up, just my Linkedin and some photos from work. That is how it will stay. 

    In the end, technology isn't going anywhere and I don't think it will get any better. There are so many positives, but I find that most of the time the negatives override those positives. My goal is to be more aware of the amount of time that I spend on technology and try to get it down.  

 Blog Post #11: EOTO Review 2

    Throughout these presentations I learned a bunch of new information and terms that I had never heard of. However, there is one persons topic that sparked my interest because of how common it is. As well as, how important it is in todays world. Reanna spoke on the topic of Artificial Intelligence and all the inventions over the years that have come with it. 

    To begin, Eliza, this was the first form of AI that was created by Joseph Weizenbaum in 1966. This was seen as an online therapist and anyone can go on this website and ask questions and Eliza will answer sometimes in a question form using Natural Language Processing. This ruined Weizenbaum's life, and he regretted it. When he created Eliza, he had no idea how much power and control that a simple computer could have. But the number of questions people would ask led to the computer knowing and learning more information than Joseph had ever imagined. This was just the beginning of AI and the technologies have come a long way, its scary. 

    Next up, Siri, this is a form of AI that I have grown up using and is still popular today even though it originally came out in 2010. Siri started as an app that could be downloaded on phones and then with the new Apple 4s they found a way to integrate it into phone and it was removed from the app store. Siri is now known as Apples personal assistant and can be found across all Apple products. After Siri all the other companies had to come up with their own versions. Amazon created Alexa who was based off the Polish device Ivona which they bought to help them create Alexa. Amazon's Alexa can play podcasts, set alarms, etc. Next came Google, this was named the Google Home, and while it is similar to the other two they added new features that hooks up to your doorbell, security cameras, and even thermostats. Lastly, in 2018 Apple decided to come out with their own version of the Google Home and name it "HomePod". All of these individual products use Natural Language Processing. 

  AI took its next big step in 2022 when DALL-E was released. This software generates images by using natural language description. Now you can type up any prompt such as, a unicorn floating in space and an image will be developed. To wrap this up, in 2023 ChatGPT was created. This online chat box has gathered so much information it is ready for any question, problem, or prompt you have. 

    While it truly is impressive to learn about all of these different AI devices and the history of it, I cant help but be scared for what is to come. Having technology listening to us all of the time is terrifying and this is still just the beginning. 

    

 Blog Post #10: Age of AI

    Lets start from the beginning, what is AI? According to Tech Target, the term AI, coined in the 1950s, refers to the simulation of human intelligence by machines. While Artificial Intelligence has been around for decades the use of AI has skyrocketed in the past few years and surrounds us in our everyday lives. 

"About 50% of jobs will be threatened by Artificial Intelligence within the next 50 years" this was the first quote that was said during this film. This concerning statistic left a big impression on me because I go through my everyday life hearing about AI but it doesn't set in how scary it actually is until you hear a real life statistic. These robots are taking over our jobs and then what is next? I walked into a restaurant the other day and a robot brought out my food, not a waiter. It is shocking how quickly this is happening all around us.

    While AI is quickly taking over at a concerning rate there is no doubt that there can be positive outcomes from it as well. For example, there is a game in China by the name Go. Many people believed that there was no way a human would loose to AI, but after five rounds of playing AlphaGO the AI took the win four out of the five games. The main reason for this was that the computer can come up with different approaches to the game that human would never think of. It is impressive and a positive outcome of AI when you use it to learn new things even if the medical world. AI has made major steps to help detecting breast cancer early on. 

    The most concerning thing to me is Google. The constant surveillance and data collecting causes us to feel worried with where the future will go. Not only are we dealing with our search history being saved but also people bring new technology, like GoogleHome, into their homes to listen in on every single thing they say. 

 Blog Post #9: EOTO Agenda Setting Theory

    My group was assigned theories, when I was assigned the Agenda Setting theory I was eager to learn more. Agenda Setting Theory describes the ability to influence the importance placed on the topics of the public agenda. In simpler terms it is suggests that the media can shape the public opinion by determining how much or little importance they put on a topic. This topic goes hand and hand with another theory, gatekeeping, both theories shape how people think about topics just by what they are told. 

    
    Now that we know what agenda setting theory is, lets back up and start with the history of this theory. Maxwell McCombs and Dr. Donald Shaw founded the Agenda Setting Theory in the year 1968. The two studied the 1968 Presidential Election and discovered that the media and news had an impact on the viewers opinions. This was based out of Chapel Hill, NC. They furthered their research by looking at the OJ Simpson murder trial as well as the attempted impeachment of President Clinton. When doing research these were the only two names that came up, that was until I stumbled on one website that brought two more people into the creation, Walter Lippman and Bernard Cohen. Lippmann, a journalist in the 1920's, argued that people were not capable of experiencing in the big world, instead they find out everything that has been constructed by the news. Cohen refined this idea by stating that the media does not tell people what to think, but what to think about. This was dated back to 1963. Then McCombs and Shaw were the first ones to put this theory to the test.

    There are different levels to agenda setting. The main two are First and Second Levels but there is also Priming, and Framing. So lets start with the First Level, this deals with how different media outlets use content to influence their audience. This is considered the traditional part of Agenda Setting Theory. It is where the media is seen influencing the what issues are included in the public agenda. Then there is the Second Level of the theory, this part deals with the study of how the media presents different issues. While they sound similar, first is the influence of issue while the second is the influence of attribute. Now, Priming comes into the picture. This is when news outlets show their set of values through the news stories that they prioritize. Priming impact the viewers since it highlights key stories as most important. And lastly there is Framing. This is how the news puts out content from a certain perspective. Different news articles approach stories and events in different ways. 

    Lastly, I wanted to quickly touch on the three types of Agenda Setting, public, media, and policy. Public Agenda Setting is when the public determines the importance of a story, this can impact the agenda of the news. Media Agenda setting occurs when the media determines the importance of stories. Policy Agenda Setting is when the media and public determine the agenda of the news. 

    Agenda Setting Theory affects yourself, family, and friends everyday and most of the time you might not even have a clue. We are so used to hearing the news and stories without even thinking that how the story is told to us affects how we view it afterwards, and that is Agenda Setting Theory.

 Blog Post #8: Privacy Online

    It was extremely eye opening watching these Ted videos. The lack of privacy on our phones, computers, and everyday life is terrifying. While we have been told this over and over again that nothing is private. That we are not the only ones who have access to our search history, videos, texts, and emails. It is very difficult when watching these videos and how each speaker uses different ways to teach. 

    How do these issues effect me, my friends, and my family? For me and the people my age we have been raised in a world that revolves around technology and being online. My whole world is online from saving passwords to my aunts Facebook page it is no shock that anyone could find out anything they want about me. In the first video "Your Online Life is a Permanent Tattoo" that analogy resonated with me. This is because when you are a kid posting stupid videos and looking up silly things online you aren't thinking about how those videos could come up and haunt you in the future. But it is true, when something is put out on the internet it will be there forever as permanent as a tattoo. 

    What should the government be doing about this? Simple put, end it. However, I don't think that will ever happen. For example, over the summer, Google was sued for stealing personal data from millions of users without getting any consent, this data was gathered to help out AI. This company violated federal laws and owes billions of dollars in return. However, the government works with Google and if they request data then for legal reasons Google will share. So they work hand in hand. 

    Lastly, what can we do to protect ourselves from an invasion of privacy? While this question is hard to answer, because they will still get information on us no matter what, unless we get rid of all technology. The only thing you can do is be safe and think before you do things. Don't save passwords or card information in computers, cover cameras, never stay logged into accounts and always clear history. While these things might seem silly they are the only thing getting us closer to not having every aspect of our lives being saved. 

 Blog Post #7: Ring Diffusion Theory

    When you hear the name Ring Doorbell nowadays, I'm sure you know exactly what it is, this is because of how common it is for many people nowadays. However, a couple years ago we would have never heard of this company. This all stems from The Diffusion Theory, how overtime people adapt and add new things to their everyday lives. Overtime companies, such as Ring become a household necessity. With the brand mission "To reduce Crime in Communities" it is a statement that resonates with so many people especially parents and families. So lets start from the beginning and dive into when this company started picking up pace. 

Innovators

    Innovators are the people who want to take the risks in businesses. They put money into a company and work hard to make it what the want it to be. Jamie Siminoff, founder of Ring, decided he wanted to make a product. According to Siminoff, "he wanted to build something cool and important". He built a team of five people, three of which were engineers, and they got together in a garage and created Doorbot, the original name of Ring. This group of innovators would be the first people to adopt and create the idea of Ring in the diffusion theory because they devoted time and money into making this product a success. 

Early Adopters 

    The Early Adopters for the Ring doorbell would be the people who bought it within the first year of sales in 2013. This is while the company was still know as Doorbot and before Siminoff had gone on the hit television shoe Shark Tank to sell his product. There was $1 Million annual sales the first year of Doorbot, these investors are considered the Early Adopters in the Diffusion Theory. 

Early Majority 

    The Early Majority are the groups of people who purchase the product that is a significantly longer time than the Innovators and Early Adopters. For Ring, Sales started exponentially rising in 2019. In December of 2020 online sales in the US had 180 percent compared to the previous year. It is estimated that Amazon, a partner of Ring, sold 400,000 units in December of 2019. This would be viewed as the Early Majority while it took a few years for it to reach that goal, it is still impressive how quickly the sales skyrocketed in 2019. 

Late Majority

    The Late Majority would be the people who adopt an innovation after the average person. It is shown on the Ring Doorbell sales that it is expecting a drop in sales and revenue this year and next. This doorbell isn't something you have to buy over and over again. So when sales went up it was great, but now these are so common and there is a lack of sales in the near future. The people who are buying Ring in this year and next would be considered the Late Majority because they are purchasing this product after the majority of people already have it. Often times these might be older people who don't think the need the product or people who don't have the money for it. 

Laggards

    These Laggards are the last people to purchase the invention. While we aren't quite in the time of Laggards yet because Ring is still a fairly new product that people are still eager to buy we can already tell who are Laggards could be. The old school people who are happy with their simple doorbell and doesn't care to have notifications and videos every time someone walks up to their door or the people who simple don't have the funds to purchase a video camera doorbell. 

 Blog Post #6: Antiwar

   When I first got on to Antiwar.com I was overwhelmed by the abundance of information that I have never heard before. The main title that immediately caught my attention "For NYT, Cluster Munitions Are Completely Wrong- When Russians Use Them". Before even reading this article, the title insinuates that cluster munitions are acceptable unless it is Russians who are the one using them. However when the article came out on NYT they left out the part that shows that the US is okay with cluster Munitions. In this front page article on the New York Times the words "internationally banned" were used when describing cluster munitions. This article was posted in March of 2022 when the invasion of Ukraine was still new. Now, New York Times has posted multiple articles in July 2023 explaining how they will now be sending cluster munitions to Ukraine. 

    Why is this so concerning? In this first post that sparked this talk about Cluster Munitions NYT mentions that neither Ukraine or Russia are members in the treaty that bans cluster munitions. However, one very important detail was left out of this article. America is also not a member of the treaty that bans cluster munitions. This goes against our first amendment right as citizens, freedom of speech and freedom of press. Why are these journalists leaving out key information, why are they making other people sound like the bad guys when they are the ones with holding information. 

    When looking at The American Conservative, there was one article that stood out beyond the rest. "Yes, Social Media Censorship is a First Amendment Issue" this title relates back to what we have learned in previous classes. This article starts off with an engaging hook, causing me to keep reading. It dives deeper to say that the FBI is driving social media companies to get rid of all covid and election related news. How is this allowed? It shouldn't be. The government has messed up so many things to the point that we as a society don't even know what's going on around us because they hid everything. Citizens are simply loosing their First Amendment rights.