Drones Reflection

  Blake Woodard presented his first EOTO on the history and applications of drones. He first discussed how they got their start in warfare during the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. Since then the military continues to use drones to make aerial strikes on enemies in order to keep soldiers safe and out of the battle. However Blake continues to present day for civilians by talking about amateur and semi-professional drones for recreation and business. 

    The biggest name in drones is DJI and many companies have followed in the footsteps of this giant of a drone business. They created the phantom drone which became one of the most used drones for photography and videography. People use them for personal footage but many content creators use them for Youtube videos and other media. Parrot came into the scene next by making small portable drones that were practically indestructible. The factor that made all of these drones accessible to the public was that you did not need an FFA license and you could control it from your smartphone.

    Blake discussed the practical applications of drones and businesses later in his presentation. I found the use of delivery to be most intriguing. I did not know that drones had already been used to deliver mail and food, I thought that was just a goal for the future. These drones could be auto piloted in the future using GPS which would remove the need for delivery drivers entirely.

    Overall drones seem to have so many uses which is probably why I enjoyed Blake Woodards presentation so much. I am excited to see where drones take us in the future.

Video Reflection

    Juan Enriquez discussed the dangers of your permanent online trace. He related it to a common tattoo. Tattoos tell stories, whether they are beautiful, intriguing or obvious mistakes. Similarly our online presence tells the world our story whether it is good or not. Every social media and online service is like an online tattoo. Photos posted are collected by many databases and are sold to companies that could find use for them. A facial recognition database with 18 billion faces was just sold to Facebook.

    But how does this affect you? Haven’t you been responsible online? The truth is that your online presence can definitely be affected by you but you are not in control. Others have posted pictures of you, companies have sold your private information and the next thing you know when you search your name you see photos of you and a spy website that will sell your address, phone number and criminal record to anyone with $4.99.

    A very scary part to all of this is that the government is not trying to control this. The government is more than happy that there are facial recognition and online fingerprints everywhere because it makes their job way easier. Terms and agreements make it impossible to get mad when a company sells your data.

    California recently passed a bill that in one easy step users should be able to hit a button and stop their information from being transferred to other online companies and users. 

    If people want to protect themselves there are a few options. First is maintaining your online reputation. The drunk picture on instagram will come back to you when it comes time for a job interview. The second is a VPN, or Virtual Private Network. Many people and companies try to advertise based on location, and VPNs make your searching and online presence untrackable. The third thing is to be careful with giving information and advocate for privacy laws. Handing out phone numbers, addresses and any other personal information should be done with extreme discretion or not at all. Sure amazon delivery needs your address but facebook does not.

The Diffusion Theory and the Snapchat Glasses

    Snapchat launched in 2011 and 5 years later innovators released the Snapchat Spectacles that would be a topic of conversation for the foreseeable future. Company owner Evan Spiegel targeted the demographic of content creators and those interested in public content because The glasses had a camera in them. They connected directly to the app in your phone which allowed you to film all of your Snapchats hands free from your perspective. These video spectacles came out at $130 and demand drove them to be resold for over $300 at one point. But how did this happen? 

    Snapchat is a very popular app home to millions of users and virtually every content creator. These content creators found some use for the glasses because they film more often than others and became the early adopters. There is an argument that the spectacles actually help them in their profession. However just like any brand name endorsed by celebrities the public wanted to hop on the train so they could be just like their favorite content creator. Soon everyone was buying out the stock so they could be cool and trendy. Eventually all 220,000 pairs were sold and prices and demand went up so expensive in fact people started to realize how dumb it was. 

    People realized that they don’t make enough Snapchats on an app that is free to warrant buying expensive glasses to film their videos. By this time the early majority was dying out, and the trend has been on a decline. Eventually people were stuck with glasses no one wanted to buy except for the laggard content creators and collectors. 

    Snapchat eventually lost 40 million dollars at the end of the fiasco because it was unsuccessful after the first spike in popularity. The second generation was also a nightmare for the company and they now wait to be resold for over $350 with the hope of a laggard wanting to hit the trend one last time. 

What I Learned about the Echo Chamber

    Jake Drew, a fellow classmate of mine presented his project on echo chambers. He described them as a sort of tunnel vision when someone only listens to ideas they agree with. Their opinion, right or wrong, is then echoed back to them reassuring themselves that they are right whether that is the case or not. This is most commonly seen in politics. People frequently affiliate themselves, identify with a party, and adhere to the group mentality and political agenda. This means if you identify as a republican you must be pro choice and if you are a democrat you must be pro choice for example. Many people do not fit this box, but some people are too comfortable pushing themselves inside of it and they find comfort in echoed confirmation bias. 

    Jake pointed out that a positive to the echo chamber is this sense of community. Surrounding yourself with people who have common beliefs and opinions is not bad because it is a good way to make friends and feel comfortable around one another. The problem is that the negatives greatly outweigh the positives.

    This sense of community is a productive community. Without contrary ideas there cannot be room for growth or true thinking. People must risk being the dissenting opinion, standing up for your ideas, and risk being offensive if it means coming to the right answer.

    Jake gave the example about the news and how echo chambers are just listening to the same politically affiliated news sources which is the same as living in that unproductive community. Fake news is created when the only time you want to hear what the other side has to say is when you are trying to make them look bad.

    I really enjoyed Jake's analogy that he and his father discuss which is “ping pong politics”. Echos bounce, and if you are in an echo chamber you only hear the same opinions which closes you off to other ideas. This creates the battle between two major political parties metaphorically playing ping pong with each other. Back and forth, maybe grunting and shouting as they try to hit harder and harder.

AntiWar

 Antiwar in America is often not a very popular opinion. Historically people were called turn coats for not wanting to fight in the revolution, hanged for deserting the civil war, arrested for burning Vietnam draft cards, called un American for not supporting wars in the Middle East, and are called Nazis for not supporting Ukraine to name a few. Whistleblowers like Snowden who call their government out especially during wartime can even find themselves in prison.

    Some of the headlines on Antiwar.com are about the billions of dollars the US president is spending on a war we “are not a part of.” These make your stomach turn when you realize where our tax dollars are going. We give money to the government so they can create violence on the other side of the world. 

   The most disturbing part is that the violent headlines are split up into sub categories by country. Violence occurs all around the world because people start it for no reason. Democracy can always be an option but selfish and evil people want to hurt others to gain from the spoils of war. 

    The reason I believe anti war voices are not heard in the news is because these opinions do not work well like war does. Everyone wants to hear about conflict and problems instead of democracy. Look at the American propaganda in WW2. So much money was made in the American war machine and Uncle Sam pointing his finger at you had something to do with that. 

    Anti-war is not an uncommon opinion to have but it is a quiet one. We have learned from the past that there are consequences from speaking out and we would rather be sheep in a herd than be the nail that sticks out. The freeze effect keeps us silent and we have too much faith that our government will make the right decisions. Being anti-war is not always unamerican, and in fact it can be one of the most noble stances if it saves lives.

Overton Window

   The Overton Window is the imaginary view of the range of ideas the public is willing to accept. The public determines what the collective opinion on new topics is in society and sets them on a scale that moves as history proceeds. These ideas change very slowly over time here and there a little. This is dones through movements and events throughout history and it usually takes time to change the majority of the opinions in the public. The scale starts on the outside of the freedom spectrum and moves inwards. The spectrum from out to in is Unthinkable, Radical, Acceptable, Sensible, Popular, and finally Policy.

    Joseph Lehman says “The most common misconception is that lawmakers themselves are in the business of shifting the Overton window. That is absolutely false. Lawmakers are actually in the business of detecting where the window is, and then moving to be in accordance with it.” This means that it is all up to the public and the overton window is not fixed, we move it. But how do we move it? This question is multivariable but can be summed up in our role in government because our goal is policy. 

    An example of this is the evolution of Women’s Rights. Before Seneca Falls in 1848 women’s suffrage was Unthinkable in the majority. Then the overton window switched to radical but acceptable when Wyoming was the first to give women the right to vote on the state level. We can see that the law detected where the window was but the people voted for it to be there. Next, we see a major shift to Sensibile and Popular in 1914 at the start of the first World War. Women were working and helping the war machine immensely, so rationally speaking there was no reason for them not to vote and popularity of that idea led them to the final step of Policy. In 1920 the 19th Amendment was passed and it was policy that all American Women had the right to vote at all levels. 

    Supposing that lawmakers accurately detect where the Overton Window is, the idea works well and can serve the public very well. We as a people choose what is acceptable and the law moves with our moral compass. The only problem is when a corrupt government detects the Overton Window by the opinion of the few in power rather than the majority of the public. Oftentimes in dictatorships or corrupt governments we see people revolt because they are not being represented correctly. Our revolution against Britain started with wanting religious freedom but the lawmakers not acknowledging the movement of the window.

    As long as we the people maintain a good moral compass and the law makers accurately study our opinions, the Overton Window is one of the most important ideologies of democracy. The people give power to the leaders and the leaders serve the people. An accurate Overton Window is the first sign of a good leader and properly represented people.

FINAL EOTO: The Evils of Technology

SLIDES PRESENTATION

    Technology has always been a battle between generations. Kids are wanting cell phones and tablets younger and younger, and parents are struggling to keep up with some of the potential dangers accompanied by technology. I believe that people my age were some of the first to get phones extremely young. My parents did not allow me to have a cell phone until I was 15 years old and even then it started with a flip phone, slide phone and blackberry before I got an ipod with texting ability. I was considered old when I got my phone because many of my classmates came to school with their brand new Iphone 4 in 5th grade. 

    My relationship with technology since the point of me getting my first phone has been a love hate relationship. Technology loves my attention but I hate giving it to it. Technology is the medium for lies. The News is mostly inaccurate, filled with agenda setting gatekeepers. For example, News Nation claims that they are the first and only unbiased and unaffiliated news coverage in the modern news web. If this is true it is very disturbing that you cannot hear the events of the world around you without getting an opinion forced down your throat. 

    Technology has its benefits but I do not see a need for a lot of it. FaceBook and Twitter were launched in 2006 since then suicide rates have inclined steepness. This was only exacerbated by the launch of Instagram and Snapchat in 2010 and 2011, and the next big thing is TikTok released in 2016. Suicide rates from 1981 to 2006 were between 28,000 and 31,000. Since 2006 Suicide in america has increased steadily (approximately 400 more every year) and is now up to 46,000. Kids with phones is an equation for cyberbullying and over 57% of highschoolers report they have been cyberbullied.

    Social media are not the only problems in today's world due to technology. Pornography doubles the chance of being divorced, excessive use of cell phones worsten anxiety and depression, and phone addictions affect the Left Anterior Insula of the brain which is the same part of the brain effected with substance abuse and can lead to withdrawl symptoms. Even if you do not feel you are addicted, Media Law and Literacy has taught us that even the presence of a phone being visible takes attention away and releases chemicals in the brain. Being dependent on something takes your agency away. We all have the ability to choose except when an inanimate object makes those decisions for us just like any other addiction. 

    Ironically a well known movie brings up a good point. Hitch-Hikers Guide to Galaxy comically says that the answer to the universe is “42”. But fans have theorized that the super computer said the answer was “for tea, two”. Aliens do not know what tea is, which is why it is out of order sentence wise meaning it should be “tea for two.” This is a reference to the main character who is British in space and is searching for a cup of tea anywhere and will share it with anyone. The point is, the definition of humanity is understanding the meaning of “tea for two”, that is the answer to the universe because aliens and computers and technology cannot understand the value of human interaction like sharing a cup of tea with someone. Social interaction is something that cannot be replicated by machines which is why technology will never be equivalent to humans in any social setting. Snapchat and Instagram are not social medias, they are fake and distorted views of the real world created my machine algorithms and the discriminatory choice of what is the best photo of me to post? 

    Social anxiety is created from overuse of technology in general because technology cannot help us practice social interaction truthfully. People have trouble communicating and socializing with other humans because technology has rendered a world controlled by them with predictive and non intrusive settings. Human interaction is filled with uncertainty, and the main substance of small talk is questions. If someone is not comfortable adapting to the unpredictability of others and answering questions presented to them, it makes not only social interaction difficult but also professional settings like job interviews, workplace communication, and presenting work. 

    Some people believe they have a grasp on the internet and that they control their screen time, content, and reaction to a digital world they know is not real. They believe they will not suffer the consequences previously discussed and they may be right. The scary part is that no matter what you do the internet can still affect your life negatively. If you search my name on google you will see photos of me and sports statistics that say I am a 5ft 9in freshman in High School. What is so bad about that? Well, in reality I did not post those photos of me someone else did, and I am actually 6ft 3in and a freshman in College. One more step further in your search for me you can find my address, phone number and (clean) criminal record for the cheap price of $4.99 at several different public records databases. All of this information whether it is accurate or not, positive or negative, defamation or uplifting, was not given by me. I did not post those things or offer it to public places. The point in all of this is that no matter how private you think your internet presence is, you cannot control others. 

The reason I say technology is a love hate relationship is because those types of relationships never work out. It is my opinion that one will win in the end. Either the internet will become good or evil through definitions. What is acceptable and what is not? Where is the Overton Window? Eventually good will be called evil and evil will be called good. It is already happening now. Plenty of sports athletes have committed heinous crimes and are revered for their physical abilities. At the same time it is acceptable to destroy someone's reputation because you don’t agree with what they view to be right. Technology may be helpful or even fun but it is not worth the horrible by products.