2nd Week Group Update

We finished our proposal and it looks pretty solid. Our final topic of choice is "How will robots take jobs from human in the future or add jobs". I believe that this is a great topic to discuss as it is a big problem that people are trying to solve. We have many sources from newspapers and magazines, but John said that he had trouble finding academic journals. Professor Middleton said that we could ask another person from a different group who wrote about this topic and had some good sources. WE are now going to do more research and get working on our rough draft.

Group Update Week 1

Our group met this week and we discussed some potential topics or interest. We all did a little bit of research and narrowed down our topic to 'How will robots affect jobs'. Now that we have our topic we decided to divy up all of the respected work and created a google doc so we could all edit and work on our parts whenever. Our proposal is due this weekend.

Collaborative Research Topic Choices

My choices of assignments are, in order:

Robotics, Computing, Artificial Intelligence: I'm interested in this topic because I believe that it is the future. With all of the advances in technology over the past decade, computers pretty much run everything in the world, robots are making things easier to get done and artificial intelligence is the next big thing.

The End of The World: How is the world going to end? This is a question everyone wants to know the answer too. Me being one of them. Is it going to be from a Thermonuclear War? Maybe environmental damage? Is the Sun going to explode? There are so many possible scenarios in which the world could end at any given moment. I find it very interesting.

Nature: I think that nature is beautiful. All of the amazing places in the world that we stare at in awe. The Northern Lights, The Grand Canyon, Volcanoes...etc... Plus the fact that everything is just right in order to sustain life is unfathomable and miraculous.

I found the following articles on my three topics:

Robotics, Computing, Artificial Intelligence: http://www.aaai.org/Magazine/Watson/watson.php

This article discusses the artificial intelligence system of Watson. A supercomputer that was built by IBM and competed in Jeopardy against the winning-est players in Jeopardy history and won. It is an artificial intelligence machine and is only the beginning of this technology.

The End of The World: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13369?feedId=online-news_rss20

This article describes the possible death of the Earth if we don't all die before this time. In a few billion years the Sun will become a Red Giant and engulf the Earth, thus destroying it and everyone on it. This could be the end of the world.

Nature: http://www.nature.com/news/a-vacuum-can-yield-flashes-of-light-1.12430

This article describes that light can be created from nothing. This is very interesting and could possibly shed light on the first few moments of the universe. It also could help solve the problem of quantum entanglement, which would be a tremendous achievement.

Reading Log 4: Satyagraha

Gandhi was a very influential figure who fought for peace in India. He coined the term Satyagraha to distinguish his fight for peace from the other 'passive resistance  acts going on in other parts of the world. Satyagraha is the 'love-force' or 'soul-force' that Gandhi believes in. He used it to win 'battles' by winning peoples hearts. There are 3 things you must try to do when using this technique. You must one, keep a good relationship with your opponents, winning their hearts as much as possible. Two, earn the sympathy of the spectators, and perhaps even their help. And three, fortify your own heart. You can do these things by being good, fighting with truth and reason to do what is right and just, and re-conceptualizing the battle as being cooperation between you and your opponent. I agree with Gandhi when he says that you must earn the sympathy of the spectators. When you are fighting for a cause against something you want as much help as possible. If you win the people over, or 'the mob' and you huge attention to your cause. The people you are fighting against will have no choice but to give you what you want because they won't want look bad in front of the world.

Reading Log 3: The Concept of Discourse Community

What is a discourse community? Well after reading "The Concept of Discourse Community" by John Swales I think I understand it a little bit more. This was very tough to read through. The language was very advanced and I didn't have any background knowledge in this area of knowledge. My understanding of a discourse community is a group that has goals or purposes, and uses communication to achieve these goals. I am part of a discourse community! I am part of a video game clan. We all have the common goal to win each game and eventually win the championship. We have our own form of communication during matches so that we know where everyone is and can help out each other when someone is in trouble. We have our own clan website so everyone knows when matches are. The only difference between Swales characteristics of a discourse community to my "discourse community" is that our members are all experts. Swales says that a discourse community needs a reasonable ratio of both experts and novices to survive. But if we had novices we probably wouldn't be that good and we would never complete our goals. Either way the topic of discourse communities is sketchy and hard to explain to an audience that isn't all too familiar with that area of knowledge.

Introduction

Machiavelli and Lao Tzu were two very intelligent people who contributed their ideas of how a leader should rule. They were both polar opposites with their views. Machiavelli said that it is better to rule through fear than love, that the ends justify the means, that you should have a strong military and that a leader has no requirement to be trustworthy. Whereas Lao Tzu said that a ruler should put trust in the people, let world problems play out, minimize government control and let go of desires, wealth and power. Machiavelli's views are more realistic and applicable in contemporary society whereas Lao Tzu's are more suited for a utopian society because of the nature of the human race and the way the world is structured today.

Reading Log 2: Thoughts on Lao-Tzu and Niccolo Machiavelli

Hey guys! This week I read two very interesting excerpts. One of them was "Thoughts of the Tao-te Ching" by Lao-Tzu and the other was "The Qualities of the Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli. After reading Lao, I had a very strong disagreement with the way he thinks government should be run. He believes that there should be minimized government control with the people in control of themselves. "Stop trying to control. Let go of fixed plans and concepts, and the world will govern itself (Tzu 29)." But I think that this method would be catastrophic for society. Everything would collapse. Why? Lao doesn't account for human nature. The Human race is lying, deceitful, cheating, violent and everyone has a hidden agenda. With no government control, no laws telling people what is right and wrong, and having them rely on their moral standards; people would kill people left and right, steal and do whatever they wanted for what they wanted. Most people aren't this bad but some of them are. Some people just want to watch the world burn. If tomorrow the President of the United States of America said your government is going to cease to exist, rule yourself, and do what you please. Everyone would have no clue what to do, nothing would get done and the country would probably blow up in 5 days. People need guidance, they need someone to lead them and set the example of what to do. That's my thought on Lao. Machiavelli's thoughts on how the Prince (leader) should rule are pretty much describing the perfect leader. Machiavelli wants the Prince to know his country like the back of his hand so if war comes to the country he will know how to protect it because he knows all of the spots in his nation to camp, where he has the advantage, and where the enemy may camp. "One learns to know one's own country and can better understand how to defend it; second, with the knowledge and experience of the terrain, one can easily comprehend the characteristics of any other terrain that it is necessary to explore for the first time; for the hills, valleys, plains, rivers, and swamps(Machiavelli 40)." Machiavelli's biggest point in my opinion is on whether it is better to be loved or to be feared? Machiavelli says that it is better to be feared and not hated at the same time. I agree with his statement. If you are loved people love you but they don't respect you, they won't listen to your orders and try to get away with the little things that they can. But if you are feared people will take you seriously and be afraid to do you wrong because of the potential punishment given to them if they are caught. Lastly, Machiavelli says that a ruler must try to be not despised or hated by keeping the people happy so they won't rebel against him and will be his friend when needed. That's it for this week stay tuned for next week to see whats' up next!

Reading Blog 1: First Response To "Globalization: The Super-Story"

Easton Obojkovits

CAL 103

Prof. Middleton

January 21, 2013

How's it going friends? This week I read "Globalization: The Super-Story" by Thomas L. Friedman and I have to say that it was a very interesting read. Mr. Friedman talks about how the world is now more vastly connected with the new international system called 'Globalization' than it was in the old system called 'The Cold War System'. He states that during the Cold War system everybody was divided. I definitely agree with that statement. The US and the Soviet Union were at war and the world was forced to choose sides. Friedman says "The cold war was a drama of states confronting states, balancing states, and aligning with states. And, as a system, the cold war was balanced at the center by two super states, two superpowers: the United States and the Soviet Union.(473)" Now with this new Globalization system, everybody is connected and the word that Friedman uses to characterize this is-web. The world is now a giant interlocked web in which people can now communicate across the world with other people and do many other things. Friedman says "Whether by enabling people to use the Internet to communicate instantly at almost no cost over vast distances, or by enabling them to use the Web to transfer money or obtain weapons designs that normally would have been controlled by states, or by enabling them to go into a hardware store now and buy a five-hundred-dollar global positioning device, connected to a satellite, that can direct a hijacked airplane.(474)" People now have the means to influence the world! Friedman used Osama Bin Laden as an example of what he calls a "super-empowered individual" Osama used the technology that he could get his hands on using the Internet and with that he orcastrated the events of 9/11. People can now get whatever they need, to do pretty much anything they want, thanks to the World Wide Web. If I wanted to I could learn how to hack using free lessons on the Internet and then from that I could hack a bank and steal all of the money. Thanks to Globalization this is now possible. Overall this reading was helpful in understanding the complex system of Globalization and how everything interacts and is intertwined.