After the bailout plan was not approved on Tuesday, the House of Representatives' website has been overloaded with millions of emails, according to a CNN.com article, "forcing administrators to implement the 'digital version of a traffic cop' to handle the overload -- for the first time ever."
The article says that a "tidal waves of e-mails and page views began over the weekend after negotiators announced Sunday that a deal had been reached on legislation to enact a $700 billion bailout of the country's financial system." The public was able to view the agreement of the House of Reps' website so as millions of people tried to look at the details of the bailout plan, the government system's site became overwhelmed and was not able to display the page on many computers. Jeff Ventura, communications director for the House's chief administrator, called this a "massive digital busy signal." But, once the website began working again and people were able to view the details of the plan, millions of emails to the different Representatives began pouring in. Now that they have implemented the "traffic cop" on the sites, visitors will receive a try again later notification of the site has too much traffic at one time.
According to the article, "Ventura said the House.gov Web site experienced a very high number of hits when the 9/11 commission released its final report on the September 11, 2001, terror attacks against the United States, but nothing like what the site has seen in the past few days."
This shows that with the new technologies, it has made government and prominent figures closer to the public, and Americans are able to more easily get their issues heard through the Internet.
Check out the article at: House of Representatives' site overwhelmed - CNN.com
- Jessica I
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Text Messages are taking over
According to an article on September 28 in the New York Times Technology section, Nielsen Mobile said that more text messages were sent than phone calls were made by American cellphone subscribers in the fourth quarter of 2007. The survey showed that the number of texts shot upward 64 percent and the number of phone calls has slightly decreased. Most cell phone providers now offer large or unlimited text messaging bundles, possibly increasing the number of messages being sent than phone calls if the person does not want to use up there minutes.
Teenagers and the youth generation are shown to use text messaging the most. Teens ages 13 to 17 are sending or receiving 1,742 messages a month, according to Nielsen Mobile, and 18-to-24-year-olds average 790 messages. Texts have allowed people to communicate immediately in situations where they are not allowed to be speaking, like classrooms, work, waiting rooms, cars, or when the conversation is private and they do not want people around them to hear. According to the article, 42 percent of a group of a teenagers said they can text while blindfolded, and it is often seen that people can text while driving and/or paying attention to other things.
The question is, in the coming years, will text messages take over and less calls be needed to communicate? This is just another way that shows actual physical and live interaction are a dwindling trend.
- Jessica I
Teenagers and the youth generation are shown to use text messaging the most. Teens ages 13 to 17 are sending or receiving 1,742 messages a month, according to Nielsen Mobile, and 18-to-24-year-olds average 790 messages. Texts have allowed people to communicate immediately in situations where they are not allowed to be speaking, like classrooms, work, waiting rooms, cars, or when the conversation is private and they do not want people around them to hear. According to the article, 42 percent of a group of a teenagers said they can text while blindfolded, and it is often seen that people can text while driving and/or paying attention to other things.
The question is, in the coming years, will text messages take over and less calls be needed to communicate? This is just another way that shows actual physical and live interaction are a dwindling trend.
- Jessica I
Social Networking for our pets?
Not only do we have our own Facebook pages, MySpace profiles, Friendster pages, and other social networking sites to keep up on, but we can also put our furry friends on the web. Dogster, Inc. created Dogster and Catster in 2004 where pet owners can make a profile for their animals including pictures and ways for owners to communicate with each other. Complete with statistics of where the most states that pets are owned, the most popular female and male canine names, and the most popular countries, these sites can connect man's best friend from the United States to Indonesia and Germany. Over 600,000 pets are on the Dogster site with about 750,000 members and over 4 million uploaded photos. Members can buy accessories for their dogs, look into adoption, and find helpful tips on training.
What's next ... a social networking site for our cars to connect? Or maybe for our babies to schedule play dates?
- Jessica I
For your Canines
For your Felines
Guitar Hero - A learning tool?
It's easy to following along and strum notes on your plastic guitar as you watch a screen filled with colorful dots and a catchy rhythm. Before you know it, you are awarded ROCKSTAR! and truly know what it's like to be an award-winning musician.
Or do you?
For most rock musicians, coming up with a catchy melody is easy to do - you think of it in your head, write it down on paper, and turn it into a number one hit, right? Wrong. While the melody of a song is easy to come up with, finding the right accompaniment is hard without formal music training.
"It's easier to come up with a melody than come up with a series of chords to harmonize that melody," said Ching-Hua Chuan, a former Taiwanese rock guitarist turned computer scientist at Barry University in Miami Shores, Fla.
To tackle this problem and as part of her Ph.D. dissertation at USC, she created a computer program that can generate accompaniment specific to the unique styles of music of bands. Chuan "trained" the program to five of her favorite artists (i.e. Green Day, Radiohead, etc.) and had the program create accompaniment to a certain song's melody. She then compared the "created" version to the actual version.
While some kinks still have to be worked out to improve accuracy, her work can be important to assisting in new musicians as they begin to create their own music.
Check out the full story here on MSNBC to learn more about Chuan's program.
-Michael Strachan
TiVo on a PC
TiVo and Nero of Germany were set to announce that they will be launching a package that turns a Windows PC into a TV recorder, just like a TiVo set-top box. This kit will cost around $199 and will go on sale on October 15th. The kit will included a remote and a TV tuner that plugs into your PC. This is not the first software that allows TV recording on the PC. It will, however, be the first time that both the TiVo interface and functions have been replicated on a PC.
I just recently got a DVR and use it all the time. I don't think I would buy this product because TV is not that important to me where I would want it on my computer but I can see how it would for some people. Should be interesting to see if the product becomes popular in the near future.
-Carly Youngren
Monday, September 29, 2008
Closing the Disability Tech-Gap
The blind should have their iPods, too. In a recent agreement reached between Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley and Apple Inc., iTunes will be programmed by June 2009 for accessibility to anyone with blind-user software to read the Internet.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080926/ap_on_hi_te/tec_itunes_blind
According to the 9/26/08 Associated Press article, Massachusetts teenager Cory Cadlik had an iPod, but he couldn't use it without asking for help. As "a self-described tech 'geek,' that was too frustrating (for him) to tolerate," the article says. Cadlik just happens to be blind.
"'For me to be as tech savvy as I am, and not be able to do something ... I hated it,' said Cadlik." So Cadlik returned his iPod. But now, with the recent state agreement with Apple, Cadlik wants his iPod back.
But beyond issues of equal access to areas of entertainment through technology, the AP piece also noted a critical point made by John Olivera of the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind. That is, how the commission "approached Apple primarily because of the increasing popularity of iTunes U, which provides lectures and other educational content from colleges and universities. Schools were posting class material there, and that created problems for blind students." The implication being that discrimination in areas of public education is illegal.
The retail store Target is cited in the piece as an example of a class-action lawsuit -- which was filed by the National Federation of the Blind -- for online store discrimination. In Target's case, its website was not designed to accommodate use by those who are blind. According to the article, "Target Corp. agreed to pay $6 million in damages to plaintiffs in California who were unable to use its Web site as part of (the) class action settlement."
These developments speak not only to legal corrections in areas of technological discrimination that affect the physically disabled, but to the fundamental imperative of companies in a competitive market to reach out to as many potential customers as possible. This broadens company market share and brand appeal. In a larger sense, then, it is also a creative challenge for hardware and software developers to automatically consider the needs of the physically disabled, as part and parcel of the design-through-marketing process. This is not only the right and fair thing to do, it's smart business. (And avoids costly, publicity-negative lawsuits.)
- Misako M.
For $10 Million, The Best Bulb Will Be Seeing Green
As a follow-up to the 09/25/08 blog entry on an LED light bulb concept, a 09/26/08 New York Times "Bits" article reports that a competitive prize of $10 million will be awarded by the U.S. Dept. of Energy for the best LED bulb that can be produced.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/26/the-10-million-light-bulb/
The article says: "If LED lighting eventually takes off, this could be a big deal. According to the Department of Energy, if every socket in the United States that now had a 60-watt bulb switched to an LED equivalent, the country would save 34 terawatt-hours of electricity a year, or enough to light Las Vegas for two years (no jokes about whether it might be better to keep it dark)."
But the winning bulb must also meet key standards of high quality over the "junk" construction associated with many existing LED bulbs already on the market. According to the article, the "L Prize will also set manufacturing standards, which should weed out the stuff that would otherwise give the technology a bad name."
What's even MORE interesting, though, are the reader comments to the NYT article, especially those that "illuminate" complications, drawbacks and criticism surrounding the idea -- regarding the irony of manufacturing overseas and what some consider a misguided government-funded project.
- Misako M.
Friday, September 26, 2008
Bison, journalism and bioethics
I recently came across an article on Wired.com regarding the rewilding of animals. Admittedly, I was not very familiar with the term prior to the article, but the writer, Andrew Curry, did an amazing job of capturing a small snapshot of the worldwide practice.
“...to restore an ancient ecosystem is called rewilding, and it goes far beyond conservation. In theory, we could re-create conditions that last existed when mammoths walked the earth and the environment was healthier and more diverse.”
Curry opens the story with the preparation of 3 young European bison for a 4 day trek from Belgium to Latvia. The bison were raised as what Curry refers to as an “audacious experiment” and to recreate the terrain of 10,000 years ago with a comparable ecosystem.
The ancestors of these specific bison were last seen in 1927, but have since been bred and grown to 3,500 bison. Similar efforts have also sustained the Bolson tortoise and the tarpan (or at least a similar replication of the wild horse). Rewilding also includes relocating non-extinct animals to an area that could benefit from them ecologically. For example, in 1988 beavers were brought to the Netherlands where they built dams and small lakes in rivers.
Within the concept of rewilding there are two dominant forces: those that are concerned with the ecological benefit and those concerned with the health of the breed. A disagreement between these two different perspectives can create damaging results: “It’s important that conservationists be aware of the genetic aspects, but geneticists should also be open to conservation and practical arguments,” said Joep van de Vlasakker.
There also seems to be thin line between keeping the bloodline pure and keeping the animals genetic disorders out of the way.
And while rewilding could very well become a real-life spinoff of “Jurassic Park,” we probably shouldn’t spend too many sleepless nights worrying over this worst-case scenario.
Why?
I don’t think it is very probable for the simple reason that humans would not allow it to happen.
Of course any sort of human interaction in the animal world creates ethical question as well as a prioritizing off what is important to us — which is essentially, well, us. When humans breathe life into things, they too feel it is OK to take life away.
And there are the obvious dilemmas: how do you control the population you have created; avoid genetic disorders; and what ultimately suffers when these animals start living like they did centuries ago? The article cited the example of the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone and the conflict it has caused between the wild animals and the ranchers.
I’m not quite sure where I stand on this particular issue but bioethicists will be in demand at this rate. I suppose its never too late to switch majors.
-Erin
“...to restore an ancient ecosystem is called rewilding, and it goes far beyond conservation. In theory, we could re-create conditions that last existed when mammoths walked the earth and the environment was healthier and more diverse.”
Curry opens the story with the preparation of 3 young European bison for a 4 day trek from Belgium to Latvia. The bison were raised as what Curry refers to as an “audacious experiment” and to recreate the terrain of 10,000 years ago with a comparable ecosystem.
The ancestors of these specific bison were last seen in 1927, but have since been bred and grown to 3,500 bison. Similar efforts have also sustained the Bolson tortoise and the tarpan (or at least a similar replication of the wild horse). Rewilding also includes relocating non-extinct animals to an area that could benefit from them ecologically. For example, in 1988 beavers were brought to the Netherlands where they built dams and small lakes in rivers.
Within the concept of rewilding there are two dominant forces: those that are concerned with the ecological benefit and those concerned with the health of the breed. A disagreement between these two different perspectives can create damaging results: “It’s important that conservationists be aware of the genetic aspects, but geneticists should also be open to conservation and practical arguments,” said Joep van de Vlasakker.
There also seems to be thin line between keeping the bloodline pure and keeping the animals genetic disorders out of the way.
And while rewilding could very well become a real-life spinoff of “Jurassic Park,” we probably shouldn’t spend too many sleepless nights worrying over this worst-case scenario.
Why?
I don’t think it is very probable for the simple reason that humans would not allow it to happen.
Of course any sort of human interaction in the animal world creates ethical question as well as a prioritizing off what is important to us — which is essentially, well, us. When humans breathe life into things, they too feel it is OK to take life away.
And there are the obvious dilemmas: how do you control the population you have created; avoid genetic disorders; and what ultimately suffers when these animals start living like they did centuries ago? The article cited the example of the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone and the conflict it has caused between the wild animals and the ranchers.
I’m not quite sure where I stand on this particular issue but bioethicists will be in demand at this rate. I suppose its never too late to switch majors.
-Erin
Companies Pushing Facebook and Myspace sites?
It seems that some companies such as CIA and FBI are pushing their employees to use such sites as Myspace and Facebook for reasons that one would not think of.
If you saw your employee on such websites during work hours you would think that they were slacking off, however their bosses could have told them to do so. These bosses are encouraging their employees to use these websites for super secret spying purposes. The CIA and FBI agencies are using a new social utility website called A-space to do their spying duties.
This website is a social-networking site for analysts within the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies. Instead of blogging like we do regarding our lives and celebrity gossip, these CIA and FBI agents can blog about "Al Qaeda movements in the Middle East or Russian naval maneuvers in the Black Sea."
This new website has been going through tests and investigations for the last few months and it has officially been launched for the nation's entire intelligence community as of Sept. 22.
"It's every bit Facebook and YouTube for spies, but it's much, much more," said Michael Wertheimer, assistant deputy director of national intelligence for analysis. "It's a place where not only spies can meet but share data they've never been able to share before."
Of course, the material on A-Space is highly classified, and so it will not be available for the public.The only people that will be able to use it will be intelligence personnel with the proper security clearance, and a reason to be examining particular information.
-Albina A
If you saw your employee on such websites during work hours you would think that they were slacking off, however their bosses could have told them to do so. These bosses are encouraging their employees to use these websites for super secret spying purposes. The CIA and FBI agencies are using a new social utility website called A-space to do their spying duties.
This website is a social-networking site for analysts within the 16 U.S. intelligence agencies. Instead of blogging like we do regarding our lives and celebrity gossip, these CIA and FBI agents can blog about "Al Qaeda movements in the Middle East or Russian naval maneuvers in the Black Sea."
This new website has been going through tests and investigations for the last few months and it has officially been launched for the nation's entire intelligence community as of Sept. 22.
"It's every bit Facebook and YouTube for spies, but it's much, much more," said Michael Wertheimer, assistant deputy director of national intelligence for analysis. "It's a place where not only spies can meet but share data they've never been able to share before."
Of course, the material on A-Space is highly classified, and so it will not be available for the public.The only people that will be able to use it will be intelligence personnel with the proper security clearance, and a reason to be examining particular information.
-Albina A
Thursday, September 25, 2008
A Better Bulb Than Compact Fluorescent Lights?
Sometimes even good things could use improvement. Compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs for example. You know, those funny-looking, corkscrew-shaped replacements for incandescent bulbs? They're great for energy-savings, but they're not entirely environmentally friendly. They contain the toxin mercury, which is harmful when released into the environment when the bulb is broken or incinerated and not properly disposed of or recycled. (Regular fluorescent tube lights should also be properly disposed of and not broken.)
According to a Fox News report, the CFL's mercury "can be dangerous even in small quantities... because it can be inhaled or absorbed through the skin, and it damages the central nervous system." When the bulbs are just tossed into the garbage, the mercury ends up in landfills where it can leach into the soil and water, and can poison fish and other wildlife.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288684,00.html
As of Feb. 8, 2006, it is illegal for California residents to throw CFLs away. But proper and convenient means to dispose of or recycle CFLs are not readily available. So, is there a better alternative? In response to these environmental needs and concerns, a well-known product design company in the Silicon Valley claims to have come up with a concept for an LED bulb that contains no mercury. According to the company, their "green bulb" concept would be even more energy-efficient than CFLs, usable for up to 30 years, and even allow for light dimming, which CFLs do not. An example of innovative thinking and design, conceived for everyday use. Now all we have to do is wait for another company to implement the idea, see if it will actually work as claimed, and get it to market.
http://www.frogdesign.com/case-study/led-light-bulb-concept.html
- Misako M.
According to a Fox News report, the CFL's mercury "can be dangerous even in small quantities... because it can be inhaled or absorbed through the skin, and it damages the central nervous system." When the bulbs are just tossed into the garbage, the mercury ends up in landfills where it can leach into the soil and water, and can poison fish and other wildlife.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,288684,00.html
As of Feb. 8, 2006, it is illegal for California residents to throw CFLs away. But proper and convenient means to dispose of or recycle CFLs are not readily available. So, is there a better alternative? In response to these environmental needs and concerns, a well-known product design company in the Silicon Valley claims to have come up with a concept for an LED bulb that contains no mercury. According to the company, their "green bulb" concept would be even more energy-efficient than CFLs, usable for up to 30 years, and even allow for light dimming, which CFLs do not. An example of innovative thinking and design, conceived for everyday use. Now all we have to do is wait for another company to implement the idea, see if it will actually work as claimed, and get it to market.
http://www.frogdesign.com/case-study/led-light-bulb-concept.html
- Misako M.
Honda Auto Plants: On Track for the Future
As classmate Ching's previous entry about Chrysler attests to, auto makers are attempting to make serious adjustments to meet changing demands, especially with respect to volatility in gasoline cost and supply. As another example, the 09/24/08 Wall Street Journal article below explains technological innovation at the manufacturing level, specifically at Honda plants in the U.S.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122211673953564349.html
Ever since the post-WWII period, Japan's leading automakers have catapulted innovation in manufacturing, such as with the "Just In Time" concept, along with other applications now standard in the industry. That sense of foresight continues today.
The WSJ article explains some of Honda's most recent cost-saving, production-accelerated innovations on their U.S. assembly lines. Such critical innovations include:
- Re-tooling some of its plants to enable the assembly of multiple Honda car models in the same way, even though their individual parts may vary.
- The use of interchangeable "gray robots," which resemble hands designed to handle assembly parts with precision and speed during the welding process. "Workers simply put different 'hands' on the robots to handle the parts for different vehicles."
These are considered unprecedented innovations. By comparison, a conventional auto manufacturing plant tends to be tooled to produce only one or a very limited number of models. If such a plant needs to produce a different model to fill a sudden spike or change in customer demand -- such as a compact model versus a gas-guzzling SUV -- the assembly overhaul required is vastly slower and far more costly and laborious than with Honda's assembly method. As the article states, Honda's rapid-response time to fluctuations in the market affords them tremendous flexibility and a "key strategic advantage" ahead of their North American competitors in this regard.
- Misako M.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122211673953564349.html
Ever since the post-WWII period, Japan's leading automakers have catapulted innovation in manufacturing, such as with the "Just In Time" concept, along with other applications now standard in the industry. That sense of foresight continues today.
The WSJ article explains some of Honda's most recent cost-saving, production-accelerated innovations on their U.S. assembly lines. Such critical innovations include:
- Re-tooling some of its plants to enable the assembly of multiple Honda car models in the same way, even though their individual parts may vary.
- The use of interchangeable "gray robots," which resemble hands designed to handle assembly parts with precision and speed during the welding process. "Workers simply put different 'hands' on the robots to handle the parts for different vehicles."
These are considered unprecedented innovations. By comparison, a conventional auto manufacturing plant tends to be tooled to produce only one or a very limited number of models. If such a plant needs to produce a different model to fill a sudden spike or change in customer demand -- such as a compact model versus a gas-guzzling SUV -- the assembly overhaul required is vastly slower and far more costly and laborious than with Honda's assembly method. As the article states, Honda's rapid-response time to fluctuations in the market affords them tremendous flexibility and a "key strategic advantage" ahead of their North American competitors in this regard.
- Misako M.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
The New Chryslers
LA Times reported that a new line of cars will be coming out under one of the world's top automobile makers, Chrysler.
Chrysler is currently making electrical cars in all types, sedans, SUVs, sport's cars and mini vans. Cars for displays and demostrations were revealed on Tuesday, however, the complete electric car line will not in the automobile market for at least two years.
While competing automotive companies, such as Honda, which has already released several electrical cars, Chrysler's chief executive, Robert Nadelli, said Chrysler is not solely making limited editions of electrical cars, instead, this new line of electrical cars will be the future of Chrysler.
Because of a whole line of new cars coming out by the end of 2010, Chrysler is confident these rechargable battery-operated cars will lead the new gas-saving automotive industry. With electic cars of all sizes under one dealership, consumers may find that Chrysler truly builds with drivers' preferences in mind.
Chrysler has not released any figures on how much the new lines of cars will cost. At this time, Chrysler is concentrating more on promoting the high-performances of these gas saving, silent electrical cars.
- Ching
Chrysler is currently making electrical cars in all types, sedans, SUVs, sport's cars and mini vans. Cars for displays and demostrations were revealed on Tuesday, however, the complete electric car line will not in the automobile market for at least two years.
While competing automotive companies, such as Honda, which has already released several electrical cars, Chrysler's chief executive, Robert Nadelli, said Chrysler is not solely making limited editions of electrical cars, instead, this new line of electrical cars will be the future of Chrysler.
Because of a whole line of new cars coming out by the end of 2010, Chrysler is confident these rechargable battery-operated cars will lead the new gas-saving automotive industry. With electic cars of all sizes under one dealership, consumers may find that Chrysler truly builds with drivers' preferences in mind.
Chrysler has not released any figures on how much the new lines of cars will cost. At this time, Chrysler is concentrating more on promoting the high-performances of these gas saving, silent electrical cars.
- Ching
The Colbert Report Nails Visuals and Text for Optimal Audience Effect
I think I just got inspired. Now wouldn't it be cool if we could add text blurbs to our multi-media project videos like below? As non-commentary journalism students, we'd of course have to nix the satire. But, no joke (that's Colbert's department), his use of well-timed visuals and text is "instructive" in how to seize and sustain audience attention effectively, informatively and engagingly. What do you think? Check it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52DB7RoXtgY&eurl=http://www.ourrepublicblog.com/2008/09/campbell-brown-let-palin-answer.html
- Misako M.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52DB7RoXtgY&eurl=http://www.ourrepublicblog.com/2008/09/campbell-brown-let-palin-answer.html
- Misako M.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Infrared Lie Detector - You're Lying!
Nope, not this time. Traditional lie detectors have been used for years to lock up convicted prisoners, to gain "truthful" information in an investigation, and even to break up marriages on the Maury show. The polygraph test works by measuring a respiration rate, heart rate and perspiration, but is not always accurate.
According to an article on newscientist.com, Scott Bunce, at Drexel University's College of Medicine in Philadelphia, "thinks a better solution is to send near-infrared light through the scalp and skull into the brain and see how much is reflected back."
By sending this light into the brain, the amount reflected depends on the amount of oxygen in the blood, which in turn tells how active the brain is. This, according to Bunce, tells the real-time activity in the brain and can be used to tell if the subject is lying.
Here is a link to the patent application. Check it out.
What do you think about this? Be sure to tell the truth!!
-Michael Strachan
Internet-ready TVs coming in 2009
Cnet news is reporting that GE will join the HDTV marketplace in 2009 with a television that will have advanced web technologies without the need for a PC.
Owners of the new TVs will be able to download widgets and other services to enhance their viewing experience.
GE's venture into the TV-making industry exemplifies the constant consumer-need for information. Unlike the internet, television programming was controlled by someone other than the user - consumers had to wait for information to be transmitted.
With internet-enabled televisions -- as well as "On-Demand" services -- users no longer need to wait for their information. You can go and get it.
Going along with the topic of innovation, different models of the new TVs will feature built-in Blu-ray players and the ability to connect wireless speakers to the unit.
"GE brand to grace Internet-ready TVs in 2009"
-Matt Mesa
Owners of the new TVs will be able to download widgets and other services to enhance their viewing experience.
GE's venture into the TV-making industry exemplifies the constant consumer-need for information. Unlike the internet, television programming was controlled by someone other than the user - consumers had to wait for information to be transmitted.
With internet-enabled televisions -- as well as "On-Demand" services -- users no longer need to wait for their information. You can go and get it.
Going along with the topic of innovation, different models of the new TVs will feature built-in Blu-ray players and the ability to connect wireless speakers to the unit.
"GE brand to grace Internet-ready TVs in 2009"
-Matt Mesa
Google Phone Unveiled Today
Today Google announced the will be selling a new phone through T-Mobile for $179 on October 22. The phone is $20 less than the IPhone and looks like a T-Mobile SideKick. The special thing about this product is it is designed to run like any computer, running any type of software you can think of. The G1 come with instant messaging, email, maps, music player, camera and the plans for the phone will be cheaper than the IPhone.
It will be interesting to see if as many people wait in lines and if there is as much hype as there was for the first IPhone.
-Carly Youngren
Monday, September 22, 2008
Limiting the use of the Internet?
An article in the the NY Times called "Putting a Meter on the Computer for Internet Use" talked about how cable companies were going to start limiting people's use on the Internet.
A specific case in Beaumont, Tex. is that Time Warner Cable, the local provider, is putting limits on new customer's Internet use. They offer plans with limits between 5 and 40 gigabytes. Complaints are that the heavy Internet use of some people is slowing down the networks for news and entertainment for everyone else.
You can purchase tools to track your consumption such as BWMeter and DU Meter which cost between $25-30.
I think this goes a person's right to act and live their life how they want to live it. They should be able to spend as much time on the Internet as they want if they are paying for it. Even though Time Warner Cable is just experimenting with this in Beaumont, I don't think it will reach other regions or even go as far as they have already. I think most people will just switch service providers
Lauren D.
"Bits" Bites the Dust, or Where Is "Hansell's" Gretel?
This is rich. Or should I say mentally bankrupt?
Saul Hansell, the "Bits" (Business-Innovation-Technology-Society) blog editor of The New York Times, only now asks one of the many critical questions that he SHOULD HAVE been asking and investigating months, if not two and three years, ago in the build up to the nation's current financial disaster: "So where were the quants?"
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/18/how-wall-streets-quants-lied-to-their-computers/?em
(Quants are "quantitative analysts" or economics, mathematics and computer science experts whose job it is to develop sophisticated, built-in risk-management computer programs on Wall Street and for investment firms that are supposed to help safeguard against critical investment losses and better manage profit risks for greater yields.)
High-tech stuff, right? Smart innovation, right? Well, as Hansell points out, that depends on who's directing the quants to design those programs, and what the real motives are in how those programs will be used. Hardly an original observation. Which is where I'm going with this. Hansell gives reason for a reader to question whether he's truly qualified to be in the editorial position he's in. Because he's not exactly demonstrating that he's got the mojo on InJo. In other words, someone needs to be eyeballing the so-called experts who are supposed to be minding the store. Because it's not just about asking long after the fact: "Where were the quants." More importantly, it's for us to ask of Hansell, "Where the heck were you?"
For example, for all his tech knowledge, editor Hansell demonstrates his own version of intellectual bank failure and collapse. Near the opening of his above Sept. 18, 2008, blog entry on the quants-related fumbles, Hansell offers the following: "Before I started covering the Internet in 1997, I spent 13 years covering trading and finance. I covered my share of trading disasters from junk bonds, mortgage securities and the financial blank canvas known as derivatives. And I got to know bunch of quantitative analysts..."
He goes on to say of the quants: "They were developing systems that would comb through all of a firm’s positions, analyze everything that might go wrong and estimate how much it might lose on a really bad day. We’ve had some bad days lately, and it turns out Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and maybe some others bet far too much. Their quants didn’t save them." Gee, no kidding, dude. Tell us something we don't already know?
So, let me get this straight. Saul Hansell, editor of "Bits" in The New York Times, takes pains to point out his niche cred early in his blog entry. Then in practically the same breath, he proceeds to demonstrate his ignorance and negligence to do the job he's SUPPOSED to have done as an expert covering those very fields? Uh, pardon me for saying so, but that sounds like a whole lot of deflective ducking and hoodwinking hooey to me. Seriously, doesn't someone need to be checking out why Hansell only now seems to be starting to see the light -- and barely half-lit at that. Not to mention come up with a zinger to: How many technology-financial "beat" editors are needed to screw in a light bulb?" (Someone please tell me what Jay Leno comes up with on that one!)
This is not a personal attack on Hansell. But it is an inquiry into his professional qualifications to perform the scope of his position's responsibilities. For is it not important for us to have confidence in reporters, editors, and their news organizations to have the intelligence, courage, foresight, and gumption to do their jobs well -- especially at this very complex and pivotal time in human history? And to find truly creative ways to pull in steady, solid revenue without overly compromising journalistic integrity and mission?
Basically, where was Hansell's cred when all this stuff was escalating into a speculative frenzy over the last three years, when evidence for the dangers abounded? After all, you don't exactly need a roomful of quants to design a sophisticated computer program to warn you -- in screaming neon lights -- that such complex high-risk speculations (as these intricately bundled subprime mortgage securities were/are) are inevitable monster disasters just waiting to implode in your face.
Unless, that is, the only thing interfering with such common-sense brain solvency might be something called flat-out, no-holds-barred, reckless and ruthless, unregulated GREED?? The kind that drives behavior and choices that don't give a darn about the consequences of one's actions upon the entire country, upon people's retirement funds and bank savings accounts and a good chunk of the rest of the global economy. (I.e., raw, amoral self-interest versus enlightened profit motives which, in the long run, help drive a healthy economy and yield a pretty decent hunk o' change and far fewer sleepless nights.)
But that's exactly the point which Hansell seems so skittish in coming clean about. And one can't help but wonder why. I mean, shouldn't someone look into that? Shouldn't his questions demonstrate more concrete savvy of the connections between the crossover fields the "Bits" department is touted to cover? Because it begs the question as to how Hansell's conscience is riding on him now, and whether he'll be held firmly accountable for his apparent oversight. For the gamesters on Wall Street and beyond, who thought they were being clever when they were in fact being out-of-control dangerous, I don't think conscience is something they wrestle with too often.
But whatever the case is with Hansell, the underwhelming tone of his blog entry here is disturbing. Like many of his professional peers, is he still not able to grasp the underlying causes and full scope of implications surrounding this financial debacle? If not, then why should anyone read his blog? This is supposed to be "his" turf. I mean, there was no shortage of information available for him to catch these get-rich-quick-swindlers and guilty-as-sin securities peddlers with their pants down. And this before the whole ugly enchilada exposed itself (and the country) to financial mayhem. So then why does it sound like Hansell only just woke up? Heck, it's not like his name is Sleeping Beauty, right?
But going back to common sense over high-risk investments, Hansell quotes Leslie Rahl, the president of the consulting firm Capital Market Risk Advisors, as follows: "'New products, by definition, carry more risk,' she said. The models should penalize investments that are complex, hard to understand and infrequently traded, she said. They didn’t." Moreover, "'One of the things that has caused great pain is complex products,' Ms. Rahl said."
Hansell goes on: "That made me think back to some of the great trading debacles of the last century, such as the collapse of Askin Capital Management, a hedge fund that fell apart because of complex mortgage security investments gone bad. Wasn’t the moral of those stories that you shouldn’t put your money (or your client’s money) in something you didn’t understand? Furthermore, even if you are convinced you do understand it, you’re not going to be able to sell it when you need the money if no one else does." Uh, you think?!
Interestingly, Hansell only then quotes Rahl as follows: “'In some ways there is nothing new,' said Ms. Rahl, who helped investigate what went wrong at Askin." He also quotes Rahl as saying, "'The big deals are front-page news, then they go into the recesses of people’s memories.'” As in Hansell's own fade-to-blank memory banks as well? Because I wonder (since I now have reason to question Hansell's credibility), did Ms. Rahl just happen to conveniently remind Hansell about Askin before he could remember it himself? If so, is he playing fishy with his wording just to try to cover his tracks? To look like he actually knows what he's doing, when maybe he hasn't a clue and is afraid he's going to get called on it? As he totally should be, if that is in fact the case.
So, here we have Hansell, NYT "Bits" editor, feebly asking such elementary questions instead of seriously probing and investigating more hard-hitting, truly cutting-edge ones. Does he figure that a $700 taxpayer-funded bailout package amounts to just a relatively painless news "bit" that deserves no greater thoughtful attention? But, then, he did aimlessly toss out a few gutless questions out there. Yeah, that's some cred.
What Hansell does at least get around to saying -- but doesn't go beyond safely touching on -- is that complicit investment firm heads and managers deliberately turned away from ensuring that such quant-designed programs would churn out numbers and reports that were more in line with reality. This insofar as a computer program can be made to do so, based on investment traders' and managers' conscious desire for keener, more responsible data input and oversight. After all, the quants will only do what they are told (and paid) to do.
Though I don't advocate Donald Trump anything, doesn't his infamous directive come appropriately to mind here? As in: "Hansell, you're FIRED." For all the fallout damage our country's now experiencing, and the vast ripple-effects ordinary American tax-payers are and will be feeling in any number of countless ways years from now, I think that's going pretty darn easy on Hansell and his (and his mainstream news peers') largely inexcusable failure to inform the public about the implications of the mortgage speculation boom and its pending bust.
But, then, who's Hansell's employer? Oh, yeah, the same "venerable" publication that was out in front cheerleading for the U.S. invasion into Iraq just a few short years and how-many-lost-human-lives-and-lost-American-reputation-and-lost-billions-of-U.S.-dollars ago? Instead of scrutinizing the glaring potholes in the devious spin that was hurtling out of the Bush-Cheney White House, the NYT's reporters/editors became all-too-willing megaphones for the neo-cons' ulterior agenda rather than being microscopes for government accountability on behalf of the American and world public. I guess the NYT thought it was in the P.R. business instead of that quaint freedom-of-the-press-cornerstone-of-democracy thing called journalism.
(Don't get me wrong, though. There's some truly awesome journalists on the NYT staff. But what's happened to them on two of the most important occasions we've needed them? Were their stories killed? Were they victims of tacit censorship by their higher-ups?)
And, as a last observation, how is it that a New York Times editor can't even get the spelling of the name of one of his article's central sources right? (An admission Hansell rightfully puts ahead of his corrected blog entry.) As is constantly grilled into our journalism student heads, such gross factual errors only erode a reporter's and a new organization's most fundamental credibility. I.e., if Hansell can't even get a name spelling right, what the heck else is he and the NYT getting wrong? Well, I think we've identified what some of those bigger transgressions are already.
So, will the real journalists and better bloggers please stand up? Heck yeah. Thanks to the Internet, they will and they are. And you can bank on that.
- Misako M.
Saul Hansell, the "Bits" (Business-Innovation-Technology-Society) blog editor of The New York Times, only now asks one of the many critical questions that he SHOULD HAVE been asking and investigating months, if not two and three years, ago in the build up to the nation's current financial disaster: "So where were the quants?"
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/18/how-wall-streets-quants-lied-to-their-computers/?em
(Quants are "quantitative analysts" or economics, mathematics and computer science experts whose job it is to develop sophisticated, built-in risk-management computer programs on Wall Street and for investment firms that are supposed to help safeguard against critical investment losses and better manage profit risks for greater yields.)
High-tech stuff, right? Smart innovation, right? Well, as Hansell points out, that depends on who's directing the quants to design those programs, and what the real motives are in how those programs will be used. Hardly an original observation. Which is where I'm going with this. Hansell gives reason for a reader to question whether he's truly qualified to be in the editorial position he's in. Because he's not exactly demonstrating that he's got the mojo on InJo. In other words, someone needs to be eyeballing the so-called experts who are supposed to be minding the store. Because it's not just about asking long after the fact: "Where were the quants." More importantly, it's for us to ask of Hansell, "Where the heck were you?"
For example, for all his tech knowledge, editor Hansell demonstrates his own version of intellectual bank failure and collapse. Near the opening of his above Sept. 18, 2008, blog entry on the quants-related fumbles, Hansell offers the following: "Before I started covering the Internet in 1997, I spent 13 years covering trading and finance. I covered my share of trading disasters from junk bonds, mortgage securities and the financial blank canvas known as derivatives. And I got to know bunch of quantitative analysts..."
He goes on to say of the quants: "They were developing systems that would comb through all of a firm’s positions, analyze everything that might go wrong and estimate how much it might lose on a really bad day. We’ve had some bad days lately, and it turns out Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and maybe some others bet far too much. Their quants didn’t save them." Gee, no kidding, dude. Tell us something we don't already know?
So, let me get this straight. Saul Hansell, editor of "Bits" in The New York Times, takes pains to point out his niche cred early in his blog entry. Then in practically the same breath, he proceeds to demonstrate his ignorance and negligence to do the job he's SUPPOSED to have done as an expert covering those very fields? Uh, pardon me for saying so, but that sounds like a whole lot of deflective ducking and hoodwinking hooey to me. Seriously, doesn't someone need to be checking out why Hansell only now seems to be starting to see the light -- and barely half-lit at that. Not to mention come up with a zinger to: How many technology-financial "beat" editors are needed to screw in a light bulb?" (Someone please tell me what Jay Leno comes up with on that one!)
This is not a personal attack on Hansell. But it is an inquiry into his professional qualifications to perform the scope of his position's responsibilities. For is it not important for us to have confidence in reporters, editors, and their news organizations to have the intelligence, courage, foresight, and gumption to do their jobs well -- especially at this very complex and pivotal time in human history? And to find truly creative ways to pull in steady, solid revenue without overly compromising journalistic integrity and mission?
Basically, where was Hansell's cred when all this stuff was escalating into a speculative frenzy over the last three years, when evidence for the dangers abounded? After all, you don't exactly need a roomful of quants to design a sophisticated computer program to warn you -- in screaming neon lights -- that such complex high-risk speculations (as these intricately bundled subprime mortgage securities were/are) are inevitable monster disasters just waiting to implode in your face.
Unless, that is, the only thing interfering with such common-sense brain solvency might be something called flat-out, no-holds-barred, reckless and ruthless, unregulated GREED?? The kind that drives behavior and choices that don't give a darn about the consequences of one's actions upon the entire country, upon people's retirement funds and bank savings accounts and a good chunk of the rest of the global economy. (I.e., raw, amoral self-interest versus enlightened profit motives which, in the long run, help drive a healthy economy and yield a pretty decent hunk o' change and far fewer sleepless nights.)
But that's exactly the point which Hansell seems so skittish in coming clean about. And one can't help but wonder why. I mean, shouldn't someone look into that? Shouldn't his questions demonstrate more concrete savvy of the connections between the crossover fields the "Bits" department is touted to cover? Because it begs the question as to how Hansell's conscience is riding on him now, and whether he'll be held firmly accountable for his apparent oversight. For the gamesters on Wall Street and beyond, who thought they were being clever when they were in fact being out-of-control dangerous, I don't think conscience is something they wrestle with too often.
But whatever the case is with Hansell, the underwhelming tone of his blog entry here is disturbing. Like many of his professional peers, is he still not able to grasp the underlying causes and full scope of implications surrounding this financial debacle? If not, then why should anyone read his blog? This is supposed to be "his" turf. I mean, there was no shortage of information available for him to catch these get-rich-quick-swindlers and guilty-as-sin securities peddlers with their pants down. And this before the whole ugly enchilada exposed itself (and the country) to financial mayhem. So then why does it sound like Hansell only just woke up? Heck, it's not like his name is Sleeping Beauty, right?
But going back to common sense over high-risk investments, Hansell quotes Leslie Rahl, the president of the consulting firm Capital Market Risk Advisors, as follows: "'New products, by definition, carry more risk,' she said. The models should penalize investments that are complex, hard to understand and infrequently traded, she said. They didn’t." Moreover, "'One of the things that has caused great pain is complex products,' Ms. Rahl said."
Hansell goes on: "That made me think back to some of the great trading debacles of the last century, such as the collapse of Askin Capital Management, a hedge fund that fell apart because of complex mortgage security investments gone bad. Wasn’t the moral of those stories that you shouldn’t put your money (or your client’s money) in something you didn’t understand? Furthermore, even if you are convinced you do understand it, you’re not going to be able to sell it when you need the money if no one else does." Uh, you think?!
Interestingly, Hansell only then quotes Rahl as follows: “'In some ways there is nothing new,' said Ms. Rahl, who helped investigate what went wrong at Askin." He also quotes Rahl as saying, "'The big deals are front-page news, then they go into the recesses of people’s memories.'” As in Hansell's own fade-to-blank memory banks as well? Because I wonder (since I now have reason to question Hansell's credibility), did Ms. Rahl just happen to conveniently remind Hansell about Askin before he could remember it himself? If so, is he playing fishy with his wording just to try to cover his tracks? To look like he actually knows what he's doing, when maybe he hasn't a clue and is afraid he's going to get called on it? As he totally should be, if that is in fact the case.
So, here we have Hansell, NYT "Bits" editor, feebly asking such elementary questions instead of seriously probing and investigating more hard-hitting, truly cutting-edge ones. Does he figure that a $700 taxpayer-funded bailout package amounts to just a relatively painless news "bit" that deserves no greater thoughtful attention? But, then, he did aimlessly toss out a few gutless questions out there. Yeah, that's some cred.
What Hansell does at least get around to saying -- but doesn't go beyond safely touching on -- is that complicit investment firm heads and managers deliberately turned away from ensuring that such quant-designed programs would churn out numbers and reports that were more in line with reality. This insofar as a computer program can be made to do so, based on investment traders' and managers' conscious desire for keener, more responsible data input and oversight. After all, the quants will only do what they are told (and paid) to do.
Which is why the irony here only gets thicker when Hansell says that "[l]ying to your risk-management computer is like lying to your doctor. You just aren’t going to get the help you really need." Like readers maybe expecting and relying on Hansell himself to offer the information and insight they could've really needed long before this last week?
My point is that, for all its glossy hype and glamour, innovation technology doesn't necessarily spell the kind of innovation we want or need as a nation and as a planet, if the mindset behind it isn't equally up to snuff or guided by the wisdom of the sages and of history, whose advice and perspective Hansell is apparently only now seeking.Though I don't advocate Donald Trump anything, doesn't his infamous directive come appropriately to mind here? As in: "Hansell, you're FIRED." For all the fallout damage our country's now experiencing, and the vast ripple-effects ordinary American tax-payers are and will be feeling in any number of countless ways years from now, I think that's going pretty darn easy on Hansell and his (and his mainstream news peers') largely inexcusable failure to inform the public about the implications of the mortgage speculation boom and its pending bust.
But, then, who's Hansell's employer? Oh, yeah, the same "venerable" publication that was out in front cheerleading for the U.S. invasion into Iraq just a few short years and how-many-lost-human-lives-and-lost-American-reputation-and-lost-billions-of-U.S.-dollars ago? Instead of scrutinizing the glaring potholes in the devious spin that was hurtling out of the Bush-Cheney White House, the NYT's reporters/editors became all-too-willing megaphones for the neo-cons' ulterior agenda rather than being microscopes for government accountability on behalf of the American and world public. I guess the NYT thought it was in the P.R. business instead of that quaint freedom-of-the-press-cornerstone-of-democracy thing called journalism.
(Don't get me wrong, though. There's some truly awesome journalists on the NYT staff. But what's happened to them on two of the most important occasions we've needed them? Were their stories killed? Were they victims of tacit censorship by their higher-ups?)
And, as a last observation, how is it that a New York Times editor can't even get the spelling of the name of one of his article's central sources right? (An admission Hansell rightfully puts ahead of his corrected blog entry.) As is constantly grilled into our journalism student heads, such gross factual errors only erode a reporter's and a new organization's most fundamental credibility. I.e., if Hansell can't even get a name spelling right, what the heck else is he and the NYT getting wrong? Well, I think we've identified what some of those bigger transgressions are already.
So, will the real journalists and better bloggers please stand up? Heck yeah. Thanks to the Internet, they will and they are. And you can bank on that.
- Misako M.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
The Financial Crisis: A Global Tsunami in Need of Innovative Correction
The global financial crisis. Perhaps the greatest homegrown financial swindle of all time.
Looking for piercing questions as to how we got in this mess -- who's responsible for it, who's profiting from it, and who's left holding the bag? Unflinching explanations as to how the fallout will affect you and generations of Americans not yet even born? Hard-hitting answers that lay out the full scope of the disaster and its complicit parties? Unrelenting demands for accountability and effective solutions to avert future recurrences?
Well, don't look to U.S. mainstream news media. Unconscionably and egregiously asleep at the wheel, America's "newspeak" reporters, editors, and their consolidated big media bosses are a huge part of the reason why financial markets and economies the world over have been rocked to their knees and are now scrambling desperately to save a sinking ship.
As far back as three years ago, anyone with an ounce of common sense could see the writing on the wall. (Can anyone say: the Stock Market Crash and Great Depression of 1929? Market deregulation? Any number of similar speculative bubbles gone bust before and since? Duh!) Mainstream news media turned a blind eye and deaf ear to these precedents, to the inevitable train wreck that lay ahead in the wake of the subprime mortgage speculative frenzy. Virtually no clear or sustained warning cry was sounded by these guys who give journalism and credibility a seriously bad name. Mainstream news media not only dropped the ball, they never even had it. Or else deliberately sat on it. (Serious conflicts of interest in the corporate newsroom/boardroom?)
Sending shock waves throughout the national and global economy, the fallout of the most colossal financial calamity in our nation's history has only just begun -- with Bush asking Congress for a $700 billion(!) government handout to the worst of the growing list of transgressors. The list of serial failures, tax-funded bailouts, bankruptcies, and corporate buy-outs reads like a heap of financial corpses, corporate giants once thought indestructible: Countrywide Financial, Bear Stearns, IndyMac, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Merrill Lynch. And yet more major national depositor and investment banks are teetering on the edge of collapse -- including Washington Mutual Bank and Morgan Stanley, which are now desperate to find buyers to come to their rescue.
But cogent perspectives from independent, alternative U.S. news and info sources are definitely out there. You just have to know where to look. (A more comprehensive view can also be gained from reputable foreign/international news sources, as classmate Erin McKenzie implied on a previous post.)
As just one example, check out the audio-file link below -- from media watchdog group F.A.I.R.'s recent interview with economist James K. Galbraith, professor at the University of Texas in Austin.
I don't agree with Galbraith's proposal to bail out Americans who bought into the housing boom frenzy -- the greedy more than truly needy ones, that is. Of the former, their motives were absolutely integral to this entire mess. And since when is the government expected to give anyone a non-binding handout for rampant, reckless greed that endangers our entire economy -- just as they're doing right now for the financial giants who are anything but victims either. (So much for the conservative mantra against "big government.") That lax attitude only rewards the very behavior that got us in hot water in the first place. Still, F.A.I.R.'s questions and much of the rest of Galbraith's comments are definitely worth hearing:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3616
Also, below is an Aug. 21, 2008, review of a book written by Yale University economics professor Robert Shiller. Shiller had predicted both the earlier Silicon Valley speculative high-tech bust and the current subprime speculative crash. But according to the reviewer, Andrew Leonard, the book falls far short in its look at the factors and players that led to the current meltdown.
http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/feature/2008/08/21/speculation_nation/
Nevertheless, relevant to our class is Leonard's mention of Shiller's suggestion for "taking advantage of innovations in financial technology to create new derivative markets that would 'tame speculative bubbles in real estate.'" And where that kind of "'liquid market in real estate futures' would allow investors to sell real estate short if they [believe] that the market [is] in a bubble." (Selling "short" means to profit from stock investments that you anticipate will lose, rather than gain, value; a kind of reverse-profit investment strategy. Interestingly, the SEC just issued a temporary ban on shorting.)
Shiller explains that in using such a strategy as a means of market, not government, control: "...then any skeptic anywhere in the world could, through his or her actions in the marketplace, act to reduce a speculative bubble in a city, for such a bubble represents a profit opportunity for short sellers. If the market were widely watched, then home builders would see the projected price declines and scale back their own activities, thus averting huge construction booms such as the one we have recently witnessed in the United States."
But Leonard rightly cautions: "Shiller's proposal is a lightning rod precisely because many observers have pinpointed innovative derivative markets as one of the causes of the subprime debacle. Yet [he] proposes a package of new, state-of-the-art financial products as part of the solution." I don't entirely agree with Shiller's idea either. It's too simplistic. But at least it might help stimulate other long-overdue, outside-the-box solutions to avert such calamity in the future, or at least stop the hemorrhaging sooner. And in our interdependent global economy, shouldn't new safeguards be designed in coordination with other nations' financial markets as well, in order to be truly effective?
And what about solutions to shore up the failures of mainstream American journalism? To serve the public interest and the public trust against widespread corruption and abuses of power AND to empower the public to embrace new possibilities for enlightened, responsible change? Is there a way to funnel smarter, more conscientious reporters and editors into the ranks? Journalists who understand the vital connections between history, politics, national and foreign policy, economics and business, health and medicine, science and technology, the natural environment, education, and news and entertainment media -- so they have the wherewithal to see the tidal waves coming long before they crash and before innovation opportunities pass us by? Well, yeah, "It's called smart journalism, STUPID!" Or, should I say, "Dude, do you do InJo?"
- Misako M.
Looking for piercing questions as to how we got in this mess -- who's responsible for it, who's profiting from it, and who's left holding the bag? Unflinching explanations as to how the fallout will affect you and generations of Americans not yet even born? Hard-hitting answers that lay out the full scope of the disaster and its complicit parties? Unrelenting demands for accountability and effective solutions to avert future recurrences?
Well, don't look to U.S. mainstream news media. Unconscionably and egregiously asleep at the wheel, America's "newspeak" reporters, editors, and their consolidated big media bosses are a huge part of the reason why financial markets and economies the world over have been rocked to their knees and are now scrambling desperately to save a sinking ship.
As far back as three years ago, anyone with an ounce of common sense could see the writing on the wall. (Can anyone say: the Stock Market Crash and Great Depression of 1929? Market deregulation? Any number of similar speculative bubbles gone bust before and since? Duh!) Mainstream news media turned a blind eye and deaf ear to these precedents, to the inevitable train wreck that lay ahead in the wake of the subprime mortgage speculative frenzy. Virtually no clear or sustained warning cry was sounded by these guys who give journalism and credibility a seriously bad name. Mainstream news media not only dropped the ball, they never even had it. Or else deliberately sat on it. (Serious conflicts of interest in the corporate newsroom/boardroom?)
Sending shock waves throughout the national and global economy, the fallout of the most colossal financial calamity in our nation's history has only just begun -- with Bush asking Congress for a $700 billion(!) government handout to the worst of the growing list of transgressors. The list of serial failures, tax-funded bailouts, bankruptcies, and corporate buy-outs reads like a heap of financial corpses, corporate giants once thought indestructible: Countrywide Financial, Bear Stearns, IndyMac, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers, AIG, Merrill Lynch. And yet more major national depositor and investment banks are teetering on the edge of collapse -- including Washington Mutual Bank and Morgan Stanley, which are now desperate to find buyers to come to their rescue.
But cogent perspectives from independent, alternative U.S. news and info sources are definitely out there. You just have to know where to look. (A more comprehensive view can also be gained from reputable foreign/international news sources, as classmate Erin McKenzie implied on a previous post.)
As just one example, check out the audio-file link below -- from media watchdog group F.A.I.R.'s recent interview with economist James K. Galbraith, professor at the University of Texas in Austin.
I don't agree with Galbraith's proposal to bail out Americans who bought into the housing boom frenzy -- the greedy more than truly needy ones, that is. Of the former, their motives were absolutely integral to this entire mess. And since when is the government expected to give anyone a non-binding handout for rampant, reckless greed that endangers our entire economy -- just as they're doing right now for the financial giants who are anything but victims either. (So much for the conservative mantra against "big government.") That lax attitude only rewards the very behavior that got us in hot water in the first place. Still, F.A.I.R.'s questions and much of the rest of Galbraith's comments are definitely worth hearing:
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3616
Also, below is an Aug. 21, 2008, review of a book written by Yale University economics professor Robert Shiller. Shiller had predicted both the earlier Silicon Valley speculative high-tech bust and the current subprime speculative crash. But according to the reviewer, Andrew Leonard, the book falls far short in its look at the factors and players that led to the current meltdown.
http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/feature/2008/08/21/speculation_nation/
Nevertheless, relevant to our class is Leonard's mention of Shiller's suggestion for "taking advantage of innovations in financial technology to create new derivative markets that would 'tame speculative bubbles in real estate.'" And where that kind of "'liquid market in real estate futures' would allow investors to sell real estate short if they [believe] that the market [is] in a bubble." (Selling "short" means to profit from stock investments that you anticipate will lose, rather than gain, value; a kind of reverse-profit investment strategy. Interestingly, the SEC just issued a temporary ban on shorting.)
Shiller explains that in using such a strategy as a means of market, not government, control: "...then any skeptic anywhere in the world could, through his or her actions in the marketplace, act to reduce a speculative bubble in a city, for such a bubble represents a profit opportunity for short sellers. If the market were widely watched, then home builders would see the projected price declines and scale back their own activities, thus averting huge construction booms such as the one we have recently witnessed in the United States."
But Leonard rightly cautions: "Shiller's proposal is a lightning rod precisely because many observers have pinpointed innovative derivative markets as one of the causes of the subprime debacle. Yet [he] proposes a package of new, state-of-the-art financial products as part of the solution." I don't entirely agree with Shiller's idea either. It's too simplistic. But at least it might help stimulate other long-overdue, outside-the-box solutions to avert such calamity in the future, or at least stop the hemorrhaging sooner. And in our interdependent global economy, shouldn't new safeguards be designed in coordination with other nations' financial markets as well, in order to be truly effective?
And what about solutions to shore up the failures of mainstream American journalism? To serve the public interest and the public trust against widespread corruption and abuses of power AND to empower the public to embrace new possibilities for enlightened, responsible change? Is there a way to funnel smarter, more conscientious reporters and editors into the ranks? Journalists who understand the vital connections between history, politics, national and foreign policy, economics and business, health and medicine, science and technology, the natural environment, education, and news and entertainment media -- so they have the wherewithal to see the tidal waves coming long before they crash and before innovation opportunities pass us by? Well, yeah, "It's called smart journalism, STUPID!" Or, should I say, "Dude, do you do InJo?"
- Misako M.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Science Debacle or Debate?
The two presidential hopefuls were given questions regarding science and technology, in what seems to be a step in the right direction, i.e. moving away from trash-talking to issue-talking.
The Los Angeles Times reports that both candidates were asked 14 questions devised by university presidents, Nobel laureates and government officials. The article highlights a few questions but the full answers are on Science Debate 2008.
One of the most interesting questions had to do with the overall ranking of America’s students in math and science. Out of 30 wealthy nations, we rank 17th in science and 24th in math. Both candidates would tackle this problem differently.
Much of McCain’s plan is focused towards colleges and universities. But teaching the fundamentals of math and science start way before higher education. “Invigorating our community college system is a good place to start.…I have long supported grants for educational instruction in digital and wireless technologies, targeted to minorities and low-income students who may not otherwise be exposed to these fields.” This may sound great but it may also sound like tracking. Not to mention, many of these jobs are already across seas.
Obama plans to step up the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) program as well as hiring teachers that have studied the fields they teach. However, he hits on the obvious. “We cannot strengthen STEM education without addressing the broader challenges of improving American education and other priority issues.” But there is hope “In addition to a focus on high quality teachers, my comprehensive plan addresses the needs of our most at-risk children, focuses on strong school leaders, and enlists parent and community support.” OK, now we are getting somewhere.
Both were addressed on the issue of National Security and technology. Obama outlines a plan that is a little vague but more specific than McCain’s. McCain sites the technology of “Internet, email, GPS, Teflon.” I’m not mocking those examples, but I thought he would for sure include the American invention “sharks with laser beams.” Oh wait, that wasn’t us.
Obama plans to create a Chief Technology Officer and McCain will also hire a Science Adviser. Both are steps in the right direction, I just believe one more than the other. Just a little.
And on to health care…. We can all guess where both candidates stand on this issue. I like Obama’s response: “It’s wrong that America’s health care system works better for insurance and drug companies than it does for average Americans, who face skyrocketing health care costs”
McCain: “By promoting research and development of new treatment models, promoting wellness, investing in technology and empowering Americans with better information on quality, we can make health care more affordable.” Yeah affordable health care…wait how am I going to afford it?
--Erin
The Los Angeles Times reports that both candidates were asked 14 questions devised by university presidents, Nobel laureates and government officials. The article highlights a few questions but the full answers are on Science Debate 2008.
One of the most interesting questions had to do with the overall ranking of America’s students in math and science. Out of 30 wealthy nations, we rank 17th in science and 24th in math. Both candidates would tackle this problem differently.
Much of McCain’s plan is focused towards colleges and universities. But teaching the fundamentals of math and science start way before higher education. “Invigorating our community college system is a good place to start.…I have long supported grants for educational instruction in digital and wireless technologies, targeted to minorities and low-income students who may not otherwise be exposed to these fields.” This may sound great but it may also sound like tracking. Not to mention, many of these jobs are already across seas.
Obama plans to step up the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) program as well as hiring teachers that have studied the fields they teach. However, he hits on the obvious. “We cannot strengthen STEM education without addressing the broader challenges of improving American education and other priority issues.” But there is hope “In addition to a focus on high quality teachers, my comprehensive plan addresses the needs of our most at-risk children, focuses on strong school leaders, and enlists parent and community support.” OK, now we are getting somewhere.
Both were addressed on the issue of National Security and technology. Obama outlines a plan that is a little vague but more specific than McCain’s. McCain sites the technology of “Internet, email, GPS, Teflon.” I’m not mocking those examples, but I thought he would for sure include the American invention “sharks with laser beams.” Oh wait, that wasn’t us.
Obama plans to create a Chief Technology Officer and McCain will also hire a Science Adviser. Both are steps in the right direction, I just believe one more than the other. Just a little.
And on to health care…. We can all guess where both candidates stand on this issue. I like Obama’s response: “It’s wrong that America’s health care system works better for insurance and drug companies than it does for average Americans, who face skyrocketing health care costs”
McCain: “By promoting research and development of new treatment models, promoting wellness, investing in technology and empowering Americans with better information on quality, we can make health care more affordable.” Yeah affordable health care…wait how am I going to afford it?
--Erin
Product Placement in Songs
Product placement is something we all a victim to everyday. When we watch American Idol we see the Coca-Cola cups they drink out of, every character on Gossip Girl has a Verizon Wireless phone, and we see countless billboards and ads every minute of everyday no matter what we are doing, even just listening to our favorite music.
According to an article on Wired by Eliot Van Buskirk, companies are paying artists to sing about certain brands in their music. A e-mail from Paul Kluger of the Kluger Agency, which performs such product placements, was mistakenly sent to Jeff Crouse of the Anti-Advertising Agency and Double Happiness Jeans, and provided a glimpse into how song lyric product placement really happens.
According to an article on Wired by Eliot Van Buskirk, companies are paying artists to sing about certain brands in their music. A e-mail from Paul Kluger of the Kluger Agency, which performs such product placements, was mistakenly sent to Jeff Crouse of the Anti-Advertising Agency and Double Happiness Jeans, and provided a glimpse into how song lyric product placement really happens.
"I'm writing because we feel you may be a good company to participate in a brand integration campaign within the actual lyrics of one of the worlds most famous recording artists upcoming song/album," begins the opening e-mail in the eventual salvo between the two.
The email went on to say that for the right price Double Happiness Jeans would be mentioned in an upcoming Pussycat Dolls song. This makes me think of every song that mentions a brand in it and makes me curious if they paid for that free advertisement... the Black Eyed Peas mentioning "Seven Jeans, True Religions," and countless more. Crouse posted the email onto his blog and is refusing to take it down so of course attorneys are now involved.
I though Van Buskirk ended the article perfectly saying, "I appreciate that artists need to embrace a variety of revenue opportunities to make it today, but selling song lyrics seems to go over the line -- assuming there's still such a thing as selling out."
Check out the article at http://blog.wired.com/music/2008/09/products-placed.html and think twice when you hear your fav new brand mentioned in the hottest new Top40 song.
- Jessica I.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
McCain-Palin@Yahoo.com
Technology has to be used quickly and efficiently by both Democratic and Republican parties to make sure there message get out first. “Speed Kills.”-War Room
September 18th Hackers broke into the Yahoo! e-mail account that Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin used for official business as Alaska's governor. This reveled personal messages she has received since John McCain selected her as his running mate. Leaked by the Associated Press, Palin herself used "gov.sarah" in one of her e-mail addresses, but the hackers targeted her "gov.palin" account.
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1884558/6206369 In a Yahoo! news video McCain explained he is computer illiterate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ2I0t_Twk0 Shorty after an Ad put out by the Obama campaign criticized presidential candidate John McCain lack of e-mail use. After the Ad aired the McCain team rebutted by explaining he is unable to type because of war injuries . The Los Angeles Times blog “Oops, Obama ad mocks McCain's inability to send e-mail. Trouble is, he can't due to tortured fingers,” was broken apart by citizen journalist. The citizens said that there are millions of handicapped people unable to type that have software to help add.
Ok, so the picture has nothing to do with either of these stories, I just needed an excuse to put it in. Palin uses the same free email account as the average Joe. McCain is unable to use an e-mail at all and the Obama campaign with the help of technology loves every minute of it. Will we ever focus on the real issues?
-ADAM M.
UC Irvine Holds Cool High-Tech Talks
HumaniTech is a program at UCI, which hosts illuminating exhibits, workshops, and panel discussions among faculty and graduate students about the interdisciplinary incorporation and implementation of technology -- with the humanities -- in teaching and research.
The HumaniTech website notes that: "The collaborative efforts of Humanities scholars and computer programmers has led to cutting-edge resources such as digital archives, interactive mapping systems, new technologies in language instruction, cultural studies -- with the potential to redefine the future of Humanities research." Moreover, HumaniTech says:
Unless mistaken, I think the HumaniTech lecture series is open to the public -- for free. Videos of past events are often posted to their website as well. The two upcoming conferences below sound especially relevant to our class:
"Public Spheres, Blogospheres" (Oct. 24, 2008)
The website notes that this "conference will feature conversations among important contemporary bloggers in the U.S. political and academic scene, focusing on the evolution of democracy and democratic participation in a digital age."
"The Future of Writing" (Nov. 6-7, 2008)
The website notes that this conference will "explore how the new communications technologies, particularly the Internet, are challenging previous conceptions of what 'writing' is." Questions to be discussed: "How are new communications technologies changing the way people 'compose,' 'write,' and 'author'? How do collaborative writing spaces and social networking challenge the concepts of 'text' and 'author'? And how are emerging emphases on visual literacies shifting what we think of as writing?"
http://www.humanities.uci.edu/humanitech/index.php
- Misako M.
The HumaniTech website notes that: "The collaborative efforts of Humanities scholars and computer programmers has led to cutting-edge resources such as digital archives, interactive mapping systems, new technologies in language instruction, cultural studies -- with the potential to redefine the future of Humanities research." Moreover, HumaniTech says:
“We see that not only do technology and the humanities mix, but, in the present digital culture, one may not be able to survive without the other.”
Unless mistaken, I think the HumaniTech lecture series is open to the public -- for free. Videos of past events are often posted to their website as well. The two upcoming conferences below sound especially relevant to our class:
"Public Spheres, Blogospheres" (Oct. 24, 2008)
The website notes that this "conference will feature conversations among important contemporary bloggers in the U.S. political and academic scene, focusing on the evolution of democracy and democratic participation in a digital age."
"The Future of Writing" (Nov. 6-7, 2008)
The website notes that this conference will "explore how the new communications technologies, particularly the Internet, are challenging previous conceptions of what 'writing' is." Questions to be discussed: "How are new communications technologies changing the way people 'compose,' 'write,' and 'author'? How do collaborative writing spaces and social networking challenge the concepts of 'text' and 'author'? And how are emerging emphases on visual literacies shifting what we think of as writing?"
http://www.humanities.uci.edu/humanitech/index.php
- Misako M.
A Job Too Big for Big Brother
, the question of how to rate the truthfulness of information on the Web is raised. With the best of intentions, Tim Berners-Lee, "the author of the web's foundation," has revived the idea of an online ratings system, one which would help readers/viewers distinguish between factual and false content on the Web.
http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/Does_the_Web_Need_a__Ministry_of_Truth__
But, as Gilbertson cautions, such an idea, in the wrong hands, recalls the dangers of centralized, authoritarian information-control in George Orwell's classic dystopian novel, 1984. And that, at the least threatening, such a system would be downright messy and impractical. Because -- truth being a moving target -- who is to say what truth is?
With all kinds of information from heck-knows-who available in cyberspace, do you think the fundamental standards of journalism are even more greatly valued today when it comes to certain online content? I.e., accuracy, fairness, balance, etc. If so, do you think such standards will encourage a higher level of expectation for accuracy among online audiences?
Do you think it's too much work to actively decide for yourself what is factual on the web, where you'd prefer to have someone else, a web community, or institution decide that for you? Or do you think a balanced, enlightened education and the development of independent "critical thinking" skills are your best guard against censorship and deception? And what might this mean when many people don't have the luxury of such an education?
A hypothetical scenario: what if a compelling, credible-sounding lie was posted on the Web about one of the two presidential candidates, and where that lie went "viral" just two days before the general election, and with many in the electorate believing that lie to be truthful? The candidate would have little time to effectively rebut the falsehood, and the final outcome of the election could be swayed.
Another extreme example is the infamous Orson Welles "War of the Worlds" radio hoax back in 1938, and the national hysteria it caused. How could the online "community" today help train audience expectations to recognize the difference between fact and fiction? And to what extent might we ourselves be contributing to the dumbing-down of the Web and online audiences?
Does all this suggest a new kind of "digital divide"? One where access to the Web is not the problem, but where online divisions reflect stark socio-economic differences that some might wish to exploit for their own agenda?
Or is none of this even a legitimate or new concern, with online audiences being more savvy than that, and all things to work themselves out in the wash?
Whatever your opinion, here's to the wool not being pulled over your eyes!
- Misako M.
http://www.webmonkey.com/blog/Does_the_Web_Need_a__Ministry_of_Truth__
But, as Gilbertson cautions, such an idea, in the wrong hands, recalls the dangers of centralized, authoritarian information-control in George Orwell's classic dystopian novel, 1984. And that, at the least threatening, such a system would be downright messy and impractical. Because -- truth being a moving target -- who is to say what truth is?
With all kinds of information from heck-knows-who available in cyberspace, do you think the fundamental standards of journalism are even more greatly valued today when it comes to certain online content? I.e., accuracy, fairness, balance, etc. If so, do you think such standards will encourage a higher level of expectation for accuracy among online audiences?
Do you think it's too much work to actively decide for yourself what is factual on the web, where you'd prefer to have someone else, a web community, or institution decide that for you? Or do you think a balanced, enlightened education and the development of independent "critical thinking" skills are your best guard against censorship and deception? And what might this mean when many people don't have the luxury of such an education?
A hypothetical scenario: what if a compelling, credible-sounding lie was posted on the Web about one of the two presidential candidates, and where that lie went "viral" just two days before the general election, and with many in the electorate believing that lie to be truthful? The candidate would have little time to effectively rebut the falsehood, and the final outcome of the election could be swayed.
Another extreme example is the infamous Orson Welles "War of the Worlds" radio hoax back in 1938, and the national hysteria it caused. How could the online "community" today help train audience expectations to recognize the difference between fact and fiction? And to what extent might we ourselves be contributing to the dumbing-down of the Web and online audiences?
Does all this suggest a new kind of "digital divide"? One where access to the Web is not the problem, but where online divisions reflect stark socio-economic differences that some might wish to exploit for their own agenda?
Or is none of this even a legitimate or new concern, with online audiences being more savvy than that, and all things to work themselves out in the wash?
Whatever your opinion, here's to the wool not being pulled over your eyes!
Wii Wizardry on a Dime (or Two)
Short on mullah but want to impress your friends? Your boss? That hunk or hottie down the hall? And if you're a teacher, your students and fellow faculty? Then meet Johnny Chung Lee: Nintendo Wii expert and tech wizard researcher at Carnegie Mellon University -- and enter a tech wonderland that's way too much fun (and affordable) to ignore.
As his rocket rise to YouTube stardom attests, Lee's your ideal model geek: someone who thinks about technology and innovation with a way-cool social conscience. A conscience high on high-tech toys, that is. For, in Lee's innovative hands, high-tech need not be exclusive or high-cost.
As the wonderful website "TED" (Technology, Entertainment, Design) explains: "Building sophisticated educational tools out of cheap parts, Johnny Lee demos his cool Wii Remote hacks, which turn the $40 video game controller into a digital whiteboard, a touchscreen and a head-mounted 3-D viewer."
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/johnny_lee_demos_wii_remote_hacks.html
Lee wants to make applications for hands-on tech tools available and affordable to everyone, and thus help bridge the "digital divide" between the people of privileged and developing countries across the globe. To Lee, it's all of us or none.
With that ethic in mind, Lee's fun with creativity is an inspiration. Check out the YouTube videos below, and let your mind be blown. The implications are enormous, and the possibilities limited only by your enthusiasm and excitement. Consider how many different ways his ideas can be applied across diverse areas and fields (academic, professional, commercial, scientific, governmental, non-profit, etc.). It's enough to make you want to switch your major to engineering and help save the world, one cool and thoughtful innovation at a time. But, as "Innovation Journalists," we can do the same and more!
So, like Lee, see the connections across the disciplines, and across national boundaries and cultures. Make cool stuff happen! You just might become one of the architects of an entirely new wave of journalism -- one that puts the people in the driver seat of innovation and democracy, pooling more cool ideas together than we could ever dream alone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhSR_6-Y5Kg&feature=user
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/
- Misako M.
As his rocket rise to YouTube stardom attests, Lee's your ideal model geek: someone who thinks about technology and innovation with a way-cool social conscience. A conscience high on high-tech toys, that is. For, in Lee's innovative hands, high-tech need not be exclusive or high-cost.
As the wonderful website "TED" (Technology, Entertainment, Design) explains: "Building sophisticated educational tools out of cheap parts, Johnny Lee demos his cool Wii Remote hacks, which turn the $40 video game controller into a digital whiteboard, a touchscreen and a head-mounted 3-D viewer."
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/johnny_lee_demos_wii_remote_hacks.html
Lee wants to make applications for hands-on tech tools available and affordable to everyone, and thus help bridge the "digital divide" between the people of privileged and developing countries across the globe. To Lee, it's all of us or none.
With that ethic in mind, Lee's fun with creativity is an inspiration. Check out the YouTube videos below, and let your mind be blown. The implications are enormous, and the possibilities limited only by your enthusiasm and excitement. Consider how many different ways his ideas can be applied across diverse areas and fields (academic, professional, commercial, scientific, governmental, non-profit, etc.). It's enough to make you want to switch your major to engineering and help save the world, one cool and thoughtful innovation at a time. But, as "Innovation Journalists," we can do the same and more!
So, like Lee, see the connections across the disciplines, and across national boundaries and cultures. Make cool stuff happen! You just might become one of the architects of an entirely new wave of journalism -- one that puts the people in the driver seat of innovation and democracy, pooling more cool ideas together than we could ever dream alone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jd3-eiid-Uw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhSR_6-Y5Kg&feature=user
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/
- Misako M.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Not exactly a "Best Buy"
Okay, this is just stupid... Yeah, I said stupid, deal with it.
Amid all the financial meltdown hitting Wall Street Monday, one company has done pretty well for itself: Napster. Best Buy just dropped $121 million for the company, for the current incarnation of what once was the most disruptive force in music.
I'm not really sure which is more surprising -- that Napster still exists or that even a stodgy company like Best Buy would think to buy it.
This is a company that has a paltry 700,000 subscribers, has 140 employees, and by it's own admission.lost $16.5 million last year. (To be fair, the year before, it lost $36.8 million.) By comparison among subscription-based services, Yahoo/Rhapsody has nearly 3 million subscribers.
Meanwhile, as MacWorld's Philip Michaels points out, Apple has become king of the hill. Not just in digital music but in all retail music, period.
A little less than four years ago, I sat in a hotel ballroom just outside Hollywood listening to a steady parade of record executives and online retailers predict doom -- or at least, short-lived success -- for Apple's a la carte approach to selling music. Subscription services -- that was where things were at, speakers at the 2004 Music 2.0 conference agreed, and Apple could either get on board or watch helplessly as its spot as the No. 1 online music retailer was usurped by subscription-based upstarts.Well, Apple has more or less stuck to its 99-cent-per-track worldview. And now it’s the top music retailer in the U.S., topping even Wal-Mart. So obviously, not having a subscription-based service has been disastrous for Apple -- so long as "disastrous" also means "financially remunerative."
Of course, this Napster isn't the same as the one of old, the one that got popular just as I got to college. You know, the one that rocked and shocked the music and tech worlds by releasing the first majorly rambunctious music-sharing peer-to-peer software by the same name. Not surprisingly, it got shut down in various lawsuits, ending conclusively in 2001.
Meanwhile, Shawn Fanning (the man from whence the Napster moniker originated), after a failed attempt at another legal music right clearinghouse company, Snocap, is now busy at work on another company, Rupture. A complete departure from the music world, Rupture is basically a social networking site for video games across all platforms.
Maybe getting out of the music business is the smart move after all. Either way, Shawn can't stay away from social networking, but can any of us?
--Roger
Free Music?
It seems that Myspace has been in negotiations with a few major music labels, and they are now offering free music.
As of this September, the Myspace Music feature will be new and improved. Myspace is planning on offering free music from any artist that you want that is part of Universal, SonyBMG, and Warner music, which according to CNN.com comprises about 77% of all the music that is out there now.
So what does this mean for some companies such as Amazon and other programs that require you to pay for music? We are not sure yet, but Myspace is hoping to get a lot of new customers because of this feature.
"Think about why people go to a music service," says Chris DeWolfe, CEO of Myspace. " They go to iTunes because they just want to get the songs and get out. Myspace is different. It's like going to your friend's house, and they have cool music playing in the background that makes the experience that much better."
The newest feature to Myspace music is that now, you can visit the musicians Myspace page, click the song that you like and you can create your own playlist on your page, and get the entire catalog of that artist if you'd like.
The only thing that Myspace needs to do in order to provide this free music service? Sell some ads. DeWolfe promises that Myspace music will have no problem selling as many ads as they need to stay alive.
It will be interesting to see what happens!
Albina A
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Google phone?
In the BITS section of the New York Times, a reporter explained that the T-Mobile will present it's phone based on Google's Android software on Sept. 23 in New York at a press conference.
At the press conference they will unveil it's pricing, release date and more information having to do with the software and phone plans.
They are already saying it's competitors are the iPhone and BlackBerry. How much will Google make off of this I wonder? I know that the BlackBerry internet charges are somewhat high, averaging about $30...?
Lauren D.
Best Buy is trying to keep up with Apple
Consumer electronics retailer Best Buy said Monday it will acquire online music-sharing site Napster for around $126.8 million in cash. This move will to boost its digital media capabilities. Best Buy will begin a tender offer for all outstanding Napster shares for $2.65 per share, representing a 95 percent premium to the stock's closing price Friday of $1.36 per share. Napster had about 47.9 million shares outstanding as of June 30, implying a price of $126.8 million. In a statement, Best Buy valued the deal at $121 million — or $54 million after netting about $67 million in Napster's cash and short-term investments. The takeover is expected to close in the fourth quarter. The deal includes Napster's 700,000 subscribers, its Web-based customer-service platform and mobile capabilities.
I have always used ITunes it will be interesting to see if Best Buy purchasing Napster will take away business from ITunes.
- Carly Youngren
- Carly Youngren
Monday, September 15, 2008
Movies of the Future
Movies of the future has already begun as more 3-D movies are being released year after year. What was first an attraction people are lucky enough to enjoy is now being developed into a norm for the up coming years in movie theaters.
Jeffrey Katzenburg, CEO of Dreamworks, said 3-D movies are "greatest innovation to occur in the movie business in 70 years." Many can agree with him that over the past century, the technology making motion picture films has advanced so quickly, it is almost an inconceivable.
In the future, 35mm film reels will ultimately disappear as computers take over motion picture showings of a more concise frames and images.
Currently in some theaters, audiences have experienced the newest glasses for 3-D movies. Unlike the 3-D glasses from the past, these new inventions by RealD look just like regular glasses, sleek and stylish. Michael Lewis, CEO of RealD says comparing old 3-D movies to the current innovation is like "comparing the space shuttle with the Wright brothers."
Technology will only advance and MG Siegler of "Venture Beat" believe 3-D glasses will not even be needed in 10 years to watch a 3-D film.
The future of movies and movie theaters will be taking over sooner than later. Say goodbye to the present "good old movies" and hello to an incredible experience.
- Ching
Halo Might Actually Kill You
So apparently, if you can play video games, you can play war games... but actually kill people. Raytheon, a high-tech defense contractor, exhibited a system recently at an air show in Britain. They dub this the "universal control system," and it is one of many new advents in drone warfare. With the push for more drone pilots to go into combat in times of war, it becomes evident that the military wants to diminish risk to pilots, but also use the best technology to accomplish the task of killing people.
Here is the scary part. The technology that is currently used to pilot drone planes is not reliable and the planes tend to crash, or miss the target. This is attributed in large part to the fact that the systems are not user friendly. Slate.com explains in the article entitled "War is Halo," that Raytheon looked at this mess and realized that civilian gamers had better equipment. So... they hired game developers from playstation and xbox to redesign drone operation, to suit military needs. Raytheon has also realized that young people who are used to these controls are better candidates to operate them. they have better hand eye cordination, and understand the process of virtual war games like Halo and America's Army.
So to paint the picture more clearly, essentially we could see adolescents sitting in an air conditioned rooms in front of 360 degree screens with a joystick or a game controller. They are playing a game where they are tasked to fly into enemy territory, bomb a certain area, and safely land the aircraft at a specified location. The only problem is that they see it as a new high score in a virtual environment, but the potential is that they might actually be killing real people.
There are some serious implications to this tech., both positive and negative. On one hand, we need to realize that war will exist no matter what we do, at least in the current state of world affairs. So with this in mind, it is preferable to use drones over actual pilots to avoid casualties. On the other hand, we might be training young people to be completely desensitized to the death of actual people. This lack of sensitivity to people of other cultures in no way leads to better global relations, and further reinforces one nations power and dominance over another.
This may be innovation for the sake of keeping American's safe, but it may also be innovation for the sake of forcing xenophobia down the throats of young people. Say what you want about how violence in video games effects children's development, but we need to consider what violence in video games might mean for the development of the global community.
-Roger
Sunday, September 14, 2008
Watchful eye or harmful eye?
Your honor, I would like to call my next witness… the defendant’s iPhone!
Everything you do on your new iPhone is being stored as a screenshot, which can later be used against you in a court of law.
“When an iPhone user taps the Home button, the window of the application you have opened shrinks and disappears. In order to create that shrinking effect, the iPhone snaps a screenshot” said Jonathan Zdziarski, a iPhone hacker and data-forensics expert.
After the image has been taken it leaves an imprint of data which is never entirely deleted, leaving hackers with too much information.
"There's no way to prevent it," said Zdziarski during a webcast. "I'm kind of divided on it. I hope Apple fixes it because it's a significant privacy leak, but at the same time it's been useful for investigating criminals."
Links:
"IPhone Takes Screenshots of Everything You Do" By Brian X. Chen
http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/09/hacker-says-sec.html
-Monica Sullivan
Everything you do on your new iPhone is being stored as a screenshot, which can later be used against you in a court of law.
“When an iPhone user taps the Home button, the window of the application you have opened shrinks and disappears. In order to create that shrinking effect, the iPhone snaps a screenshot” said Jonathan Zdziarski, a iPhone hacker and data-forensics expert.
After the image has been taken it leaves an imprint of data which is never entirely deleted, leaving hackers with too much information.
"There's no way to prevent it," said Zdziarski during a webcast. "I'm kind of divided on it. I hope Apple fixes it because it's a significant privacy leak, but at the same time it's been useful for investigating criminals."
Links:
"IPhone Takes Screenshots of Everything You Do" By Brian X. Chen
http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2008/09/hacker-says-sec.html
-Monica Sullivan
Swimming robots help in gaining knowledge of the seafloor.
Robots are the new explorers of the big wet blue. According to a article from MSNBC, robots have been filling oceanographic gaps of knowledge of the seafloor. One of the newest robots described is Sentry which looks like “a miniature version of the starship Enterprise from Star Trek” and “ocean sunfish.”
This new robot, Sentry, is twice as fast compared to the old models. Sentry has a good combination of swimming and hovering prowess that aided in mapping the seafloor off the coast of Oregon.
The goal for the Oceans Observatories Initiative is to establish a sensor network in the ocean from Juan de Fuca tectonic plate around the Pacific Northwest coastline. The sensor network would have fiber-optic cables that would help monitor marine life, chemical reactions, tsunamis, earthquakes, hydrothermal vents and underwater volcanoes.
Link:
“Submersible robots explore the ocean’s depths” By Bryn Nelson
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26462687/
-Monica Sullivan
This new robot, Sentry, is twice as fast compared to the old models. Sentry has a good combination of swimming and hovering prowess that aided in mapping the seafloor off the coast of Oregon.
The goal for the Oceans Observatories Initiative is to establish a sensor network in the ocean from Juan de Fuca tectonic plate around the Pacific Northwest coastline. The sensor network would have fiber-optic cables that would help monitor marine life, chemical reactions, tsunamis, earthquakes, hydrothermal vents and underwater volcanoes.
Link:
“Submersible robots explore the ocean’s depths” By Bryn Nelson
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26462687/
-Monica Sullivan
Green is going mainstream II (The Milk Jug)
A few months ago, Wal-Mart and Costco debuted a brand new design to an old product. The familiar milk jug has been redesigned to make it easier to transport and store; effectively cutting cost and reducing its carbon-footprint.
The new design, however, may take some time to get used to. The New York Times reported that many consumers find the new jugs harder to pour:
“I hate it,” said Lisa DeHoff, a cafe owner shopping in a Sam’s Club here.
“It spills everywhere,” said Amy Wise, a homemaker.
“It’s very hard for kids to pour,” said Lee Morris, who was shopping for her grandchildren.
Though the new jug may frustrate milk-drinkers, retailers will continue to push the cost-cutting redesign.
Per cubic foot, the new jugs can transport 50% more milk than with the previous design. With more milk being carried per load, delivery trucks will make far less trips reducing the amount of fuel needed.
So what?
The benefits to retailers and producers is obvious, but why should anyone else care?
Besides the fact that the new jugs can greatly reduce the amount of carbon emissions during its process, milk will be cheaper! If saving the environment does not interest you, the price drop certainly will.
The new jugs also eliminate the need for crates which required several trips to stores as well as labor and water to clean.
The elimination of the crates cuts the amount of time needed by producers. According to the New York Times article, milk from cows can reach stores the same afternoon.
The same great milk that you've grown up with is fresher and cheaper. I think you can deal with the square jug.
LINK: Solution, or Mess? The New York Times
-Matt Mesa
Green is going mainstream
What was once seen as unnecessary was buying organic products with higher price markings than the same product made from different materials. As time went on, consumers were told by scientists about the importance of using all products with natural materials.
Typical household and personal use products have been targeted to go organic. Shampoo, soap, lotion, face wash, baby powder, laundry detergents are some examples of products that were once used daily without concerns until consumers were told of the toxic chemicals used to make these products.
Not only is it detrimental to the environment as these products get disposed down the drain, into the ocean, as toxic waste sits in our ocean floor, but hazardous to the health of those who uses these products on their skins.
Today, companies are eager to share their products with consumers as they proudly advertise themselves as going green. Traces of toxic contents in products are slowly diminishing as coconut oil, lavander and green tea are main ingredients in skin care products.
-Ching C.
Typical household and personal use products have been targeted to go organic. Shampoo, soap, lotion, face wash, baby powder, laundry detergents are some examples of products that were once used daily without concerns until consumers were told of the toxic chemicals used to make these products.
Not only is it detrimental to the environment as these products get disposed down the drain, into the ocean, as toxic waste sits in our ocean floor, but hazardous to the health of those who uses these products on their skins.
Today, companies are eager to share their products with consumers as they proudly advertise themselves as going green. Traces of toxic contents in products are slowly diminishing as coconut oil, lavander and green tea are main ingredients in skin care products.
-Ching C.
Friday, September 12, 2008
Kind of like the 'Real World'...
In an article in NY Times, Stuart Elliott talks about the comparison of the show 'Real World' and a new show coming out.
'Engine Room' is a reality show series where 16 contestants are divided into four teams and are to produce digital art using PCs, work stations, monitors and other products sold by Hewlett-Packard. The series is to run for seven weeks and at the end one team will win prizes that include $400,000 and program the giant MTV screen in Times Square for one night.
It certainly has a lot to do with advertising but a marketable way to show students putting their knowledge of the digital age to good use and be rewarded for it.
Lauren D.
Blogger Sarah Palin?
In an article on September 11, Wired discovers the "many faces of Sarah Palin online." In her spare time, the Republican vice presidential nominee blogs, tweets and produces YouTube videos ... wait how could the mother of 5 have extra time for that? Since John McCain announced the governor of Alaska as his running mate, Sarah Palin parodies have been popping up on the Internet more frequently. There are YouTube videos where "Palin" raps, blogs with frequent misspellings, and tweets about her ex-boyfriends and Cindy McCain.
These parodies are actually getting thousands of hits and have people checking them daily. The "FakeSarahPalin" Twitter site has almost 3,000 followers and the "Palindrome" blog has dozens of in-bound links. A recent post raising buzz is the "Pre-Interview Worksheet" of suggested themes to discuss for her interview with Charles Gibson that was on Thursday night. Also, the YouTube impersonator is 27-year-old New Yorker, Sara Benincasa, who's most popular vlog was posted on Labor Day receiving 163,000 views, and who's videos have been featured on CNN. Benincasa says "she chose to parody Palin because she finds McCain's choice of a vice president 'absurd' and 'disturbing.'"
How is the Internet in this election affecting this campaign? These parodies have been noted by some columnists as having a "sneering" tone of liberal commentators, so could these parodies be actually helping the side that they are trying to criticize? With no censorship on the Internet, nominees have no regulation of these vlogs and posts, which could be influencing thousands of citizens' political opinions.
-- Jessica I.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Innovation through young minds
As a growing trend, the importance of being eco-friendly continues to remind people to use and reuse to save the environment.
Today, not only are adults aware of the benefits of being eco-friendly, children of America have taken on the responsibility of saving the environment. As reported in the LA Times, environmental groups are finding a rise in youth participation. Children are volunteering to clean our beach shores, recycling daily, trying to reuse what they already have urging others to conserve energy with them. Children understand the importance of a simple lifestyle by using nature's best to prevent toxicans and pollution to get into our air.
"This generation of kids seems to be hard-wired for environmental awareness," Leah Schmalz,the group's legislative and legal affairs director, told LA Times, as the growing number of children are contributing to learning and saving the environment. It is impressive to see the decisions children make on their own and the time they are taking out to be a part of the eco-friendly movement.
-Ching C.
Today, not only are adults aware of the benefits of being eco-friendly, children of America have taken on the responsibility of saving the environment. As reported in the LA Times, environmental groups are finding a rise in youth participation. Children are volunteering to clean our beach shores, recycling daily, trying to reuse what they already have urging others to conserve energy with them. Children understand the importance of a simple lifestyle by using nature's best to prevent toxicans and pollution to get into our air.
"This generation of kids seems to be hard-wired for environmental awareness," Leah Schmalz,the group's legislative and legal affairs director, told LA Times, as the growing number of children are contributing to learning and saving the environment. It is impressive to see the decisions children make on their own and the time they are taking out to be a part of the eco-friendly movement.
-Ching C.
"New Facebook Design is being Forced Upon Customers"
Just recently Mark Zuckerberg, 24 years-old and the creator of Facebook, just realized that after 4 1/2 years of having Facebook, it is very difficult to change the program without causing a huge uproar.
Ever since Zuckerberg unveiled the new Facebook design 7 weeks ago, to get people used to the new design, there are have been many groups that have formed rioting against the new facebook design and Zuckerberg is trying to handle the situation.
As of today, Wednesday, September 10, 2008, over 100 million customers of Facebook will need to start using the new Facebook design whether they like it or not, and we will see how this ends up for Zuckerberg. Since it was unveiled over 40 million have been trying the new Facebook and 30 million are viewing it as a positive thing and have not reverted back to the old Facebook.
"Any change can be a big deal to our users because this is how they connect with their family and friends," said Zuckberg. Most people are saying that they will not stop using facebook because it is still the best social networking out there. It will be interesting to see how this story pans out.
Albina A
"Better Education Through Innovation"
In an opinion article in LATIMES.com, three prominent figures speak on how innovation is needed within the classrooms to better education in our country. Without proper education, future journalists and students will not be updated with the latest innovations. This is due to the failure of government officials and school board officials.
"Today, the shame of our cities isn't bubonic plague; it's ignorance. In our urban areas, only one child in five is proficient in reading. On international tests, we rank behind the Czech Republic and Latvia; our high school graduation rate barely makes the top 20 worldwide."
"Today, the shame of our cities isn't bubonic plague; it's ignorance. In our urban areas, only one child in five is proficient in reading. On international tests, we rank behind the Czech Republic and Latvia; our high school graduation rate barely makes the top 20 worldwide."
As one of the strongest countries in the world, I am pretty sure that public officials can spend more money in schools for innovating our teachers and students.
-Nina Pak
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-mitchell31-2008aug31,0,543893.story
Full link to the article.
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
More money for InJo Research
In an article posted on siliconvalleywatcher.com by Tom Foremski he talks about how Finland has given a large sum on money to the research of Innovation Journalism.
"Innovation journalism is a concept that has been popularized by David Nordfors, who leads the Innovation Journalism program at Stanford university. The subject just received a big boost from the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation with the award of 900.000 euro ($1.31 million) research grant to a Finnish research consortium that will work the innovation program at Stanford."
<3 Carly Youngren
Monday, September 8, 2008
Google posting more articles online
In an article in the NY Times, it says that Google has begun scanning microfilm from old newspapers' archives so they can put them online and people can search and find these articles using keywords. They can view articles right as they appeared originally in the print of those newspapers. It'll be easier for people who are researching or looking for older news to connect to a newer event because they can access those articles right online.
Marissa Mayer, vice president for search products and user experience at Google, said in the article that it will be good for newspapers because they are bringing online an old generation of contributions from journalists and then as well, widening the reader base of news archives.
--Lauren D.
Fannie Mae and Freddie who?
We journalism students are glutens for punishment. Not only do we read the newspaper for classes, but we would probably would read it on our own. However, I must admit that when it comes to most subjects I only know a little bit of everything (OK, not everything).
But when it comes to knowing the ins and outs of government we could all use a little educating.
For example, when I heard on Sunday that the government would be bailing out, yet another, mortgage company I was not sure how to put it all into perspective. I'm aware that the government has already has some involvement in both entities, but I cant say there is much more I understand about the issue.
It is for this simple reason that we go to online journalism sources. Technology has made it ridiculously easy to find information while it is still happening.
Take this Los Angeles Times Q&A that breaks down what Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are and how the governments response will affect us. In a very concise, direct wording the article takes much of the confusion out of understanding the government-sponsored corporations.
So I continued on with the LA Times to see if whether the story is near the top of the website.
Hmm, not so much.
At the 3:45 on Monday, people were still more interested in Palin's style (for like the 4th day in a row) and dogs that can surf.
And while the story has gone from headlines to second page news in less than 24 hours, international news has picked up where much of the mainstream media has left off. The Independent reports how this will not only affect smaller banks, but also the international banking system. The story offers and box filled with several related articles as well.
And while I don't wish the U.S. to slide any deeper in the hole, the need for greater government transparency and public education is alarming. Now theres a story for the media?
Did I mention the "severance package" the former CEOs will be given? CEO Watch reports 23 million.
--Erin M.
But when it comes to knowing the ins and outs of government we could all use a little educating.
For example, when I heard on Sunday that the government would be bailing out, yet another, mortgage company I was not sure how to put it all into perspective. I'm aware that the government has already has some involvement in both entities, but I cant say there is much more I understand about the issue.
It is for this simple reason that we go to online journalism sources. Technology has made it ridiculously easy to find information while it is still happening.
Take this Los Angeles Times Q&A that breaks down what Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are and how the governments response will affect us. In a very concise, direct wording the article takes much of the confusion out of understanding the government-sponsored corporations.
So I continued on with the LA Times to see if whether the story is near the top of the website.
Hmm, not so much.
At the 3:45 on Monday, people were still more interested in Palin's style (for like the 4th day in a row) and dogs that can surf.
And while the story has gone from headlines to second page news in less than 24 hours, international news has picked up where much of the mainstream media has left off. The Independent reports how this will not only affect smaller banks, but also the international banking system. The story offers and box filled with several related articles as well.
And while I don't wish the U.S. to slide any deeper in the hole, the need for greater government transparency and public education is alarming. Now theres a story for the media?
Did I mention the "severance package" the former CEOs will be given? CEO Watch reports 23 million.
--Erin M.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
The computer that decides if you live or die...
Dr. Jack Kevorkian, A.K.A Dr. Death, first drew national attention in 1990 when he hooked up a 54-year-old Alzheimer’s patient to his homemade suicide machine and watched as she pushed a button to release lethal drugs. According to the June 5, 2008 New York Times, by the time he was jailed nine years later, he claimed to have helped more than 130 terminally ill patients take their own lives. In 1997, however, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Americans who want to kill themselves, but are physically unable to do so, have no constitutional right to assisted suicide. Within euthanasia, and all life-or-death controversy, has always been the question of whether or not the person can or would choose to end their life. However, BBC News reports on January 12, 2008 that before the end of this year, critical end of life decisions may be turned over to a sophisticated computer program, enabling a form of digital euthanasia. The article goes on to say that Bioethicist Dr. David Wendler and his colleagues at the U.S. National Institute of Health have written a complex computer algorithm they refer to as a “population-based treatment indicator,” that can guess, entirely on its own, what life or death decision comatose patients would choose if they were able to make the choice themselves. So I think an important question arises when considering the implications of this technology: when it comes down to it…who has to pull the plug?
When serious injuries leave loved ones of all ages in a coma, reliant upon ventilators to keep them alive, relatives often face the most difficult decision: to wait it out, or to turn off the machines. According to the American Bar Association on March 11, 2008, the Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990 mandated that patients be informed that they can document their treatment options in an advanced directive, including “Do Not Resuscitate” orders, should they lose the ability to make the decision themselves. The December 13, 2007 CNN program, cleverly entitled “The computer that decides if we live or die,” explains that although patients have gained this control, many still fail to sign a living will or a directive looking to the future, and therefore, relatives or “surrogates,” are often asked to step in on a loved one’s behalf. Dr. Wendler continues to note that society has always gone with the idea that people who know the patient can best decide about their treatment. However, he was concerned this process put too much of the burden on families, and wanted to develop an alternative. His new approach of digital euthanasia essentially bases all of its decisions on a profiling system, similar to psychological or criminal profilers. According to a press release from the Public Library of Science on March 12, 2008, to use the population-based treatment indicator, the doctor first enters the incapacitated patient’s circumstances and personal characteristics into a computer. For example, the patient is a 60-year-old, well-educated Native American male who has Pneumonia and severe Alzheimer’s disease. The computer analyzes the treatment preferences of similar individuals who are able to voice end of life concerns and estimates the likelihood that this patient would want antibiotics to treat his pneumonia. A finding that 90 percent of highly educated Native American men over the age of 50 do not want to receive treatment in the setting of advanced Alzheimer’s would provide strong evidence that this patient would not want antibiotics in these circumstances either.
Since it’s impossible to simply ask patients what treatment they would want at the time they’re incapacitated, we need to explore the efficacy of this technology, and how it affects both patients and their families. The March 6, 2008 Chicago Tribune states, studies looking at whether surrogates accurately predict patients' treatment choices must use hypothetical situations. For example, one study used the following scenario: "You were recently in an accident leaving you in a coma and unable to breathe without a machine. After a few months, the doctor determines that it is unlikely that you will come out of the coma, but there is a chance. If your heart stopped beating in this situation, what would you have told the doctor to do?" Wendler explains in a Medical Health Policy Forum on August 6, 2006 that analysis of 16 such studies reveals that surrogates accurately predicted the patient’s choice about 68% of the time, and amazingly, preliminary tests with digital euthanasia resulted in the exact same precision. In fact, Dr. Wendler explains in an interview with Time Magazine in January 2008, that he hopes to build up a broader bank of personal profiles that will include age, gender, religion, ethnic background, and socio-economic standing that will enable predictions with 15 to 30 percent more accuracy than with humyn surrogates. This possibly near-perfect system also raises an interesting point as to how exactly we give power of attorney to computer software. Medical advances aside, some relatives may always want to make end-of-life treatment decisions for incapacitated loved ones, while others may prefer this system’s assistance. On the other hand, Wendler notes in a November 15, 2007 Columbia University Seminar that patients could choose this option in advance, seeing it as a way of unburdening their family or simply believing it’s more accurate. In the previously cited Chicago Tribune, Kathryn Muller states, “I was married to my husband for 30 years, but when he had his stroke, and couldn’t breath on his own, I had no idea how he felt and couldn’t decide what to do. I just wish he could have told me what he would have wanted.”
Putting your life in the hands of a computer would’ve seemed preposterous only a decade ago, but with the development of digital euthanasia, we must consider the social and personal implications. The International Journal on Emerging Medical Technology notes on February 17, 2008 that no doubt, there will be concerns about either the government or the hospital controlling the means to make decisions for those who cannot speak for themselves. Similarly Dr. Timothy Quill explains in the August 15, 2007 American Family Physician, that poor, non-empowered groups are worried this process will be used to cut off treatments, especially when patients have no medical coverage. Although, Wendler does contend that he is trying to identify the best way to make decisions for these patients. But the problem even lies in the language he use: “Make decisions FOR these patients.” In addition, Wendler’s research, presented in the August 2006 Medical Health Policy Forum, notes that these predictions do match the majority of Americans, but in the end, bases decisions only upon what the general population prefers, and doesn’t take into account those who vary from the norm. So, an Orthodox Jew and a member of the Greek Orthodox faith, who may have similar beliefs about God, but not end of life care, are considered equal in the profile. Beyond that, the personal implications of a technology that essentially has the ability to make life or death decisions for patients, especially those with no next of kin, are worth noting. In the previously cited CNN program, Wendler explains that not all family members are equipped or even appropriate to make this decision. Tumultuous, personal relationships are not usually taken into account. Also, many are so emotionally overwhelmed, that they are not in an appropriate mental state to make a decision about a loved one’s life. However, advice such as: “People like your father prefer this type of treatment,” might diminish doubts or offer support to overwhelmed family members. The decision is a difficult one, to end their life, end their suffering, or simply wait for a miracle.
The burden of whether or not to pull the plug on a loved one, as harsh as it sounds, is not uncommon, and can cause serious mental anguish for children and parents who are forced to do so. This software may be a new advent in Kevorkian-like medical treatment, but it may also be a ray of hope for families too grief stricken to cope with the death of a loved one, and just wish they could know what they would choose.
-Roger
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)