Diana Bang's ETEC 531 e-portfolio

Hi everyone,

I wanted to share a fascinating TED talk that I watched recently that incorporates a lot of our discussions on the effects and trends of technology combined with the current and future implications for the field of medicine. Here’s the link at: https://www.youtube.com/user/TEDtalksDirector#p/u/32/CH4TZteceas

Hope you all enjoy watching it too!~
Diana 🙂

Yet, what exactly is transcendence? What does it mean to be transcendent? Based on the online Merriam-Webster dictionary “transcendence” is defined as “the quality of state of being transcendent” (which in turn can mean any number of the following:
1a : exceeding usual limits : surpassing
b : extending or lying beyond the limits of ordinary experience
c in Kantian philosophy : being beyond the limits of all possible experience and knowledge
2: being beyond comprehension
3: transcending the universe or material existence — compare immanent
4: universally applicable or significant ttp://cio.gsfc.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/jul/HQ_11-240_Atlantis_Lands.html) does this mean that humans no longer want to “transcend” to paradise and rather would prefer to stay grounded here on Earth? Although, NASA does have future plans in place to continue with their space exploration (http://www.nasa.gov/about/whats_next.html) nowhere have we witnessed people staying permanently in the deep nebulus of space. Thus, does this mean that the idyllic paradise is lost and hasn’t been found as of yet?

Also, as Stalder (1998) so boldly asks: “if technology has been deeply influenced by religious motives (as Noble, 1997 suggests) then why is it so ambiguous in fulfilling its promise of a better life?” Noble’s (1997) response and conclusion that technologies are not about meeting basic human needs and instead has a goal of transcending any mortal concerns is a statement that I find to be a bit questionable. Technological advancements have had a profound effect in helping humans to meet their basic survival needs of food, water, shelter and even comfort as it helps us to stay connected to each other regardless of location. Thus, I think that it is illogical to merely state that technologies are ultimately meant to “transcend” any “mortal concerns.” What are your thoughts on this?

Diana 🙂

References

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (2011). Transcendence. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transcendence

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (2011). Transcendent. Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/transcendent

NASA. (2011). NASA’s proud space shuttle program ends with Atlantis landing: Agency ushers in next era of exploration. Retrieved from http://cio.gsfc.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/jul/HQ_11-240_Atlantis_Lands.html

NASA. (2011). What’s next for NASA? Retrieved from http://www.nasa.gov/about/whats_next.html

Stalder, F. (1998). Canadian Journal of Communication, 23(4). Retrieved from http://felix.openflows.com/html/noble.html and http://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/1072/978

The expanded conception of ecology is Guattari’s attempt to address mass mediatization and by asserting that there are 3 ecologies in which we are trying to cope with technological advancements. The 3 ecologies consist of: the environment, the subject or self, and the socius. According to Murphie & Potts (2003), this is akin to Bateson’s (1972) idea of 3 cybernetic/homeostatic systems: the individual human organism, the human society, and the larger ecosystem.

Guattari (1995) suggests that there are two different types of sign systems that are the foundation in which our communities have been formed (as cited in Murphie & Potts, 2003). According to Guattari (1995), signs that only operate are those that help us “plug into it” (i.e. traffic lights, ATM, etc), but differ from signs that are meaningful which signify communities.

I think that meanings from signs can be interpretive, subjective and differ from person to person. For example, signs in the form of gestures, symbols and even sign language hold a vast amount of meanings as that may be (for some) the main form of communication. Thus, signs are only meaningful when it is interpreted as such. In contrast, signs can also be operational and hold a functional quality to provide a designation, direction, or command as evident in storefront signage, street signs, and exit signs.

Autopoietic are self-operating and self-contained. For example, living organisms are autopoietic in the sense that they can be born and die on their own. In contrast, allopoietic processes depend on aspects outside of themselves in order for their survival. According to Guattari (1995) there is a relationship between autopoietic and allopoietic in that most assemblages contain both aspects (as cited in Murphie & Potts, 2003). Examples of both processes are illustrated in the Internet and people (i.e. communities that we are all a part of). Murphie & Potts (2003) states that we and our communities are essentially “autopoietic and allopoietic machines” (p. 197).

Also, a quick check of the online Encyclopaedia Britannica (2011) reveals the following:
“A newer definition of life revolves around the idea of autopoiesis. This idea was put forth by Chilean biologists Humberto Maturana and Francisco Varela and emphasizes the peculiar closure of living systems, which are alive and maintain themselves metabolically whether they succeed in reproduction or not. Unlike machines, whose governing functions are embedded by human designers, organisms are self-governing. The autopoietic definition of life resembles the physiological definition but emphasizes life’s maintenance of its own identity, its informational closure, its cybernetic self-relatedness, and its ability to make more of itself. Autopoiesis refers to self-producing, self-maintaining, self-repairing, and self-relational aspects of living systems.”

References

Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2011). Autopoietic. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/340003/life/279344/Autopoietic

Mariotti, H. (n.d.). Autopoiesis, culture and society. Retrieved from http://www.oikos.org/mariotti.htm

Maturana, H. R. & Varela, F. J. (1980). Autopoiesis and cognition: The realization of the living. Hingham, MA: Kluwer Boston Inc. Retrieved from http://books.google.ca/books?id=nVmcN9Ja68kC&lpg=PR9&ots=_mpZ3QEf2f&dq=Autopoietic%20autopoiesis%20culture&lr&pg=PR4#v=onepage&q=Autopoietic%20autopoiesis%20culture&f=false

Murphie, A. & Potts, J. (2003). Culture and technology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Thomson, K. R. (2007). System type: Allopoietic system. Retrieved from http://www.indiana.edu/~aptac/glossary/atisAllopoieticSystem.pdf

Globalization has given rise to modern warfare in an evolved type of work wherein war occurs between complex online networks. Thus, a concern is the advancement of communication systems that interconnect the globe. Although widespread communication is beneficial in some ways, consider the aspect of terrorism. Terrorism is no longer an isolated, home-grown notion. Rather it has turned into a global phenomenon where terrorist activities can occur just about anywhere. For example, after 9/11 airport security measures were tightened and there are regulations for liquid carry-ons, shoe-removal (due to shoe bombs), and even pat-down screening (including the use of a highly debated full-body electronic scanning device).

Although the Internet was first developed and utilized by the military, the widespread use of the Internet is leading to increasing difficulties to fully monitor and control virtual communities. For example, there are terrorist factions that communicate and operate through the Internet. Thus, in a sense there is an abundance of information available to just about anyone and so this enables the ease in which information is shared. There are positives and negatives to this aspect in that this free flow of information can aid people in their decision-making processes, helping them to become more informed or it can have negative effects like recruiting individuals into terrorist activities through the manipulation of individuals susceptible to biased information (essentially brainwashing them) and spreading information on bomb-making and the like is now widespread and easily accessible online.

Also, in terms of economic highs and lows- the world’s markets are intrinsically linked due to globalization. Thus, with economic perils and market crashes there is a ripple effect felt among countries who are investors and trading partners. For example, the recent economic meltdown in the U.S. that has put them through a state of recession has also affected Canada as they are one of Canada’s major trading partners. Capitalism and the effects of the recent economic hardships, the monopoly of large corporations being bailed out by the U.S. government, and the subsequent effects on its citizens in the form of widespread home foreclosures was well-illustrated in a Michael Moore documentary called “Capitalism: A Love Story.”

Another potential concern around globalization is the shift of labour to other countries and the growth of knowledge-based jobs in industrialized countries. Although this means that purchasing consumer goods is relatively inexpensive compared to the past, what does this mean in terms of our overall standards? Having access to cheap market goods may pose potential health and safety risks (i.e. faulty baby cribs, food contamination, toys laced with harmful chemical additives, etc). For example, whenever there is a food recall, this message is communicated worldwide as the product may not merely be a localized concern since it has been exported to countries around the globe.

Also, I wonder whether globalization is occurring under the pretense of a Westernized dominating force? Is it under the guise of having more positive benefits than the negative? Is it benefiting some countries but not others? For example, consider the concept of the rich becoming richer at the hands of impoverished nations. Is globalization truly benefiting third-world countries and helping them get out of poverty? Is it really benefiting the lives of citizens or is it helping governments to gain more dominance in terms of their own power and control?

Additional resources:
For the historical development of the concept of globalization check out: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/globalization/

Here is a link to an interesting article from the Bank of Canada regarding the “Implications of Globalization for the Economy and Public Policy” (2008) at: http://www.bankofcanada.ca/2008/02/speeches/implications-globalization-economy-public-policy/

Also, according to Fischer (2000) “we are in the process of becoming one world.” What implications does this message carry? This article can be accessed from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) entitled “Globalization: Valid Concerns?” (2000) at: http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2000/082600.htm

Globalization and Health: Health law and Bioethics at: http://queensu.academia.edu/udoschuklenk/Papers/70994/Globalisation_and_Health_A_Developing_World_Perspective_on_Ethical_and_Policy_Issues

The Globalization Rorschach Test: International Economic Integration, Inequality and the Role of Government (2004) http://bev.berkeley.edu/ipe/readings/globalizations-rorschach-test-paper.pdf

Anderson (1991) refers to a nation as an “imagined community.” Poole (1991) refers to it as a “principle of identity or a number of principles of identity.” Murphie and Potts (2003) refers to a nation is an ideal concept. Compared to a state which operates as a collective of functions, a nation operates with principles. As Poole (1991) mentions it essentially combines a diverse group of individuals, and cultures into one. People identify with the nation (i.e. identifying themselves as Canadian, American, etc). It offers a sense of place (home) and a common time (i.e. shared history). The nation offers a shared identity in which people feel a sense of belonging. The concept of a nation is almost illusory as Murphie and Potts (2003) offer a prime example of how people symbolically would sacrifice their lives in war for the sake of their country/nation and yet they would not do the same for different state functions (i.e. the CRA tax office, or in the U.S.- the much despised IRS).

Thus, I think there’s a great deal of symbolism associated with the thought of connecting yourself to a particular nation and showing national pride. It definitely illustrates the power of such national symbolism as evident in the Vancouver Olympic games and in stark contrast the quick tarnishing of a nation as shown in the media’s depiction of the recent Vancouver riots. Is brings to light, when does a person associate themselves with their greater community, city, and/or country? Does it have a bit of a group mentality associated with it as it may occur when everyone else is showing their pride? For example, competitive sports like hockey, football, etc bring about more pride and spirit than at other times (i.e. when the game season ends and there’s no teams competing).

According to Murphie and Potts (2003) the state is operational, it has fixed borders and laws that people follow. It is an entity to which one belongs whether one likes it or not. The state is a pragmatic entity a set of functions (borders, laws, armies, police, education systems, taxes, regulation of industry, the protection of copyright, etc).

Advances in technologies have enabled the state’s functions to monitor and act as a governing surveillance system that tracks movement of individuals and products (i.e. from passports and other paperwork to networked computing, satellites, airplanes, etc). The adoption of widespread technologies has also enabled the state to maintain electronic records of its citizens within the state and to communicate with neighbouring counties about these issues. For example, in healthcare there is the development and use of electronic health records so that clinicians can have immediate access to a person’s health history and any medications they may be on which is linked to their government-issued health card. The state also regulates and dictates operations within the boundaries of their borders (and sometimes even beyond i.e. the U.S.-led operations in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.) with roads, railways, and other infrastructure.

My media production entitled Digital Memories: Theoretical Frameworks and Implications can be accessed on my “First Media Production” tab at: https://blogs.ubc.ca/etec531dbang/first-media-production/. It can also be found on YouTube at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zL_AU83N2I8

For this mp, I used Camtasia for the first time and also learned how to utilize its add-on feature in Microsoft PowerPoint. Although, I began my mp using Photostory 3 for Windows, I ended up switching to a 30-day trial version of Camtasia as it offered the ability to embed video and make my mp more dynamic rather than the static images and audio narration offered by Photostory. I have to admit that there was quite a bit of a learning curve to use Camtasia effectively- one which I hope to master as I use it more often. I found that my previous experience using Windows Movie Maker definitely helped me navigate through Camtasia. For this mp, I conducted research- trying to compile a variety of information (journal articles, books, images, videos, and music) to create a script using Microsoft Word (mirroring an essay style), Microsoft PowerPoint to create narrated slides, and storyboarding techniques to plan out how I was envisioning my video turning out. After multiple drafts (for my script) and revisions of my storyboard, I utilized Camtasia to record my narrative, then utilized images and text to supplement my points.

Overall, this was my second major video that I produced (next to the “I am an artist” practice clip) and uploaded it successfully onto YouTube and my UBC blog. It’s quite amazing how a “short” video encompasses a lot of work: compiling, organizing, editing, and producing the final product. I am certainly glad to have submitted it prior to the deadline and I’m looking forward to the next assignment (after a bit of a break). 🙂

The connectionist model of design contends that the brain operates from the bottom up rather than the top down approach and has been utilized in recent artificial intelligence research. A simplified version of this model is that thought is considered to develop though associative and low-level series of connections. For example, brain neurons are stimulated by the impressions given to them by the body’s sense organs. These impressions and responses then develop patterns in the brain’s neural pathways. When some networks are strengthened we achieve learning and at another level patterns form into conscious thoughts. Also, though time these patterns will continue to change. In relation to AI research, they’ve developed neural nets (i.e. web of neurons) which try to copy the parallel processing capabilities of the human brain. Minsky and Papert (1988) refer to these copies as the fundamental parts of “percepetrons” (as cited in Murphie & Potts, 2003). Thus, if this is indeed the way the human brain functions then the implications for AI research is that consciousness will develop with the proper connection between low-level components and the appropriate environment to learn. Ultimately, then the focus of AI should not be about trying to create a replica of the human brain as creating consciousness in machines is a matter making the “right” connections. What are the implications of achieving machine consciousness? Is it vision of a doomsday Terminator-like scenario or akin to WALL-E?