Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants: Commentary

Here we have yet another reading about Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants. The same tune to a different blog post. Are Digital Natives so very different than the Digital Immigrants and if they are different is it so different that they can't work together in the same ways? The author says that the claims made in the original article are too much. I tend to agree. Humans are adaptable and so of course we are going to change with our environment but Immigrants can be just as proficient as Natives. I really liked what he said about computers being a tool to teach with not the teachers themselves. A computer program is only as good as its programmers. The teacher can use this great tool to help them teach and the processes may change a little bit but learning still comes the same ways it always has.
P: This is a commentary on an article and is full of the authors opinions on the subject.
T: There are arguements from both sides of the fence as to whether Digital Natives and Immigrants are really all that different.
I: Is the claim that Digital Natives are extremely different than their predecessors true?
C: He concludes that no the extremist view is wrong.

Letter from Birmingham

P: He outlined his plans and visions for equality.
T: He addressed reasons why nonviolent protesting was the way to go.
I: Was nonviolence better than violence?
C: He says nonviolence will work and we can have peace if the people live up to their Christian name.

Is Google Making Us Stupid?

Is Google making us stupid? A valid question. I have seen in myself many of the symptoms that Nicholas Carr points out as effects of using Google and other internet sources for information. I find that I tend to have a staccato style of writing. Of course, having it pointed out to me and noticing when I do it myself, I have tried to remedy it. I feel that yes Google is making us just as stupid as it is making us smarter. There will always be those who fashion a crutch from a ladder. Just like when writing became commonplace, some chose to not memorize things but instead write them down. There are others, I'm sure, who used the new access to information to memorize more things. Google is the same. While reading this article, I was able to search the internet about the creators of Google out of curiosity. I could spend hours learning about Larry Page and Sergey Brin but I'd rather not. The internet gives us the option to learn as much as we want about any subject. Unfortunately, it seems, a vast majority of us tend to choose to learn nothing much about anything. I would say that the more technology we are blessed with, the more polarized we will become. Mean those who fall behind will fall farther and those who can get ahead will rocket far beyond their peers.

 I personally love to read books. I like the feeling I get when I'm in an impressive library. I crave information. However, reading takes time, even for those who practice and have a talent for it. I'll admit that I have spent hours at a time on the internet skimming whatever suits my fancy quite often, learning just enough to say I know just enough. That being said, I recognize that the things I know most about are the things I dove into instead of skimming. We simply need to dive. Yes our "skimmer" is the fastest it has ever been but all we will know about the ocean is that it is blue and wet unless we jump off the speed boat and dive. 

P: The purpose of this article is to bring to the attention of the reader that the way they think is affected by the way we are now learning.

T: Various examples are shown in which instant information is changing the way we think.

I: Are we losing something valuable in the way we learn in exchange for the newer ways? 

C: He declares that if we aren't careful, we will become the machines.

Slave

If a picture is worth a thousand words, and a video is worth a thousand pictures, and a video of Seinfeld is worth a thousand videos, then this should suffice.

I think the moral of this story is something along the lines of "the passionate become legends". I can dig it.

P: This article is telling us about someone that others think is odd but he doesn't seem to care. The purpose is to show what can happen with obsession.
T: The story of a peculiar soup maker is told to entertain and maybe inpsire us.
I: Is the rudeness worth the success?
C: I conclude that in some cases, yes it is.

Pearls Before Breakfast

Art is often lost. I have often thought about who the fastest man in the world is because for all we know, the fastest man simply doesn't have the means to show anyone. I'm a big believer in liking something because you like it. However, this shouldn't get in the way of seeing and appreciating talent. We are as close to total control of what we listen to and see as we have ever been. This tragically limits us to only what we know unless we make a concerted effort to experience the new. We have more responsibility to seek out the best now.
P: We are missing things and when we don't miss them we don't seem to appreciate them.
T: He basically gives us a play-by-play of an experiment.
I: The question raised is are we able to recognize and appreciate beauty when we are exposed to it?
C: It seems that in general no we do not. This is out done by the conditions in which we are exposed to the art but according to the experiment we tend to miss out.

Cultures of Our Past

I had quite a bit to say in the class discussion we had about this reading today. Being interested in the film and entertainment industry, I have kept a close tabs on what comes out and such. Sousa was worried that by allowing free media, we would lose our main contributors to the culture. I agree. We no longer feel the need to entertain ourselves with our imaginations because of the video games and movies so readily available to us. When imaginations aren't exercised, creativity suffers. It seems movies these days are all sequels to things that have already been made. We are witnessing the wilt of a once beautiful flower.

P: The purpose was to inform the readers of 2 different ways we as a society are affected by copyright laws.
T: The hearing by Sousa, as well as statistics and some defining of what a Read/Write and a Read/Only culture are.
I: The question posed to the reader is how much control should copyrights have?
C: The conclusion is for the reader to decide for themselves.

Amusing Ourselves to Death

As a future entertainer I found that Neil Postman's speech "Amusing Ourselves to Death" struck a familiar chord. I have noticed many of the things he mentions for myself. I think that we as a people are giving ourselves up to the flashiness and glitz of the world much to easily. Our society is like a cat chasing a laser pointer around. We don't seem to care that the thing taking all of our attention won't REALLY do anything for us. It's bright and we want it.
That being said there is a lot of good that can be done if people can 1. recognize that this is a real thing that is happening, and 2. adapt to it. I don't think we can change society back to a more serious state, but why would we want to? The way society thinks is putty, and good people need to help shape it. Don't worry so much about stopping the negatives that will happen either way. Instead, focus on what you can do to promote the good on such an impressionable crowd.
P: I feel Mr. Postman's main message here was to alert of us the state our society is in. He feels we need to know that we are spiraling into a catatonic state of our own accord.
T: He gave a number of great examples in which we have evolved, as a society, into an entertainment thirsty horde. Substance is no longer what sells. The pretty people are elected, while the capable people are not. If a commercial isn't funny we change the channel. Micheal Bay is successful at making movies that are made to be eye candy. I personally believe we are easily controlled. Too much of a good thing really IS our downfall. Part of the reason I want to be involved in the entertainment industry is the power that is there, for good or for bad.
I: The issue is addressed heavily in the topics spoken of here. We are letting ourselves be affected in extreme ways by entertainment value. I agree that it is taking its toll on society. Our current president was elected to office because he ran one of the best campaigns ever, back in 2008. He was fun, exciting, new, and ENTERTAINING. Him and his advisers read us all like a book and chose the ending. The same thing happened when JFK ran against Richard Nixon. JFK was a good looking fellow whereas Nixon was a sweaty stuffy politician.
C: He seems to offer no real conclusion to this problem. He doesn't seem to think anyone has found one. He's correct in finding it much harder to rebel against our own laughter than it is to rebel against bullets of lead. Self-control seems to be the only real answer but it seems to be a little out of reach for most of us.