OnLive Gaming

Steve Perlman, one of the founders of Google has come up with a new gaming system. His new gaming system is called OnLive gaming. It allows the user to stream any video game to their TV or PC. The only piece of hardware needed is a 99$ box and controllers. According to Perlman, "Being tied to physical media is gradually dying away". I agree with this statement. Atleast as far as I'm concerned, the less hardware there is to malfunction, the better! However, OnLive gaming has to deal with many issues. According to the article, many consumers don't want to have yet another box attached to their televisions and the large gaming companies have a lot more financial resources than OnLive Gaming.

This is also another great example of the democratizing ability of new technologies. After listening to the podcast about piracy, it struck me that something needs to be done to stop it. This OnLive Gaming system is piracy-proof. Since the games don't come on CD's, it is impossible to make copies. To me, this is democratizing because Stever Perlman saw that we had a piracy problem and used his ingenuity to do something about it. Personally, I like the idea of having on-demand games. It's almost like Netflix. We'll have to wait and see if this gaming system is successful!

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/technology/29onlive.html?ref=technology

The Smart Shopper

Have you ever bought something for full price only to find out that a nearby store was selling it for half price? It's frustrating isn't it! Especially with Christmas around the corner, shoppers are doing everything they can to find the best deals. There are multiple new apps that are now available for download that allow the user to take a picture of the barcode on an item with their cell phone. Ideally, the phone will then recognize the item of interest and search the internet for nearby stores with better deals. According to the article, the app can be extremely useful but can create some awkward situations if a store clerk happens to notice. However, it is completely legal. I think that if this app becomes widely used, it could not only allow people to save money this holiday season, but also may pressure some retailers to put their merchandise on sale.

This app is a perfect example of the democratizing effect of the internet. The ability of cell phone users to search for better deals allows the general public to take more financial responsibility. However, while store clerks can't really do anything about it, I feel that this app could become slightly controversial. Just like we talked in class about how, in the past, what type of car one owned showed their social class, those with this app may be stereotyped as people who are living on a tight budget. But living on a budget isn't a bad thing! According to the article, many users of this app have said that if you can get over being self-concious it is a great money-saving tool.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/25/technology/personaltech/25smart.html?_r=1&ref=technology

Hey, There's an App for That!

How would you feel if your bank account was as public as your Facebook page? Well, now theres an iPhone app called Blaze Mobile that allow its users to pay for things by swiping their phone past a sensor. It works like a debit card. The phone owner puts a certain amount of money on their phone card and uses it when ever he/she likes. The only problem with this is that everytime someone makes a purchase the details of the purchase are posted on facebook or which ever social network the user decides to use. Does anyone, other than me, see a problem with this? This not only puts personal bank information on the internet, but allows anyone to find you no matter where you are which poses a huge safety issue.

The companies that support this type of payment say that it will decrease the amount of payments made in cash so that people can get through lines faster. I personally think that there a some things that should stay private either because they are personal or because no one cares about. For example, who cares that you just bought a 12 pack of Diet Coke? As far as the lines going faster, I feel that life is too fast-paced as is. I think that our society would benefit greately if we all just took life a little bit slower and enjoyed every day as much as we can instead of always planning every little detail ahead of time.

Another aspect of this technology that bothers me is that as more information is put on the internet it is much easier for companies and the government to have complete control over every aspect of our lives. This idea of digital information leading to complete government control reminds me of Neuromancer. I feel that the technology that society is creating today is going to create a future similar to that of Neuromancer.

Path

One of the main themes of today's society is the idea of being constantly connected to as many people as possible. Well, not everyone agrees with this idea. Sometimes sites like Facebook and Twitter can cause people to feel uncomfortable about sharing their thoughts or pictures with others because there are so many possible viewers. I know, on multiple occassions, I have refrained from posting my thoughts or pictures on Facebook due to the fear that someone might mistinterpret them and get offended. Even so, the goal of these "powerhouse social networks" is to increase the use and publicity of their websites. To counteract this idea, "Path" has been created. Path is a picture sharing website, very similar to facebook, but only allows each user to have 50 friends.

According to the article, the idea behind this website is that people will be able to be themselves if their pictures and thoughts are available only to those who are closest to them. This number wasn't just randomly set at 50 friends. Physcologists have concluded that the human brain is not caple of having "close" relationships with more than 50 people at any given time. Path is innovative in the fact that it goes against the norm that social networks should continue to expand. I feel that the emergence of Path is a sign that society has finally realized that being connected all of the time to the entire world is the best idea. Hopefully, more websites like this will be created and we will be able to rebuild the idea of true relationships, instead of cyber relationships.

Reverse Engineering the Brain

Recently in my E101 class, my group had to give a presentation on Reverse Engineering the Brain. I bring this up because it reminds me a lot of Neuromancer. Reverse Engineering the brain is the use of nanotechnology, in conjunction with powerful super-computers, to create a simulation of the human brain. The goal is to have these simulations be capable of problem solving, cognition, and emotions, just like a human is. The question we now have to ask is whether we should continue to develop this type of technology. Do we want to live in a world like the one portrayed in Neuromancer?

I think one of the most important things to do when faced with this kind of decision is to thoroughly examine both the positive and negative affects of this type of technology. If engineers successfully created a human brain, it would provide unlimited medical advances. We would be able to understand, and therefore possible cure, mental disorders such as schizophrenia and Alzheimer's Disease. We would also be able to put these "human brains" in different mechanical devices that could be placed in places humans have yet to reach, such as the outer regions of our universe or the deepest depths of the oceans. This would allow us to have a greater understanding of the interconnections that create Earth. However, one must think about the negative effects. For example, one of the goals of Reverse-Engineering the brain is to create machines smarter than humans. In my opinion, this could only end in disaster. I know it sounds crazy, but if we did achieve this goal, at first it might be cool but the seemingly farsical idea of machines taking over the world could actually become a problem.

The overall message I am trying to get accross is that Engineers and scientists always need to think about the possible consequences of their work. Through our class discussion of Neuromancer, although I am still not a fan of science-fictions, I do believe it is important for Engineers to reflect on the messages that science-fiction literature portrays. Often, these novels predict some of the aspects of future technologies and the effects it will have on society.

Hey, It's Not Just Us!

When most people think about how the internet has affected this generation, the most prevalent argument would be that social sites, such as facebook and myspace, are providing teenagers the opportunity to share intimate details about their lives. Since elementary school, children have been taught that they must be aware of online predators and that they must be careful about what the put on the internet as once information is on the internet, it can never be deleted. However, what if intimate details about a childs life are put on the internet without their consent? The article I just read talks about a case where a new mother blogs constantly about the difficulties of motherhood and the conflicts she has with her children. Her oldest child, who had been the focus of her blogs, is now protesting against her mothers blogs and refuses to be photographed with the fear that every detail of her life will soon be on the internet. This brings up a new ethical dilemma... does the legal system need to provide underage children with rights that protect them against their own parents blogs?

Apparently this has become a growing problem through out the nation. The mother I just described  seems to have no problem putting her children's lives on the internet. Surprisingly, she is not alone. Many other mothers who are also dealing with the struggles of motherhood follow her blog. She has so many followers that she has actually turned her blogging into an extremely lucrative business. Because her oldest daughter has refused to be part of her mothers blog, she is going to start blogging about her younger child. But how long is it going to be before her younger child starts rebelling? Is it right to exploit your children for monetary gain?

In today's world, there is so much controversy over the misuse of the internet by the children of this generation. People are constanly warning us (by "us" I mean the younger generation) about the dangers of releasing personal information and pictures on the internet. However, what happens when we have no control over how much of our lives are displayed on the internet? Do underaged children have the legal right to tell their parents to not blog about their personal lives? I mean, as far as I know, until you're 18 your parents can do pretty much whatever they want. I think that no one has really thought about this issue because the mindset of the generations ahead of us have not had to deal with these types of situations. They only see what's going on from an outsiders point of view. What stands out to them are websites like facebook, where teenagers are constantly getting introuble for what they share with the world. However, the internet is available to everyone and, just as there are teenagers that do know how to use the internet properly, there are adults that are engaging in online behavior that can have an adverse affect on others.

To me, this article shows that there needs to be a complete change in the mindset of society as a whole. Maybe, if people looked at the way the internet is being used by society as a whole it could be more easily understood how we can make the internet a safer place. Also, this is a great example of how "technology creates itself out of itself". As the technology of the internet evolves and ethical issues of its use come to our attention, the technology of our legal system must evolve simultaneously.

What is that you're reading?

While looking through articles about different types of technology I happen to come across one about E-books. I guess I had never really thought about how innovative and brilliant this concept is as I have grown up with the concept of E-everything. The fact that one person has access to pretty much any book in the world just by going online brings a whole new meaning to the idea that reading books opens you to a whole new world. Now we can take that phrase literally! Especially in today's world with so much other technology like the I-Pad and laptops, we have the ability to get any book on the planet no matter where we are. So, in a sense, these E-books really do give us access to the whole world of books from one electronic device.

Another thing that struck me as important feature of these E-books is the fact that there is no paper involved. If we everybody switched over to E-Books, not only would everyone have access to a whole world of information almost instantly, but there would be huge ecological advantages. Also, I am not positive, but I'm thinking that E-books are cheaper than printed books. Having said that, investing in electronic copies of books, schools and businesses could save thousands of dollars. Not only are E-books almost impossible to damage, they don't take up nearly as much space and can be reused over and over again. I believe that converting to E-books, the money that is budgeted to school systems could be used more efficiently.

Now, I'm not going sit here and tell you that I love E-books, because I don't. I think the concept is great, but I'm used to having a physical book infront of me when I'm studying or reading for pleasure. However, when looking at the pro's and con's of E-books, it's hard to not like them! This ties into the whole idea that as technology changes, we must change with it. The whole idea of a paradigm shift applies. Right now, E-books are more accepted and used among the younger generation. In order to promote this type of technology, or many other types of techonology for that matter, among the older generation, a change is going to have to take place and I think this change is going to come only with time.