David's CHS 202 Blog - Clemson University

Well, our class is almost over! We have to turn in our blogs on Friday, the third. So, I thought I might put in my two cents worth on what I thought of the class. My honors class was originally slated to be Chem 101 (I know, what was I thinking, right?), but I already had credit for Chemistry, so I really wanted to get out of it. Fortunately, for me, I found an open honors class, which happened to be this one, Computers and Society, that fit the EXACT same time as my Chemistry class. I can't tell you how lucky I was, because we were already a week or two into the semester. Anyway, the class proved to be much more beneficial than Chemistry 101 would have been, and I am very thankful for having taken it.

I've always been a computer fanatic, so in a way, this was a great class to take. I've been using computers for as long as I can remember, way back when we had to use MS-DOS to execute programs and view files. I can't believe I didn't turn out to be a computer programmer, because I used to know how to type those commands and stuff for DOS when I was like, seven years old...pretty good for my age! I used to play a lot of computer games as a young kid, most of them which came from a company called Sierra, which used to be a powerhouse in the PC gaming industry, but not quite as much these days. Most of the games required text-inputted commands for characters who roamed 'somewhat 3-D' levels. From them, I really developed a skil at typing. After that, I used CompuServe for email (still before I reached the age of 10) and eventually switched to AOL. I've been Instant Messaging for many years now, and foresee it many years in the future.

Basically this class really gave me a chance to look at the history of computers before I was born as well as their impact through the decades. It was nice to read about some of the history of computers after hearing of my parents inputting cards in the big computers here at Clemson back in the 80's. Finally, it was interesting to hear some of the discussions about where computers will take us in the future...it really makes me excited to see what our future has in store for us. Sometimes, I envy the children of tomorrow who will grow up with all the advantages we talked about in class. But then, another part of me is proud to be a member of the first real generation to grow up entirely in the age of the modern computer. We are truly a pioneering generation, and I truly believe that our wants/desires as teenagers and young adults in the computer age are having the most impact in shaping the direction computers will take in the future.

It will be interesting to use my knowledge from this class in the future to continue to keep an eye on the dichotomy between computers and those who use them.

Thanks, it's been a pleasure. :-)

Our class was required to attend to lectures by Marc Smith, a sociologist from Microsoft. One of the lectures given in class focused primarily on game-theory or the prisoner's dilemma. For those who didn't know the concept, he gave an interesting exhibition using two members of the class. To both, he gave them an envelope and dollar and sent them out of the room with two instructions. First, they could choose to keep or put the dollar in the envelope. Secondly, when they came back in the room, they would then trade envelopes, and he would double the money (if there was any) in the envelope. Basically, it's a game of trust. If both people trust each other, they will both put the dollar in the envelope and stand to both earn two dollars. If they both keep the dollar because they don't trust the other, then they will only have one dollar. The final scenario, which is the one that played out in class involves one student keeping the money while the other succumbs to trust and puts the money in the envelope (hoping all the while that the other one has too). Instead, he opens his envelope, finds nothing, and realizes the other person has now gotten away with three dollars (the one she kept, the one in the envelope, and the promised extra dollar). Kind of a lengthy description, but hopefully understandable.

The point in bringing up game-theory was for Smith to elucidate the idea that the Internet contains lots of instances in which game-theory comes into play. Sites such as e-bay rely on the trust of both buyer and seller, and when one fails to live up to that trust, the person who trusted is screwed. Sites like ebay have to work to manage this sort of problem.

Smith also spoke in a lecture outside of class on the topic of computer mediated collective action. Much of his discussion focused on his observations of UseNet postings and the various sociological data that can be gathered from people who use UseNet. He showed many charts and graphs detailing how many times people had posted and how many times they visited UseNet in the past month, whether they replied or answered to other posts, etc...

In all, it was fairly interesting, and made me wonder if being a sociologist was always as interesting as he seemed to make it...

A group of mine in the class recently presented a project on Hacking and Internet Terrorism. We created a webpage with links to all of the pages we used for information in the presentation. It also links to a game we encouraged our classmates to try out that simulates a hacking environment without actually teaching people to hack! Here's the link:

Hacking Project

Enjoy!

In class today, we discussed the idea of speech-to-text recognition. While I don't have much time to post here on the subject, I would like to include a quick link to a text-to-speech device increasingly coming into use by hearing impaired individuals and others. It's called CART (Communication Access and Real Time Translation)and is derived from court room stenographic devices. Although I did not mention this in class, CART requires a captionist (very much similar to the lady who comes to my classes today) using a court-room stenographer. Although I made a distinction between the current system I use and the CART system, I realize there is probably not as much difference as I originally thought. Here's another description of the CART system provided by UCLA (one of many schools utilizing this technology for its students).

It's been awhile (unfortunately) since I've posted. First off, I have to say, Ray Kurzweil's book, which we are reading in class now - The Age of Spiritual Machines - kicks some serious butt. It's a great read with some interesting propositions (even if a lot of them are a bit extreme or hard to understand). Kurzweil explains some interesting phenomena in an easy to understand way...

One such example of his ability to explain deals with a subject I've often been intrigued by and yet could not for the life of me explain my thoughts on it. I quote Kurzweil here for your benefit:
"Human perception of color is more complicated than mere detection of electromagnetic frequencies, and we still do not fully understand it. Yet even if we had a fully satisfactory theory of our mental process, it would not convey the subjective experience of redness or yellowness. I find language inadequate for expressing my experience of redness...So how do I know that you experience the same thing when you talk about redness? Perhaps you experience red the way I experience blue, and vice versa. How can we test our assumptions that we experience these qualities the same way?"
So perhaps the color of this blog text, which you and I both call 'black' actually looks different to both of us...perhaps to you, the reader, it looks like the color I call blue, but you've been taught from an early age to call it black. On the other hand, while it is what I've always been told to call black, the color itself looks different to you. Make any sense? It's complicated stuff, but it's really interesting if you're able to wrap your mind around it!

Part of the reason why it affects me so much is my severe hearing impairment. I have been fascinated by the idea of what it may be like to hear fully and normally, just like everyone out there who does not require a hearing aid (like me) as an assistive listening device. I wonder sometimes if my perception of sounds are different than your perception of sounds. I have also always wondered what it would be like to hear 'normally' for a day...would it be so radically different that it takes me time to get adjusted to the addition of new frequencies of sound that I've never been able to hear before? Hmm...

Think about it, it's crazy!

Now we're getting to the meat of this class! After reading chapter 6 in our latest book, Professor Mack challenged us to divide in groups and discuss the pros and cons of uploading our minds to a computer hard drive. She wanted us to do this from three points of view:
1. scientific/logical argumentation (disembodied)
2. argument based upon opinion and basic belief
3. argument based upon our experience as humans with bodies

My group was charged with the task p.o.v. number 3. Rather than take one side of the issue, we brainstormed a number of different pros and cons for each side of the argument (for uploading our brains and not). Here are some of our ideas discussed in our individual group as well as our entire class...hopefully they will provoke your own thoughts on this incredibly interesting subject:

Pros of uploading our minds to computers
1. we would no longer have to feel bodily pain
2. our minds can continue to function long after our bodies have worn down (we came up with this point after discussing Ray Kurzweil's idea that our minds are nothing short of human software running on the hardware that is the human body. Kurzweil commented that the human body was not a particularly robust machine, and that uploading our minds to a computer would allow us to function in a body that is much stronger and functional for a longer-lasting amount of time)
3. computer could do heavy thinking/homework/etc while our bodies go out to seek physical pleasure, whether it be from watching T.V., playing sports, etc.
4. people with debilitating injuries or physical handicaps/paralyzation can use this as a last resort to continue to function without a body
5. your brain is still your brain, no one can access it or know its contents unless you should choose to share/divulge it with others

Cons of uploading our minds to computers
1. why would anyone want to live forever?
2. living forever means life would lose much of its special meaning
3. robotic bodies or computers could physically malfunction beyond our control (with bodies, we can physically go to the doctor or take a certain medicine, etc.) ...we may be able to fix internal problems, such as viruses, but would need another person or device to fix our hardware problems
4. a virus could permanently wipe out our memory on the hard drive (but then again, so could Alzheimer's)
5. connection to a 'world brain' or all the other brains uploaded on a computer could be access to more information than our brains are ready for...access to all points of view...when in a body, the mind/brain can only access information that the body allows it to access (by taking it to a certain section inthe library or conversing with certain people)...point of view could potentially be extinguished, making us all essentially the same software
6. hacking...no privacy for your brain when it's connected to a modem

These are only some of the ideas addressed in our class. Hope it piqued your interest, and I'll definitely post some more in the future on this subject. Have a nice day! I'm off to study for a calculus quiz! Whoohoo!

Haven't posted in awhile, I know...we just recently had a test and have just begun immersing ourselves in another book, Small Pieces Loosely Joined. Soon as we get into the book and have some conversations arising...I'll be sure to post some of my thoughts.

Also today, we received word that we should begin preparing our topic and sources for our term paper, which is coming up quickly! Agh!