You Are Not A Gadget

Jaron Lanier gives readers his steps to becoming more human within his first chapter.  Jaron argues that the world is coming more robotic, not just in the since of computers are more popular than others, but also we, as humans are changing right along with the timeline of computers.  Jaron mentions that we will have become dull and that the fad of anonymity has been wrongly empowered.  When the web first came into existence, Jaron writes about how flavor the web had because people created their own blogs and websites that were unique and companies were not a part of the picture yet, ruining the web with advertisements.  Jaron, wants to see the world wide web go back to hat and he creates a list that proposes to help change user's minds about how they operate and participate in the web.

• Don't post anonymously unless you really might be in danger.
• If you put effort into Wikipedia articles, put even more effort into using your personal voice and expression outside of the wiki to help attract people who don't yet realize that they are interested in the topics you contribute to.
• Create a website that expresses something about who you are that won't fit into the template available to you on a social networking site 

•  Post a video once in a while that took you one hundred more time to create than it takes to view

•  Write a blog post that took weeks of reflection before you heard the inner voice that needed to come out
• If you are twittering, innovate in order to find a way to describe your internal state instead of trivial external events, to avoid the creeping danger of believing that objectively described events define you, as they would define a machine.

-Lanier, p.20 

The advice that Lanier gives pertains to how he thinks that people should follow in order for the nation to have a better understanding of the current mistakes that the web harbors.  Lanier makes it clear that he does not like present social statures that the internet gives.  His first problem has to do with the fact that people post anonymously.  Posting without using your name gives the commenter a place to run or hide, or have no accountability for their actions.  If people stopped posting anonymously the community could lessen some of the cyber bullying,  because half of cyber bullies are from those that the victim does not know.  In this way, if everyone changed their own actions, then they could change a whole community.

Lanier wants the users of the internet to write blog posts after weeks of reflection and not when your emotions are at their peak.  This advice reminds me of the film, The Social Network.  In the beginning of the movie, Mark Zuckerburg blogged about his break up with his girlfriend while intoxicated.  It was a terrible decision and made life for his girlfriend terrible.  If everyone took their time blogging, instead of making rash decisions, life on the internet would be less unpredictable.

When many people change their actions to be a little more positive, then a whole community will be impacted  positively.  Lanier could just be over exaggerating with his need for the internet of the past to come back to what it used to be, or he could be making good points by saying that the internet has been degrading recently and the problem needs to be fixed.  He realizes the problem and then finds a way to fix it.

Does Google Glass Make Ties Weaker or Stronger?

Google Glass is a huge topic, not just in our class, but also around the word.  I think that Google Glass is the coolest thing to hit the shelves because it is a brand new technology that is futuristic and helpful.  I don't see the Google glass, however sweeping off the shelves because, although it is really cool the only feature that is worth having is the video camera, which cannot be used often.  Google Glass is ideal for bloggers, or those with interesting lives, but for those with not such an interesting like, how else would we utilize it?  Additionally , creating these Google. Glass only gives the option to share an experience.  Sharing first-hand experiences and moments are one the most intimate moments a person could share with another.  It creates insiders and reminiscences.  Is Google Glass creating weak ties or strong ones?

I found the concept of weak and strong ties fascinating because there is not only very truthful, but it is also very shameful.  There are plenty of people I have befriended on Facebook after only meeting them once.  I know that deep down in my heart, no matter how many times we chat each other, or tag each other in pictures and statuses, that we will never truly be friends.  When on Facebook, it is common to tell someone that I miss you, but with the concept of weak and strong ties in my mind, is that truly a sincere remark?  Especially if you have only met face to face once.  It also got me thinking of what consitutes a weak and strong tie.  Gladwell defines weak ties as this:

The platforms of social media are built around weak ties. Twitter is a way of following (or being followed by) people you may never have met. Facebook is a tool for efficiently managing your acquaintances, for keeping up with the people you would not otherwise be able to stay in touch with. That’s why you can have a thousand “friends” on Facebook, as you never could in real life.

He has a point.  A strong tie he defines are knowing someone as more than an acquaintance. He uses the example of the civil rights movement event, The Greensboro Sit In, to explain that the boys were as motivated as they were because of they knew each other and had a strong bond.

I wonder that if Google Glass is making strong ties by giving the public a first-hand insight into your life and the life of others.  Watching the video of Google Glass made me feel as though I shared a special exciting moment with these people.  Not only do I not know these people personally, but I don't even know what they look like.  When you post your Google Glass video to a social network like Facebook or Twitter, will that be opening the door to more intimate times with your thousands of Facebook friends, or will that be spreading the friendship thin and ending in shatters?  In the video featured, one man sends his picture to two specific people instead of a whole social network.  In this way the Google Glass seemed to be a lot more intimate.  Sharing something with the Google Glass makes it seem as though the owner wishes that you were with them.

There are limited features for the Google Glass, but I think that the video recording and sharing will be the most popular.  I cannot make a decision on whether or not the Google Glass makes a relationship a strong or weak tie but if I would have to decide then I would say that it creates weaker ties on social networks because it is as if it is the most advance check-in service or tweeter ever.  Sharing something personal, like first-hand ties can be a very big step, but if it is received wrongly by someone on your friend's list then it could be dire.



\

Be the Change You Want To See In the World

Both of these articles were truly relevant to me because I have seen blogs like Egyptian Chronicles and I have done some of those rebel activities that had no substance.  Ignorance is a contagious disease that has spread from generation, to generation; from country; to county.  Ignorance has started many wars and has been the foundation for a lot of hate and pain in the societies, especially America.  Education is the best way to cure the disease.  When you are educated on a topic, or a concept, or a people, then you have enough grounds and knowledge to speak intellectually about a topic.  I think that Egyptian Chronicles is here to educate the visitors of the blog.

Egyptian Chronicles is a blog that updates everyday about the social activism in Egypt from the perspectives of a young woman.  I believe the blog was created by the event that took place pertaining to the murder of Khaled Said.  Khaled Said fell victim to police brutality.  Khaled was quite the activist himself and this caused an uproar throughout Egypt that sent its government reeling.  I, personally, did not know that there were still things going on in the country.  Things have a weird way of going quiet once the media stops making it a big deal.  This blog educated me to see that there are still protests happening and even pictures and video.

In Gratwell's article he said that people will not stick to activism unless they are personally involved or know people who are personally involved.  Because the writer of this blog is a native it doesn't surprise me that she updates it everyday.  Its different to blog about firsthand experiences than if you were in another country.  Especially if that firsthand experience was about something in your home country.  Most people you come across with and communicate with is going to be a fellow countrymen.  I, have experienced falling out of an activist role because I personally was not being effected.  KONY2012 campaign came out last year.  When I first saw the video I was pumped to do something about it.  I was already checking my bank account to by a box full of their advertisement so that I could post it around school when I caught wind that the business was quite untrustworthy.  The campaign did not request a lot from me.  They only wanted needed money and advertisement.  I dropped the cause because I was not affected by it.

The blog surprised me because of its decorative homepage.  The top banner has beautiful images of Egypt and although the blog talks about how thousands of people are protesting their corrupt government there is still a very positive manner in which she delivers the news.  By the use of her color scheme I can already tell that protesting is a positive manner to her and her small biography on the right-hand side tells me that she loves her country.  I certainly do not use my social networking sites to try to do anything that she does.  I use most of my social networking sites to have friends and talk to people.  I never thought of using it to keep those same friends updated on today's current events.

Facebook and Privacy

"How did this get on here," is a phrase that I have come to accompany with Facebook and its tagging feature.  Tagging is the feature that lets you mention to a friend that they appeared in one of your photographs.  They usually get a notification that you "tagged" them, even though I remember hearing that they didn't used to give notifications.  This seems like a great idea, except not all photographs that everyone puts up is..."safe".  For example, I have many family members as friends on Facebook.  I went to a hookah bar with friends and joined in legal activity.  One of my friends posted a suspicious picture and tagged me in it.  In order to get it to come down Facebook made me send him a personal message asking him to take it down.  He took a long time to see the message and I was left answering to nosy family members.  Tagging is just one of the many problems Facebook has with privacy.

In the beginning, Facebook was exclusive to Harvard students only, just as the film, The Social Network illustrated.  I remember when they expanded Facebook to people younger than college students.  After that I started to receive messages about certain people that would ask me whether I knew a particular person on my friends list.  They would even send many warnings telling users to not accept people that you don't actually know.  I could tell that Facebook was really being careful about their security.

 But as the years went by,  it seemed as though Facebook stopped caring along the way. There were slip up, like when I sent someone a friend request their statuses would appear on my wall but when I tried to view their page I wasn't their friend and the friend request was pending.  I was friends even when they didn't want to be.  Another recent feature is the "seen" indicator in the messages.  This blurb appears on the sender's chat box when the receiver has seen the message.  This is a problem because you are able to send messages to people who are not on your friends list.  These users could be anyone including strangers, enemies or people you are trying to avoid.  When you read the message, they are able to see that you have read it and at what time.  This could prove awkward if you choose to not want to respond.

General sharing of information has its difficulties as well within the realm of Facebook.  There are privacy settings that any user is welcome to alter but the way to go about changing them can be a little unclear at times.  There is the option to let only your friends see your profile and pictures, then there is the option to let friends of friends see it too.  Facebook likes to post everything that you do on your wall and your friends wall such as, relationship status changes, new photos uploaded, and, if you have Spotify, what music you listen to.  The users are becoming more aware of the options surrounding their online security.

Between Facebook's tagging issues and ghost friends there is obviously a lot to be desired.  Not all websites are error free and Facebook, being one of the most popular websites, is no excuse.  Facebook is meant to be for social networking.  No one should put anything online they don't want others to see.  The information that Facebook sends to the people on your friends would be acceptable if it it was meant for everyone's eyes.  However, since we are human beings we live private lives.

The Social Network

The Social Network truly intrigued me because of the irony in the creation and the creator.  Based on the reading and the movie, Zuckerberg wants social knowledge and openness on the web.  There are small critical things that every Facebook user is asked, such as relationship status and the gender you are interested in, that support the goal of opening the web a little more.  Mark Zuckerberg seems to be the farthest person from open and community  based on his portrayal in the film.  The directors did a very good job on creating a character that was both easy to hate and hate to love.  Since he is the creator of Facebook many moviegoers were expecting to see a lovable character whom they could send a friend request to, but instead they got the true Mark Zuckerberg and it is up to them whether they still like him by the end of the movie.
Mark Zuckerberg is portrayed as a rude person before the movie can even role the beginning credits with the scene of him and Erica in a pub together.  We see Mark being the one at fault in the break up scene and later doing what so many of us try to avoid now, which is rant on the internet about a person.  Cyber bullying    has skyrocketed because of the social networks like Facebook.  Mark obviously has a severe social awkwardness.  Facebook connects friends and family to each other using the internet.  Mark, who cannot even look people in the eye, is able to create a space where thousands of people can connect.

Oh the irony.

Google: Society's mirror

I found it eye-opening that Google was changing perspectives on authority by way of their website.  During class, it was stated that Google changed authority by democracy and it switched the role of the authority figure in society.  When Google was becoming a powerful web tool, businesses found ways in which their pages could come first by hacking the page to find the secret to such a website's success.  These  businesses saw Google as enemy number one because they felt that Google played unfair by controlling the search results to better suit themselves.  Google responded by passing the buck along to their algorithm.  Google publicly says that they have no say over the search results, besides safe search and moderate search.  The algorithm does not have a mid of its one, but more like a million minds.  Google uses the most popular pages that can be found in links on other pages.  The people are the ones who create these links as well as use them.  Google is able to do nothing while search results are compiled every second by society's wishes, rants and dreams.

Google's authority is their algorithm.  This equation is how the creators of Google can afford to take a step back from their creation and tell the businesses that they have no control.  It is very easy to throw the concept of God at this topic.  Here, you have an entity that is not quite human nor machine (more like an equation), that appears to know everything.  It is easy to see the Googlism, but if you take a moment to realize who is giving Google its searches, it will turn around and point at the users.  Google's searches are a mirror of ourselves, our society.  Whatever many people have searched, discovered, unveiled, linked, is what  Google shows us.  If I Google beauty in Google Images, I will be bombarded by the society's idea of beauty. 

Google's searches are not man made, or so Google creators tell us.  If they truly do care about the society and making limitless information available, then there is no capping of the searches.  Google is a power tools that is utilized by the many people, and therefore has many perspectives of many topics for its searches.  It is almost like walking up to about million people and asking them to take a survey.  Google's searches are powerful, but it can only be as powerful as the people who use it.

You Can Be Serious Without a Suit

Google reminds me of my past experience in a camp at a Microsoft business complex. The campers got the opportunity to see the different departments within Microsoft, in hopes to inspire young women to have an interest in Microsoft as a company.  One employee spoke to us and said this:

"Everyday is casual Friday because it doesn't matter how you look doing your work. As long as you did it well and meet the deadline."  

Experiencing Microsoft, it didn't surprise me that Google was along the same guidelines.  One of their "Ten Things We Know To Be True" talked about how being casual company did not deplete from the fact that their business still got work done when it came to doing what you had to do.  There are many religions that follow a traditional routine from dress to actions.  Based on one of  Google's points, one comes to think that some traditions may not be necessary.

The religious traditions that I am familiar with is Christianity and Islamic faith.  In the Christian community followers usually attend a church service on Sunday and the term "Sunday's best" is early learned.  Many churches will say that you should come as you are but there is a social stigma attached to the wardrobe that you choose.  A Sunday Best outfit can be compared to a worker's uniform or formal business attire.  This tradition, at least in the community I am familiar with, is not only a big deal but it is expected.  There is no guidelines that read what we are supposed to wear exactly, but everything must be in modest shape and form.  This outfit, by no means, makes the sermon better or worse but it affects the dynamic of the church experience.  Google's belief that the casual attire does not mirror their work ethic would tear away the traditional sense of Christian Sunday Best outfits.

In the Muslim community there are very traditional believers and those who are more casual and modern.  Many of the females wear a hijab over their heads to symbolize purity.  The elders wear longer garments also.  Clothing in the Islamic faith is has more meaning than the Christian faith and the point that Google makes is that formal attire wouldn't necessarily impede on the outcome of things.  That if teamwork and individual accomplishments is prideful, then there is no need for anything more.  Google's founders says that work should be challenging and that challenge should be fun because that gives its employees the motivation. Islamic faith plays into the hands of that a bit.  Muslims pray at certain times of the day and that motivation to do something for themselves and their religion is inspiring and Google would support that.  However, Google would probably not support the old tradition.

Of course believers of any religion have the right to freedom of religion and have the right to dress any way that they see fit.  I just find it interesting that this is the logic behind the casual style of Google.

iPad 3

Today we got to play with iPads in class.  I recently got to hold one for the first time right before second term started, however, it is still nice to have the latest in technology within reach.   Its obvious that a couple of things got tweaked since the original iPad, like the cameras on the rear and front of  the device.  I personally think that is the greatest addition to any technological device.  For too long young people have tried to aim the lens directly at themselves when attempting to take pictures by themselves.  But I digress... The iPad is big news because it is innovative and empowering to the self.

In Steve's original iPad launch on January 2010, Jobs talked about wanting to be at the corner of Liberal Arts and technology.  One of his slides represented this concept by having a street corner marked by Liberal Arts and Technology streets.  The image is in the video.  This is grabbed my interest because I was able to understand what he meant by saying that only because I had an iPad in my hands.  As a Lawrence University student, I feel that me and perhaps the rest of my classmates can understand the connection between liberal arts.  Since we attend a liberal arts college, just as Jobs did, we know that the purpose of liberal arts is to connect different disciplines in order to have a well-rounded individual.  That is why English majors must have a math course and a science course before they graduate.  Even though it is not their major it is understood that you should dapple into many different things that you otherwise wouldn't do.  Jobs always talks about going to that calligraphy class at Reed and how that inspired one of the many traits of Macs. The iPad is at the corner of technology and liberal arts. The state of the art design makes it look futuristic and its simplicity makes it accessible to a wide spread community.

I believe that the iPad made a hit in the market for tablets everywhere.  Jobs had the great innovation for stylus-less touch screens.  The iPad 3 has a better touch precision than the first Apple iPad but that is to be expected with any new versions of the same device.  Microsoft used a stylus because at the time that was a big deal and it even gave a professional look to the owner of it.  Jobs' Apple iPad gave the feel of something less professional and a lot more informal.  The informality of the iPad design makes it a great customer buy because of the personal identity that comes along with it.   The iPad successfully grasps the personal life of its customers with liberal arts and technology.

The iPad was Jobs' own desire.  He wanted to create a tablet for a long time and finally got his chance in 2007.  Jobs' sense of design amazes me.  He and his Apple soul mate, Ives, have this thing for simplicity.  Their obsession with simplicity can be compared to that of simplifying fractions.  The more you simplify the smaller your fraction becomes.  That is how Ives and Jobs saw their technology.  Other companies created there computers by engineering everything that needed to go inside of the device and then told the design team to make a case for all the compartments.  In creating devices in this manner, all you got was an ugly, intimidating device.  Although the device would allow you to do so much more, its sales would not be great due to the customer friendliness that it essential in good sales.  Jobs and Ives knew better than to create a device this way.  They would first design the casing into something simple and beautiful, and then they would take it to the engineering team and tell them to make everything fit.  They would have many meetings discussing the components that could be left out and what couldn't.

The iPad faced many controversies the day that Jobs released it.  He was proud to show off his pride and glory just for it to be shot down in a flurry of insults and touch criticism.  The comment that I am most familiar  with is "The iPad looks like a bigger iPod."  I found myself saying this when the iPad came out because it still had the same shape and personally it was just too big for me.  No one paid attention to the size of the iPad.  No one cared whether or not they made 20 different models of the iPad and played with them daily to see if they would be the right size.  No one cared that one side of the rectangle was sloped so that grabbing it off the table would have been easier.  There were no ports or anything that could have distracted a customer from the "futuristic sleekness".  Jobs was upset and even sent email responses to those who insulted  the iPad.

The iPad's rants and insults did not continue for long.  The first day that it came out in stores, it sold nicely.  Consumers began to compliment and give gratitude toward Jobs because of the iPad.  One blogger, even changed his initial opinion about the iPad and said that once he got the device into his hands that he knew how great it was.  The simplicity had paid off. There was a very interesting story of an illiterate six year old boy given an iPad for the first time in his life.  He was able to play a few games on i without having seen an iPad before.  Obviously, great things came from the simplicity concept that they so dear.

The self and the Wii

In our last class, Mr. Cartwright mentioned the trend that is happening in the American society with the example of the popular gaming system the Nintendo Wii.  He commented that the Wii gave the impression of community and family, but Nintendo recently shipped the new Wii that is the opposite of community. In the first Nintendo Wii commercial community, family and friendship is the apparent theme here.  No home that the group visits is alone.  There is the image that this game needs to be played in a group of your closest friends, or even strangers. However, the Wii U is opposite.  In the clip of the Wii U commercial the person playing moves from the TV to the smaller device to allow another person to watch the TV.  The apparent community nearly leaves the Nintendo Wii platform.  There is also another scene where two people are playing a game of go and there is a player obviously winning.  The losing player becomes a sore loser and throws the pieces off the game board in a very impressive way.  This display of poor sportsmanship shows me that Nintendo is platforming a little less for the community and a little more for the self.  I do not, however, blame Nintendo for their marketing.  They are merely following the direction in which the American society is going.


Within the gaming community there are all types of games to suit everyone's fancy.  There are games that are meant to be one-player games and then there are games that are meant to be for the whole participation for the whole family.  In order to combat the Nintendo Wii, Microsoft released the Kinect for the Xbox 360.  Now the Kinect was showing the same commercials that inspired families to join in on the fun.  There is something about these devices and these gaming systems that urged the costumers to not play unless they were with others.  In my own experience, I remember my mother and grandmother wanting to play the Kinect because they thought it was amazing not having a controller and overall they wanted to do what the commercials urged us to do; and that is the play together.  For the release day of the Kinect, Microsoft held a concert in Times Square and brought about one hundred dancers to dance for one of the new games.  This represented community in a flashy way.  Microsoft brought together people with talent and similar interest and made the product marketable to many different consumers across the country.  This is the thinking that went into the production off this device in 2010.  Xbox has an online network called, Xbox Live.  Xbox Live is really popular with the consumers and is marketed very well.  Being online means that you can connect with other people around the world.  This is an awesome feature that has been a great success til this day.  However, this access to a bigger world may actually be taking you smaller.  It allows you to get to know people from across the world but not the people sitting on the couch right beside you.

In 2006, when the Nintendo Wii was released, there was a need for community and friendship in the United States.  The Wii was able to provide that. In 2010, the Kinect was able to achieve that goal too.  Now, games are started to recede from that platform of community and friendship because that is the direction we, as Americans, are coming to.  In class we talk about how these technology is beginning to become infused with our personality, with our goals and and dreams.  We are starting to get into our "self" image more than ever.  That is why companies like Nintendo, Microsoft, Apple and SONY are having to market out of the standard community platform and more toward the personal consumer.

Zen Buddhism and Steve Jobs

I understand now!  While reading the biography I found Jobs' sudden attitude change after high school to be odd.  Jobs' childhood was something to sympathize.  Perhaps because of this initial introduction into Steve's childhood I subconsciously sided with his controversial attitude.  I want to believe that the same socially awkward grade-skipper was indeed the arrogant, perfectionist of Apple.  Then I saw the video, Talks of Shunryu Suzuki Roshi at Tassajara Zen Mountain Center.  As Suzuki explains a few Buddhist words and their meanings I feel that Steve expertly portrayed some of the qualities.

     

Can you not hear Steve as the bird?  Steve lands into the offices of different companies and takes them as his own!  Steve's business etiquette, before he started wearing suits, was unprofessional and, honestly, plain unhygienic.  Not showering and not putting on deodorant is a turn off to many businessman and civilians alike.  For Steve to feel that he can come dressed  in any attire comfortable was surprising.  From this clip, it seems that his Buddhist practice supports the idea of taking a being and place as your own.  This perception that Steve had would either be taken or abhorred.  There are many cases of Jobs being taken as the dirty, smelly hippie with the bad attitude, for instance, when he landed in England right before his trip to India.  However, there are others that accept his behavior and even like it.  For instance, Al Alcorn allowed Steve to work at Atari after he refused not to leave and wore a robe with sandals.  Obviously, this behavior inspired by his Buddhist practice, was essential in his life and opened many new doors.

It is obvious that Jobs felt comfortable in his attire and  behavior but did he choose to act that way because of the inspiration of Suzuki and Buddhist practice? The qualities that set Steve apart from most businessmen at the time was his sense of style and his behavior.  Suzuki explains that we all have a reason for being here and that no two things are alike.  I think after graduation Steve developed a love for his search for enlightenment and when he came across similar Buddhist teachings he craved to be different.  Steve needed something that would set him apart from the rest.  Steve's clothing and lifestyle left a first impression worth remembering. 

Steve's search for enlightenment led him to different places like India and allowed him to meet different people.  It is apparent that Steve's journey and practice of Buddhism shows not only in his innovative appliances, but also in his personality and behavior.  

Here is the full video:

Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson: Response

Steve Jobs was not the  man that I thought he was.  Honestly, I didn't know about Steve Jobs before his passing.  I am not the owner of many Apple products.   I had heard of Bill Gates and his clear absence of people skills.  As I began reading, I understood that this man  was probably going to be the same as Gates.  In Jobs' high school he was the odd man out, and  but many famous people are bullied or picked on when they were younger.  However, by the end of the sixth chapter I understood that this man was no longer socially awkward.  He was a somebody.

The first thought of Jobs being a man was when he started using drugs.  As a motivational speaker or a role model many people do not choose to have that part of their life exposed.  Then if they do actually admit it then it is seen as a regret and shameful action they had partaken in. However, in the book, Jobs admitted to doing it, a lot.  Then in one paragraph they mentioned that LSD was the reason why there were so many new and great technologies that littered the market.  Those who took it thought and different way.  They thought of things that no one had though they needed.  The author, Isaacson, did a good job in not having an underlying message of advocacy towards taking LSD.

I found it interesting that many of the negative things were brought up, as they should be.  Jobs told Isaacson that nothing was off limits in his life.  That included his screaming therapy, drug usage, parental ties. Jobs had a rough childhood because of the adoption.  Even though his adoptive parents told him that he was adopted and gave him his confidence boosting, he grew unstable.  Sometimes I wonder if he felt the way towards his parents because of their education limitations.  Once you find a weakness to someone, then you lose respect for that person and authority.  It didn't help that his adoptive parents would give him his way most of he time.

Despite all of the negative things in his life Jobs' will grow up to have one of the best corporations in the world. I was shocked that early on there were skeletons the closet, but because of them, it makes the book all the more interesting and enticing.  Jobs is a borderline jerk.  I have mixed feelings about him.  There are times when I want to dislike him and then there are other times when I want to say he is a hero, yet there is no evidence of why I make him out to be a hero.  Its as though I cannot imagine the man who made created Mac and Apple ware was a jerk.

Steve Jobs Commencement:Response

Steve Jobs is a better speaker than I initially thought.  While reading his biography, I didn't find it particularly unusual that he had been such a  loner and  outcast in his grade school years.  There are many people who are ahead of their time and obviously this was Steve Job's case. He obviously, grew out of his childhood mannerism and developed the business man, keynote speaker that appeared before the Stanford class. Jobs' points that he so elegantly delivered at the speech were surprisingly sentimental and extremely insightful.  The three ideas that he expressed reminded me of very necessarily views that one should take up.

 The first point the Jobs touched on was having faith that everything will work out.  This is quite a hard concept to adapt because upon delivery, Jobs made it seem as though dropping out of school was the greatest thing he ever did.  Jobs takes pride in the fact that he dropped out of college, but he also does not let on to think that it is for everyone, nor did he come off as a salesman of the choice.  There is no pressure to drop out, he only lets the audience in on how well he like the choice.  However, becoming a dropout was not to be seen traditionally in Jobs' case.  Even though he dropped out he was still able to stay on the floors of his university friends and audit classes.  To Jobs, dropping out merely meant that he was able to take the courses that he wanted to take.  By not wasting time on the required courses Jobs was ale to pull free and be his own person.  He was finding himself when he sought after the courses he wanted. He made the point that when you have to have faith that things will work out.  Using a calligraphy class as an example, Jobs was able to express how even the smallest things in the oddest of circumstances will connect with your future in a good way.  Even something like taking class in college can help in revolutionizing technology.  This faith that he talks about can be compared to many people showing their faith toward a deity.  Instead of putting faith into someone else Jobs explained that it you should faith in yourself.  Jobs said "You have to trust in something; your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever."  The example he uses all pertained to the self and not a deity or religious background.  From this quote, it is clear the Jobs has an opinion about pertaining to ones' self.

Jobs brings up a story about following your heart to do what you love.  This sends a person on mission to find something that you love and stick to it.  In most religions there is a state of place or a place that every follower wants to get to.  For example, Christians want to get to heaven.  To Jobs, I feel as though his heaven, or nirvana, is doing what he loves.  He was fortunate to have found that early on in his life.  But there are many people who find themselves at a job they hate or a job that they just don;t love.  In Bellah's book, he tells about a person who works for a community who he loves.  He loves the community so much that he is blind to the actuality of the town and its people.  This man did what he loved.  Jobs wanted the audience as well as others, to believe that if you just did what you loved then it all would come together.  There was once a saying the went something along the lines of,  "Do what you love and the money will come".  Many are afraid of pursuing what they love because it may not be any money in that career.  Not everyone's love is multi-million dollar technology corporations like Jobs, but there is still some truth to his words.  If you want to do what you love then you won't mind working that much harder to ensure that it stays that way.  This is a goal in life that Jobs brings to the forefront of their minds because of the importance of it.

The point that Jobs makes is that you have to live life to the fullest because death is around the corner.  Jobs asked himself everyday that if he died the next day, would he want to be doing what he is doing right now.  That comment struck me, because your body can go on autopilot without you even realizing.  So many times we are faced to do things that we don't want to do on a daily basis and we only put up with it because it seems like the right thing.  Consciously asking ourselves whether what we do is to die for or not, lets our minds think for its self and its own happiness. Jobs talked about how death is around the corner and that you should do what you feel is right because how much longer will you have.

The commencement was a wonderfully delivered.  The ideals and suggestions that Jobs gave were insightful and inspiring.  The points that he made were building blocks to living a religious life without the religion.  The place that he felt everyone should aspire to go was finding that something you love, that way when you ask yourself every morning if you are doing something worthy of your last days, then you can say yes.  That is why he wants you to put your faith in yourself or "whatever".  Not only faith in yourself, but also in the things that you want to do.  In the end of the speech Jobs explains that the graduates are now young and new, but that they will soon be becoming the old and that they have to lay down their foundation and their mark for the future generations.

Topic #1 "Turn Right" (Life Hack)

A GPS is perhaps one of the most useful technologies I use.  I couldn't tell you what the abbreviation stood for without Google, but I know how to utilize one.  A GPS is there to light the path for those with a bad sense of direction.  It helps to appease frantic and nervous drivers.  This device literally gives your life shortcuts.  The market demand for a GPS is high enough that vehicles are already equipped with them. With a GPS the world gets a little bigger and your private life gets even smaller.

    As a memory-driven driver, I am able to get to where I am going based on the landmarks surrounding it.  I can't remember street names or interstates. With the GPS,  I don't have to be embarrassed by my lack of knowledge of street names.  By avoiding the socially awkward conversation there is one less interaction between a human.  The GPS continues taking away different interactions between its owners and others.  Just imagine you are lost in a suburban community and you stop at a gas station to ask for assistance.   Asking someone not only slows down your travel time, but it also lets a stranger in on a piece of valuable information about the whereabouts of your destination.  The GPS gives its owner one less reason to leave their vehicle.  Cars and trucks are both very personal and private ways of transportation.  Unlike using a public transportation system you are able to lock your own doors and control the climate.  With the lessening of interactions between people, you stay to yourself.

The GPS becomes this seemingly idolized object in the car.  If your GPS is inside your car's system, it can turn your music down to be heard.  The GPS can interrupt conversations between the driver and passengers.  No one wants to get lost, therefore everyone in the vehicle pauses for the GPS to give directions.    In some cases, owners like to name their GPS and treat it more importantly than the passengers.  There have been many movie scenes where this is displayed.  It is understood why so many buy GPS and why they chose to personalize them.  A GPS is our ticket to a faster commute, or trip to a big city is a piece of cake. In this economy, who doesn't want that extra time to themselves?  Just realize that the GPS can make unnecessary interactions disappear and ease your state of mind.  It makes your private life, more private in this way.

I have never written a blog and I didn't think I would ever have to write one for homework.  Apple, Google, Facebook is a very interesting class.  I am finding new ways in which Americans, or even humans, behave and a few reasons behind it. I am forced to think differently about the very actions I participate in.  I think America is all  about move, move, move.  Not many want to stop and think because there is so much to be done.  This will make us think.  I hope I am doing this blogging right.  *TEST RUN*