3.2 Follow Up

Were you more interested in the technical/material or social dimensions we have discussed this week? Explain your interest and how it relates to your interests more broadly. Pick one of the contests for control that we have reviewed this week? Which actors would you have (or do you) side with and why? What have you learned about the relationship between technology, society and change by reading Lessig’s chapters? Were there any new questions/insights that reading these chapters inspired? I would have to say that this week in class I was more interested in the social dimension of the material. I really don't know that much about the technical aspects of this kind of stuff. I get the technical stuff... Okay actually im going to change coarse. I would say that i enjoyed learning about both the technical/ material and social dimensions of the material we covered in class this week. I would say they they were both interesting and serve the same importance in learning this information. I would say my interest is based around the idea that I want to learn as much as possible about anything and everything this class has to share. Relating to to my interests more broadly... thats just how I am I want to know about everything and be as well rounded as possible. In the contest between free-resource and controlled resources I would side with free resources. I believe that tools should be provided to the world via internet for free such as this blogger account and all of the google gadgets and all the free resources out there. I believe that control resources should still be available however like things are today. However i strongly regard ripping off other artists/ information systems is wrong and should not occur. Artist's need to make a living too. I've learned that technology has had a great effect on our lives as they have always in human history have done. As of now i dont think I have any further questions that I could raise. The only thing id like to say though is that I cant wait to see what the next 10 years brings!

Question 2

"To take what is our culture; "rip" it- meaning to copy it; to "mix" it- meaning to reform it however the user wants; and finally, and most important, to "burn" it- to publish it in a way that others can see and hear. Digital technology could enable an extraordinary range of ordinary people to become part of a creative process." This quote from p.9 of chapter one in Lessig's book The Future of Ideas captured my attention because I find the author goes against his main argument while encouraging people to be "more creative." The quote is referring to the music industry specifically however i believe that it applies to all design and creation realms. I find it interesting because the author encourages people to "rip-off" someones hard work through open source technologies in order to allow people to become less ordinary and more creative. It seems to me, if you wanted to encourage people to keep being creative and less ordinary. That you would encourage someone to create original works on their own instead of ripping off and leaning on someone else's hard work for the back bone of a piece. To me possibly the artist in me believes that one should have to jump through the same hoops as the people before them. By doing so it would keep the creative juices flowing in our society that Lessig encourages. As well as moving society even further forward than before compared to the little step forward that is achieved by ripping off and using someone else's work. So the question I want to raise is... Is it better for our society to be shaped by extraordinary creative people, or is it just okay to let the ordinary creative people use the hard work of others to shape our society? If its okay will the authenticity of our society still remain?

Blog 3.1

1.The development of the Internet was similar to the development of the telegraph in a couple of ways. For one thing the internet as well as the telegraph were completely new ideas for their times. These new technologies both had a great impact on peoples lives that affected how they interact in their daily lives. Both allowed for people to communicate across distances. As well the impacts changed more than communication they both spread into different areas of our society such as having effects in our political, social, economical systems. Likewise both systems started off rough in some ways. The telegraph sparked conflict with companies who didn't like the idea of another competing system such as the postal service. The internet sparked many conflicts based off of social issues surrounding the many technological disasters of the era. Not everything was the same in the development of the internet and the telegraph. I have found that when the telegraph was invented, it was such a new concept and idea that people were amazed and didn't understand it. It seems as when the internet was invented people were starting to get used to these advances in technologies and weren't as amazed or ignorant in how it worked. 2.I don't think the way i Have thought about the relationship between, technology and society and how they interact based off our discussion about the invention has changed. I have found that the invention of these technologies are very simular in the aspects of our lives that they have changed and that the overall reaction of people were about the same. I feel like both of these technologies have been a valuable asset to how we live and interact within our society today.

Blog 2.2

Our original question: -What might we learn about the relationship between technology, society, and change by studying the case of the telegraph? Your individual reflections: -What have you learned about this relationship? I have learned that technology can have a greater impact on our lives than simply making our lives easier to deal with. Technology can extend past our physical relationship with it and can have a greater meaning. It has the ability to effect the world in a greater way such as in the reading, when the telegraph seemed to grip our entire country and had the ability to effect everybody's life. From this it can be seen that the effect of technology can actually be negative rather than manly positive outcomes. -What tensions did this technology spark? When the telegraph was invented it made long distance communication faster and easier to do. Do to the expensive cost of sending a telegram the telegraph was mostly beneficial to the upper class businessman who were able to afford it. This allowed for the richer to get rich and the middle class business to struggle. The Western Union created a monopoly from the telegraph and was saught to have the capibility of controlling various aspects of our economy and politics. Due to these reasons tension sparked up from the invention of telegraph technology. -What other ides/questions have interested you? Gardiner Greene Hubbard was William Ortons main competitor, or the man who was trying to minimize his "monopoly" over the telegraph communication system. He claimed to be fighting for rights of the middle class against the upperclass. Could it be said that after Hubbard's many failed attempts of becoming wealthy himself. He being jealous of rich businessmen sought to tear down the Western Union claiming by doing so to be in it for the middle class. While scheming his way to becoming a rich business man at the same time?