Robots Are Taking Over!

Movies where robots and artificial intelligence take over the world, such as “I, Robot” and “The Matrix Trilogy”, are becoming more prevalent in today’s culture. This is probably because robots ARE taking over the world. With new self-checkout systems, electronic nurses, and commercial production machinery, humans are being displaced from possible jobs. As a result, the human connection created at the checkout counter or with a nurse is being replaced by technology.

Montefiore Medical Center’s Home Health Agency now uses a new electronic nurse of sorts in the homes of patients who have heart problems. This “nurse” monitors vital signs, questions the patient concerning their health, and takes care of the patient without the need for a human nurse. So far, this technology seems to work, but is it more effective at provided medical care than an actual nurse? The nurse is able to see the patient and evaluate their health status better, especially if the patient answers the electronic nurse’s questions incorrectly. Also, the nurse can physically save the patient if they need CPR or any other sort of emergency medical care, while the machine cannot. However, the electronic nurse is less expense in the long run and can provide medical care for the patient 24/7. This new electronic nurse might be able to put up a fight for nursing positions and beat humans out.

Self-checkout systems are also becoming more common in grocery and retail stores. These machines are quick and easy to operate once you learn how to, but they may prove difficult to learn for the older generations. As a consumer, you are able to check out more quickly and avoid the long lines and the normal checkout counters. Conversely, fewer jobs are available in stores who convert to this technology. Checkout clerks will be less common, and fewer jobs will be available.

With any technologies like the aforementioned ones, there is a loss of human connection. When we stop interacting with each other, our ability to interact in society is hindered. Society needs these human connections to remain a society. As quick and efficient as these new technologies may be, we lose both jobs and human connection as a result. Robots will effectively take over the world at this rate.

Photo Credit

Facebook: a Stadium to Fight Your Personal Battles?

             Communicating with someone via social networking sites is very different from speaking to someone face to face. When conversing with someone online, we are indeed interacting with that person on an interpersonal level, but we are connected to him or her only by the screen in front of us. As much as we are connected, we are equally separated because we are shielded by the vast world of cyberspace. The shielding afforded by online interactions yields an odd twist to interpersonal communication; individuals often feel more at liberty to speak their minds online, sometimes in ways that are harmful or just plain rude. Communication online seems to generate the attitude that we can say whatever comes to mind without consequence. There is a lack of the immediate repercussions a person might feel after a rude comment or an angry outburst in a face to face interaction.

             This stems into a further problem that I continue to see all over the Internet: individuals conducting themselves in a highly distasteful manner as they interact in an impolite fashion not just with strangers online, but with acquaintances and friends as well. What threw this issue into the light for me was witnessing an argument on a close friend's Facebook account that was displayed for anyone to read.    

          Over the past weekend, there was some drama within my friend group: my friend, Jordan, had a horrible break-up with her boyfriend of three years after he left her for another girl. Their mutual close friend, Bobby, was very angry with the boyfriend for doing this to Jordan, and he decided to take Jordan’s “side” of the break-up, even though he was very close with the boyfriend’s family.

            Let me interject to say that there was nothing catastrophic or abnormal about this situation; it was simply petty drama within a friend group. However, in the comment section under Jordan’s changed “relationship status” on Facebook, the ex-boyfriend’s mother began writing rude and suggestive comments about the situation. Insulted, Bobby wrote a retort to her comment, and the two of them began throwing hateful comments at each other via this comment forum. The argument exploded into paragraph upon paragraph of insults, retorts, and screaming angry words (shown by all-capital letters) at each other. The entire argument was directly sent to the “News Feed” (a forum that displays all of the interactions between friends on Facebook) so that all four hundred mutual friends of the people involved could read and comment on the fight.

            What was so astonishing wasn’t that there was an argument taking place, or even that they were fighting about a rather private, personal matter; it was the absolute harshness and lack of thought in the words written, especially on the part of an adult poking around in a situation that was pointless, juvenile drama. Quite frankly, it made her look like a fool. The content of what she said on the forum was so boorish in nature that it was hard to believe that this was the respectable, polite mother we all knew well in real life. To top it off, she began deleting certain comments she had written to make Bobby look like he was saying angry things for no reason. The whole argument made her look extremely ridiculous, yet there is no way for any of us to tell her so without further fueling the fire. 

            Taking this example and countless others I have seen online into account, I would like to implore people to be careful with their words, especially on public forums. It is not a free-for-all place to lower your standards and resort to uncivilized verbal sparring. If you truly have a problem with somebody, talk to the person face to face, and do not hide behind the shield of cyberspace.

           

For Love or Cell Phones

I believe that cell phones destroy relationships.

A couple I know built their relationship on the love of cooking and bus driving. They spent most of their time involved in various activities that did not involve electronics and were almost always together. This togetherness helped their relationship grow and they were one of the closest and most functional couples I've ever known; however, this changed once they made the decision to both get an iPhone. The first argument erupted even before the new phones were purchased. More arguments followed until their new phones arrived; however, things did not get better. They stopped arguing but, the also stopped talking. Instead of sharing and preparing a meal together, they were transfixed on their iPhones. They used their phones for the simplest tasks and preferred the company of an electronic device to each other. I don't know if this will ultimately be the ruin of their relationship but, I do know that it isn't helping them grow closer.

I do admit that cell phones are useful tools in long distance relationships; however, I do think that the overuse of this technology may very easily lead to the downfall of relationships. My boyfriend and I have gone through this same struggle. We decided to downgrade our phones so that they might only serve their basic purpose. I believe that this has helped our relationship and may do so for many others as well.

Facebook Official

A new social phenomenon brought on by Facebook is people announcing their relationship status’ online. According to UrbanDictionary.com, a site that defines slang words and references that one would not find in a more authoritative dictionary, Facebook Official is defined as “The ultimate definition of a college relationship- when on one’s Facebook profile it says ‘In A Relationship’ and your significant other’s name.”

Why is it that Facebook users feel the need to share their relationship status with everyone online? Isn’t that personal information? How awkward is it for couples to announce their breakup online? Ever since the founding of Facebook, couples have had to seriously discuss the ways that they are defining their relationships. Facebook puts pressure on people to define certain aspects of their lives that was not previously discussed until information became public.
If a woman defines herself as “single,” does that give her unwanted attention from men and red flags to be hit on? If a couple goes out on a date or two, are they serious enough to declare to their entire online network that they are in a relationship? Before Facebook, couples would refer to this discussion as the relationship talk. Nowadays, a relationship talk is better known as becoming Facebook Official. The New York Times article “Married or Single: Is That in the Facebook Sense,” from February 2011, discusses some of the pressures of defining relationship status to the virtual world.

While I could understand wanting friends and family to be happy for you in your new relationship, or even the desire to announce that you are no longer single, don’t people worry about what will happen when their relationship ends? I cannot even imagine the humiliation of changing your Facebook status to single and having to respond to comments inquiring about what went wrong. Some things are better left private, and I think that relationship status may be crossing the line.

Related material to this post can be found here.

If it's not on Facebook, it's not official!

“Mom, I’ve been meaning to tell you this…but um, he asked me out…we are official now”
“Wow! That’s great!...but how come I haven’t seen it on Facebook yet?”

I’m sure this scenario is either familiar or sounds true enough to be real to most of us. Our generation seems to be not only physically or mentally dependent on online social networks, but also socially dependent. The most influential social network these days is Facebook, which has over 500 million active users worldwide. Facebook limits its users to one of six different “relationship statuses”, and also gives the option not to post a status at all. According to a Time Magazine article regarding Facebook relationships, 60% of Facebook users choose to post their relationship status. Interestingly enough, most of them are either “single” or “married”. It seems as if Facebook puts social pressure on its users to share as much as possible through the network with their friends or with the general public. Consequently, users post their pictures, locations, and common friends, and in addition-their personal relations with their “partners”.

By giving their users the decision whether to announce their new or current relationships or not, Facebook creates this social expectation, which most people want to meet. No one wants to date someone who refuses to be in a relationship on Facebook, while a person who is open to suggestions would want to keep his or her options open by making sure the word “single” is loud and clear on his/her page. Furthermore, Facebook makes it easier to follow your friends’ or acquaintances’ relationships, while also giving some insights for the gossipers in society. After all, who doesn’t enjoy seeing ten “Likes” or multiple congratulating, and sometimes dramatic comments about his or her own changed relationship status?

Other than students following their friends’ teenage on /off relationship statuses, adults also utilize Facebook as a reachable medium to publicize their current love life situation. I mean, it is much easier rejecting a romantic date by “friend requesting” your fellow worker, letting him see your page, rather than saying “Sorry, I’m engaged” face to face, right? In the same Time article, an engaged couple shared an interesting story about announcing their engagement to the world via a simple Facebook status change. After receiving an angry phone call, they realized they forgot to tell the news to their own parents who ended up finding out through the network. Evidently, society believes Facebook provides the best and fastest way to announce, share, track and comment about personal relationship statuses of the people around us. Without this wide updating network, people would feel “out of the loop” and would be less entertained by judging others’ decisions or following others’ achievements. Once again, we fall into the online trap- getting addicted to being constantly connected.


So bottom line, to share or not share?

Online Identities: Opening the Door for Friends and Bullies

There was once a time when you played with who ever was on the playground. When the world extended only as far as the tan bark and you had to find self-validation in your fellow classmates. That time has been long forgotten as today’s youth now turns to a much higher power in their search for identity and acceptance. The power of the Internet has allowed people to find support for any aspect of their identity, and it has been a godsend for those who have recreated themselves via social networks. In the true spirit of postmodernism, many have begun to blur the borders of the self, abandoning the idea of a consistent self for online identities and profiles. These online avatars are worn and shed like clothes (Allison et al). However, the Internet has also given way to a new breed of bully that preys on the exposed and more sensitive parts of people’s identities.

The PBS documentary, Growing up Online (on reserve in Shields) shows teens who have used the Internet to find their niche and to locate others who support them. This affirmation can be beneficial as a depressed boy can receive much needed support or an adopted girl can find solace in others sharing her pain. On the other hand, some of the interviews in the documentary reveal darker forms of support. One girl found an online community of other anorexic teens that support her disorder, encouraging her to eat less and be skinnier. For better or worse, affirmation is now just a click away as individuals from across the world can band together.

The anonymity afforded by the Internet has acted as a stepping-stone for the shy or socially challenged. What you could not say on the playground you can say online. Jumping at the promise of affirmation, many have begun to express what they where afraid to, uploading parts of themselves onto the Internet. Psychologists have begun to utilize this in therapy for those with Asperger’s Syndrome. Although being constantly connected can help a shy individual break out of their shell, it also opens the door for bullies to get in and directly attack aspects of a person’s identity.

In his dissertation, William Woolley found that there is a statistically significant link between schoolyard bullies and cyberbullies. The Internet does not mutate a person into a bully, but acts as a force multiplier, giving new powers to an old bully. This new breed of bully is devastating, and unlike the schoolyard bully, it does not stop at the end of recess or even at the end of class.

The Internet can expose vulnerable aspects of individuals on an extremely public stage. What makes this worse is that many have voluntarily put parts of them selves up for everyone to see and attack. In his book, The Saturated Self, Kenneth J. Gergen argues that traditional ideas of a concrete identity have given way to the dissolution of the self in Postmodernism. We no longer cling to a constant identity but play different roles, breaking our selves up into online profiles. As Turkle, a 19-year-old mentioned in “The Development of the self in the Era of the internet and Role-Playing Fantasy Games” (Allison et al) put it: “you can have a sense of self without being one self.” By posting these parts of our identity online, one invites others in, and runs the risk of having ones secrets and self critiqued on a permanent and global stage.

The Postmodern dissolution of the self onto the Internet has proved a double-edged sword. Individuals can now seek affirmation for any aspect of their identity and have opened up in order to do this. However, cyberbullies can target these presented parts of people’s identities and do devastating psychological and social damage. This begs a few questions: Why are the assaults on our online identities so devastating if Internet avatars are seen as roles, personas we can don and shed? Why is cyber bullying seen as a more rampant and extreme problem if Woolley is correct that the Internet does not create a bully?

Anonymity in Cyberspace: Faceless Cage-Fighting from the Safety of Your Home?

Last week, 17-year-old Kayla, a girl from my theatre community in my hometown, stood up on stage and “came out” to her high school at an all-school assembly. She did not do this just to inform the world that she was gay; in a powerful and touching speech, she cracked open the taboos and barricades surrounding the acceptance of gay teens and gay marriage. Kayla’s speech was heartfelt and brave as she spoke about a personal subject that is very controversial. Kayla’s words were not confined to the time and space of the assembly, however; a video of her speech was posted on Youtube.

I was one of the very first people to watch the video on Youtube. I immediately posted the video onto my Facebook to share it with all of my online friends. By the end of the day, thirty of my friends had reposted the video. After three days, all of our friends and many friends of friends had seen the video. After six days, almost everyone in my hometown had seen or at least heard of Kayla’s speech. It was the talk of the town. It did not stop there; after a week, the video went beyond the boundaries of people who know Kayla: the video went viral.

Before the video went viral, the comment section was full of friend and family’s support, love, and admiration. As the video began to spread, complete strangers praised her words, her bravery, and her message. The upheaval of positive support was enormous. Yesterday, however, as the video reached 16,000 views since it was posted last Monday, some anonymous person wrote a short and hateful comment violently opposing not just the girl’s argument, but also the girl and everyone who supported her. There was an instant outcry against this comment, and things immediately got messy: the comment forum exploded into a battleground against this negative comment. It was like Pandora’s box had been cracked open: everyone began hashing out their opinions against the offender in a brusque manner. A few more rude and negative comments against Kayla’s argument appeared. These negative comments sparked angry and sometimes equally hurtful responses. Even the people who were against the comment were violent in the way the dealt with and answered the original offender. 

The conversations soon escalated into branched-out cyberspace fights, and soon a large majority of the conversation threads on the comment page no longer had anything to do with the actual video. Instead, every few seconds new comments would appear to bash apart a previous commentator. The majority of the people shooting angry comments back and forth did not even make an effort to censor what they were saying by trying to be polite and reasonable. Those that tried to do this initially quickly became incensed by the “ignorance” or unwillingness for the offender to see their point of view.

I was left wondering: what on Earth made it all right for people to brawl in such an undignified way on a public forum? Part of the answer, without a doubt, is the veil of anonymity cloaking a person to the point where they find themselves at liberty to say whatever they please, no matter how insensitive, hurtful or extreme. The comment section for Kayla’s video has turned into a bitter brawl as angry comments are flung back and forth between completely anonymous people. These people stopped arguing about the video and started openly insulting each other with profanities and accusations, most of which have nothing to do with any of the issues presented in Kayla's argument. 

What does this say about the power of anonymity in such a public forum? It allows people to say violent things that they would never say in person. Yet from the safety of their perch behind their computer screen, a person can say anything that they please and distance themselves emotionally from the repercussions their words might cause.

As of this afternoon, the video has jumped from the 16,000 views it had yesterday to a whopping 70,000 hits. Since this morning, over 600 comments have accumulated in the comment forum. Watching a video spread so rapidly and generate such a large response is an eye-opening vision of the strange functions of this modern world of cyberspace. It leaves me with these questions: is it OK to argue in this uncivilized, potentially hurtful way on a public forum? Or has the internet reduced human disagreements into faceless cage-fighting from the safety of your home? 

Talk to the Handsfree

The photo above is a link to a recording of my senior project at UCLA, an interpretive dance about my addiction to my cell phone. The project was based on my senior thesis, titled "Talk To The Handsfree," and expanded upon the ways in which long distance relationships affect our short distance relationships with the people around us.

The first ten seconds of the video was a prank played on the audience. After the curtains opened and shortly before the lights went up, I asked all of the performers to whip out their cell phones to check the time or for text messages and missed calls. Sure enough, one of my professors who had sat in the house with the rest of the audience informed me later on that over half the audience had done the same thing and it took them a few moments to look up from their own phones to see that we were mocking them.

The first section of the performance was a joke about the awkwardness of being in such close proximity to other bodies (i.e. when we are in a crowded elevator). My theory was that we have grown quite bad at socializing with neighbors or making new friends quickly because cell phones and wi-fi allow us to take the comfort of our already-made-friends and family with us wherever we go; whereas before these techological developments, we may have been forced to form new relationships. But then again, perhaps I'm wrong, and we've always been awkward with face to face interactions.

The rest of the project comments on our relationships to and through our cell phones, automated voice messaging and automated responses (i.e. "lol" and "omg"), multi-tasking, being in multiple places at once, and so on. I like to leave room for interpretation of course.