Final Blog Entry

At first, I thought blogs were mostly diaries. But Christine brought up the point that blogs were often synonmous with content rather than the format. Format-wise, I've warmed up to blogs. I really like how the reader can see one's thought process evolving over time.

So what is a blog afterall? It's a series of writing over time, but a blog can be anything you want it to be. Journalism. Diary. Academic journal, etc. It would be really interesting to see how blogs play out in academia. Authors can keep a day to day log of their writing and thoughts about where their writing is headed. I can't imagine any other uses for them.

A collaborative blog might be interesting. I've seen collaborative blogs by friends, but the entries never really seem to connect all that well. However, should we all decide to answer one question and one question only, the different entries lined up together can add better perspective. I suppose that might be one way to go about it. It would suit the requirements of PWRII.

Okay that's it. I hope I answered all the questions and more. I had fun trying this out...but everything has an end.

Farewell.

Memorable Moments

1) Derek did something with music. Although it was a bit loud, it really jolted my attention. I like how the music didn't start at the very beginning of the presentation, but kinda in the middle, when one wasn't expecting it as much. Elements of surprise are always good. Plus, the rest of the music seemed to really go with whatever he was talking about.

2) Live browser searches were really interesting. Being really adept with tech, etc helps. Most people found this a great show of ethos.

3) Several people stood at the podium. I think, even without powerpoint, their presentation was really interesting. I liked all of Fred's anecdotes. They were really funny and shocking. Humor adds to a good persona.

Anyways, there are probably more examples. I liked a little bit from everyone's presentation, but am now at a loss for more examples (blame it on short term memory).

Presentation Plans

My presentation is on Monday, but I still don't have a concrete idea of what I'm going to do.

For content, I was thinking of presenting a case study on Toysmart.com. It would help me explain more in detail the concepts and questions that I will be working with in my research paper.

Structurally...I'm not sure how I want to set this up. I definitely want to work on a snazzy introduction; this time I was hoping for a theme to tie my presentation from the beginning to the end. At any rate, I am probably going to incorporate a Powerpoint presentation (the horror, the horror) to enhance the audience's understanding.

Edit: 5 minutes later after discussing my plans with Jason.

Find actual website that was going to auction off customer information and present in a scenario-like manner--pointing to a random person in the classroom and say "Hey you, how would you feel about a commerce site auctioning off your credit number?" Helpful idea, but I think I have to have more content.

Hypertext

I read "Electronic Reading" on Hypertext Now.

It starts off with, "There is no longer room for doubt: the literature of our immediate future will be electronic. Our scientific and technical writing, our journalism, and our stories: all will be written and read on screens."

*COUGH* Excuse me, what did you say?

Most of the people I know still print out electronic reading and read it on paper. The author argues that with better pixelation and what not...blah blah blah, then reading hypertext would be a pleasure. He makes ludicrous counter-arguments that being able to read the book anywhere even in bed is not necessarily a good thing--"putting us to sleep is not the highest aspiration of literature."

Instead of continuing my angry monkey dance, I will now turn to make a few (hopefully rational) points as counter-counter-arguments.

*
1) Portability:
One of the great features about books is that you can read it anywhere. Even outside, on a sunny day, which might otherwise blur your laptop LCD screen. I guess you can bring a laptop anywhere, but it's not so lightweight.

2) Physicality:

In an overly digital high tech world as ours today, it's nice to be able to actually physically touch the information, to flip through the pages. I always sigh with pleasure and pride after I finish a particular thick book, but I can never do the same for a website that I scrolled forever. I have no physical mark of how much I actually absorbed. I have no physical way of underlining, scribbling notes, or doodling over the illustrations.

3) Organization:

The author makes a point that arguments are not linear and hypertexts would be the best way to adapt that. Sure, maybe if you make a complicated map and provided links. But hypertexts don't do as well as books in synthesizing the information together. And really, if it was that complicated and nonlinear, most people wouldn't want to read it anyway.

4) Adaptability:

Hypertext is more changeable than paper text, he says; it's better because it can cater to our need, and people feel like it speaks more to them, then at them. Granted, he has a point that hypertext is more easy to change than paper. But I don't think it makes a difference in Electronic Reading, because at the time we're reading, the text is fixed.

The only thing he didn't latch on to in his argument was that with hypertext, you have the dimension of time. If things were not merely revised but put into a sequential order (like blogs), you can actually see the development of the author's thought over time. That's one advantage hypertext has over books.

5) Format of Content

It's really hard to adapt a book onto online. You can't just load a book onto the internet and call it hypertext. Somehow the long winded sentences and the long paragraphs don't really fit there. We're more tempted to read Faulkner on paper than on the internet.

*

I concede that in certain cases, hypertext may be more useful than on paper--when it's short, scannable, and with lots of cool illustrations. But what about the other cases? Do we really want to read Jane Eyre online? Maybe you like reading Foxtrot comics and short funny sketches on The Best Page in the Universe. But when was the last time someone asked you about your favorite hypertexts?

My most memorable readings have always been offline.

The Point of Powerpoint

Response to Julia Keller: Is Powerpoint the Devil?

She makes a good case about how powerpoint is good if you want business-like presentations, but not suitable for all others. It's a very reasonable argument. I don't think of Powerpoint as necessarily good or bad.

Everything has its time and place. Surely, powerpoints are not good to use if you're Abe Lincoln giving the Gettysburg address (not that old Abe had a choice). Surely, powerpoints are not appropriate to use if you're a coach and you want to boost your players' morale before their last shot. Powerpoint should not be used in place of an eloquent speech, with its clickety bullet items measuring out emotions with coffee spoons.

But what about business meetings and reviews? What if you have a lot of graphs to go over? What if you have actual logistical things to go over, with lots of little details? Now it's clickety bullet time. So writing a poignant speech in this case would be just as bad as using a powerpoint as your best man at wedding speech.

Okay, so what about school? Keller poses the question whether classroom learning should be presented like a spirited speech or a business-like review. She explores both sides of the argument, but I think it shows through the following quote what her final biase is:

"What sort of world is reflected in PowerPoint? A world stripped down to briefly summarized essences, a world snipped clean of the annoying underbrush of ambiguity and complication. But is that the world in which we want to live? And are the values prized by businesses - succinctness, directness, manipulation of symbols - also the values we want running our schools and nurturing our children?"

*sniff* That's just so eloquently said. I don't know if I can add more. While I have had some excellent speakers for professors here at Stanford (*cough* Christine, the best PWR teacher in the world), others drain the light out of my day with countless Powerpoint slides. I know we have a lot of material and complicated visuals to cover, but the clickety clicks aren't very inspiring. Moreover, Professors read slides at a break-neck speed; I am not able to absorb the information.

The main problem is that sometimes people think a presentation is the powerpoint. But there is so much more to a presentation. I shouldn't complain because there have been good moments in my classes, when the lecturer talks with so much zeal about the subject at hand. You can see their eyes sparkling and their hands animating. We all know at that moment, he loves what he is talking about; he is not only hoping that you would too, but he is making you love it through the force of his voice. Even after the lecture, some of his words resonated and stayed in your head.

Those are the best lectures, when the point is beyond Powerpoint and still crystal clear.

Oral Presentations

Most of the classes I take are math/science related. With math, I'm lucky enough to get someone who speaks English well, so let's not go there.

Not recently, but I have had Freshman Physics with Osheroff. The man has great oral presentation skills, a surprise considering physicists do not speak English. Some may argue his skills and our undying attention had a lot to do with his Nobel prize...but whatever. He had a knack for describing things. Once, when trying to describe circular polarized waves propagating through air, he waved his arms around in huge circles and then did a ballet twirl. A sight to see. A physicist doing ballet. I don't think any of us later missed questions on circular polarized waves. Humor is a powerful thing; if you can make an audience laugh, you can make the same people love you.

A Chem Professor of mine also had a knack for oral presentations. For twenty minutes every week, he liked to present the latest findings in Organic Chemistry, but again, in a very humorous fashion. Once, he gave a presentation on "How Organic Chemistry Almost Ended my Marriage." First of all, the title was enough to wake up some of the sleepers in the class. He proceeded to tell a very ordinary story about how people developed some drug to develop the disease. The story took a long time, but there was no mention of his marriage. The students all looked at each other, confused and impatiently waiting. We all thought somehow he and his wife, a clinical doctor, both got involved with the project and had a brawl. Finally, he concludes the story of the drug development with "So, how does this story relate to me?"

Click. "I watch TV." There was an uproarious laughter.

Click. "I see this story of how the doctor got all the credit for the drug when it was really the chemist who deserved the fame."

Click. "I get mad."

Click. "I insult my wife, a doctor."

Click. "After a long fight, I apologize. I thought, or so I said, it takes chemists, but doctors, technicians, everyone to all make the miracle drug."

It was an amazingly funny presentation. We laughed so hard until tears came out. His lines had good timing. But more important, he did everything in his usual deadpan face and disguised the irony well. I think for me, humor is an important aspect of oral presentations, especially in an academic setting. In academic settings, people tend to be more uptight; any way to soften the audience would help the presentation tremendously. That's why I find good lectures always involve a laugh, or two.

Research Topics

Today, I went to the Lane Reading room to browse the HAS-Digital section as suggested. After four hours of reading about the digital divide, the Microsoft anti-trust case, and Privacy and Information Access, I became most interested in Privacy. So here are two particular topics.

1) Consumer Privacy- Have you ever wondered how these companies know so much about you? Apparently, one company Equifax actually purchases driver licenses information and stores it in their database along with credit information, etc. Then, they sell it to other companies. All that information about you is a huge asset of Equifax--one of their major ways of revenue. Back in the 1980s, there was a company called Lotus that made nice business program applications, like Lotus 1-2-3, a more popular application than MS Excel at that time.

Anyways, as the story goes, Lotus purchased a lot of consumer information from Excel--name, address, telephone, age, average salary, education, and personal criterions like "Inner city chick." Then, Lotus developed an application (Lotus Marketplace: Households) which provided already made mailing lists for individual businesses. It was probably a very good program for businesses, but right after Lotus released the software, they got a lot of angry calls. Many people were not comfortable with the release of their personal information. Despite making many amends, Lotus decided to finally cancel the software because of the heavy critiques.

If I were to address this topic in my research paper, I would consider answering the following questions: How justified were the consumers in their outrage? What should have higher priority--consumer insecurity about violated privacy or corporate well-being and innovation? Who should own the information--the consumers that comprises the database or the companies that have somehow gathered or bought the information?

2) Privacy in the workplace- Or lack thereof. Companies like to monitor their employees in many ways. In the digital age, it has become even easier for Big Brother to exist on every corner. Some companies have surveillance cameras which record the time the employee takes for bathroom breaks, regular breaks, and lunch. For phone operations, they have bugs which record how long each customer transaction was; this is a way of interpreting the agent's efficiency.

For email, the current law is that companies have a right to read what you write. Most companies encourage email because of its cheapness and efficiency. Some employees are made to think what they write is safe from prying eyes. One company heard rumors of insider trading involving one of its employees; management immediately looked at the email records, found out who, and took appropriate actions. Theoretically, companies only use emails for security reasons. However, there have been many instances of employees' demotion and termination warning merely due to emails which made fun of the company or criticized the manager for his possibly sexist mannerisms.

Information access is such a gray topic. Technically, the companies own the computers and thus what you write on it. Technically, the companies have a right to make sure their employees are working hardly, not hardily working. But it seems like an incredible violation of privacy to me. Anyways, I think I would be addressing similar questions here: What should be the higher priority--employee happiness and security or corporate well-being? Who owns the information of emails, sites visisted, etc?

I don't know which topic I'm particularly leaning toward now. I borrowed materials for both topics, and probably will go with the one about which I have the most to say.

But tell me if the following incidence is a sign from above: Just as I was leaving Green, the santa-claus lookalike behind the desk said that he actually had to take the books out of my bookbag for inspection.

"I'm not really doing this to be doing this," he fumbles through the pages of my books, "They got cameras everywhere monitoring things. So I have to look like I'm actually inspecting."