Week 15 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

Boy, that Mr. Kurzweil sure does have some kooky theories. Well, maybe the theories themselves aren't so far fetched, but the dates that he provides are probably a little off base. I think we're still a decade off from having retina screens and a virtual reality internet experience. However, I don't doubt that such things are achievable in the not too distant future. Kurzweil's vision of technology in the years to come does seem overly optimistic, but by the same token, Joy's vision is far too cynical.

Just because the human race can make advancements in technology, does that mean it should? I say why not? Roll the dice, take a gamble. If the world goes to Hell because of it, at least we'll all get to live out our last days in a virtual paradise thanks to our computer specs. If our robot slaves revolt and turn against us, at least I'll know how to reprogram them (assuming of course they're LEGO robots).

The reality is, no one can completely predict the future. I suppose we can assume that Moore's law will hold true, and our technological leaps will continue, but that could just mean more computer space and faster internet. Look how long it took for the telephone to evolve into the iPhone. We're talking hundreds of years. Surely computers have a much longer journey before they start implanting them into our brains. I'm pretty excited for the future, mostly just to see how things will turn out. The experts can predict all they want, as long as I have my flying car by 2020.

Love,
James

Week 13 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

Net neutrality, what a complex issue indeed. According to the lecture slides, the underlying issue here is rights. Let's be honest though, the real issue is money. Comcast and other network providers want money from big sites like Yahoo and Google, but net neutrality laws prevent that from happening. If those laws didn't exist, network providers could legally tamper with internet traffic, making certain sites load slower for example. In addition, they could give preferential treatment to higher paying internet customers. See, it's all about the bucks.

Of course, that's not the only issue (although it seems to me to be the most important). Without net neutrality, network providers could block certain content for whatever reason. If the internet is anything, it's a place where anyone has the ability to be heard, no matter how annoying. Not everyone can write a story worthy of the New Yorker, but anybody can publish their work on the internet. Without net neutrality, that could all disappear.

The religious right and those lefty liberals, both of which have somewhat controversial opinions depending on who you're talking to, are all for net neutrality. Without it, network providers might choose not to keep their websites around. All those hate groups would be left out as well. Now I for one am not an anti-Semite (just a plain old Semite), but those idiots have the right to free speech just like the rest of us.

It comes as no surprise that our friends the Libertarians apparently oppose net neutrality, however I'm certain that is based purely on principle. The less government involvement the better, as they say. Of course telecommunication companies are opposed as well, and rightfully so. Without the government, they are given free reign over the internet, which sadly gives them a great deal of power, considering the amount of time most people spend surfing the web. They would become more powerful than the Corleones and the Sopranos combined. Just look at the cable industry. I can't express the amount of hatred I have towards Comcast, their horrible customer service, and their lack of the Game Show Network, but I don't really have a choice living in San Francisco. It's either them or satalite. Now if a cable service offered every channel for 30 bucks a month (the same as Comcast), they would be missing out on a ton of cash. Telecommunication companies want a piece of that cable action, hence their opposition of net neutrality.

Yes, I am completely for net neutrality.


Love,
James

Week 12 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

The Turing test, a novel idea if I've ever heard one, is a test to determine whether or not a computer is intelligent. However, I would say it's more of a test to determine whether or not the human being chatting with the computer is smart enough to realize he's talking to a robot. Thus the fatal flaw of the Turing Test: it's much too dependent on the human variable. One person might easily be tricked by a chat bot, while another more sophisticated person might find the chat bot to be completely unconvincing. Is it really that impressive that a chat bot was able to convince a couple of pornography enthusiasts? I can only imagine how that chat went.

Much like the IQ test, I don't think the Turing test is very reliable. I can only imagine that a computer's response is completely based on whatever it is asked, so it's possible for two different people to have the exact same conversation with a chat bot. With that in mind, even if it does fool everybody, I don't think it could be called intelligent because it's been programed to think a certain way. I would call HAL from "2001: A Space Odyssey" intelligent because surely he was not programed to feel jealousy, it was something that he learnt on his own. That is a sign of intelligence, not being able to fool a couple of humans.

If there is a better way to test computers for intelligence, I don't want to know about it. Computers should not be made to think. Once that happens, it's only a matter of time before they outsmart us and take over the world. It could already be happening. Maybe the computers are just playing dumb, biding their time for the perfect moment to strike. God help us all.

Love,
James

Web 2.0

Dear Professor Brooks,

Dig to the Other Side is easily the most useful thing I've stumbled across on the internet. Dig answers the question I and many others like me have asked since the beginning of time: where would I end up if I were to dig a hole to the other side of the world? Using this Google Maps mashup, I "dug a hole" from my apartment in Hayes Valley. Where did I end up? Smack dab in the middle of the Indian Ocean. Thankfully Dig exists, otherwise I would have wasted my life digging to the other side of the world only to end up drowning.

Although I fancy myself a master of the culinary arts, sometimes there are just too many dirty dishes to deal with, leaving only one option: eating out. Along with this comes the difficult decision of where to eat. There are just so many restaurants in San Francisco to choose from, it takes hours just to decide which one to go to. Thanks to Wheel of Food, a mashup using Yahoo Local Search, the decision is no longer mine. All you have to do is type in your zip code, choose which meal you'll be eating, and spin the wheel. Unfortunately, the selections are somewhat limited, however later version will surely correct that.

For those of us that are 21+, Pub Walk is a great tool for a Saturday night of debauchery. Coming Google Maps and Geocoder, this mashup catalogues the various drinkeries within your neighborhood and allows you to actually create your very own bar crawl. You can even customize your adventure to only include Karaoke and Biker bars. Let's just say I know what I'm doing this weekend.

Love,
James

Week 10 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

I always get a little worried whenever I give away my personal information, which is why I don't do it so often. I've had some bad luck in that area. About a year ago, I left my credit card at a bar in Daly City. I went on a trip the next day, so I wasn't able to pick up the card for a whole week. A month later, I noticed that $250 had been charged on it at some pizza place in Daly City that I had never even heard of, much less spent that much money there. I marched to the Richmond police station and demanded that they find the bastards that did it, but they told me that the police only got involved when tens of thousands of dollars were at stake. Thankfully, the credit card company came through and refunded me completely, yay! I also learned never to get so drunk at a bowling ally that I forget my credit card at the bar.

I always feel nervous whenever I give out my social security number. I don't even know why we still use those darn things. I'm not going to see a dime of my social security, yet it's still the easiest way for someone to steal my identity. It just doesn't make any sense to me. Anyway, last month when I was applying to rent an apartment, I refused to put my SSN on the form. Knowing landlords, they would probably just throw out the application without shredding, leaving all my personal information for Johnny the bum to find in the trash can. Eventually, my roommate made me start writing it on the forms, because she thought it was the reason we weren't getting offered any houses. My question is, why would a landlord need that information anyway, especially when we gave them current credit reports? That reminds me, I had to give my SSN to the website that I got my credit report from. In that case, I was okay with giving away my information because otherwise I would probably be homeless.

The only organization that I feel completely comfortable with having my information is my bank. If I can trust them with my millions of dollars, surely I can trust them with my SSN. I suppose having USF know my information isn't so bad either. Although, because USF employs students, the door is opened for any undergrad with a school job to possibly stumble across all my info. College kids these days are so tech savvy and broke, they have all the know-how and nothing to lose by stealing my identity and signing up for some credit cards. Thankfully, I'm three and a half years in and nothing has happened, knock on wood.

Whenever I sign up for something on the internet, such as a new e-mail address, a JTT fan club, or a Harry Potter message board, I always give false information. My go-to pseudonym is Sammy Clems, I'm from Alaska (zip code 99501), and I'm ninety-seven years young. I'm also a woman. It's foolproof I tell you.

Love,
James

Week 9 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

I download music. Lots of music. Before this whole high speed internet thing, I bought albums. I think at my peak (right before coming to college), I had nearly 1,000 actual compact discs (LPs, EPs, singles, etc). Then I got some speedy internet. Suddenly, downloading a single song took a couple seconds versus a half hour. Needless to say, I currently have about 100 GBs on the old external hard drive committed exclusively to music. Now, do I download music because CDs are too expensive? Obviously if I was able to amass a collection so large in my high school days, money is clearly not a huge issue (besides which, used CDs can be as cheap as three or four bucks, you just have to know where to go). No, the number one reason that I, and perhaps many others, download music is because doing so gets me the music months earlier than the official release date.

They call it a leak when an album is put on the internet before its actual release date. I would estimate that 90% of the music I've downloaded would fall under this category (with about 3% being something I could have purchased at a store, the other 7% being live bootlegs or unreleased/b-side material). So, am I really even stealing when the music I'm downloading isn't even available in any format to the public? Shoplifting a CD from a store, for example, would constitute stealing in my book. In the end, I would have stolen something tangible: compact disc, plastic casing, liner notes. Furthermore, I would have stolen something that the store owner has already purchased.

Downloading music however is completely different. You don't get a tangible thing; you simply get files that contain the music. Usually, these files will be of a quality that is far below a compact disc. For example, iTunes sells music files at 128 kbps for $0.99. While this might seems like a fair deal for the buyer, the quality of such a file is about 1/10 the quality of an actual CD. Let's say I buy a twelve song album from iTunes. The price would be around twelve dollars, which is a little bit cheaper than an actual CD (depending on where you go, it could be a little more expensive). However, all I've gotten for my twelve dollars are some horrible quality music files. Shouldn't the price directly reflect the product? If the CD is fifteen dollars, than the music files should be 1/10 that price ($1.50), minus the dollar it would have been to produce a compact disc and those other things that come with it. So really, the actual worth would be fifty cents, which I would gladly pay.

The big story in the music industry right now is the way in which Radiohead released their newest album, In Rainbows. After a four year hiatus of sorts (during which they toured new material, released various solo records, started a blog), the band announced on October 1st that it would be releasing its seventh record two ways. Option one: $80 for a deluxe version (titled Disc Box) that includes two versions of the album (CD and vinyl), a bonus CD, and original artwork, all of which would be shipped sometime in December. Option two: a downloadable version of the album made available a mere ten days after the announcement (Oct. 10) for a price to be determined by the consumer. Well, people went a little nuts about this, claiming that Radiohead were striking a final blow to the record industry. In reality, that was not the case. Currently, Radiohead do not have a record contract, and therefore they have very little means of distributing the album. The download was a way for them to get the music to the fans in a speedy fashion rather than have it sit while they negotiate a record deal. The $80 Disc Box is obviously not something every Radiohead fan will be able to afford, so WASTE, their merchandise company, will be able to handle the orders themselves. It has been estimated that by early 2008, In Rainbows will be available in stores, most likely brought to us by a major record label.

So how much did I spend on the download? Nothing. Aside from the quality not being so great (160 kbps, better than iTunes at least), I'll buy the CD when it is eventually released (CD quality is a must for Radiohead albums). In addition, I try to attend their concerts whenever possible. Last summer I saw them five times at $50 per ticket. It's fairly well known that bands reap their biggest earnings from their concerts, which is the main reason I condone downloading music, regardless of major or independent label. With television, networks play shows to lure in viewers, but the real money comes from the advertisements played during the commercial breaks. In theory, viewers are supposed to be loyal enough to sit through the ads. In the same way, putting music on the internet is a way to lure people to the concert. By getting the music for free, I'm being exposed to more music and I have more money, both of which add up to me attending more concerts. So in my mind, the cosmic and ethical balances even out in the end.

If a band can distribute its music for free, where does the record company stand? Well, not every band can afford to record their own album, right? Wrong. Stephen Malkmus and his cronies (collectively known as Pavement) had a four track, and they made Slanted & Enchanted, one of the most highly revered albums of the 90s. So I guess you don't need super expensive recording equipment to produce something amazing. In fact, I've heard fantastic albums made solely with Garageband and a thirty dollar computer mic.

I do think record companies have a place in the future of the music world, but by condemning file sharing, they're fighting against evolution. In the end, some will still pay for CDs in lieu of downloading music for free, merely to get the best quality available. People still buy and collect expensive vinyl records for this very reason. Maybe by getting a larger cut of the concert revenue, the loss of CD sales wouldn't be felt as much. I don't know, I'm not a record executive.

If you're actually still reading this, bravo. As you can probably tell, I'm very passionate about this whole debate. In regards to the scenarios you suggested (as I did get slightly off topic), I'm only ethically opposed to one (shoplifting a CD, as I previously mentioned). I think all music should be made available on the internet for free, and I would gladly share my music library if I didn't have to worry about being sued.

Love,
James

Week 7 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

Although it appears that we're still a few years away from flying cars and robot servants (which in turn will become robot masters), the future that all those sci-fi writers thought up isn't so unimaginable when considering radio frequency identification. As the name suggests, RFID is an identification system that harnesses radio frequencies to identify things. What things you might ask? Lots of things. With RFID, Information is transmitted by a tiny microscopic tag when read by an RFID reading device. The data is processed, and depending what the chip was programed for, some sort of reaction will ensue. It sounds broad because RFID can conceivably be incorporated in most aspects of every day life.

Currently, the most practical use for RFID is tracking. As you know, RFID tags can be surgically implanted into pets. When they stray too far from home, all someone would need to do is scan them with a reader to determine its owner. Of course, a cheaper way to keep from losing your cat would be to just put a collar on it, but that's hardly as cool as a microscopic chip embedded in its shoulder. The same type of tracking could be used with consumer products. In lieu of a serial number (who remembers those anyway?), an RFID chip could be placed inside the product. This way, if someone stole your TV and tried to pawn it, the shop keep could immediatley determine that it was "hot." You'd have your TV back and the crook would be in jail. Sounds good to me.

The last time I was in Chicago, the 7-Eleven by my brother's house had one of those paypass devices for credit cards. I bought so much crap from that store just so I could use it. Of course, this is also a form of RFID technology. Eventually, it will get to the point where you can just grab an item and walk out the store. Through RFID, your credit card (which will probably be a chip embedded in your skin) will automatically get charged when you leave the store. Think of how much faster our lives will be when we don't have to stand in lines.

Of course, along with such advanced technology comes some concerns. With RFID, there is the potential for privacy invasion. Anyone with an RFID reader could find out exactly what is held within your house. This is good news for career thieves, who could target houses that contain expensive electronic equipment. Burglars aside, through tracking your whereabouts, RFID could lead to a "Big Brother" dystopia. I like to keep my tracks covered; I sure don't want someone aware of all my whereabouts. I'm also not too keen on getting a computer chip surgically put into my skin. However, the idea of being able to walk up to my door and have it unlock is pretty cool.

In some ways, the privacy issue doesn't bother me too much. Surely a line will be drawn, and if the government or a corporation should choose to cross that line, they would have to prepare for some heavy duty lawsuits, as privacy is protected by the 14th Amendment.

Love,
James

Week 6 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

I turned eighteen in 2003, just in time for the 2004 election. I'll bet you can't guess who I voted for. Give up? Is that your final answer? Are you sure? Alright then.

Gotcha. Trick question. I didn't vote for anyone, because I didn't vote at all. Good thing too, because after getting all this information regarding electronic voting, who knows where my potential vote could have gone. Alright, so the real reason I didn't vote was due mostly to laziness and my inability to get an absentee ballot.

Nevertheless, the documentary Hacking Democracy really opened my eyes to some serious crimes occurring in America, right under my very nose. While I type away, some old lady could be rifling through my trash at this very moment. That is quite a disturbing thought. Also, that whole thing with the voting machines. Who would have thought they'd be so easy to hack into? Our good friends at Princeton sure did. They feature a video demonstration on their website showing how easy someone with a fair knowledge of programing, not to mention a screwdriver, can rig an election. Worst of all, they can do so without leaving any trace of foul play. So who's to say that traitor Benedict Arnold couldn't beat old George Washington in a fair election? If a Diebold voting machine were used in such a contest, we'd have a different face on our one dollar bill.

Hackers aside, the Diebold corporation didn't help to calm concerns people had about electronic voting. Sure, they used complicated programing and security measures in order to make their machines nearly untouchable, but then they accidentally left all of that information easily accessible on the world wide web. Heck, if some soccer marm can crack their secrets, surely a hacker can as well. In addition, Diebold's apparent pay off from the Republican party, as well as one of their top execs practically ensuring a win for G.W., probably didn't sit so well with the liberals of America.

I say just get rid of all electronic voting. The first step in robot domination is allowing ourselves to be reliant on machines. As technology advances, not even programers and hackers will be able to match artificial intelligence. If we keep with these electronic voting machines, don't be surprised when RobotX83 is announced the winner of the 2024 presidential election. Keep it simple. Go back to counting votes by hand. In order to keep the process free of tampering, assign secret numbers or codes to the candidates. This way, the vote counter will not know which candidate is which, therefore their personal politics won't come into play. Once the first count is finished, there will be second count conducted by a different set of vote counters. The process would be very tedious and time consuming, and the results wouldn't be available for weeks, but at least it's more secure than using Diebold voting machines. It would also produce less e-waste.

Love,
James

Week 5 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

Although the amount of jobs in the fields of CS and IT are on the rise, there has been a drop in Americans pursuing education in such careers. According to the article from Computerworld, "the percentage of college freshmen listing computer science as their probable major fell 70% between 2000 and 2004." The site claims that this has to do with a "nerdy" image that is associated with anything having to do with computers. Perhaps that was the case twenty years ago, but not today. Many, if not most, young Americans use computers on a daily basis, therefore it would be hard to argue that computers are just for nerds. The social stigmas that computers once had are long gone, so what could cause this decrease in CS related majors? The answer is outsourcing.

Outsourcing just might be the scariest word to any recent American graduate that majored in anything related to CS. Why would a big corporation hire an American when a foreign person could complete the exact same job for half the salary? It's simple economics. The bottom line is money, and corporations can make more of it by outsourcing. I don't really see a reason to argue for or against such a practice, as there are both pros and cons depending on which side of the debate you are on. However, there will come a time when all of the American jobs have gone to foreign workers, leaving US citizens unemployed and broke. The foreign employees will eventually demand the luxuries that their American counterparts once enjoyed. Because Americans won't have had jobs for so long, they would have no means to pursue an education in cutting edge fields such as IT. This would leave the big corporations in quite a pickle, and they would eventually have to pay their foreign workers the same as they did their American workers. Either that, or some sort of global minimum wage will be established.

As an English writing major, I feel pretty secure that my future career is safe from outsourcing. Say a big time American publishing company wants someone to write a short story about being in high school. More than likely, this job will go to an American writer, as he or she probably went through the same experiences that most of the potential readers did. Surely American movie studios, record labels, publishing companies, etc., are more apt to hire writers (or whatever) that can relate to a large portion of their demographic, which I assume would be Americans. In the same way, it is unlikely that I would ever be hired to write a screenplay for a Bollywood studio because I do not have a deep understanding of Indian culture. I still can't figure out why the characters break out in song every so often during those movies. The best I could ever hope to do is parody the genre, but I doubt that people in India would want to see a movie that pokes fun at their culture. The American entertainment market is pretty hard to break into, whether it be film, music, or literature. Most of the people who do succeed don't even make that much money, and there really is no job security. So forget outsourcing, I'm more worried about computers being programed to write creatively. When that happens, it's just a matter of time before they brainwash the human race into slavery.

Love,
James

Week 4 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

I'd like to think that I have a little more experience when it comes to recycling than most people. When I was young, my mom would make me sort the recycling on garbage day. It was a messy job. I also worked for USF Recycles for nearly three years. Thanks to us, the department was ranked fifth in recycling in all of San Francisco, although I'm not sure if that meant county or city. If that isn't enough, my Dad owned and operated American Iron, which, according to their website, is the "Upper Midwest's Leading Metals Recycler." Needless to say, recycling is in my blood.

What happens when someone from America sends his old computer to the local recycling plant? Apparently it ends up in junkyard in a third world country, where poor inhabitants pick through the rubble in order to salvage what little valuable pieces they can in order to earn a living. The process of extracting the material is quite dangerous, and with no real regulations to speak of, the workers don't appear to wear much safety equipment. In addition, the hazardous materials embedded within machine can dissolve into the air or drinking water of the local inhabitants, causing illness. Now, does this happen with every computer that goes to a US recycling plant? No, but due to America's ever increasing consumption of technology, it happens quite often.

The amount of electronics purchased in America is staggering, due to the rate at which technology advances. A computer is deemed obsolete a mere two or three years after it is released. Don't even get me started on iPods. This leads to tons of electronics being donated, recycled, or just thrown out. However, because this influx of technology is fairly recent, the government hasn't had time to catch up with the rest of the country. There currently is no firm federal law concerning e-waste recycling, which is why it's so easy for a plant to just ship their junk off to a third world country. The US government, as well as American consumers, should take this issue into consideration.

Thanks to my mom, I am a pack rat (I believe that is the proper term). I rarely donate or throw anything out. Instead, I just let it sit in storage somewhere. I'm sure I still have clothes from middle school at my house. Off the top of my head, I've gone through four cell phones. The three old ones are in their respective boxes, collecting dust at my house. I got my first computer, an iMac, at the age of fifteen. It lasted me all the way through high school. Currently, it is also collecting dust at my house. Okay, you get the point I'm sure. It's not that I don't want to recycle these things, I'm just a lazy person. Also, the idea of someone using my old computer creeps me out. Do you know how much internet porn I saved on that thing? Tons. In my defense, my technology purchasing habits are pretty limited. I don't go out and buy the latest gadget just to be at the head of the techno front. Only when a respective machine breaks do I really go out and buy a new one.

Now, my solution for this e-waste problem is this:

1. Gather up all of the world's e-waste
2. Pack it all into space shuttles (this might require a lot of space shuttles)
3. Send the space shuttles to the sun where they will incinerate

This can also double as a solution to the world's garbage problem. It might seem far fetched, but surely this is what the robots will do with all of the dead human bodies once they take over the planet and enslave humanity.

Love,
James

Week 3 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

The Internet Archive sure is a neat place. I've always wanted to take a stroll down memory lane and go to the boring old Yahoo of my childhood. Thanks to the IA, this dream can now become a reality.

A simple click on the "About Us" link leads any of the IA's visitors to their agenda and purpose. To quote directly from the IA, "the Internet Archive is working to prevent the Internet... from disappearing into the past.... we are working to preserve a record for generations to come." Now, perhaps the generations to come won't find it particularly useful to see what Yahoo was like back in the late nineties, but surely the oodles of information the library contains will come in handy to any student of the future writing a research paper on life in the late twentieth century and onward (assuming of course that the robots haven't yet taken over and enslaved the human race).

The question isn't what information does the IA capture, it's what information doesn't it capture? However, since the original question was the former, the answer is loads of info. Aside from checking out what websites throughout the internet's life-span looked like and contained, one can peruse many of the myriad works of literature that fall under the public domain. Sure, you could always just head to your local library, but with the IA, you don't even have to leave your house you dirty shut in. If books aren't your thing, there's always music. The IA hosts a number of concert bootlegs; they even have a whole section dedicated to the Grateful Dead. Interestingly enough, most people old enough to have actually seen the Dead perform live probably aren't internet savvy enough to stumble upon such a website. If you can't afford to go to college, just check out the IA's Education section, which contains university lectures and free courses. The best part is, no homework.

There are many uses of the IA based on the amount of content alone. Aside from the occasional nostalgia trip, the IA is an important tool for historians. Much of American society revolves around the internet and other forms of media, so it is vital to understand the web in order to fully grasp current affairs. The IA gives documentary film makers easy access to video clips that fall under the public domain; the same goes for electronic musicians who use samples in their music. The IA also seems like a great place for a bored internet user to waste hours of time. It might not ever become as big as Youtube, but anybody who visits the IA will surely leave slightly more knowledgeable.

Love,
James

Week 2 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

The internet and I go way back. Some of the earliest recollections I have of using the net are instant messaging people from school that I normally didn't have any interest in chatting with (but using the computer was cool back then), looking up info on obscure cartoon shows (this took forever being before the days of Road Runner or whatever the kids use these days), and downloading porn with Dave-o. These days, I pretty much use the internet for the same reasons, minus IMing and whatever the other non-porn related activity I previously mentioned was.

I feel as a whole, the internet has been a positive force in my life. However, upon closer inspection, this might not be the case. For example, thanks to the internet, my music collection continues to grow and grow. I have nearly 100 GBs of music, some of which has yet to be released. It really impresses my friends when I somehow acquire a new album that isn't set to be released for months. Oh yeah, did I mention that most of it was free? I have the internet to thank for that. Of course, in the eyes of the law, this makes me a criminal. So while the internet has given me hours of free music, it could also lead me to a jail cell and/or a hefty fine.

Another example of how the internet has helped improve my everyday life is the wealth of information held within and throughout the world wide web. If I need to know an obscure fact like who the first president of the US was, or when Keanu Reeves birthday is, or even the addresses of all my current college professors, I need only to peruse the net. Of course, like with the previous example, this bevy of info is a double edged sword, particularly when it comes to school. I remember way back when, a research paper only needed two sources. Now, thanks to the internet, students are expected to use more, which means they have to read more, which takes away valuable television watching time. Also, who's to say the information on the internet is reliable or even accurate? Recently, it was believed that Sinbad (the comedian, not the sailor) had overdosed on cocaine and died, this according to the popular website Wikipedia. As you can imagine, due to Sinbad's ever increasing popularity, this caused quite a frenzy. As it turns out, Sinbad didn't overdose on cocaine and die. In any case, everybody knows that he prefers meth over cocaine. The point is, anybody can make a website or add their own opinion to the myriad of sites on the internet, and thanks to our crutch for using the web to access all of our information, this can be a big problem sometimes.

Of couse, the internet remains a remarkably reliable place to download porn, with or without Dave-o.

Love,
James

Week 1 Writing Assignment

Dear Professor Brooks,

Hi ho, James Harry Isaacs here. I am a student in the Robots class, a senior at USF, and an English major. I was born and raised in a suburb of Minneapolis, MN, the superior sibling of the Twin Cities. I've lived in San Francisco for about three years now, and I think it's great. No snow. My parents recently moved to Las Vegas, which is a lot of fun. For fun I like to listen to music, read books, and wander around the city looking for fun and exciting places to eat. I think computers are way expensive, and a great way to pass the time. I am careful never to feel intimidated around computers because I've been told they can sense fear. I'm excited to take this class because I feel that it will prepare me for the eventual robot enslavement of the human race. I'd like to know how to dismantle one in case I ever find myself in a tight situation. I've also always wanted to take a class in this room, however after spending an hour and forty five minutes here, I must say that I am not as impressed as I thought I would be.

Love,
James