People rely too much on digitization without realizing the consequences of losing physical presence, so digitization should be used for more than storage.

I know, I changed my thesis yet again towards last minute to more general. I wasn’t sure how to word what I wanted to say. Somewhere in my paper I wanted to argue that people should develop pictures, edit documents by hand, and rely less on digitization.

Supporting claims: [in progress, publishing now for people to see and comment]

1) Art is different when it is digital. The process of making art has changed now that it can be digital, and the medium of art matters a lot.

2) There’s a good source analyzing digitization that I still have to go through. But so far it’s talking about how digitization is hermetic and focuses all about form. It “represents but does not present”. Alone, digitization is just a representation of form and is nothing, but it is our interactions with it that make it alive.

[Still in progress]

My topic will still be digitization, and i’m not sure if I should narrow down it more yet.

“Digitization has helped art but cannot improve it, so digitization should be used as a mean  and not an end.”

One claim is that the digitization has a significant effect on art and the development of it. Art is better off as a physical process, and working on it in a digital manner does not produce the same effect.

Art is still popular in the sense that art pieces are still sold around, so having the physical piece is still important. Art is not limited to paintings though, so more can be said.

https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/1028/dicharry.pdf?sequence=6

The above source involves digital art and what is lost or gained from it compared to art by hand. I skimmed the pages, and it seems like there is a mixed opinion on the issue. It is from 2005, which may be too old, but it relates a lot to digitization and my topic. My topic is still general, and digital art can be one topic to elaborate on.

http://web.ebscohost.com.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=4df5ad4d-6554-4387-92c4-34fe389b8963%40sessionmgr15&vid=2&hid=12

This source talks about the impact of digitization on the arts and the humanities, from 2007. This helps reveal some of the negatives of digitization and things to consider when something is digitized. Technology may be better now, but I can build on the idea of how digitization of something produces a different feeling when it is digitized, and how the medium, or surroundings, matter.

From my sources, I hope to show that the effects of digitization are drastic enough such that everything should not be digitized or that people should be encouraged to do more with digitization. For example, pictures are digitized and can be edited, but it helps for them to be developed. I think it gives the picture more value and cannot be lost digitally. People should print and edit on paper instead of on the computer. Art can be looked at the computer, but people should be encouraged to go to the physical places (if interested and possible). Digitization is acceptable in some areas more than others, but they should not rush to it.

Other helpful links:

http://www.treehugger.com/clean-technology/7-major-ways-were-digitizing-our-world-and-3-reasons-we-still-want-hardcopies.html

http://www.kpmg.com/US/en/IssuesAndInsights/ArticlesPublications/Documents/impact-of-digitization.pdf

http://web.ebscohost.com.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/ehost/detail?sid=46ed98ac-ebb4-4858-bbca-385a082fa4f7%40sessionmgr15&vid=1&hid=12&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ%3d%3d#db=aax&AN=505676099 (I was going to use this, but it’s from 1997, so I dunno)

The topic I plan to write about is the evolution and possible future of digitization. I may argue that it is overrated or discuss the tradeoffs of it. Digitization focuses even more on the computer, and while there are benefits, some things are lost. Things that get digitized may lose some quality and be ‘different’ than when they were not digitized. Everything seems to be getting digitized now such as books, television, and corporate information. People are supposed to always back up their files, since they can easily be lost. Things may be stolen or pirated too. Pictures are all online now, and I think people don’t develop pictures as much. Perhaps the topic is still too general.

I think this is a good topic because with more focus on the computer and internet, it is true that more things are digitized and there is a lot to discuss about. The topic connects do dependency on the internet, reading on the computer, and many other topics.

My thesis statement may be something like “digitization, while convenient, should not be the solution to everything” or “digitization has been overused and makes us attached to the computer too much”. Some main points are the current, mainstream digitization trends, the positive and negative effects of digitization, and how lifestyles have changed because of it.

Technology seems to be influencing everything these days. It’s not surprise that education is being affected. I found a link about the future of classrooms:

http://technology.inquirer.net/9177/when-digital-classrooms-become-reality

Vibal Publishing House Inc. and Microsoft are working on it, with the introduction of e-textbooks. From the article, the e-textbooks will have “multimedia features like educational videos, full-color pictures, instructional audio content, customizable text, interactive quizzes, online connectivity allowing external links to resource websites, study tips, and many more.”

A quote from Chris Datol, operations manager of Vibal’s subsidiary Vibe Technologies Inc., said “a child becomes smarter when he or she uses a digital device and consumes digital material.” That statement is bold, and I do not think it is entirely true.

The e-textbooks have hyperlinks, audio content, and more that seem to adjust to the distractedness of today’s world and make up for it. This is another approach to learning, but will it be ‘better’? It may be more effective to certain groups of people instead of everyone. Regular textbooks may be just as effective. I don’t know.

Things will be still taught in the classroom, of course. In The Shallows, author Nicholas Carr has made it aware that technology is changing our brains. It has made some of us hyper attentive. The book talked about experiments that showed that being hyper attentive may slow learning, and readings with links embedded does not make reading as effective. M

There are online courses available in today’s time, but I prefer being in a classroom if possible. Digital classrooms with students at home or somewhere else are not as effective, if it ever happens. Maybe it’s already happening. Who knows.

Note: Right now I’m thinking about various topics relating to the future of technology of the internet.

Here’s a predicted timeline from a blogger that I found on google. Original post here.

I’m not sure how credible it is, but it is interesting how fast events are happening. I would think those things would be spread out more. Technology has been evolving recently, but I don’t think the progress will continue to be fast. Television replaced by online in 2013? Yea I don’t think that’s happening.

Another site that makes predictions is future timeline. I haven’t looked much into it, but a lot of it may be questionable.

Here are two quotes from The Shallows that intrigued me:

“The potential for unwelcome neuroplastic adaptations…the more difficult it becomes to turn back” (35)

“Looking ahead to future applications…such things are only for posterity, not for us.” (80)

One line that struck me was about how the mental skills we sacrifice may be more valuable than the ones we gain. That’s a scary thought, but it does make sense. It is good that our brain adapts to the environment, but with bad habits, it can be for the worse. I wonder how much can be forgotten. When taking certain subjects back in high school, I would always forget the material soon after taking the exam the material was on. It’s as if I didn’t learn at all. Some things are engrained in our brains, while others are not though. Once you learn a new language and speak it fluently, can you ever forget all of it? I would think not, but I don’t know. I have heard about intellectual decay, which is why I’ve heard recommendations to exercise your brain when you get older. Will we be able to know at what rate the circuits weaken?

De Forest’s prediction of monitoring brain waves and quantifying emotion is a scary thought. If it happens, people may get obsessed with the numbers. I would be fascinated by it, but it seems complicated and it might be misleading. It would be cool if a professor could directly insert knowledge to the brain, but it sounds dangerous. It wouldn’t be that simple. He made a lot of future predictions, but I am skeptical of them. I don’t think we should mess with our brains that much. While useful, it may be dangerous or be harmful in the long run.

Welcome to Blogs@Baruch!

This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging.