Furey's Lectures

I found Furey's lecture on genetic information quite interesting for several reasons. One thing that struck me as interesting was the fact that companies are trying to make a profit out of sequencing a person's genome. In my mind, as Furey explained it, this is ridiculous because these reports do not really reveal any significant information. For example, if the test tells the person that he has a 10% more chance of getting a certain disease, but the disease is only found in 2% of the population, then the chance the person gets the disease is 2.2%. This information (the 10%) is misleading especially because the people who receive these reports do not really understand it. Further, the reports do not really come with any kind of analysis that reveals the truth. Furthermore, I found it really strange that companies are trying to patent different parts of the human genome. In my opinion, this should not be allowed becuase it might significantly destroy the prospects of the advancement of technology. For example, I believe that a certain company patented part of the genome that may help in curing breast cancer; however, this means that other companies can not use this to further science. This could be a major problem in the future when companies figure out different ways to cure diseases but they are unable to use what they find because it is patented.

Hippo Technologies

Recently, while playing Second Life, I visited a store called Hippo Technologies (the slurl is: http://slurl.com/secondlife/Hippo%20Technologies/95/169/44). Upon visiting the store for the first time, I was intrigued by the architecture of the building, which was covered with black glass and a logo for the store. Hippo Technologies is a very complex business in that it offers a variety of quite advanced services and products. For example, some of the services they sell are home security services and delivery services. It seems rather ridiculous that one would need home security in Second Life, but there must be some kind of demand for it considering the store was packed with avatars. Furthermore, their delivery service seems realistic; for example, if a person, for some reason, is unable to pick up something he purchased, or if the person's computer crashes, Hippo Technologies will pick up the product you purchased and deliver it to your inventory. This business also sells products, such as various scripts that sell for hundreds of Linden dollars.

This business is very different than most other businesses that I saw in that it is very, very complicated. The services and products that it sells is certainly not for the average Second Life player. Though the business does not attract these type of players, there is no doubt that there will always be customers in the store because it caters to a more advanced Second Life audience that spends a large amount of resources on the game.

Copyright Laws: Smith and Jenkins Lectures

In my opinion, both Kevin Smith's and Jennifer Jenkins's lectures on copyright laws and how the laws are colliding with new means of intellectual property were very interesting. Kevin Smith, naturally being a lawyer and librarian, discussed the fight between Google and authors and publishers around the world. Many authors believe that it is copyright infringement when Google, through Google books, allows people to see previews of their books. Because of the copyright laws, Smith explained to us that Google had to reach an agreement. Now, there are strict rules on which books people can preview and how many pages or paragraphs or sentences that can be previewed. One thing about the copyright law that Smith mentioned that I found strange was the length of copyright. Originally, it was for 14 years, after which the owner of the intellectual property could renew the copyright. But after years of progression, the copyright law is now the life of the author plus 70 years. Though I understand the need for copyright, in that it fosters creativity and innovation, it does not make much sense to put such a long time constraint on it. For example, if a person needs to use something, which has not been touched in years and something no one cares about, but is still protected by copyright law, that person is not allowed to use it without the consent of the owner. Even though there is a good chance that this person will never find the owner, the government still claims that it should be protected by copyright. This does not make much sense, and, in a way, may, as a direct result of governmental policy, cause a deadweight loss. This is detrimental to our society. I believe that copyright law should be a certain number of years, after which the owner can choose to renew it. This way, if no one renews the copyright of a tangible item, it is free to use in the public domain.

One topic that Jenkins talked about that I found interesting was the fact that the copyright law has been written in such ambiguous and arbitrary terms that it is almost impossible for anyone, without legal training, to understand the document. This means, according to Jenkins, that often times, in cases where copyright law is not clearly defined, judges usually rule based on their own gut feeling, and not strictly according to governmental law. Thus, many of the recent cases with copyright law and its collision with the new medium that displays intellectual creativity (ie. the Internet) will be decided by the will of the judges. This seems dangerous considering that many present judges, being relatively old and perhaps being not technologically savvy, may not see the importance in loosening copyright law so that creativity will be encouraged and promoted through this new medium.

Furthermore, after hearing both of the lectures, I concluded that there is a serious battle underway between copyright laws and digital creativity. It seems that much of what random people are creating online is, in the eyes of the United States Government, copyright infringement. However, in my opinion, these outdated, antiquated copyright laws are indeed stifling digital creativity. If you look at much of the material online, such as videos, pictures, sound clips, etc., a lot of this seems that it would be copyright infringement. In my opinion, if the government goes after those who created this items, or even becomes stricter with sites that facilitate these items, such as YouTube, there will be a great loss in digital creativity. For example, many of the popular mashups on YouTube, such as this song, which is a mashup of six popular songs, would not be shared with millions of people around the world. After listening to songs such as this one, and viewing videos that use copyrighted material, it is evident that these new items are very creative and don't have any intent to profit from the original material. I believe that if the government becomes increasingly strict about imposing copyright law on the Internet, digital creativity will soon be lost.

Don Fowler's Lecture and TWIT

I found Don Fowler's lecture to be especially interesting considering that IT consulting or management consulting are occupations that I may be looking to pursue in the near future, after graduation. At first, I found myself questioning the validity of the occupation because it is hard to imagine how small changes in efficiency can translate to larger changes that actually impact the business. However, Fowler did a great job at illustrating the advantages and uses of consulting. One example I found quite interesting that Fowler mentioned has to do with outsourcing, which, often times, is a solution to reducing costs for many businesses. Fowler talked about how outsourcing allowed projects to cycle around the world, thereby, ensuring that the project was being worked on 24 hours a day. For example, a project could be worked on in the US, but after the work day, it could be sent to, say India to be worked on, and then maybe Australia, and then back to the US. This would drastically increase efficiency. I think consulting would be a great field for any graduating student considering that just about anyone, from any major, can be hired by a consulting company, such as Accenture. Furthermore, Fowler also mentioned that it was a relatively stable job; whether the economy is in a recession or in a boom, consultants are in demand, either to help cut costs or help expand businesses.

Fowler also made it clear that consulting would be nearly impossible without the advent of the information technology revolution. For example, outsourcing would be next to impossible because companies would not be able to transfer data and projects across the world, like it is possible now.

One topic I found interesting from TWIT was how print newspapers are on the decline and how they are even starting to disappear. The panelists on the radio station were discussing how print newspapers were becoming redundant and that using the online versions of newspapers would be relatively easier and less redundant. They also mentioned, however, something I agree with, which is that reading a print newspaper has a different feel to it. For example, it feels more natural to scan the headlines of a newspaper and to be able to flip through the pages. Obviously, online newspapers have very different layouts than print newspapers, and, in my mind, are less conducive in allowing readers to scan the news. At the same time, I believe that online newspapers have significant advantages as well and that neither version of the news can be sacrificed. I, however, may be biased, coming from New York, where the world-renowned New York Times is found in practically every household. Another reason for the demise of newspapers, according to the podcast, was that they waste a significant amount of paper, a process that is extremely detrimental for our planet. And, at the same time, online newspapers can be stored relatively easily and in large amounts without wasting many resources. When listening to this podcast, I thought of a story in the news that I had heard recently. Apparently, Seattle's main newspaper ended their print version and now only have the online version. Though this may have a few significant benefits, for the most part, it does not make much sense considering there may be a large population of readers that either do not have Internet access or do not know how to access the online version. This is just one example of how technology may be leading to the demise of the publishing world (though I do not buy the argument that it is leading to the demise; rather, I believe that the world of technology and the publishing world can coexist and complement each other).

DiVE Into Reality

Today was the second time this year that I have visited the DiVE. Just as the first time, this time I was both impressed and intrigued by the virtual reality system. Systems like the DiVE allow information to be represented in ways that are impossible to do so usin other visualizations. For example, Fred Nijhout explained how the 3D gradient he derived is very difficult to understand when you cannot move around and visualize it. The DiVE allows users to do this; and, in turn, the user can comprehend the information represented by the image in a way that he wouldn't be able to do otherwise. The DiVE along with other 3D also allow users to interact in data in an unprecedented way. For example, while in the DiVE today, we ran the program in which you can move around giant coins. The way this system allows a user to move objects is, in my opinion, incredible. The movements feel extremely natural and innate. The same is true for the program in which you had to move the molecules around. From these new interactions, we may gain new insight into how different processes actually work, as exemplified by the molecular interactions. Of course, these are all major advantages of these types of visual systems. One big disadvantage is the cost of these systems; often times, installing visual systems like the DiVE is just impractical because of the space it takes up and, more importantly, the large amount of money it costs. Also, these types of visual systems are still in their infancy; there are still many flaws that can only be corrected or improved as technology progresses and improves.
It is not difficult to foresee a time where the use of these visual systems will be combined with programs like Second Life. At the moment, programs like second life are crude in terms of movement, graphics, etc. Combining these with the 3D visual systems will enhance these qualities. In addition, the systems will make the programs much more realistic (the original goal of many of the programs like second life.)

Prof. Halpin's & Prof. Schwartz-Bloom's Lectures

Though I don't think you can exclusively say that it is always the case that you need more than one way of looking at data, I believe that providing multiple images can be more beneficial in the understanding of an idea. The more visual representations of data that are provided, the greater information you can relay to the audience. As we saw from both Halpin's and Schwartz-Bloom's lectures, illustrating data through multiple representations may bring out different information from the same data. This can help the audience and even the researcher see the data in a different way and help discover something more than they already know. For example, Halpin illustrated that, in his case, multiple representations of the data helped reveal new information. Specifically, Halpin showed how different representations of the movements of a whale (the 2D and 3D) representation bring about new information. Specifically, the 3D model may help show the depth at which whales feed and where plankton live. In many other cases, a single representation may in fact be more effective in demonstrating an idea. For example, if someone is demonstrating a simple idea then perhaps you wouldn't want multiple representations of data for it may be overwhelming and confusing. Another example is that if you are showing something or demonstrating an idea to an informed audience that already understands the concept, showing multiple representations may be unnecessary for such an audience. For example, Schwartz-Bloom illustrated that when trying to explain concepts to high school students, often times it is important for the educator to show multiple representations of the same thing, so that it becomes easier for the student to understand. However, imagine if instead she was explaining a complex idea, something that has to do with neurons for example, it would not be necessary to provide multiple representations of neurons, considering that the audience is already familiar with them.

One technique that was prevalent in high school was the use of mnemonic devices. For example, my Latin teacher taught the class the following mnemonic devices: TAAPPPIIICCV and SIDECAPPS. Though the first device may seem strange, it was relatively easy to memorize (it's pronounced tap-ick-v). These two devices help students remember the various prepositions that go along with accusative and ablative cases, respectively.

Severe Storm Visualization and Dr. Richardson's Lecture

Though the severe storm visualization may have been adequate for its time, looking at it now, it is evident that there are problems with the visualization. One major problem was that there was no indication that the storm had been stretched vertically so that the viewer would be able to see the details easier. Had the visualization explained this somehow, it would be much clearer. Another problem was that the narrator often referred to directions; however, the compass was only present for the first few frames of the visualization. Instead, the compass should always be visible. Additionally, the contrast between the plane and the lines (that created a grid) was too great and made the visualization slightly distracting. Further, there was also a problem with the color map that showed where the water density of a cross section of the storm was the greatest. The use of the archaic rainbow color map took away from the information the map attempted to convey. By using other color schemes on the map, the color map could be greatly improved. A major reason for all these problems is that when the visualization was created, the computing ability was much weaker than it is now. Computers were slower, and creating these types of visualizations required frame by frame creation that took a long time. Likewise, early visualizations of molecules were not perfect either. In the early 2D models of molecules, it was difficult to get a sense of depth, which was important in perceiving molecular interactions. In addition, though the earlier 3D models of molecules showed some type of depth, it was difficult to translate the models onto scientific journals and other print.
These types of early visualizations were, of course, very helpful to their respective fields in that they provided additional information that would be lacking otherwise. Since the 1980's, since our computing power has increased by a lot, we are able to create more sophisticated visualizations in much less time; back then, people were forced to draw each frame to create a visualization. Dr. Richardson's visualizations of molecules were different than the visualization fo the storm. For example, Dr. Richardson's visualizations changed due to molecular interactions, whereas the storm visualization was constant and was not altered for any other reason.