Hot Spots in Computer Programming

• Artificial Intelligence

In a number of areas, artificial intelligence is considered to have surpassed humans in proficiency (including but not limited to mathematics, language translation, or even chess). As AI's become smarter than humans in more areas, are programmers sure that they will still be able to fully comprehend and control the things the AI does? What if a dangerous and powerful machine understands a general command we give, but not the intention we have in giving it? (See "Benefits & Risks of Artificial Intelligence")

• Cybersecurity

Anything networked can be hacked, and while networking things such as traffic lights, fridges, or cars can make systems far more effective in many ways, we also open the door to hackers in very real and dangerous ways. In 2015, some hackers wirelessly took over the electronic systems in a Chrysler Jeep, gaining control of the dashboard functions, the steering, the transmission, and even the brakes. How can we keep so many objects in so many homes completely safe from attacks? (See "Manufacturers Remain Slow to Recognize Cybersecurity Risks")

• Internet Censorship

Censorship has been a hot topic for hundreds of years in many fields, but few (if any) innovations have enabled the free exchange of knowledge like the internet. It can be incredibly helpful to have worlds of information at our fingertips, but the internet also bypasses several economic, political, and social boundaries as a medium of communication and knowledge. And while governments have too much influence and too little understanding to truly fix any of these problems, programmers are left to try to manage a flood of data larger than the world has ever seen and hope it doesn't drown us. (See "Everything You Need to Know About Europe's New Copyright Directive")

Of these issues, censorship is arguably the most difficult problem to solve. Different countries have different standards and rules, but the internet has no rules and no international boundaries. How can we control something that lives in a world of its own? How can we apply time-tested solutions to problems that don't follow the rules--where anything can be duplicated and shared over any distance? We can already see the effect the internet's freedom has had on American politics, but what effect will it have in the future on international relations? 


Image Credits: Image via www.vpnsrus.com

When Romantic Ideals Begin to Come True

At the very core of Romanticism is a yearning for the unknown, the unattainable, and the incomprehensible. And while the movement to spread these ideas began relatively recently, in the last few hundred years, many concepts dubbed "unattainable" had eluded mankind for thousands of years before the Romantic Era. Mysteries such as flight and lightning have consumed the imagination of men for as long as history has been recorded. In the late 19th century, however, things changed. 

Some awe-inspiring lightning

With advances in industrialization came advances in technology. Suddenly, we discovered how to capture lightning, how to harness electricity and put it to our own deliberate use. We finally conquered the air and learned how to soar through the sky without meeting the ground in an unfriendly manner. Almost overnight (in the grand span of time), things that people had romanticized about for thousands of years became possible and even accessible. The question I ask is: how did achieving some of our wildest dreams affect society?

Thomas Edison's Laboratory

Some might say that once a person fulfills a deep desire, that person loses purpose and becomes bored. I've definitely seen examples of this in my own life, such as finally finishing a puzzle and suddenly feeling let down because I've lost a sense of direction. On the other hand, however, I've also had experiences in which I've seen fantastic technology, been filled with awe, and immediately filled with even more questions and ideas than before. 

As we can see from history, progress did not stop in the 19th century. Perhaps some people felt a loss of direction during the Gilded Age; it is well-known that the U.S. Patent Office closed down in 1899 because someone apparently thought everything had been invented. But the evidence shows that technology continued to flood the world and advanced at a unprecented rate. 

In short, I think this quote by Walter Ong describes accurately the relationship between the Gilded Age and the Romantic Era which preceded it: 

From man’s beginnings perhaps well over 500,000 years ago until recent times […] knowledge had been in short supply. To keep up his courage, man had continually to remind himself of how much he knew, to flaunt the rational, the certain, the definite and clear and distinct. Romanticism and technology appear at the same time because each grows in its own way out of a noetic abundance such as man had never known before. Technology uses the abundance for practical purposes. Romanticism uses it for assurance and as a springboard to another world. (Walter Ong, Rhetoric, Romance, and Technology: Studies in the Interaction of Expression and Culture) 

Image Credits: in the public domain and licensed through Creative Commons 

Technology's Effect on the Scientific Method

I have often wondered about the relationship between the Enlightenment and contemporary advances in technology. How vital were new inventions to the success of the philosophy of the scientific method? 

What is the Value of a Life?

The Classical Ideals: Arete and Pietas

The ancient Greeks remain infamous for many reasons--among them, a substantial lust for glory. Arete was the virtue of the day, a word primarily denoting individual courage and excellence in areas such as battle and public affairs. 'What a primitive way of life!" some of us might think in a lofty mental tone. But is today really so different?

Instead of battle, we have business; instead of heroes, we have celebrities; instead of public oratory, we have the internet. The ideals of society have come full circle over the last three thousand years. The question is: where did the journey take us?

The Disappearing Venetian Treasures

During the 16th century, Venice became the printing capital of the world. Mass printing became a powerful tool of mass communication at the time. The demand for printing became so large that many aspiring entrepreneurs and humanists chose to center their work here. Venice offered many powerful advantages including:

• Easy access to the Adriatic sea
• Economic wealth
• A center of trade and industry

This is a photo of Venetian waterways that I took myself

With these advantages, many aspiring artists, merchants, patrons, and other influential people were drawn to Venice. It quickly became a place of beauty and wonder. Few cities could match the novelty of a metropolitan built on the water.

Unfortunately, the city is not what it once was. While still maintaining much of the novelty and aesthetics that it once held, it now lacks a reliable economy and infrastructure to manage the upkeep. The city is quickly going bankrupt as the economy has shifted to a tourism-based income. The city is more interested in marketing it's unique qualities than protecting the city. This is evident in the contaminated water, pollution levels, and overpopulation. Large cruise ships have also begun to dock in the city, further raising water levels and damaging the unique environment. 

Europe is largely a progressive society. Some areas do a better job than others at taking care of their cities. I feel that Venice is lacking largely in this department despite it being a city that needs more upkeep than others. The past is literally sinking into the sea, and before long the damage will be irreversible. The city no longer has the industrious society that it needs to protect the cities unique history.

Technological Advances: Stop the Dam or Ride the Wave?

Around 1450, Johannes Gutenberg revolutionized the spreadability of knowledge and media by bringing a printing press with movable type to Europe in the heart of the European Renaissance. This allowed books to be printed and sold on a scale previously incomprehensible. Now, almost 600 years later, this is seen as an essential stepping stone towards all subsequent technological advances. As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, the part that the printing press played in the Protestant Reformation is indispensable.

Without the power and bias of hindsight, however, not everyone in that era was pleased with Gutenberg's accomplishment. Some even saw the printing press as barbaric and claimed that it would "impair learning by lowering it to the level of the multitude". The "high society" of knowledge was desirable and praiseworthy because it was "high society". Making knowledge more accessible made the acquiring of it less admirable.

We see this resistance to technology in our day as well. Periodically, I will receive an email from my father with a link to some study with conclusions such as "having your cell phone in the same room while working will decrease productivity even if it is powered off". Do I blame him for having these views? Can I use the printing press, what I see as a marvelous invention, to invalidate his worries? No.

People see what they want to see. Those who fight against new technologies have their reasons for doing so, and often see themselves proved right. I'm sure the studies my dad sends have valid data, and I have seen the distraction my smart phone presents. Those who grasp onto new developments also have their own reasons, and often see the good done that they hoped to see.

So do we ride the wave of technology? Do we stick to the old ways? The point is moot, the choice is yours. Either way you will be right.


Image Credit: Wikipedia Public Domain

Around the World in…1095 Days?

Portuguese explorer, Ferdinand Magellan, actually only made it 596 days—a stab wound in the ended his life while in the Philippines—but his crew continued their exploration and made it back to Spain 1095 days after they’d left, becoming the first people to circumnavigate the world.  That record has since been exceeded--credited largely to the advances of technology--and cultures have mixed more than ever before.

Magellan and his ships

Phileas Fogg’s Voyage 

In the  movie, Around the World In 80 Days, Phileas Fogg, because of a bet, decides to travel the world in 80 days using almost any and mode of transportation available in the late 1800s: “boats, trains, balloons, elephants” (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0327437/plotsummary#summaries).  His adventures lead him from London to Paris, to Turkey then India, and from China to San Francisco and New York.  Although fictional, the movie illustrates how technology had advanced, allowing ordinary people to launch their own voyages, tasting a larger sample of cultures in a shorter amount of time.

“When Steve Fossett Became the Magellan of the Skies”

Flash forward to February 28, 2005 when American pilot and businessman, Steve Fossett, flew around the world in 67 hours (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/when-steve-fossett-became-magellan-of-skies-180954323/).  That’s 392 times faster than Magellan’s ships, again demonstrating how advanced technology increased man’s ability to explore the world.

Coming Full Circle

Instead of taking on several-year voyages or multi-day flights to travel around the world, much of what the early explorers discovered comes to us instead.  In mere seconds we can access pictures of Paris’s Eifel Tower, find recipes from Rome, listen to Mexico’s Mariachi band, or watch the World Cup from nearly anywhere.

But technology isn’t the only reason we can experience a cultural feast in our day-to-day lives.  When I served as a Spanish-speaking missionary for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, my “trainer” was Hermana (Sister) Fastidio.  I thought her last name sounded Spanish and quickly learned what fastidio meant: a nuisance or annoyance.  But Hermana Fastidio was from the United States—in fact, she wasn’t Hispanic at all. Her grandfather was Filipino, and because the Spanish (the first voyage being led by Magellan) conquered the Philippines several centuries earlier, many of the surnames are resultantly Spanish. 

I doubt the early explorers envisioned that technology would breach the scope it has or that their voyages would lead this melting pot of cultures.

Image Credit: (Laurence Bergreen: Poza krawedz swiata, Rebis, Poznan 2005), (https://www.pexels.com/photo/camera-caucasian-cell-cellphone-267438/). 

Are We Forgetting?

One of the concepts outlined in many of the readings focused on the conflicting view of print and the mass distribution of literature and other forms of art. In “The Press-Rival and Ally,” it is written that the Italians were especially “hostile to printed books, regarding the press as a barbarous German contraption which, at best, would impair learning to by lowering it to the level of the multitude.”

While I completely condone the education for any person and being a normal working-class-originated literary student, the printing press is one of the most singularly important inventions ever gifted to humanity.

However, deriving from this concept only slightly, I wonder if there is some validity that mass production or mass sharing of images, art, or literature numbs the receiver to its impact. I recently visited BYU’s Museum of Art which is currently displaying Pulitzer Prize winning photography. Much of this collection consisted of photographs many of us may have have seen recently, such as the attack on the World Trade Centers in 2001, and there were other photographs of similar or more intense nature, such as aftermaths of war, protests, mass shootings, and suicide bombings.

As I continued to walk through the gallery, I noticed how little I was affected by the content of the photographers, especially the ones I had seen. In our social media driven society, are we continually scrolling through our news feed and Instagram posts, mindlessly scrolling past history-changing events like 9/11 or sharing a picture of the event with text written over it reminding us to “never forget”? Have we already forgotten? Does a picture truly contain 1,000 words the more times we post it? Through our quick, almost mindless, mass publication of visual rhetoric, have we also “changed the appearance and state of the world?”

Why do we resist Inventions?

Today when we think about revolutionary inventions throughout history the printing press is one of the first that comes to mind (especially if you have been studying the Renaissance recently) and why wouldn't it? The printing press significantly increased the rate at which books could be copied, making it possible for a greater audience to have access to literature and all that it entails. Yet at the time the printing press was invented, some people balked at the idea with reasons ranging from fear that it would impair learning by making it more accessible to everyone, to seeing the printed word as somehow inferior to that of the written. Yet this is hardly a unique scenario, you might be just as surprised to find out that at various times people ridiculed light bulbs, umbrellas, and even coffee. My question in all of this is simple, why?

To begin it is important to realize that hindsight can cause us to easily see flaws in the past and write away the people that hesitate to embrace a new invention as foolish or worse. Context is important and seeking to understand the reasons why people rejected inventions can perhaps help us better understand why we do the same today. 

The simplest answer seems to be fear, particularly fear of the unknown. When facing new and unfamiliar ideas. we often want to bring thing back to the known and comfortable as quickly as possible. When new ideas or inventions are introduced in a frame of reference that helps us see its usefulness and can quickly be adopted into our view of the world, we can more quickly adapt to it. The more difficult this becomes, the longer the time required for things to take hold. It is enough to examine our world today. At one end, people look forward with optimism to a future where human and AI work together with incredible inventions that can't even be imagined, while at the other end people fear that Armageddon is lurking around the corner and that we will eventually create the monster that will destroy us. 

When looking at the technological progression of the last 100 years, the progress is staggering. Yet often upon examination what often caused us to not adopt a technology sooner was that our current frame of reference simply didn't allow for it. The same has been true throughout history. Understanding the potential of something new is difficult, but with time we move forward.

Image credits: “Ipad It Smash” by pixabay is licensed under CCO. 

Revolutionizing the Weapons in a War of Ideas

Prior to the printing press, knowledge had but one mode of mass distribution; word of mouth. These words could arrive through the whispered gossiping of a neighbor, the passionate preaching of a secular or religious orator, or a public decree recited by some royal emissary. The limitations of the spoken word, however, make it virtually impossible for the original speaker's ideas to remain pure as it is spread through society. Only the written word can keep the author's own ideas accurate.

The advance of the printing press in the 15th century revolutionized the way that wars of ideas could be fought. Before, ideas might be put forth as excuses or causes, but their wars could only be waged by those in power. All it took to Christianize the Roman Empire was a simple decision by Constantine. On the other hand, fire and bloodshed were required for Charlemagne to convert the pagan Saxons in the 8th century.

With the printing press, even a simple scholar (such as William Tyndale) could turn the whole world on its head. With the written word able to be produced en masse, ideas could spread quickly and precisely. Suddenly, a conflict of ideas couldn't just be resolved by the decision-making powers of a monarch. Suddenly, everyone got involved.

It seems to me that prior to the advent of the printing press, "cultural revolutions," at least in the modern sense, never really existed. Religions prospered or died under the thumb of empires, and cultural idiosyncrasies never challenged an established political order, they merely squirmed underneath it to try to get more comfortable. Real change was wrought only by the wars or whims of those in power.

Since the written word has become widely available, we have seen the rise of personal religion, the rise of democracy, the rise of identity equality; these are all ideas that, whether for better or worse, no Dark Ages despot would ever embrace. As more individuals in a society become important, the balance of power shifts. In fact, I'm even tempted to think that without the printing press or subsequent advances in the technology of communication, maybe our world today would function much the same as it did a thousand years ago. What do you think?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Savonarola-preaching-against-prodigality-ludwig-von-langenmantel-1879.jpg