Thesis: DRDs are addicting. Carrie is "married to her phone." Henry thinks that Facebook is not a drug for him but to others, it is.
An aspect of DRDs people use to get attention or to give people attention is the internet through computers. From personal experience, I use AIM because I want to be updated from friends and it is the best way for me to keep in contact with them while I am barricaded at home. Why AIM and not phone? Maybe it is 'cause I have trouble communicating with others through phone and AIM allows me to hide behind the screen. I know that Facebook is boring and stupid but I find myself going on Facebook to get updates from friends. Lauren had a casual conversation one day and we were wondering why we like to have casual conversations. We thought that casual conversations help us keep in contact instantly and we are able to feel significant from causal conversations. In a short period of time, we can update people and it feels as if someone was there to care about your day. Even on Facebook, we have statuses so people can get an inside scoop on our life. AIM 7.0 is biting Facebook and has the same features, where we can comment on their statuses to show that we care or "like" the statuses. The feed allows Titus to watch Violet's feed efficiency so he is updated on how Violet is doing. People like to take pictures, capture moments but some people do it A LOT; in Michelle's post, they are called "camera whores."
DRDs are efficient. Cellphones, for example, allow us to keep in contact so moms can find their kids and kids can let moms know they are safe (Interview). Yu-Xi said that computers, IMs, and the internet allow people to feel more comfortable because there is a computer between the chatters (people like me). This comfort cause us to say things that we would not normally say; we can say mean things because we would not be able to see their reaction. Colleges and Universities are going green and they are accepting applications online so applicants would need to use the internet to fill out the applications. Even homework can be done online (Snyder's and Manley's); it saves paper and homework can be checked anytime. In the song "I love my computer," the artist loves his computer because he can flirt with people on the internet and stop anytime. He does not have to deal with the consequences or the aftermath; he is able to connect "in the most soul-less way." Computers allow us to play MMOPRG; we can play any role we wish and do things we cannot in real life. Even Wiis allow us to exercise and have fun at the same time. Laptops are made so people are not stuck at their computer desks with back pains; they can settle comfortably in bed. People at work use computer to optimize the amount of work (for example, sending out a note) in a short amount of time. In Feed, trees were cut down to make air factories because air factories can produce air at a higher rate than trees.
Efficiency sooner or later will cause us to become lazy. In Wall-E, people sit in portable chairs; they do not have to walk anywhere or even notice they are moving, the computer knows where they want to go. People in the movie are bigger than the standard size and we see robots carry their drinks for them, they do not need to get out of their chairs. Whenever they want shade, they just have to clap their hands and say "shade", the shade will come in two seconds. I interviewed my friend about IM-ing someone in the room next to yours and she said that people are either lazy, feels uncomfortable communicating directly, or they want to avoid situations that happen when communicating in person. Snyder points out that we are encouraged to google things we do not know; we just want the information and regurgitates it. This is seen in Feed, too; they just want the information, not to learn or process it.
Conclusion: DRDs are addicting because they allow us to seek and provide attention. They are efficient and this efficiency inevitably causes a universal laziness in our society.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Points on your paper according to where they appear:
ReplyDeleteThesis: I think your thesis is clear and concise and you just need to tidy up the Carrie and Henry examples you put with it.
Argument 1: I like your argument here, it is something that I have seen you talk about before in other blogs so I know that you have more to say than what you put here. I think that you need to clarify your example here with Lauren, specify how you had the conversation and if it included anything else. And would talking about how the conversation or other conversations on AIM and Facebook are always casual contradict the statement because it's a deeper topic? Also, you stray a bit too much for one argument, you range from AIM to Facebook to photos and other features of these sites, you should focus instead on just AIM and Facebook, if not just one.
Argument 2: I like how you start off by talking about the interview we did earlier in the unit, but I think that you should do more than just say (Interview) when you refer to it, because not everybody will understand the context. You do however stray quite far away from the main topic you start the paragraph with, that computers are efficient. You can still use most of your examples here, but you need to connect them back to the main point otherwise it makes them seem like random ramblings on technology. You should also do this when connecting to Feed, show the parallels between the book and our world so that it is clear what you are trying to get the reader to think about.
Argument 3: I really like the way you proposed your idea here through the examples provided. I think that all of these examples are relevant and could use a little expansion or connection to really make it work. You spend twice as much time developing Wall-E as any of your other examples, and they falter a bit as a result.
Conclusion: I think this is a fine conclusion, but you can fluff it out a bit to make it sound a bit more approachable and appealing to accept.
Overall: I think that you have a lot of great ideas here in your outline and I am genuinely interested in what you have to say in these postings that will come up. I think that in order for these to become really relevant and exciting you really need to smooth things together more so that it has flow. The way you currently propose your points is very "blurty", by this I mean you just throw stuff out there but there is no flow. If you can both expand on your points and get them to flow together more you will have a tremendous paper that everybody should read.