The experience of creating and learning throughout this perspective journey over the last few weeks has been somewhat interesting. I have found that during this I was left feeling a range of emotions; intrigued, bored and enlightened.
The first emotion I felt was intrigued. Learning about topics that already existed in a more in depth manner, made for a heightened interest in the topics themselves. The most intriguing topic to me was the concept of futurists and the predictions for the future of our own society. As said in the ‘Perspective Summit’ post, I talked about the Disney film ‘Wall-E’. I feel that the human dystopia depicted in the film is the creator’s theory of the future that may or may not become our reality. Andrew Stanton and Pete Docter created the film, with the concept of their own futuristic theories. This intrigued me because the possibility of these theories becoming a reality are so much higher now with the technologic advances happening on a daily basis.
The next emotion I felt was boredom. Although the topics discussed were interesting, I couldn’t help but have boredom creep into my state of being. I think that this emotion played into the topics discussed in itself. When I felt bored, I would turn to technology to surpass the emotion. By using technology, I was paying a testament to the idea of technology taking over our lives. Previously, we would turn to books or even verbally communicating with the people around us. Instead, I turned to technology in all its glory.
I also felt enlightened during this presentation process due to the information learnt. I learnt the most about the possibilities of the future that technology can have. For example, during the Art and Technology presentation, I discussed how the youth today use technology to create art more than the more traditional methods. That was something that I had noticed but never really thought about in the sense that it’s an issue.
I feel that these perspectives have made me more aware of my surroundings in terms of the way I communicate with others and the use of technology on a regular basis.
This week we had our Perspective Presentation Summit. There were eight teams and each team got to pick a topic that they would present on. My team consisted of Jason, Juhi, Mickel, Lucy, Jack and myself. We explored the topic of Multimedia.
I feel that our presentation on Multimedia was the most relatable to my possible future career. In my future career, I want to use photography, graphic design and painting combined so multimedia is extremely applicable in wanting to combine these three things in some way.
The thing about multimedia is that it’s also one of the scariest technologies. This is because of having to find a balance in the use of multimedia. It’s super easy to produce an overload of information and content in the output of multimedia. It can be used in a variety of industries and platforms such as websites, social media, advertising and journalism for example. Within the multitude of industries and platforms available to multimedia, the amount of content exposed to us as the audience is extreme. Typically, the exposure to the content and information is so oversaturated that it goes over our head. Us as the consumers don’t notice the oversaturation of the content.
Since we don’t notice the oversaturation, when we create our own multimedia output it’s so easy to overload it with content because we think that’s the way it’s supposed to be. We jam pack the output which ultimately can make the output confusing and incomprehensible.
And I realized throughout our presentation that if this trend within the exposure and output of multimedia continues, there will be an overload of information and content out in the world even more so than what it is now. This could possibly result in a future with a change in the way humans interact with one another. This future that I’m talking about would look like one that I’ve referenced in “Perspective Presentation 5 – The Future of Work”, in relation to the Disney animated film ‘Wall-E’. In the film, there is a dystopian world where humans are no longer living in the way that we are now.
Below is a video link to the scene within the film:
The film also references Team 3’s presentation on Technology and Media. I found their presentation to be one of the most intriguing due to its relation to my predetermined viewpoint on the future of human interaction and the role in which Technology and Media plays into that. During their presentation, there was a comment made which was that “computers control everything in our society today.” This comment is one that I don’t agree with because of its timeline. I think that in the future, computers can control the world in the sense of an overload of multimedia complimented with a technological takeover.
The effect that technology could have on society is shown in ‘Wall-E’ as I said before (see video above). In the film, the humans are living on a ship in a different universe. They are seen to have become obese from their dependence on the automated lifestyle they deem to live. As seen in the video above, they are reliant on hover chairs for their movement, an automated crew to enable their basic human needs and necessities, as well as a virtual reality styled device that enable communication. If technology and media continues to advance and takeover the way that I predict, coupled with the overload of multimedia, the ways of basic human interaction will change. The human dystopia of ‘Wall-E’ could come true.
Another thing about teams 3’s Technology and Media presentation that I found interesting was the concept of technology and media providing us with somewhat of an internet bubble, seeing as the internet seems to be the center of technology and media. As a society, we are not necessarily run by technology and media or computers, but it is a central part of our lives. And it also creates the bubble in which we live. Since we’re inside of this bubble, what we’re exposed to can become congested or even customized to us as individuals but not to the point where we notice it. We tend to become so caught up in our own world to the point where I think we enjoy living in an internet bubble. It effects the way that we view the world, the way we do things as well even the way we communicate.
This idea of living inside of an internet bubble and the way that it affects us, made me think about Team 5’s presentation on Visual Language. Visual language is a broad subject but basically refers to a way of expressing a thing, concept or theory in a way. Living inside of our internet bubble, as well as the increase of technology and media, greatly determines the language that we use when doing this. With my generation specifically, we have now become accustomed to using text-speak on a regular basis, using visual language and technology negatively. However, in doing so, we’re becoming more illiterate. Not using proper language and grammar when communicating verbally and non-verbally. For example, I personally tend to use the word ‘Like’ to replace words that would typically go in its place. For example, saying “And then I was like go away” instead of saying “And then I said go away”. The word “Like” specifically is a tech-term that became popular when I was in intermediate. That’s just an example of the improper language use that stems from the overuse of technology. Also, an example of visual language is the use of emoji’s. We use emoji’s to relay emotions in a visual way rather than verbally or written simply because it’s easier, which also shows the way we as a society are becoming lazy and giving in to the negatives of visual language and technology.
A statement made during their presentation was that they believe that visual language will become the future of language and communication. That the verbal human language will become ancient in the same way that we consider cavemen communication today. It’s a statement that I agree with, simple because of the way we’re using visual language today. So, it will only advance from here on.
In conclusion, the entire summit opened my mind and eyes up to what was already right in front of me. It made me consider the impacts that these specific technologies are already having on our lives to the point where we don’t even realize that it’s impacting us. We’re so caught up in what’s happening in our own little lives that we don’t realize how the technologies we’re using are altering our lives. And if we don’t realize it soon, it might be too late for us as a human race.
This week was my teams turn to present on a topic for the rest of the class to discuss. Our topic was The Future of Work.
With there only being 7 people in my group, we had to drop three of the questions to discuss during the presentation. My contribution to the group was to do the introduction of the topic. I had to discuss a basic outline of the entire topic and the points that the other members of my group brought up. On the day of presentations, I was absent from class but my group already had my notes so that they could get my point across alongside theirs.
Below I will link the groups Google Slides presentation as well as my point discussed:
I found this topic to be really fascinating because I was unaware of the topic in general. I was oblivious to the concept of having the future of the workplace being altered by technology even though everything else is, I had just never considered the impact of it on the work force. Learning about this topic was an eye opener to me to realise how the job I may have in the future may not even be invented yet which is a baffling concept to comprehend.
I watched the following videos below separate from my research on my point, so that I can have the ability to comprehend the topic deeper.
The moot given to discuss was “In the near future, there would be no need for humans in the workplace for we would be replaced by technology”
I was informed that the class discussions were left at a 50/50 basis. I was not surprised by this because there are a range of positives and negatives that can be found through this moot. For example, if technology replaces humans then humans won’t have to work that much and be able to spend more time with loved ones.
A negative example would be that if humans are not working as much, humans may refer to a possibly harmful alternative pass-time. Humans would turn to unhealthy habits if there is no pass-time found. An example of this is in the Disney animated film ‘Wall-E’. In the film, there is a dystopia of humanity which half the film is set in. Within this dystopia, humans do not work, but rather robots are running the fictional world for example from being the doctors to being the cooks
My personal opinion is that I disagree with the moot. If we think about the fast rate at which technology is advancing and being incorporated into the workforce more and more, one must stop to think that a ‘takeover’ per say may be inevitable. However, there will always be things that technology cannot do which humans can. Like fixing the technology and human interactive collaborations for example. So jobs that require those things cannot be ‘taken over’ by technology. Humans will always be needed in the workforce, if not to do the actual job, then to do the new job of ensuring the technology does the job.
This presentation was about the way the world of art and technology collide. Technology was introduced into the art world to push the boundaries as to what art is in general. The idea that we have as what art is, is pushed to a point where you must consider is it is still a piece of art or if it must be categorized as something else.
Digital artworks are becoming more and more common, almost to the point where some could consider it the ‘new traditional’ art form. Younger kids are commonly being taught and shown digital art nowadays as compared to previously. This assumption is based on my childhood compared to my littler brother’s (currently sevens years old, in Year three at school) childhood. The art that he does in school is largely based around the ‘classroom iPad’ where they’re tasked with creating art directly onto the iPad itself. For me, this was never the case. I was dealt with physical painting and drawings when taught or shown art. From time to time, my brother will partake in the more traditional child-like methods of creating art like felt tips and finger painting for example. But not enough, which leads me to my assumption on the tsunami of digital art and the cross over between the technological world and the art world.
One of the points brought up during the discussion of the moot was the notion of digital art being a quicker way to make art. The direction of this particular discussion was going in the direction as of to say that digital art is some sort of ‘cop out’ and that ‘real artists’ would spend more time doing things in a more hands-on traditional way. I was in full disagreement with this discussion and the direction it was heading in. I believe that digital art can be just as time consuming as the more traditional methods of creating art pieces. And just like traditional art pieces, it depends on the piece itself. For example:
The video above must have taken plenty of time to construct so there is so fairness in the discussion of digital art being any type of ‘cop out’ to the art making process or outcome.
The moot discussed was ‘Forget painting, we have technology’.
My opinion on this moot is that I am very middle of the playing field. I feel that with technology becoming such a prominent aspect of art, the practice of painting will eventually disintegrate. However, the fundamentals of painting will still be needed and known in order to have a basic understanding of art. Today’s generation are taught art is both a digital and physical sense, but at some point, I believe that it will be fully digitized. Technology driven art will become the new traditional art. Digital art opens up audiences to a piece of art that in unique and offers more of a literal experience, for example interactive digital art.
Since there is no specific timeline given for this moot, I must disagree with the moot. Eventually, painting will be forgotten but only in 100 years in my opinion but not in the near future.
This week’s presentation was about how the future of content is constantly changing and pathing new pathways to enable life to be just that much easier. Generally saying that the way that content is being mass produced means that the content will consume us.
An example that I thought of through my understanding of the presentation is social media. Social media has taken the world by storm in the past ten years, especially the millennium generation. We have become so fixated and consumed by social media in a way that we give it the power to possibly control us. Also, with it being so accessible it creates a bigger vortex to pull on into.
The moot given was ‘Customized content will improve productivity and provide characteristic information. However, it will cause people to become less independent.’
Through the class discussions, I gathered that most of the class agreed with the moot. A topic which was discussed was the concept of independence. I found this conversation to be a rather interesting one. It arose questions such as are we independent now? Who is to say whether or not we have independence or not? And with regards to the technological advances, have we ever been independent?
My opinion on this moot is that I disagree with it. Because I’m partial to agreeing with the idea that customized content will make people less independent but I strongly disagree that customized content will improve productivity and provide characteristic information. I think that the content that we’re exposed to today is already customized. The content that I’m exposed to is different to the content that my parents are exposed to. I feel that this is based on the environments one is in rather than the content itself. However, through the customization of the content we will eventually become less independent because the knowledge that we have will come from the content within our environment making us close minded. We won’t be exposed to other content that enables us to be more dependable on ourselves, we’d have to reply on others that are exposed to the content to provide us with it. But I don’t think that this will make us less productive, if anything it’ll help human interaction. We will then be required to partake in more collaborative and engaging interactions with one another to learn content that we are not exposed to while others may be. Im am straddling the fence with my statement but I if I had to pick, I mostly disagree with the moot.
In this week’s presentation, we were introduced to virtual and augmented reality. My understanding of the presentation is that virtual reality is being that you can be floating amongst the stars in space. Whilst augmented reality is having the stars jumping out at you. My personal connection to augmented reality is through the app ‘Pokémon Go’. And virtual reality is with the VR headsets that are now the ‘in thing’ to own.
To clarify my understanding of virtual reality, it is a virtual world that one can be transported to. You can be taken out of your reality and placed within a surrounding virtual reality of your choice. For example, 360 degree videos have become rather popular on youtube. These videos allow you to be transported into whichever virtual world without the use of a VR headset. If viewing on a phone, one can move the phone around as if it’s your head moving and looking around. On a computer, one must move the mouse to do so.
My understanding of augmented reality is already clear. With everyday examples such as ‘Pokemon Go’ and ‘Snapchat’ filters
The moot given to discuss was ‘In 30 years time, people will be spending more time in a virtual world than in a non-virtual world’.
During the class discussion, a point was brought up about how the technology behind virtual reality is being worked on and improved on a regular basis. It’s growing and becoming more and more mainstream. I connected this to the use of augmented reality being brought to mainstream apps such as ‘Pokémon Go’ and ‘Snapchat’. Snapchat is the app that I connect with personally with it being an app that I use on a regular basis. On Snapchat, there are filters that are applied through the camera on your phone and they have now come up with glasses that create the filters. This is just an example of how the technology is advancing and becoming more mainstream. I personally think that both virtual and augmented reality started from 3D movies. The fascination of audiences of having things pop up from the screen must’ve inspired the technology to advance further. In terms of having people spending more time in a virtual world in 30 years time, it’s not hard to believe because 3D movies only came about less than 20 years ago, and the internet as well.
However, I personally do not agree with the moot. I believe that as humans, we have physical needs such as food and sleep for example. In a virtual world, those needs are not met in a physical sense. Beyond just physical human needs, we have mental needs. We need to grow and develop as people which often occurs from difference of opinion and interaction with others. But if we’re spending more time in a virtual world that in the real world, then you get to pick and choose the things inside of that world. This limits the difference of opinion that you’d be exposed to so then you wouldn’t develop as a person. In 30 year’s time, if we’re spending more time in virtual worlds than in the real world then the existence and mental capability of humanity would deteriorate and lessen.
The presentation today was discussing Futurists and their predictions per say. In general, three Futurists were discussed in the presentation; Marshall McLuhan, Alvin Toffler and Ray Kurzweil.
We discussed multiple moots through their presentation but the main one was that “Does our memory get better or worse with the rise of technology”. The class was then tasked to discuss this particular point and a lot of valid thoughts were brought up.
One of the main points that was discussed was that technology aids our memories rather than having it worsen our memories. Through technology advances like social media, we’re able to capture and post memories in a way that’s beyond just simply taking a photograph. We’re sharing the memory with others and publishing it in the technologic universe, to which people always refer to saying that ‘once it’s out there you can’t get it back’. So once our memories are put out there, it’s there forever and will not disappear over time. It allows us to store important and minuscule memories that we typically would forget about.
For me, this discussion brought about the idea of memories being a part of our sub-conscious. I believe that with the help of technology, we’re able to bring certain memories into our conscious mind that would typically be left in our sub-conscious due to our perspective of it being insignificant. However, once we share it through social media, it’s brought into a conscious state regardless of its significance.
Another point brought up during the in-class discussion was that we may start to depend on technology for our memories. I found that to be relevant in my thoughts of conscious and subconscious memories. If majority of our memories are brought into a conscious state through technology, then our subconscious would be empty for the most part. If our subconscious is cleared out of memories, then I feel that other information may take its place such as knowledge or intelligence. These factors may then move into our subconscious to make room in our conscious mind for our memories. This is a disadvantage for our mental state as humans because we will be remembering things that may have no importance by pushing the important factors out of our mind.
After our discussion, I endlessly felt that our memory gets better with technology but I could argue that our human mental state could worsen.