WebLog 11

My Twitter account name is: kandrushko15

Here are my tweets for the #fysswarm and completed pictures of the ant simulation:

Annotated Bibliography

Annotated Bibliography

Barber, Benjamin. "Jihad vs. McWorld." The Globalization Reader. By Frank J. Lechner and John Boli. Malden: Blackwell, 2000. 21-26. Print. This article is about globalization. Jihad represents the old world which consisted of wars. McWorld represents todays technological advance and companies spreading all around the world. As McWorld expands cultures are being brought together and cultures want to be independent and not be forced to accept other culture's beliefs.  This article will help my paper because it shows how cultures are being forced together and cultures not wanting this. As a result, a war occurs because cultures are not accepting of one another's beliefs. My digital story is about globalization and cultures not wanting to be forced together and therefore this article will help. 

Johnson, June. "Behind Digital Divide." Global Issues, Local Arguments: Readings for Writing. New York: Pearson Longman, 2007. 424-28. Print. This article is about how wealthy people do not know or realize what it is like to have little money. They do not know how it is like to live on a dollar or .75 cents a day. In this article a person responds, “It has no connection to my life” when someone was saying about how other countries are less wealthy than America. People blame people like Bill Gates for distraction other citizens from problems in the United States, such as people living on only a dollar a day. This article also questions people’s priorities. This article is relevant to my digital story because it shows how some countries are advancing faster than others. As a result, the slower advancing countries people can only live on .75 cents a day or only a dollar. Either financial issue is very difficult I believe because I live on at least twenty dollars because I have the benefits of electricity, college education, food, clothing, etc. This is an important article in my digital story to show examples of what countries are less advanced and how they have to survive. 

Johnson, June. "In Defense of Globalization: Why Culture Exchange Is Still an Overwhelming Force for Good Globalization." Global Issues, Local Arguments: Readings for Writing. Boston: Longman, 2010. 430-35. Print. This article will be used as my naysayer. This article is defending technology by saying it does not separate cultures. From other articles and my own personal experiences I have noticed media and technology are bringing cultures together. Quotes like the following from this article are what is used to form my opinion, "Cross-cultural exchange can spread greater diversity as well as greater similarity: more gourmet restaurants as well as more McDonald's outlets." This statement is defending globalization. This article is also about how losses of diversity are a good thing. I know though that losing diversity is a bad thing because it takes aways different cultures beliefs, traditions, and unique qualities. The purpose of different cultures is for their unique qualities and if they were taken away then cultures would blend which is not good. I can use facts from other articles to defend my reason against this article. Using this article will show two sides of my digital story. 

Packer, George. "When Here Sees There." Global Issues, Local Arguments: Readings for Writing. By June Johnson. Boston: Longman, 2010. 421-23. Print. This article is about how developing countries are satisfied with what they have until they see on television what other countries such as the United States have. After this, the developing countries are jealous and want it. The article will help my digital story because my digital story is partially about how countries are happy with what they have until they see what other countries have and that is one of the main focuses in this story. This article is also about how countries such as America read something in the newspaper about something bad in another country and then two days later they are onto something else and forget what just happened. This is showing how the world is coming apart when it should be coming together. This article will help my digital story by showing how the world is falling apart due to technology such as the television. 

WebLog 10

I believe Facebook and its users constitute a superorganism. This is because Facebook is run by it's makers and then under them are people who have pages on Facebook. Having a group of people controlling Facebook is what makes it a superorganism. Facebook is currently changing to keep up to date. This is important because or else it would die. Facebook needed to have an app for ipods and smart phones because that is how people these days use the internet and keep in contact with others. Most people always have there cellphones on them and are continuously checking them. Having a Facebook app on your phone, ipod touch, etc makes it easier and faster to check Facebook whenever you want. Without the millions of users on Facebook, Facebook would not exist. The users are what makes up Facebook. 

WebLog 9

An example of emergent behavior that I have witnessed is Facebook. Facebook is an example of emergent behavior because it started out with simple rules and for social networking. Now Facebook is used for much more. People use Facebook to keep in contact with friends and share photos/videos. It is used to invite people to events and know who is coming or not. Not only do people have Facebook's, but so do companies. Facebook is an example of emergence because it began with a few simple rules, but many different options to do whatever you want to do. People came up with their own ideas to make their pages how they wants and companies came up with an idea to promote themselves. Facebook offers a wide range of options and what you do with them is what makes Facebook special. I have seen Facebook grow over the years. It started out with just colleges using it, then the public, and then companies. A major example of emergence is taking what began as a social networking site for individuals and then companies using it to promote their business and products. Facebook is always updating. The "like" button has been added which is neat and I believe Facebook will continue to expand. Facebook is also a way of getting information from one person to another. Whether it is from a news corporation to the public or person to person. Facebook is shown emerging to the global perspective because Facebook is on the news a lot, which gets the word out about Facebook, and most people in the United States knows what Facebook is. Facebook is also a way of getting information from one person to another. Whether it is from a news corporation to the public or person to person. 

WebLog 7

The United States government should make laws that stop computer companies from selling equipment to China that China will use to block what the citizens in China can and cannot do on the internet involving violations of human rights or freedom of speech. America wants countries such as China to allow freedom to their people. The US does not want countries to have laws that block people from saying what they want to say. The United States does not want to be involved with countries who do not give their citizens freedom to express their feelings. America does not want to be “two-faced” by allowing their citizens the freedom of speech, but then support other governments who do not allow their citizens freedom of speech. The United States likes to help other countries according to Bob from Leominster. Bob said, “I never hear any of our leaders talk about cutting foreign aid.” This statement shows how Americans support their country giving aid to foreign countries who need it. 

In contrast, the Untied States government should not make laws that stop computer companies from selling equipment to China that will allow their government to block what citizens do on the internet that violates human rights or freedom of speech. Companies such as Cisco. According to Sarah Stirland in the www.wired.com article states “that Cisco engineers regarded the Chinese government’s rigid internet censorship program as an opportunity to do more business with the repressive regime.” This statements shows that Cisco is looking into selling product that will repress citizens while online. The company will block out if someone says something bad about their government. The United States government wants to make laws that stop companies from selling this type of equipment to China, but I believe the United States does not have any business in telling companies what they can and cannot do. The point of a business is to make products that will attract certain people. Therefore, companies such as Cisco, Yahoo, and Google should be allowed to modify their products for certain countries according to their laws. Businesses do this to be successful. The point of a business is to make money. If changing a product for a country is what does that then they should be allowed to. The Untied States government should not be interfering with large companies just because they do not believe in their products. Just because the United States have laws that allow freedom of speech does not mean other countries have to follow Americas laws. Each country having their own laws makes them unique and that is why people choose to live in that country. If you do not want to follow the rules then move to a different country. America should not make important countries like China mad by interfering because as a result China may then stop exporting products to America. This would be very bad for the America because the US gets a large amount of products from China and therefore the America’s economy would be hurt. The American citizens would be mad because then they could not get the products they want and would have to start making them or get them from a different country. 

As Chinese people get better at using microblogs and social networking sites they are speaking out which is creating more freedom of speech for the citizens. This is good because currently the Chinese people have sensors on what websites they can go on and what they can say on it. If the Chinese citizens get freedom of speech then they will be able to have social networking sites and blogs that make it so they can speak what they want to and not have to worry about getting in trouble. The Chinese citizens want freedom and believe that using social networking sites and blogs give them that. According to Michael Bristow in his BBC article stated, “Microblogs are widely popular in China. There are tens of millions users. People are expressing themselves like never before, and there is a lot of criticism of the government.” What Bristow meant by this statement is that people believe they can change China’s rules by using microblogs to speak out. People are criticizing the government because they do not have the freedom of speech and the ability to do what they want on the internet. If a lot of people in China are posting about how bad the government is then the government may change the laws. They may change the laws because the government does not want people all around the world knowing how much their citizens hate the Chinese government. As a result, China’s government may change their laws because they do not want a bad reputation all around the world. 

Using microblogs and social networking sites to speak out and criticize the government will not create more freedom of speech for citizens. People blogging about the government and how they want freedom of speech will not change the governments opinion. The government has made up there mind many years ago and has not changed the rules yet so most likely people complaining online about it will not change their opinion.  Michael Bristow in his BBC article mentioned how the recent high-speed train crash in Wenzhou killed 40 people caused a huge response on the web. All these people responding the train crash has not made the government open up more about the train crash. People all around the world want answers to their questions, but China’s government is not giving them many answers. So how can people believe that blogging on the internet will cause a change in the law when a huge train crash is trying to be covered up by the Chinese government by giving little response of how and why and what is going to happen now. If the Chinese government listened to the people and changed the laws then the citizens would get used to it and always expect that if they spoke out and complained a lot then they will expect to get anything that they want.

Works Cited:

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/03/13/curious-about-u-s-aid-to-foreign-countries/

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/05/leaked-cisco-do/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-14422581