Well this is my first blog post for Writ 1301 at the U of M. Exciting. I'm not entirely sure what I should include in my weekly posts, but I'm going to give my best effort in staying on track to what we talk about in class.
This week's reading was on the topic of computer communication. The piece we read was entitled "The Computer as a Communication Device" written by J.C.R. LIcklider and Robert W. Taylor. It was written in the 60's and basically predicted what advantages/disadvantages a computer world would bring.
The authors were pretty accurate in their predictions. They proposed one idea that hasn't completely come about, but still has possibilities (although I'm not sure if it's something that I like the idea of). This idea is entitled OLIVER. An OLIVER is basically a mechanical secretary that will, "Take notes (or refrain from taking notes) on what you do, what you read, what you buy and where you buy it. It will know who your friends are, your mere acquaintances. It will know your value structure, who is prestigious in your eyes, for whom you will do what with what priority, and who can have access to which of your personal files. It will know your organization's rules pertaining to proprietary information and the government's rules relating to security classification." For me, the first few parts sound plausible (and handy!) because those are all measurable sets of data. However, when it comes to differentiating friends from acquaintances, understanding value structure, prestige, and priority, I'm not sure if that part is plausible. These are all concepts and that are interpreted individually and I don't see how it would be possible for a machine to be able to grasp such a concept and interpret it exactly how my mind would. And I'm also not sure if I would want a machine to become that powerful.
It's the common "robots taking over the world" fear. I don't see computers as ever having as much or more power than the human mind. Maybe when it comes to mathematics or configuring problems like that, but when it comes to philosophy, reasoning, and pure thinking, it's just not a concept a machine could efficiently achieve. For example, I often use dictionary.com to look up synonyms for words to enhance my papers. Now, although the computer knows more words than my brain, it is up to ME and MY reasoning to pick the one that fits the best and why. Computers can feed the information, but nothing can replace the expansive thinking of the human mind.
And with that, I conclude.
Haylee Daggett
