Throughout our generation, the digital technology has changed many things in our life. The computer and cell phone is the fastest development, and these things have shaped people live, think and communicate. Many of these products are changing people’s life, and using these events each day. The internet is one of the greatest inventions of our world, prompting many people to suggest it has ushered in a new revolution. With the help of the internet we can now communicate with each other almost instantly anywhere in the world. We no longer have to use our letter mails and wait for days to communicate to our friends and families. We can use skype and msn to contact with friends and families all over the world, and it fast and easily. Instant messaging technologies have revolutionized casual conversation and young people communicate. Not only contact with friends and families, but also most businesses now use the internet to communicate to its customers. However everything has good side and bad side. Some article proved good side and others proved bad side. Many students spend 10-12 hours per day to play online game or watch series. These behaviors affect our health and waste our time.
Vannevar Bush’s” As We May Think”, the article came up with many interesting ideas from several perspectives such as recording device, photocells, microfilm. According the science has improved people life in different way. It is fascinating how the author has managed to touch on so many technological advances seen today, such as data storing, the internet and networked communication. Additionally, Bush’s descriptions are extensions of what existed in his time. However, his imagination and technical perception of his devices are very clearly.
“Author Nicholas Carr: The Web Shatters Focus, Rewires Brains” by Nicholas Carr, the article presumes that non-surfing subjects in the first paragraph were performing deep and critical thinking before they were corrupted by web’s thinking influence. I trust this premise is greatly unfair and incomplete. The remainder of the evidence ignores a single, all important fact of the brains you are testing are not all the same. Certain brains are more adept at processing varied information, and not categorizing that level of adept function and factoring it into results is bad science. The final paragraph is conclusion like makes an illogical leap to shaky ground. As mentioned, more brain activity is unnecessarily good, however it is not necessarily bad. Also we could just as wee be experiencing and evolution of thought where decision making powers have been honed to such a point that we can process and ignore loads of information as unnecessary at a glance.
“Why Abundance is Good: A Reply to Nick Carr” by Clay Shirky, in Shirky’s argument contra “old” media is the individual knows best which cultural products he should consume. This is particularly with regard to demise of newspaper. When we will all create our own customized new feeds from the net, therefore we can get just the information we want to know, and avoid else. When some of students get our news from Fox and others from famous people, there is no common set of facts from which political discourse can proceed. Indeed, we don’t really need facts at all, I have my own opinion, and that is just as valid as yours, whatever those facts may say. We should try to leverage technological change to everyone’s best interest. Does he really expect us to believe? There’s a serious reactionary anti-clock element fighting the advent of the internet and the web.
Richtel, M. “Growing up Digital, Wired for Distraction” is talk about how children always had challenges in their lives. Students like Facebook, YouTube and making digital videos, and always faced distraction and time wasters. However computers and cell phones, and the constant stream of stimuli they offer, pose a profound new challenge to focusing and learning. Many parents and educators express unease about students’ digital diets, they are intensifying efforts to use technology in the classroom, seeing it as a way to contact with students and give them essential skills. Across the country, schools are equipping themselves with computers, internet access and mobile devices, therefore they can teach on the students’ technological territory.
Michael Agger’s “Lazy Eyes” talk about how people read information online. It’s easily to get attention of online readers to get the points straight and short. Many people do not want to spend too many time to read lengthy articles and are often put off by having to read in depth. Online reader can get information in many ways, image or text should not feel overwhelmed by how much they have to read or view. In Agger’s article called “Lazy Eyes How we read online” he uses easy to read print and separates his editorial into short paragraphs. He makes jokes throughout his article about how he may have lost the concentration of some readers because a few paragraphs are too long or that the audience may have been distracted by other websites. You can quickly and easily to fine the answer which you want to know on the websites.
To conclude, we can’t say the Internet is good for everyone, but a true benefit to society is really good for us. All aspects are debated. Through it all society evolves towards higher knowledge and better understanding. And everything has good and bad side. Bad side is for the internet that some of people use internet to commit a crime. Also some students waste too many times on their digital products.