Keeping Popcorn and Balloons Around Longer

Blog #23

Maria Kozdroy

11-28-14

Disclaimer: this is to be used as a response to class discussion and reading.

Keeping Popcorn and Balloons Around Longer

            Should people stop consuming easy microwavable packages of popcorn?  Should parents stop purchasing balloons filled with helium for their children’s birthday parties?  Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is a very harmful chemical released when microwavable popcorn is made, while balloons contain helium which is slowly becoming scarcer.  A solution of how to prevent PFOAs from continuing to enter into people’s bodies and attacking them and polar bears too, and a solution to prevent helium from being completely used up must be outlined.  Additionally, according to Woodhouse in chapter 18 of his STS textbook, “although great improvement surely is possible, it may prove forever impossible to help everyone,” (240), yet if even somewhat achieved, it will greatly help create a positive vision of a saner technofuture.  Small steps that consumers of helium and microwavable popcorn can do today is simply to stop consuming it; however, government cannot fully make this go into effect.  In this blog post, I am going to argue that instead of people ending consumption of microwavable popcorn and helium for balloons, it is up to engineers and scientists to discover new ways and materials that can replace them so that everyone can still be happy and satisfied with this new popcorn and balloon filler. 

            In a previous chapter of Woodhouse’s STS textbook, he mentions how green chemistry needs to be studied and used more often as a replacement to brown chemistry before it becomes even more detrimental.  Additionally, scientists need to find an alternative to microwavable popcorn releasing PFOAs, without taking them away entirely.  Government can attempt to remove production of microwavable popcorn, but this will definitely only create more conflicts for society.  Therefore, scientists should understand to create a safer, greener environment, one that will last longer, a change is needed.  That change may be to add a safe chemical to the popcorn to make sure it does release PFOAs.  Scientists and engineers have the ultimate responsibility in ensuring safety for everyone, as people will continue to consume what is produced without realizing the cons of the product.

            As for helium, it is causing harm in a different way—by using it in balloons for own leisure reasons, it may soon run out and cause problems for doctors because it is used to chill the superconducting magnets in MRI scanners.  Recently, on November 27, 2014, Macy’s once again held its 88^th annual Thanksgiving Day Parade.  “Enough to fill 600,000 to 700,000 Mylar party balloons [of helium was used]. But the parade helium is 99.999 percent pure, whereas the stuff in a party balloon might be only 97.5 percent pure.” (Fox News).  This is a lot of helium to be using when the supply of helium is running short!  However, the parade is a tradition.  People will not be pleased if it is stopped, especially those that are still waiting for the right year to go see it in person.  Stores such as Wal-Mart will not stop selling the 97.5 percent pure helium in tanks, and for that reason the company producing the tanks must be advised of the increasing lack of helium in the world.  A new job should be created under the United States Environment Protection Agency and other countries’ EPAs, so that an individual can warn the helium tank producing companies that change is needed.  An incentive from government should then be offered to the company as a way to convert them to begin producing “better helium.”  In order to preserve the helium that is left today and to allow balloons to continue floating, helium producers and scientists need to discover new ways that helium can be sold.  One is to sell it as a mixture with other compounds, as to only include a much smaller percentage of helium.  Therefore, the mixture inserted in a balloon is still lighter than air but not contain pure helium; for example, hydrogen can be used in this mixture.  Upon using much less helium for everyday entertainment purposes, doctors can continue to provide MRI scans for patients in more years to come. 

            Although, helium and microwavable popcorn production cannot be stopped entirely, ways to preserve helium and make microwavable popcorn safer is simple.  It is up to scientists and engineers to solve these problems in order to continue to please everyone that consumes these products already.  If these problems are fixed, then helium can continue to be used for MRI scans with no worries of it running out as soon as it is predicted today and microwavable popcorn can continue being made so as to not produce less fertility in women.  Simply, these everyday products can be enjoyed without the harmful side effects. 

Sources:

Woodhouse, Edward. The Future of Technological Civilization. Chapter 18

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/11/26/few-uplifting-facts-about-helium-which-makes-big-balloons-soar-in-nyc/

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24903034

 

 

Direct Impact of Technology

Maria Kozdroy

Blog #22

11-22-14

Disclaimer: this is to be used as a response to a class discussion and a reading.

Direct Impact of Technology

            Women can achieve just as much as men, only if they are willing to do so.  In a competitive society this may seem very far-fetched and apparent with why many more men have higher positions in large companies.  According to Woodhouse in Chapter 17 of his STS text, he states “In practice, most people tend to behave in ways rather similar in their workplace and in their subculture.  Legacy thinking?  Gently Tyranny? Sensible choice?”  History has predetermined the culture and ways many women and men live today.  The idea of women working inside the house to keep it clean has been around for centuries.  The only way that this stereotype can be attempted to be removed from society, would be to have more women believe and prosper in asking for more and not settling for less, as explained by the COO of Facebook Sheryl Sandberg.  Additionally, with the constant pressure to work long days to succeed, it is more common for people to experience a lack of “leisure” time on weekdays.  Leisure to some may mean using a device to play games, etc., yet leisure used in this paper will mean any form of relaxation and fun without using a cellphone, laptop, TV, etc.  In this blog post, I am going to argue that leisure and determinism to advance are linked each to technology, and that for this reason, one can gain more leisure time and willingness if technology is appreciated rather than over used.  In other words, children playing Angry Birds on their tablet should go outside to play basketball, and more women going into “simpler, liberal arts” careers should consider STEM careers and gaining higher titles. 

            In a recent study from the Speak Up 2010 Survey, results showed that many students in grades K-12 have personal access to different kinds of mobile devices, specifically 60% of students grades 6-8 had personal access to laptops (ReadWrite).  This is a shockingly high number.  Many middle school students nowadays have it much simpler when it comes to writing reports, where one can easily search for statistics, books, and articles online in seconds.  Schools nationwide are creating harsher penalties on students using cell phones in class because of the distraction they pose to others and the students themselves.  In reality, this may be the only time that a student can take a break out of their busy days to relax because as soon as they go home, chores will need to be done, dinner will need to eaten, and then the tedious homework must be completed.  Although using your phone to browse the Internet is not considered leisure is this essay, this idea of students using them during class is quite interesting.  Since students know of helpful sites like Khan Academy, the student may feel that it is easier to retain the information at home by themselves then fully paying attention in class.  The only reason students check their phones during class is that they know when they get home they can use technology to help them more than in the classroom.  The dependence on technology has taken away from leisure time in the sense of going to the park, reading a book, and most importantly playing a family board game.  Not only are students finding more and more to do on an Internet enabled device, parents are too.  How can a parent act as a role model for their children in this sense? 

            Some mothers, however, are working hard to keep their children active.  My mom has driven me so many places, to make me happy while also keeping up with her own hectic work schedule.  Women, according to Sandra Sandberg, need to keep pushing forward while maintaining their families and push to get their name out to earn a better pay, social mobility, and success.  Ironically though, I never have heard of her before listening to her speech yesterday.  To be successful and earn a high position in a company, women need to build a strong foundation.  Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute is a good start to success, where upon graduation with a Bachelor’s Degree, one is bound to find a satisfactory job and hopefully climb to become a CEO someday.  This is great news for women that attend RPI because of all the companies that want a well-educated woman to work for them.  However, not all women can afford a STEM college education; this should never stop a woman though from trying, perhaps, settling for a job in a local store to earn money to then go to school.  The little steps must first be taken, to get to success. 

            Technology has transformed society for all people—men, women, and children.  An equality must be found between men and women in the workforce, while children need not be too overly controlled by technology.  The social structure of society will soon hopefully find a balance with technology and all people.  This change may not come in one month, but if I’m willing to make a difference and you are too, we’re already that much closer to finding this balance. 

Sources:

What Do Kids Say Is The Biggest Obstacle To Technology At School? http://readwrite.com/2011/04/03/what_do_kids_say_is_the_biggest_obstacle_to_techno#!

Sheryl Sandberg, 2013, 15 Minute Talk about “Leaning In” November 21, 2014

Woodhouse, Edward. The Future of Technological Civilization. Chapter 17

 

 

Protecting Innovation and the Future

Blog #21

Maria Kozdroy

11-20-14

Disclaimer: this post is to be used a response to class discussion and reading.

Protecting Innovation and the Future

            Technology is rapidly changing and the United States is starting to slowly fall behind to other countries.  The war of arms has been increasing and countries are thoroughly competing now to have the best weapons.  According to Woodhouse in Chapter 16 of the STS text, he believes that “availability of new weapons changes the way that military planner and decision makers think and act.”  Military innovation involves individuals to think in different and new ways, taking in consideration of fairness, hopefully.  The Secretary of the Department of Defense Chuck Hagel announced at a recent defense forum at the Minot Air Force Base on Friday November 14, 2014, “We must change the way we innovate, operate and do business.”  The United States does not want to fall behind, and needs to take the necessary steps to progress and overcome the challenges of danger and therefore fairness.

            Ever since September 11, 2001, the United States DoD has taken more planned approaches in security measures.  Other countries that the U.S. is currently in war against, such as Iraq, are expanding their knowledge of weapons and developing newer and more advanced technologies.  In order to combat this, the United States must too focus on combatting their technologies while also combatting against the physical attacks of the countries’ militaries themselves.  The United States government, especially the DoD, must ascertain the precautions of new military weapons.  The main goal of the U.S. government and military to me, is to protect the rightful citizens of the United States.  Military innovations, thus should continue to protect us as one proud country.  New technologies need to be able to stay faithful to this idea.  For example, in response to 9/11, the U.S. has been watching very closely to all its boundaries to protect all its citizens.  A change to military innovation would be to host more soldiers on U.S. grounds.  Even though this may not be a physical innovation, it should help bring out the thought of overall protection. 

            Additionally, Chuch Hagel believes, “This program [of military innovation] will look toward the next decade and beyond.”  Even though, life is being lived at the moment, there too is constant consideration of the future.  As a result, the U.S. should not just necessarily focus on new technological advancements; rather, changes in the military and military innovations as they stand right now.  War is not just based on physical strength forces attacking but the power of technology.  Military innovation is changing politics, making more individuals go into research, and the military itself.  It leaves me to wonder what will military innovation and U.S. protection be in six decades.

Sources:

http://www.wjhl.com/story/27395791/hagel-us-needs-game-changing-military-innovation

Woodhouse, Edward. The Future of Technological Civilization. Chapter 16

 

 

Enhanced Regulations

Maria Kozdroy

11-16-14

Blog #20

Disclaimer: this blog is to be used as a response to class discussion and readings

Enhanced Regulation

            I can guarantee you that there is at least one person in your family or a friend you have that takes Omega-3 fatty acids to improve their health, or some kind of₌ vitamin enhancer.  Many people are using taking these pills to maintain better health and memory, should this mean children should begin taking Omega-3 at a young age with the goal of never having bad health or losing memory?  Will these young students perform better on tests and become so dependent on the pill, that they would not be able to survive without it?  Many children take simple gummy vitamins today as a fruit supplement, but Omega-3 fatty acid pills have much more serious effects and risks associated with them, as they are not just fruit in another form, yet fish and flax seed.  According to Woodhouse in chapter 15 of the STS text, he states that there should be no innovation without representation.”  In this blog post I am going to argue that children should only take the gummy fruit vitamins and not the more serious enhancement pills, as dependence on these pills may cause addiction and the feeling of being better than everyone else—a major misconception.  Scientists and engineers should continue innovating these enhancements as suggested in Woodhouse’s argument; however, have government apply stricter regulations on how these enhancements are obtained.

            Again I will clarify that for the sake of this paper, the gummy fruit vitamins usually in a shape of an animal are safe for children as they are to be taken as an alternative to eating fruit.  On the other hand, Omega-3 pills and any enhancements along the lines of improving memory, etc. are designed to help maintain better health for adults.  If a kid were to start taking fish oil pills at the age of 5, that possibly when they reach being a teenager their body will have fully come addicted to the pill that the only way to achieve normal health would be to stop taking the pill.  The state of health that the teenager would be in over achieves the safe health conditions as stated by government, since their body would forget what the norm of good health even is.  Human engineering is becoming more and more of a growing concern, and may be because of the problem with children developing bad habits of health enhancing pills.  Scientists are coming up with ways how to change a child’s health after affected from enhancements, in order to respond to the environment—the way it had been before relying on the pill each day.  It would be easier if the child does not take the pill at a young age in the first place.  Health enhancements seem to be becoming the norm for older people, as doctors are telling more of their patients the benefits of easily taking one pill a day.  However, adults can take this pill for a longer span of time daily because they tend to begin on a level of “bad” health.  In addition, any enhancements as such should better state that better life health should not depend on taking a pill every day.  Government should step in and force producers to provide this message clearly in packaging and advertising, so that the public consumers understand what they will be getting themselves into, and possibly even their children. 

Imagine if your child began sneaking your Omega-3 pills each day before school, and suddenly began bringing math tests of grades 100 home on a normal basis, when they usually received 80’s on.  The parents should suspect that something is fishy with this (no pun intended!).  Besides the student gaining a high dependence on taking an enhancement to make sure to keep doing well on tests, they would begin to gain a selfish attitude, as they probably brag to his or her classmates of how well they have done on the most recent test.  It is up to the parents to make sure their son or daughter does not sneakily obtain any enhancements that one can purchase easily in a store, and use them in the wrong way.  Yet again, these enhancements are designed to maintain better health up to par with the standard health conditions; perhaps government should force enhancing pills to be prescribed by doctors in order to gain procession of them.

Omega-3 fatty acid pills are intended to be used by adults, and only adults, and only for short time periods at a time.  Doctors and governments should implement new regulations of the use of any “modest enhancements.”  Taking vitamins and other supplements will seem to benefit the physical body of a human, but have a negative effect on the mentality of the consumer, child or adult. 

Works Cited:

Woodhouse, Edward. The Future of Technological Civilization

The Many Difficulties Faced By Economy

Maria Kozdroy

Blog #19

11-7-14
Disclaimer: this blog is to be used as a response to class discussion and readings.

The Many Difficulties Faced By Economy

            The economy is rapidly changing.  Politics are rapidly changing; forcing society to change, too, as a result of both politics and economics and especially large corporations.  In such an advanced society like the one I live in, it is hard to please everyone.  In this blog post, I am going to argue how the economy functions today under the influence of politics, such as education, a somewhat laissez-faire system (little government intervening), and how larger companies have a lot of power to make many major decisions.    

Recently, in October the United States economy added 214,000 jobs, making the unemployment rate only 5.8%, the lowest level it has been since July 2008 (Time).  This is very good news to many and more production can now occur.  However, I presume that of this high number, somewhere around 30% of the people will be making over $60,000 a year.  Education is becoming more of a factor in deciding how “good” of a job one can have, as companies hire highly educated individuals in well paid positions.  The minimum wage in Connecticut is soon expected to be $10.10 sometime next year (Wage).  Yes, this does sound very exciting, but prices will probably rise, too, especially gas prices.  Those with higher level jobs, usually due to more education, will likely make more, too. 

            Additionally, the availability of resources present today may be slowly running out, as discussed in the previous overconsumption blogs of mine, but are becoming harder to gain possession of.  Companies need to be able to trade with other companies to gain the materials needed to produce their innovation.  In the end, both the natural resources company and the producing company should benefit.  It is strange to think about how one company can own a natural resource.  Also, if you think about it much money generated by economy goes to the large gasoline companies, as all products and materials need to travel around the world somehow.  Gasoline can cost any price that the executives of the gasoline company want it to be.  Government once again cannot necessarily fully rule a gasoline company, but just watch over what they do, making sure to add a tax addition to the cost, depending on what U.S. state it is.  In a way, governments across the world are struggling with restraining the gasoline companies from taking over the economy and jacking up the price of gas at any given moment. 

            Lastly, the bigger products that companies are currently selling, such as cars and refrigerators, tend to come in one size making it a bit more challenging for shorter and taller individuals to use.  Government cannot demand such a massive change occur, for example, forcing companies to produce custom products; however, production as it is right now will remain as is.  For this reason, artifacts do have politics and people must find a way to deal with it (Winner).  Companies are allowed to produce whatever they want, under one condition, no government regulations are disobeyed. 

            Economy has always had the reputation of struggling with politics.  Both economy and politics work together to manage a society, either one that people like or dislike.  The availability of resources, a company’s executive decisions, and the lack of government say, affect society and how satisfied people are.  Society will continue, however, to function with the struggle of economy and politics, or else we’re doomed!

Sources:

Time. http://time.com/3572116/new-jobs-report/
Winner, Langdon.  Do Artifacts Have Politics?
“Wage.” Connecticut Poised to become the First State with a $10.10 Minimum Wage. http://jobs.aol.com/videos/job-search/connecticut-poised-to-become-first-state-with-10-10-minimum-wag/518174953/

 

 

The Norm of Nanotechnology

Maria Kozdroy

Blog #18

11-6-14

Disclaimer: this blog is to be used as a response to class discussion and readings.

The Norm of Nanotechnology

The purpose of nanotechnology is transforming materials on such a tiny level to create alternatives of what is already present today (such as producing a stronger “cotton”).  Currently, a tiny percentage of people know exactly of what is going on with the progress of this advancement.  According to Woodhouse in chapter 13 of his text The Future of Technological Civilization, he argues that decisions of science need to be directed to all individuals in society, including industries, scholars, government officials, scientists, media groups, and more.  He believes, too, that scientists are not very accountable for their work because of being so isolated from all the others associated with society.  Earlier in one of my blog posts, I argued that overconsumption should run its course, forcing engineers and scientists to find completely different solutions by that time.  Now, in this blog post, I am going to argue nanotechnology should continue progressing with as little as possible association with others in society except for the scientists themselves, as the problem of overconsumption will safely soon be solved.  In other words, nanotechnology should be researched and then implemented in society when appropriate and sufficiently fulfill government regulations.

This proposal may sound like a very drastic change, but with the problem of overconsumption becoming more and more feared, an alternative must be in full research right now.  Scientists must remain in full control of all scientific advancements to follow the rapid pace of technology.  If nanotechnology research is slowed down by the complaint that democratic groups for representation are very much needed, then this will only make more problems.  Currently, nanotechnology is a newer technology and there are many kinks associated with it.  In time these kinks will soon be resolved, and government should allow scientists to fully implement new materials and products in society. 

In an article written by the ETC Group titled A Tiny Primer on Nano-Scale Technologies and “The Little Bang Theory,” it mentions that cotton production will slowly come to halt and that the economy specifically in the south will struggle.  However, these struggles must be resolved, possibly soon there will be many factories of workers of an adequate knowledge of nanotechnology producing t-shirts of this newly synthesized material.  There will surely be a surplus of sources of information—school, internet, books—that by the time nanotechnology fully takes action more people will soon appreciate and understand.

As of right now, materials that undergo nanotechnology are very expensive.  In decades to come, the price of these new materials and products will significantly go down as many new companies will have the knowledge and ability to produce forms of nanotechnology.  For example, there are many companies competing with selling computers, this is how the newly nano-technologized cotton companies will be. 

Once nanotechnology is safely implemented, a new age of technology will be created that will need to be accepted in society, as it will be the norm.   Price of such products that are made from nanotechnological methods will decrease to an affordable price because society will fully have deviated from the technology of per se 2014.  Nanotechnology must progress by scientists and mainly only scientists for there to be a solution in time to overconsumption.  By that time there will be an increase of students going to college to study nanotechnology and many newly founded markets and companies. Again, this is a very drastic change, but will be a sufficient alternative to the growing problem today of overconsumption.

Sources:

ETC Group.  A Tiny Primer on Nano-Scale Technologies and “The Little Bang Theory”
Woodhouse, Edward. The Future of Technological Civilization

Politics and Products

Blog #17

Maria Kozdroy

11-1-14

Disclaimer: this blog is to be used as a response to class discussion and readings.

Politics and Products

            Engineers produce products that hold authority over politics.  Engineers are not the main reason though for the problems generated in society by the new technologies, but the way the product is used by consumers is the major problem with innovations and politics.  Government authorities try to suppress the economic and political effects of newly engineered technologies; the engineers themselves only used their knowledge in their product and have done nothing wrong.  The way in which the people use the technologies is what is causing harm and conflicts in society.  Therefore, artifacts do have politics, as proposed by Langdon Winner.  As for Woodhouse in Chapter 12 of his textbook The Future of Technological Civilization, he believes engineering is a highly political activity, as contributed by the engineers themselves.  In this blog post, I will argue that engineers drive politics because they have their own control over what products they decide to produce and implement, as foreseen by government.  Therefore as a result, engineers will continue producing, while politics struggles because of those few consumers that claim to dislike the products and misuse them, when in reality they contribute to the reason of political-innovation problems.

            The majority of products engineered today are set to a standard size.  There are, however, people of different sizes that really want to use and enjoy these technologies, but struggle with them.  The question now belies whether engineers should worry about this problem or not.  An example of this is with midgets and cars.  Car companies have been designing cars for decades now, under one generic size usually.  There are far less undergrown short people in the world, and car companies have been running smoothly with sales; there is no need to engineer a new machine to accommodate this low percentage of people that have simply learned to adjust to this problem.  Car companies’ main concern is to not lose sales and keep engineering cars to attract more people to purchase their new products.  This issue as viewed by a technological determinist, would agree with me; as for a social determinist of technology would say engineers should listen to society’s demands.  Engineers are the ones that drive society, as well as the consumer; however, the engineers make the decisions of what the public and consumers will eventually begin using. 

            In addition, the government demands engineers to produce war materials, for example drones.  Although some may find discontent with drones and wish to have them removed, the engineers do not need to stop producing them, as government has control over this.  Instead, the engineers of drones will only continue to do their job, unless they go on strike!

            It is indeed that artifacts, or engineered products, bestow their own politics.  As for the engineers themselves, they will continue designing and producing, and continue to follow the regulations posed by government.  I believe society should keep functioning this way because politics is derived through the way people behave; since twenty first century politics deals with the way people behave now but with new technologies.

Sources:

Woodhouse, Edward. The Future of Technological Civilization. Chapter 12.
Winner, Langdon. Do Artifacts Have Politics?

 

Dragging Drones

Maria Kozdroy

Blog #16
10-31-14

Disclaimer: this blog is to be used as a response to class, readings, and presentations.

Prompt:  Explore questions of inequity.  Who has access to drones?  Could those not associated with a dominant country access the global network necessary to operate a drone?

 

Dragging Drones

            Drones have dragged people into the belief of inequity.  On October 31, 2014, several people from Grounding the War Initiative from Syracuse, New York came to speak with the students of the RPI introductory STS class, along with other older interested individuals.  The main argument of these individuals from this organization is that drones are killing innocent people and the only way to suppress these unjust actions for peace is by protesting and spreading awareness to others.  Mary Groves, the main supporter of this movement, has continually been arrested over the last 3 years from the actions she has taken on this subject of stopping drone attacks.  She believes that innocent Pakistani children do not deserve death as a result of U.S. drones.  Many consider these young kids are losing their life as a result of inequity.  In this blog post, I am going to argue that citizens should understand that drones are driven by government for the main reason of having equity in society as a whole, and not just the obvious inequity reasons; in other words, the only way to achieve equity is through supposedly considered “unfair” ways.

            On first look, people usually just see and acknowledge the obvious negative reasons of major problems in society that the media portrays, such as many military news as shown on the television.  The deeper meaning of drones should be dominant in society rather.  The question of who gets what in society has been a recurring conflict now especially with the increase in wars happening.  Drones are a major issue as they appear to be unfair to many people, as seen through the protest groups such as the one Mary Groves is part of.  Protesters like her tend to have only knowledge that is selected by government to be passed on to society, as known as the superficial reasons.  She probably does not realize the main reason why drones are used; to provide equity over inequity.  The ones that drones are often targeted at have caused inequity for American citizens and soldiers.  As a consequence, some lives are taken away, however, with the main goal of attacking the one that caused the unfairness to the country attacking.  Inequity and equity bounce back and forth between the two opponents, until hopefully fairness wins. 

            Additionally, no matter what country one associates with, country using or not using drones, one should be allowed to access information of operating a drone.  This individual will be on a neutral level of fairness and unfairness, which would probably prove beneficial in drone operation, so that they can provide unbiased facts and concerns of drone operation.  This is a very complex issue in society today, and if governments of these dominating countries is unwilling to absorb information from impartial sources, then equity will continue to be fought for. 

            Drones cannot be stopped by citizen protesters that only acknowledge the political effects on inequity apparent in society, but by those willing to accept the fact that drone uses for equity come before inequity.  I believe that the Grounding the War Initiative should rethink what they are protesting against to come up with a new set of beliefs centered on equity rather than inequity.

Sources:

Presentation at the Chapel and Cultural Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute on 10-31-14, Grounding the War Initiative