As an online course, the writing that we do in English 305 is substantially different from a face to face course. As such, it is imperative that you understand the course style from the start. Nearly all of your work in this course will be posted on the course blog.
EACH WEEK YOU WILL HAVE THREE BLOG ASSIGNMENTS:
1. A BLOG ENTRY,
2. A READING, AND
3. A WRITING ABOUT THE READING. Your reading and writing on the blog must be completed by the Friday (by midnight) of the week in which the reading falls. You have all week each week to complete the reading and writing for that week, but there are no late assignments accepted, so be sure to be disciplined about the work from the start. Let me re-state that point; if you do the assigned work before or during the week it is due, you will receive full credit. If you do the work after the Friday of the week it is assigned, you will get zero credit for that week.
Saturday, February 4, 2012
WEEK FIVE RESPONDING TO WHAT YOU READ
Which of the two articles was more compelling and why?
The first article about the walking injury risk was way more compelling to me than the second article.
First off, the first article caught my eyes mostly in the end because it talks about maybe getting a new law or censorship for walking with your phones in ear or anything like that because it is more of a risk of not "looking both ways to cross traffic so you can get hit more then with not listening or hearing anything. I see the purpose to the law but, with this law and the car law, we have no where to talk unless we are sitting at home. How are we suppost to contact our friends or family if something happens? A lot of people say what did they use to do in the old days, well this is a new generation where people havent dealt without their phones and have no idea what to do without them.
I see the risk while talking on the phone and walking but whats the purpose of walking with a firend and talking? your both distracted.
All in all, I love this article because i agree with it listening to headphones and not hearing traffic is dangerous but to banned it, i dont agree.
I feel that article two “Is technology helping disability?” was most the compelling out of the two articles. While I did feel that article one was informative, it did not compel nor convince me to agree with the idea of passing a law that prohibits technology while walking in major cities. Paying attention while walking in public should be common sense. While there have been some accidents as stated in the article, those are very few and far in between. When we address the problem as a whole it does not seem like that big off an issue differing from the issues addressed in the second article.
The second article focuses on a problem that affects not only Jeff Hall but also numerous other individuals. It is amazing to read about how many disabled people have been allowed to live fully accessible lives with the help of technology. I believe that it is important to not forget about the disabled population when creating new types of technologies because they are apart of the consumer marker too; they should be targeted just as any other demographic group. Article two did a good job of connecting with the reader. Each anecdote told a story and was able to further push the idea that disabled individuals use technology just as much as the rest of the population including being apart of its development like Jason Grieves. Article two was more compelling overall because it connected on a personal level; the individual stories allow the reader to understand why technology is important to the disabled population and how it can either help them tremendously or hinder and leave them out of mainstream America.
In my perspective, the first article “Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise” is more compelling. The reason of my opinion is because the number of distracted pedestrian accidents is increasing in the actuality. All this usage of electronic devices while walking is hypnotizing the pedestrians, making them to completely ignore the pedestrian and traffic signals. For example, last week one of my friend was driving safely, obeying the traffic signals, when all of the sudden a young individual appeared in front of her car. The pedestrian completely ignored the traffic signals while jogging, curiously he was wearing his headphones. Fortunately, there where no mayor consequences since the pedestrian continued exercising. However, my friend suffered an anguishing moment, and presumably the pedestrian did too. In cases similar to this, the driver seems to have a mayor responsibility when in reality the pedestrian is culpable for disobeying the laws. In my perspective, this bad habit of using electronic devices while circulating in busy streets should stop. I think that if pedestrians continue using technology, or any other object that serves as a distraction while walking, the government should start to act. Overall, technology is a very practical and a powerful tool, but pedestrians should consider to not use electronics while walking. By doing this, the accidents rates will decrease and we will have a better public health.
From the two articles, the one that I found more compelling was Article 1, Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise, for the reason that it is a very important issue when it comes to cell phones distractions. There are many incidents that could happen when you’re on the phone or texting. It’s just a matter of pay attention where you’re going and not getting distracted. Each year the number increases of pedestrians getting distracted because of phone usage when they are walking. Another reason why I found it more compelling is because I thought that the new law is a great idea because it will decrease the accidents. I have seen pedestrians walk and not looking both ways when they cross the streets because they are using their cell phones especially when they have their headphones on and they do not hear the traffic flowing by. In my opinion I think there should be a law enforcing pedestrians not to use their cell phones or any devices while walking. It's better to be safe than be in a collision.
The article on distracted walking injuries was most compelling. The Homo sapiens species never ceases to amaze me. We have the most adavanced brain of any other organism on the planet, yet we are complete and utter itiots. Maybe I am being too harsh, but honestly i'm sick and tired of hearing about these crazy ways people are hurting themselves. Obviously people care more about talking on the phone than they do about their own safety and the safety of others. We have all this great techonology that we ourselves created, yet it makes us digress. We are addicts to social technology and its becoming a plague among us.
The article about technology helping disabilty was more compelling to me than the article about distracted walking injures being on the rise. First of all, the article is written in a way that is not easy to follow. The structure of the article didn't make for an easy read, the sentence structure was disorganized, and there were grammatical errors. Also, the beginning of the article wasn't attention grabbing at all. Lastly, the topic isn't very interesting to me. I don't know what do about people always talking on their phones, texting, or goofing off on their laptop when the should be watching where they are walking, driving, or anything else that requires a person's full attention. I think the second article was much more compelling to me because the strucute of the article was organized, there didn't appear to be too many grammatical errors, and it was an easy to follow read. The author also began the article by relaying the story of a man who is disabled and utilizes technology to aid him for various tasks. By telling this man's story in relation to the topic makes it more personable and captiviting. I think this article is very interesting and I find it pretty remarkable that technology can provide so much good to many. I think it is quite refreshing to read about the positive things that technology can provide.
Article number one is the most compelling because it’s an issue that is growing. And with time, things always seem to worsen. Personally, I have seen individuals walk with their headphones or talking on the phone and not paying attention to their surroundings. Just last week, I was driving and noticed a student crossing Stockdale Highway while talking on his phone—and not paying attention to the incoming traffic. This is extremely alarming because if an adult can’t take responsibility. Can you imagine today’s youth and how their safety is on the line? According to a New York Times story, research has shown that more than 1,000 patients have visited the emergency room, all related to phone or headphone usage. I believe more awareness is needed. People need to stop relying so much on technology.
The article, “Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise” by Aron Kase was more compelling to me. This article arises an important matter that probably not too many of us notices the danger. Using the headphones nowadays causes many deaths; death is increasing and I guess people don’t die from disease anymore (a lot of people still die due to some illness), but rather from new technology. The other day, I was walking and a saw a young girl walking with her headphones on and black glasses, she was about to fall off the stairs and I have no idea what she was thinking. I heard the music from a mile away and I was like “Goodness, does her head hurt or even ears.” I honestly don’t know why we are becoming like this and the world is becoming scarier as the time go. Kids go to school with headphones on and loud music. Texting while walking or texting while driving; I wonder what will be next???? The other day, I got a call and I actually had to pick the phone and I was driving back home, it was so distracting and I noticed that I was crossing into the other lane. See, how dangerous this sound! I see people talk and text while driving and it really pisses me off. Listening to music while driving, how a person can actually hear what is going on and in case if a train comes their way or whatever…… I really like this article because it highlights important points that many of us don’t pay attention to or we don’t see the consequences. I am not sure if there will be a law for something like this, but I will say that we need to educate people about the risks of using headphones and phones or any other technology while driving or walking……
For me, the most compelling article is article number one. I do agree that more and more people are using electronic devices for just about anything. Everywhere you go, you'll see at least one person with their hearing blocked by headphones or one's ear stuck to a phone or someone picking on their cellphones. It is not surprising that many accidents and injuries are due to such devices occupying our attentions, that we hardly notice what is going on around us. However, I don't believe that it is right that we put all the blame on technology. I believe that, at some point, each individual is to blame. Everyone should have the discipline to control their usage of electronic devices. For instance, while walking or crossing the street, people should refrain from using cellphones or having both ears plugged with headphones just as best practices. I know that it is tempting to do so, but I don't think that in these cases, such devices should be completely at fault. This article is compelling to me because it awakens us to how much we lack discipline regarding usage of electronic devices. I do admit that I tend to do it as well, but I take full responsibility to that. In addition, the talk about government meddling on how and in what situation can we and can we not use our cellphones is just another way to implement control. It is surprising how government attempts to intervene with our private life again right when they see a chance to do so.
The more compelling of the two articles was the Technology and the disabled article. It used ethos as its driving force to suck me into it, and really feel for the disabled community. The open software movement is great for the able body community, it allows us to create new software distribute it and have others make it better for all. For the handicapped that is a disadvantage, because when a software engineer is redoing a program through open software he is not thinking of the advantages it could give a handicapped person if he just were to change a few things on how to start it up, or where to place a certain menu. The article also compelled me to more to understand how a closed software firm like apple very strict on its projects. The fact that they are so strict makes a world of difference for the handicapped, because they can start and finish a project with the intent to help the handicapped community. The first article wasn’t very compelling at all, those statics don’t surprise I see phoning and walking every day. I phone and walk, I don’t think I do with such recklessness as the people mentioned but I do partake. To create laws to prevent would be far too much medaling on the government’s part.
I found the first article, “Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise” more compelling than the second article. As soon as I read the first few lines, and I look at Bakersfield and the amount of pedestrians that have been hit by cars in that last 6 months, I agree that distracted pedestrians are a problem. Whether cell phones or headphones are to blame is unknown and depends on case to case. I think what also made this article more compelling was the subtle hints of sarcasm, it says things like,” Death by Headphone” and “Who can I sue”. This article also uses statistics and states actual numbers of injuries and collisions to compel the reader as well. The article seems to state the facts, and agree that headphones are problematic but also exudes that the topic is slightly ridiculous sounding, making this article more compelling
The first article, "Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise" was more compelling for the fact that I not neccesarily surprise by the facts. I myself have almost fallen or ran into objects while texting or looking something up on the internet. It really can be dangerous, not only for yourself but others. The stats were quite compelling, I couldn't imagine dying because I was rockin out to my favorite song and something happenning to me because I was too distracted. To me the people are more at fault than the technology. You must be responsible for your own acts and pay attention when in certain circumstances.
“Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise” was the more compelling article to me. It brought to light an issue that goes overlooked as something not important because so many individuals today are so dependent on using technology that they see it as being normal to be using some type of electronic device all the time. I too, use my phone all the time, but I feel like it's common sense regarding how and when to use it. I don't think there should be a law that prohibits you from using your phone or listening to headphones while you are walking, but if you are crossing the street- don't be distracted. Drivers already have a lot stay focused on while driving, so they shouldn't have to watch out for people walking out in front of their car because they aren't paying attention too. I do think its okay to use technology, but everyone should use better judgement and not put themselves in a situation where they become a liability.
Article one makes a compelling argument about distracted walkers. Any time a pedestrian are distracted while walking, they pose a danger to themselves, motorists, and any one else around them. For example,16-year-old boy who walked into a telephone pole while texting, suffered a concussion, and was lucky that it was not a motor vehicle. The women at the mall was so distracted by her cell phone, she toppled right into the water fountain. Splish! Splash! Hilarious if you watch it on YouTube. It is easy to find humor in these examples, but the end result could be tragic. Since 2004, the article states that 116 people have been killed due to collisions between people wearing headphones and vehicles, and even more frequently, trains (Kase.2012). Pedestrians who are distracted can't get out of harms way if they don't know about it. A study conducted by Western Washington University In 2009, revealed that only 25 percent of people using a phone while walking across campus noticed a man wearing a “purple-and-yellow clown costume with polka dot sleeves, red shoes and bulbous red nose” riding around on a unicycle(Kase.2012). The article says it best, “If you are so engaged in a phone call to not notice a clown on a unicycle, how are you going to be aware of such an everyday sight as a car in the street, even if it’s bearing down on you at high speeds? (Kase.2012)” It is time to save lives, prevent injuries, and have some sort of distracted pedestrian regulations to protect them.
I found that the first article Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise was more compelling than Is technology helping disability? because it's true it's amazing how people can be so distracted on their phone and not see a clown on a unicycle right next to them. I had to see the video of the girl who falls into the fountain while texting, and let me say that was too funny I just can't believe how some people do it, c'mon is it too hard to stop or sit down and text or even look up once in a while to see where your going???? She could have avoid the embarrassment of appearing in the news.
The second article was more compelling then the first, the first only reminds me of more pointless bureaucracy. If we make a law for every aspect of life and justify it by saying it’s for our own good might as well call us sheep and send us out to pasture. The second article was intriguing because it presented a new age problem. There is many laws in place in the united states to promote equality, but as this article suggests technology has a different master then the united states government. This article reminds me of the internet, the internet is a loosely organized, hotbed of free ideas, services, and voices of countless individuals. Technology resembles the internet in that its constantly changing and being fed by individuals trying to feel a need. The concern that technology may shut out the disabled, or putting a blind eye to their plight is troubling but has a silver lining. I don’t think this is much of a problem for two reasons, one technology is built to fulfill a need, if there’s a need out there someone is trying to make it easier to address it. The second reason although less inspiring, but most likely far more effective is simply capitalism. If there is a market (demand) for something then, it will be met. The disabled must put voice to wants and concerns and the giant machine that is the United States will take over from there.
Both articles were really interesting, but I think article, "Is technology helping disability?" is more compelling. It is amazing to see how much technology has affected our society. I think technology is available to help us with our needs; however, some people attract danger with their carelessness use of technology. Everyone should not get censored or restricted to be able to use their electronic device because of certain people who decides to endanger themselves. With the new technologies we have today, people with disability has found ways to interact with their surroundings more than ever. You, yourself, should be at fault if you decide to endanger yourself with the usage of electronic device. Technology is available to help everyone with their needs, and it should continue to be easily accessible for everyone. Only if people can use their common sense to keep them from harms way while using an electronic device, then there should be no problem about using an electronic device while walking. I think aiding those people with disability is more helpful to everyone than protecting those individuals who chooses not to protect themselves.
The first article was more compelling to me since I see these occurrences on a daily basis. The other day at a mall a lady got hit by a car pulling out of the parking lot. The reason to why she was hit was simple because she was more worried about her phone conversation. I agree, this is becoming a big problem for not only pedestrians, but also the people behind the wheel. Pedestrians walking around with headphones or engaged in their smartphones must be held accountable to a certain degree. It's interesting to think that this is just the beginning to even more accidents as more and more careless people transition to smartphones. Technology can be good for people in article two, but dangerous for people in article one.
Article 1, "Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise, was more compelling than the second article. Handheld electronic devices have been a great step in the rise of technology, but the article provides useful information that suggests that technology can also have a negative effect on society. Injuries from distracted walkers is an overlooked subject, and it is great to read article that address it. I would say the article is more compelling than the second article because it provides examples as to why there should be regulations regarding walking while phoning.
I found article one to be more interesting. I was amazed at the numbers the author provided. It just goes to show you the negative side to technology. Even though the second article showed us the positive and the advances to come in technology, I believe it is also good to know how it is affecting us. Every where you go now in days you see pepole on their phone either texting or talking. Not only is it dangerous while driving but aperently now it is just as dangerous while doing it walking down the street. We use our phones for everything we do everyday that people are hooked. It makes you think if technology today does to much that people can not detach from it enough to be safe.
The article titled "Is technology helping disability?” is more compelling because think for a moment that you can be paralyzed for an accident or an illness. The new technology is going to give you the opportunity to see the world out of your bed. The technology is also helping you to be in contact with your family and friends anytime and from anywhere. Thanks to technology Jeff Hall has the opportunity to be independent again. He can manage everything in his house using the special program that technology has provided to him. Even though there is few people with similar disabilities like Jeff, he has hope the technology can make his like easier and better. For example, Christopher Reeve was able to mobilize around his house and went out using an specialized mobile chair. Also, there are lot children with different disabilities who take advantage of the new technology to learn something new everyday.
The first article was compelling to me because I don't think I would have thought that distracted walking was a concern until I read it. I enjoy walking and don't text or call people while I walk. To me, that would defeat the purpose of going for a walk and enjoying my surroundings. As I said before, I like to live in the moment as much as I can. Forgive me for having a sick sense of humor but I thought it was kind of funny about when the people got hurt because they weren't paying attention. I feel like they got what they deserve. But then again I am a fan of the show "1,000 ways to die". It is sad when people die, but dumb when they lose their life over not paying attention.
The first article was more compelling to me because i see this happen on a day to day occurrence. When pedestrians are walking along side the road they already have preexisting dangers like cars running a red light when crossing the street. When pedestrians are preoccupied with there cell phones or other electronics its makes things that were not a danger become a danger like; a telephone pole or a fire hydrant. I like how only 25% of the people in the article were aware of the clown, this just goes to show that people are not aware of there surrounding. When pedestrians are not paying attention to there surrounding it becomes more hazardous to the pedestrian and people around there surrounds causing more accidents that shouldn't have happened. I don't think they should come up with a law to prohibit people from using there electronics and walking. I think people should just pay attention and be awry of there surrounding no matter what they are doing.
The first article about the walking injury risk was more compelling to me than the second article. We all know about the dangers of texting and driving, but nobody thinks about the dangers of talking on the phone or wearing headphones while walking. It surprised me to read the number of injuries that have been recorded due to using cell phones and headphones. I found this article to be more compelling because I think it sends out a strong message to the public about the importance of paying attention to our surroundings at all times, and not get distracted by electronic devices. Most of us can all relate to this article because we have had one of those moments where we almost bumped into a pole or a trashcan while walking. We become so engaged in a text conversation that we become blind to our surroundings. This article advises people to be careful with the usage of headphones and cellphones. People need to be safe and make sure they are not being a risk to themselves, and others while they walk down the street while they listen to their favorite music or talk on the phone.
The first article was definitely more compelling to me. As every day goes by I can’t help to think how sad it is that we depend so much on our technology gadgets. I work for a billion dollar Phone Company and see on a daily basis how desperate we are when we lose our phones. While reading this article and the accidents that have occurred due to our lack of attention I wonder did these individuals change their street smart safety habits after their accident? Sadly I don’t think they did. I definitely feel like pedestrians too should pay more attention while out on the streets, because as many mentioned, many as pedestrians are not very careful and the simplest things such as stopping while a car is halfway out of a parking space become hard due to the lack of concentration when walking.
The first article about the walking injury risk was way more compelling to me than the second article.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, the first article caught my eyes mostly in the end because it talks about maybe getting a new law or censorship for walking with your phones in ear or anything like that because it is more of a risk of not "looking both ways to cross traffic so you can get hit more then with not listening or hearing anything. I see the purpose to the law but, with this law and the car law, we have no where to talk unless we are sitting at home. How are we suppost to contact our friends or family if something happens? A lot of people say what did they use to do in the old days, well this is a new generation where people havent dealt without their phones and have no idea what to do without them.
I see the risk while talking on the phone and walking but whats the purpose of walking with a firend and talking? your both distracted.
All in all, I love this article because i agree with it listening to headphones and not hearing traffic is dangerous but to banned it, i dont agree.
Really?
DeleteI feel that article two “Is technology helping disability?” was most the compelling out of the two articles. While I did feel that article one was informative, it did not compel nor convince me to agree with the idea of passing a law that prohibits technology while walking in major cities. Paying attention while walking in public should be common sense. While there have been some accidents as stated in the article, those are very few and far in between. When we address the problem as a whole it does not seem like that big off an issue differing from the issues addressed in the second article.
ReplyDeleteThe second article focuses on a problem that affects not only Jeff Hall but also numerous other individuals. It is amazing to read about how many disabled people have been allowed to live fully accessible lives with the help of technology. I believe that it is important to not forget about the disabled population when creating new types of technologies because they are apart of the consumer marker too; they should be targeted just as any other demographic group. Article two did a good job of connecting with the reader. Each anecdote told a story and was able to further push the idea that disabled individuals use technology just as much as the rest of the population including being apart of its development like Jason Grieves. Article two was more compelling overall because it connected on a personal level; the individual stories allow the reader to understand why technology is important to the disabled population and how it can either help them tremendously or hinder and leave them out of mainstream America.
In my perspective, the first article “Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise” is more compelling. The reason of my opinion is because the number of distracted pedestrian accidents is increasing in the actuality. All this usage of electronic devices while walking is hypnotizing the pedestrians, making them to completely ignore the pedestrian and traffic signals. For example, last week one of my friend was driving safely, obeying the traffic signals, when all of the sudden a young individual appeared in front of her car. The pedestrian completely ignored the traffic signals while jogging, curiously he was wearing his headphones. Fortunately, there where no mayor consequences since the pedestrian continued exercising. However, my friend suffered an anguishing moment, and presumably the pedestrian did too. In cases similar to this, the driver seems to have a mayor responsibility when in reality the pedestrian is culpable for disobeying the laws. In my perspective, this bad habit of using electronic devices while circulating in busy streets should stop. I think that if pedestrians continue using technology, or any other object that serves as a distraction while walking, the government should start to act. Overall, technology is a very practical and a powerful tool, but pedestrians should consider to not use electronics while walking. By doing this, the accidents rates will decrease and we will have a better public health.
ReplyDeleteFrom the two articles, the one that I found more compelling was Article 1, Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise, for the reason that it is a very important issue when it comes to cell phones distractions. There are many incidents that could happen when you’re on the phone or texting. It’s just a matter of pay attention where you’re going and not getting distracted. Each year the number increases of pedestrians getting distracted because of phone usage when they are walking. Another reason why I found it more compelling is because I thought that the new law is a great idea because it will decrease the accidents. I have seen pedestrians walk and not looking both ways when they cross the streets because they are using their cell phones especially when they have their headphones on and they do not hear the traffic flowing by. In my opinion I think there should be a law enforcing pedestrians not to use their cell phones or any devices while walking. It's better to be safe than be in a collision.
ReplyDeleteThe article on distracted walking injuries was most compelling. The Homo sapiens species never ceases to amaze me. We have the most adavanced brain of any other organism on the planet, yet we are complete and utter itiots. Maybe I am being too harsh, but honestly i'm sick and tired of hearing about these crazy ways people are hurting themselves. Obviously people care more about talking on the phone than they do about their own safety and the safety of others. We have all this great techonology that we ourselves created, yet it makes us digress. We are addicts to social technology and its becoming a plague among us.
ReplyDeleteThe article about technology helping disabilty was more compelling to me than the article about distracted walking injures being on the rise. First of all, the article is written in a way that is not easy to follow. The structure of the article didn't make for an easy read, the sentence structure was disorganized, and there were grammatical errors. Also, the beginning of the article wasn't attention grabbing at all. Lastly, the topic isn't very interesting to me. I don't know what do about people always talking on their phones, texting, or goofing off on their laptop when the should be watching where they are walking, driving, or anything else that requires a person's full attention.
ReplyDeleteI think the second article was much more compelling to me because the strucute of the article was organized, there didn't appear to be too many grammatical errors, and it was an easy to follow read. The author also began the article by relaying the story of a man who is disabled and utilizes technology to aid him for various tasks. By telling this man's story in relation to the topic makes it more personable and captiviting. I think this article is very interesting and I find it pretty remarkable that technology can provide so much good to many. I think it is quite refreshing to read about the positive things that technology can provide.
Article number one is the most compelling because it’s an issue that is growing. And with time, things always seem to worsen. Personally, I have seen individuals walk with their headphones or talking on the phone and not paying attention to their surroundings. Just last week, I was driving and noticed a student crossing Stockdale Highway while talking on his phone—and not paying attention to the incoming traffic. This is extremely alarming because if an adult can’t take responsibility. Can you imagine today’s youth and how their safety is on the line? According to a New York Times story, research has shown that more than 1,000 patients have visited the emergency room, all related to phone or headphone usage. I believe more awareness is needed. People need to stop relying so much on technology.
ReplyDeleteThe article, “Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise” by Aron Kase was more compelling to me. This article arises an important matter that probably not too many of us notices the danger. Using the headphones nowadays causes many deaths; death is increasing and I guess people don’t die from disease anymore (a lot of people still die due to some illness), but rather from new technology. The other day, I was walking and a saw a young girl walking with her headphones on and black glasses, she was about to fall off the stairs and I have no idea what she was thinking. I heard the music from a mile away and I was like “Goodness, does her head hurt or even ears.” I honestly don’t know why we are becoming like this and the world is becoming scarier as the time go. Kids go to school with headphones on and loud music. Texting while walking or texting while driving; I wonder what will be next????
ReplyDeleteThe other day, I got a call and I actually had to pick the phone and I was driving back home, it was so distracting and I noticed that I was crossing into the other lane. See, how dangerous this sound! I see people talk and text while driving and it really pisses me off. Listening to music while driving, how a person can actually hear what is going on and in case if a train comes their way or whatever……
I really like this article because it highlights important points that many of us don’t pay attention to or we don’t see the consequences. I am not sure if there will be a law for something like this, but I will say that we need to educate people about the risks of using headphones and phones or any other technology while driving or walking……
For me, the most compelling article is article number one. I do agree that more and more people are using electronic devices for just about anything. Everywhere you go, you'll see at least one person with their hearing blocked by headphones or one's ear stuck to a phone or someone picking on their cellphones. It is not surprising that many accidents and injuries are due to such devices occupying our attentions, that we hardly notice what is going on around us. However, I don't believe that it is right that we put all the blame on technology. I believe that, at some point, each individual is to blame. Everyone should have the discipline to control their usage of electronic devices. For instance, while walking or crossing the street, people should refrain from using cellphones or having both ears plugged with headphones just as best practices. I know that it is tempting to do so, but I don't think that in these cases, such devices should be completely at fault.
ReplyDeleteThis article is compelling to me because it awakens us to how much we lack discipline regarding usage of electronic devices. I do admit that I tend to do it as well, but I take full responsibility to that. In addition, the talk about government meddling on how and in what situation can we and can we not use our cellphones is just another way to implement control. It is surprising how government attempts to intervene with our private life again right when they see a chance to do so.
The more compelling of the two articles was the Technology and the disabled article. It used ethos as its driving force to suck me into it, and really feel for the disabled community. The open software movement is great for the able body community, it allows us to create new software distribute it and have others make it better for all. For the handicapped that is a disadvantage, because when a software engineer is redoing a program through open software he is not thinking of the advantages it could give a handicapped person if he just were to change a few things on how to start it up, or where to place a certain menu. The article also compelled me to more to understand how a closed software firm like apple very strict on its projects. The fact that they are so strict makes a world of difference for the handicapped, because they can start and finish a project with the intent to help the handicapped community. The first article wasn’t very compelling at all, those statics don’t surprise I see phoning and walking every day. I phone and walk, I don’t think I do with such recklessness as the people mentioned but I do partake. To create laws to prevent would be far too much medaling on the government’s part.
ReplyDeleteI found the first article, “Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise” more compelling than the second article. As soon as I read the first few lines, and I look at Bakersfield and the amount of pedestrians that have been hit by cars in that last 6 months, I agree that distracted pedestrians are a problem. Whether cell phones or headphones are to blame is unknown and depends on case to case. I think what also made this article more compelling was the subtle hints of sarcasm, it says things like,” Death by Headphone” and “Who can I sue”. This article also uses statistics and states actual numbers of injuries and collisions to compel the reader as well. The article seems to state the facts, and agree that headphones are problematic but also exudes that the topic is slightly ridiculous sounding, making this article more compelling
ReplyDeleteThe first article, "Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise" was more compelling for the fact that I not neccesarily surprise by the facts. I myself have almost fallen or ran into objects while texting or looking something up on the internet. It really can be dangerous, not only for yourself but others. The stats were quite compelling, I couldn't imagine dying because I was rockin out to my favorite song and something happenning to me because I was too distracted. To me the people are more at fault than the technology. You must be responsible for your own acts and pay attention when in certain circumstances.
ReplyDelete“Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise” was the more compelling article to me. It brought to light an issue that goes overlooked as something not important because so many individuals today are so dependent on using technology that they see it as being normal to be using some type of electronic device all the time. I too, use my phone all the time, but I feel like it's common sense regarding how and when to use it. I don't think there should be a law that prohibits you from using your phone or listening to headphones while you are walking, but if you are crossing the street- don't be distracted. Drivers already have a lot stay focused on while driving, so they shouldn't have to watch out for people walking out in front of their car because they aren't paying attention too. I do think its okay to use technology, but everyone should use better judgement and not put themselves in a situation where they become a liability.
ReplyDeleteArticle one makes a compelling argument about distracted walkers. Any time a pedestrian are distracted while walking, they pose a danger to themselves, motorists, and any one else around them. For example,16-year-old boy who walked into a telephone pole while texting, suffered a concussion, and was lucky that it was not a motor vehicle. The women at the mall was so distracted by her cell phone, she toppled right into the water fountain. Splish! Splash! Hilarious if you watch it on YouTube. It is easy to find humor in these examples, but the end result could be tragic. Since 2004, the article states that 116 people have been killed due to collisions between people wearing headphones and vehicles, and even more frequently, trains (Kase.2012). Pedestrians who are distracted can't get out of harms way if they don't know about it. A study conducted by Western Washington University In 2009, revealed that only 25 percent of people using a phone while walking across campus noticed a man wearing a “purple-and-yellow clown costume with polka dot sleeves, red shoes and bulbous red nose” riding around on a unicycle(Kase.2012). The article says it best, “If you are so engaged in a phone call to not notice a clown on a unicycle, how are you going to be aware of such an everyday sight as a car in the street, even if it’s bearing down on you at high speeds? (Kase.2012)” It is time to save lives, prevent injuries, and have some sort of distracted pedestrian regulations to protect them.
ReplyDeleteI found that the first article Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise was more compelling than Is technology helping disability? because it's true it's amazing how people can be so distracted on their phone and not see a clown on a unicycle right next to them. I had to see the video of the girl who falls into the fountain while texting, and let me say that was too funny I just can't believe how some people do it, c'mon is it too hard to stop or sit down and text or even look up once in a while to see where your going???? She could have avoid the embarrassment of appearing in the news.
ReplyDeleteThe second article was more compelling then the first, the first only reminds me of more pointless bureaucracy. If we make a law for every aspect of life and justify it by saying it’s for our own good might as well call us sheep and send us out to pasture. The second article was intriguing because it presented a new age problem. There is many laws in place in the united states to promote equality, but as this article suggests technology has a different master then the united states government. This article reminds me of the internet, the internet is a loosely organized, hotbed of free ideas, services, and voices of countless individuals. Technology resembles the internet in that its constantly changing and being fed by individuals trying to feel a need.
ReplyDeleteThe concern that technology may shut out the disabled, or putting a blind eye to their plight is troubling but has a silver lining. I don’t think this is much of a problem for two reasons, one technology is built to fulfill a need, if there’s a need out there someone is trying to make it easier to address it. The second reason although less inspiring, but most likely far more effective is simply capitalism. If there is a market (demand) for something then, it will be met. The disabled must put voice to wants and concerns and the giant machine that is the United States will take over from there.
Both articles were really interesting, but I think article, "Is technology helping disability?" is more compelling. It is amazing to see how much technology has affected our society. I think technology is available to help us with our needs; however, some people attract danger with their carelessness use of technology. Everyone should not get censored or restricted to be able to use their electronic device because of certain people who decides to endanger themselves. With the new technologies we have today, people with disability has found ways to interact with their surroundings more than ever. You, yourself, should be at fault if you decide to endanger yourself with the usage of electronic device. Technology is available to help everyone with their needs, and it should continue to be easily accessible for everyone. Only if people can use their common sense to keep them from harms way while using an electronic device, then there should be no problem about using an electronic device while walking. I think aiding those people with disability is more helpful to everyone than protecting those individuals who chooses not to protect themselves.
ReplyDeleteThe first article was more compelling to me since I see these occurrences on a daily basis. The other day at a mall a lady got hit by a car pulling out of the parking lot. The reason to why she was hit was simple because she was more worried about her phone conversation. I agree, this is becoming a big problem for not only pedestrians, but also the people behind the wheel. Pedestrians walking around with headphones or engaged in their smartphones must be held accountable to a certain degree. It's interesting to think that this is just the beginning to even more accidents as more and more careless people transition to smartphones. Technology can be good for people in article two, but dangerous for people in article one.
ReplyDeleteArticle 1, "Distracted Walking Injuries on the Rise, was more compelling than the second article. Handheld electronic devices have been a great step in the rise of technology, but the article provides useful information that suggests that technology can also have a negative effect on society. Injuries from distracted walkers is an overlooked subject, and it is great to read article that address it. I would say the article is more compelling than the second article because it provides examples as to why there should be regulations regarding walking while phoning.
ReplyDeleteI found article one to be more interesting. I was amazed at the numbers the author provided. It just goes to show you the negative side to technology. Even though the second article showed us the positive and the advances to come in technology, I believe it is also good to know how it is affecting us. Every where you go now in days you see pepole on their phone either texting or talking. Not only is it dangerous while driving but aperently now it is just as dangerous while doing it walking down the street. We use our phones for everything we do everyday that people are hooked. It makes you think if technology today does to much that people can not detach from it enough to be safe.
ReplyDeleteThe article titled "Is technology helping disability?” is more compelling because think for a moment that you can be paralyzed for an accident or an illness. The new technology is going to give you the opportunity to see the world out of your bed. The technology is also helping you to be in contact with your family and friends anytime and from anywhere. Thanks to technology Jeff Hall has the opportunity to be independent again. He can manage everything in his house using the special program that technology has provided to him. Even though there is few people with similar disabilities like Jeff, he has hope the technology can make his like easier and better. For example, Christopher Reeve was able to mobilize around his house and went out using an specialized mobile chair. Also, there are lot children with different disabilities who take advantage of the new technology to learn something new everyday.
ReplyDeleteThe first article was compelling to me because I don't think I would have thought that distracted walking was a concern until I read it. I enjoy walking and don't text or call people while I walk. To me, that would defeat the purpose of going for a walk and enjoying my surroundings. As I said before, I like to live in the moment as much as I can. Forgive me for having a sick sense of humor but I thought it was kind of funny about when the people got hurt because they weren't paying attention. I feel like they got what they deserve. But then again I am a fan of the show "1,000 ways to die". It is sad when people die, but dumb when they lose their life over not paying attention.
ReplyDeleteThe first article was more compelling to me because i see this happen on a day to day occurrence. When pedestrians are walking along side the road they already have preexisting dangers like cars running a red light when crossing the street. When pedestrians are preoccupied with there cell phones or other electronics its makes things that were not a danger become a danger like; a telephone pole or a fire hydrant. I like how only 25% of the people in the article were aware of the clown, this just goes to show that people are not aware of there surrounding. When pedestrians are not paying attention to there surrounding it becomes more hazardous to the pedestrian and people around there surrounds causing more accidents that shouldn't have happened. I don't think they should come up with a law to prohibit people from using there electronics and walking. I think people should just pay attention and be awry of there surrounding no matter what they are doing.
ReplyDeleteThe first article about the walking injury risk was more compelling to me than the second article. We all know about the dangers of texting and driving, but nobody thinks about the dangers of talking on the phone or wearing headphones while walking. It surprised me to read the number of injuries that have been recorded due to using cell phones and headphones. I found this article to be more compelling because I think it sends out a strong message to the public about the importance of paying attention to our surroundings at all times, and not get distracted by electronic devices. Most of us can all relate to this article because we have had one of those moments where we almost bumped into a pole or a trashcan while walking. We become so engaged in a text conversation that we become blind to our surroundings. This article advises people to be careful with the usage of headphones and cellphones. People need to be safe and make sure they are not being a risk to themselves, and others while they walk down the street while they listen to their favorite music or talk on the phone.
ReplyDeleteThe first article was definitely more compelling to me. As every day goes by I can’t help to think how sad it is that we depend so much on our technology gadgets. I work for a billion dollar Phone Company and see on a daily basis how desperate we are when we lose our phones. While reading this article and the accidents that have occurred due to our lack of attention I wonder did these individuals change their street smart safety habits after their accident? Sadly I don’t think they did. I definitely feel like pedestrians too should pay more attention while out on the streets, because as many mentioned, many as pedestrians are not very careful and the simplest things such as stopping while a car is halfway out of a parking space become hard due to the lack of concentration when walking.
ReplyDelete