• Our technology - Renishaw
  • Good Reads: “iGods: How Technology Shapes Our …
  • HOW THE MEDIA SHAPES OUR WORLD - Hiiraan Online

17/03/2013 · How Language Shapes Thought: The languages we speak affect our perceptions of the world (This is an article sent by my son, Pramodh, for my reference.)

HOW THE MEDIA SHAPES OUR WORLD

How Our Imagination Shapes Technology, and How ..

Posts about “Whose Global Village? Rethinking How Technology Shapes Our World” written by harrisrh
Our technology can build complex shapes that are not possible with traditional casting and machining methods, or subtractive techniques. Parts can be solid, or contain hollow elements with or without lattice structures. In order to optimise parts, engineers are increasingly designing for the additive manufacturing process.

Plus: Why you shouldn’t give probiotics to your dog

December 2013, p.112 BioGeometry: The science that should shape our world By Ahmed ..
Information technologies have not been content to remain confined tovirtual worlds and software implementations. These technologiesare also interacting directly with us through roboticsapplications. Robotics is an emerging technology but it hasalready produced a number of applications that have important moralimplications. Technologies such as military robotics, medicalrobotics, personal robotics and the world of sex robots are just someof the already existent uses of robotics that impact on and express ourmoral commitments (see Capurro and Nagenborg 2009; Lin et al.2011).

 

Tomorrowland How Silicon Valley Shapes Our Future

Craig Detweiler uses his book “iGods: How Technology Shapes Our Spiritual and Social Lives” to argue for a theology of technology in the Christian world.
Who has the final say whether or not some information about a useris communicated or not? Who is allowed to sell your medicalrecords, your financial records, your friend list, your browser history,etc.? If you do not have control over this process, then how canyou claim a right to privacy? For instance Alan Westin argued inthe very early decades of digital information technology that controlof access to one's personal information was the key tomaintaining privacy (Westin 1967). It follows that if wecare about privacy, then we should give all the control of access topersonal information to the individual. Most corporate entitiesresist this notion as information about users has become a primarycommodity in the digital world boosting the fortunes of corporationslike Google or Facebook. There is a great deal of utility each ofus gains from the services of internet search companies. It mightactually be a fair exchange that they provide search results for freebased on collecting data from individual user behavior that helps themrank the results. This service comes with advertising that isdirected at the user based on his or her search history. That is,each user tacitly agrees to give up some privacy whenever they use theservice. If we follow the argument raised above thatprivacy is equivalent to information control then we do seem to beceding our privacy away little by little. Herman Tavani and JamesMoor (2004) argue that in some cases giving the user more control oftheir information may actually result in greater loss of privacy. Their primary argument is that no one can actually control all of theinformation about oneself that is produced each day. If we focusonly on the little bit we can control, we lose site of the vastmountains of data we cannot (Tavani and Moor 2004). Tavani andMoor argue that privacy must be recognized by the third parties that docontrol your information and only if those parties have a commitment toprotecting user privacy will we actually have any real privacy andtowards this end they suggest that we think in terms of restrictedaccess to information rather than strict control of personalinformation (Tavani and Moor 2004).


We live in a world rich in data and the technology to record andstore vast amounts of this data has grown rapidly. The primarymoral concern here is that when we collect, store, and/or accessinformation it is done in a just manner that anyone can see is fair andin the best interests of all parties involved. As was mentionedabove, each of us produces a vast amount of information every day thatcould be recorded and stored as useful data to be accessed later whenneeded. But moral conundrums arise when that collection, storageand use of our information is done by third parties without ourknowledge or done with only our tacit consent. The control ofinformation is power. The social institutions that havetraditionally exercised this power are things like, religiousorganizations, universities, libraries, healthcare officials,government agencies, banks and corporations. These entities haveaccess to stored information that gives them a certain amount of powerover their customers and constituencies. Today each citizen hasaccess to more and more of that stored information without thenecessity of utilizing the traditional mediators of that informationand therefore a greater individual share of social power (see Lessig1999).


Using Technology In The Classroom | Education World

Assuming we are justified in granting access to some store ofinformation that we may be in control of, there is a duty to ensurethat that information is useful and accurate. If you use a numberof different search engines to try to find some bit of information,each of these searches will vary from one another. This showsthat not all searches are equal and it matters which search provideryou use. All searches are filtered to some degree in order toensure that the information the search provider believes is mostimportant to the user is listed first. A great deal of trust isplaced in this filtering process and the actual formulas used by searchproviders are closely held trade secrets. The hope is that thesedecisions are morally justifiable but it is difficult to know. Ifwe are told a link will take us to one location on the web yet when weclick it we are taken to some other place, the user may feel that thisis a breach of trust. This is often called“clickjacking” and malicious software can clickjack abrowser by taking the user to some other site than is expected; it willusually be rife with other links that will further infect your machineor sites that pay the clickjacker for bringing traffic to them (Hansenand Grossman, 2008). Again the anonymity and ease of use thatinformation technology provides can facilitate deceitfulpractices. Pettit (2009) suggests that this should cause us toreevaluate the role that moral values such as trust and reliance playin a world of information technology.

Additive Manufacturing - MIT Technology Review

Early in the information technology revolution Richard Mason suggestedthat the coming changes in information technologies would necessitaterethinking the social contract (Mason 1986). What he could not haveknown then was how often we would have to update the social contractas these technologies rapidly change. Information technologies changequickly and move in and out of fashion at a bewildering pace. Thismakes it difficult to try to list them all and catalog the moralimpacts of each. The very fact that this change is so rapid andmomentous has caused some to argue that we need to deeply question theethics of the process of developing emerging technologies (Moor2008). It has also been argued that the ever morphing nature ofinformation technology is changing our ability to even fullyunderstand moral values as they change. Lorenzo Magnani claims thatacquiring knowledge of how that change confounds our ability to reasonmorally “…has become a duty in our technologicalworld” (Magnani 2007, 93). The legal theorist Larry Lessigwarns that the pace of change in information technology is so rapidthat it leaves the slow and deliberative process of law and politicalpolicy behind and in effect these technologies become lawless, orextralegal. This is due to the fact that by the time a law is writtento curtail, for instance, some form of copyright infringementfacilitated by a particular file sharing technology, that technologyhas become out of date and users are on to something else thatfacilitates copyright infringement (Lessig 1999). But even given thisrapid pace of change it remains the case that information technologiesor applications can all be categorized into at least three differenttypes each of which we will look at below.