Blog Entry #7

The author of the first example proposes that instead of using hard copies of textbooks, Arizona State University should look into utilizing solely online textbooks. This would contribute to the environment, and reduce the costs for students. Personally, I agree with this perspective. I currently use e-books for a few of my courses and I find them much more convenient and accessible than a hard copy. I think that the author could have mentioned how many of us are from out-of-state and it would be much more comfortable and proper to simply pack our laptops or iPads when we go home for the holidays than to have to carry our laptops and books as well. I think the people who would be resistant to this sort of change are those who are reluctant to change. For some it may be comforting to have a tangible source in front of them when working on an assignment. However, society and our way of life is evolving along with technology. This means that we have to adapt and look towards the future. I also believe that certain professors would oppose this argument as well. Several professors publish their own textbooks for their courses and go on to publish modified editions. If Arizona State University were to use only online textbooks, those professors whom publish their own textbooks and the publishing companies that publish those books would lose a considerable amount of money. I think the author used ethos considerably well. When he made a point as to why e-books are a good idea he had really good arguments to back up his stance. Because the author developed a strong argument and had good points to support him, I think this is a good model for our proposal argument.

Blog #6: Solution

Slowly but surely, technological advances have become a huge part of our lives, so much that they have begun to take humans out from the manual labor workforce. While these improvements seem to be cost-beneficial to those who employ them, there are many people who are losing their jobs because of this. A possible solution for this would be to cut subsidies for companies who have more than half of their production produced by robots. If companies are put in a situation where they would lose government aid if they start basing their business strictly off machinery, they would most likely continue to hire humans to do some type of manual labor and continue providing their services. Another possible solution to this issue would be to offer those who are being laid off an opportunity to return to school wherever it is that they left off and eventually get a job that cannot be replaced by a robot. In addition, if a company still insists in utilizing automatons, they could hire humans to build and repair the machinery. There may or may not be a feasible solution to this issue, but one thing is for certain- robots need to be repaired and modified frequently, making them unreliable to a degree; but humans adapt and learn quickly. 

Blog #5: Robots v. Humans

Within the past few decades we have experienced several technological advances that have greatly impacted society as a whole. We no longer have to wait in long lines at the supermarket, we can simply "check out" ourselves. Many of us don't even set foot at gas stations anymore, for solar panels attached to vehicles convert sunlight to electricity and use that as fuel. While these innovations have made everyday tasks much simpler, we are now facing a serious issue: robotic-like machinery is posing a threat to our jobs. Computer-driven robots have gradually been replacing the hands of hardworking farmers, all whom depend on their job to provide for their families. As we all know, the automobile industry plays a huge role in the United States' economy, employing an ample amount of Americans. However, we have been observing that these jobs are also starting to reduce in size, for the CEOs of such companies have decided to invest heavily in droids instead of paying humans hourly wages to do the same task as the machine. While these technological advances may present several advantages to those who own the businesses, those who rely on their own manual labor to make a living for themselves are in big trouble. If a great part of society is unemployed, more than it already is, it will only make the economy worse. There needs to be constant cash flow within the economy in order for it to prosper; if people do not have the money to spend or invest, the economy will eventually stall. Even though it is the duty of the federal government to look after its people, it is already in enough trouble as it is for it to be providing for even more than it already is.