Response to Klosterman WJ7

After reading the Klosterman text about the use of laughtracks in sitcoms since the '50s, I'll admit I can't help but agree with his central point. He claims that the use of laughtracks in sitcoms is as stupid as we get as Americans. They essentially re-wire the way we think by making us not have to worry about what is or is not funny by having it done for us. A point he made regarding the Germans and their lack of laughter stuck out especially to me. Klosterman said while in Germany he noticed how they don’t laugh unless genuinely amused, unlike Americans who’s laughter is purely conditioned. He would say 51% of our laughter has no relation to how we feel or the humor of the situation, but is just part of our dialect as filler, just like laughtracks. After considering this myself, I definitely notice this phenomenon in daily life during interactions with a number of different people. I’m  guilty of this myself. “We mechanically laugh at everything, just to show that we know what’s supposed to be happening. We get the joke, even if there is no joke.” This direct quote best summarizes the point of the entire article to me. It really gets me to consider how much the media really does affect and change the values present in our lives.

Annotation, WJ5

Salvatore Distefano, Marco Scarpa, Antonio Puliafito, "From UML to Petri Nets: The
     PCM-Based Methodology," IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, vol. 37, no.
     1, pp. 65-79, Jan./Feb. 2011

The paper presents a method to validate the performance of a UML model that represents a new software architecture. UML models are visual representations of a computer program. Certain specifications are collected such as schedulability, performance and time specifications. These specifications are collected through an intermediate model called a Performance Context Model (PCM). From this point a performance model is used to translate the specifications in the intermediate model which is then evaluated and used. The paper details how to use a PCM to derive a petrinet as a performance domain.

Response.. WJ4

After reading this long ass article, I've concluded that even though there are studies that show heavy technologically inclined multi-taskers have trouble "disconnecting" from modern technology, the use of such technology actually increases the neuron activity in their brains compared to the non-users, or not so heavy users, of technology. Wow, I must say I didn't see that coming, though I'm not really suprised.  Being a heavy user of technology throughout the course of my own life, I can see where they're coming from.. I can multi-task like no other.. give me a list of 3-5 things to do, and you can bet I'd have at least a start on every one of them before the first one got finished. What are they trying to say though? Is becoming expert multi-taskers the next checkmark on our list of human accomplishments? The way it's looking so far, I wouldn't overlook it too soon. On the negative side, though, scientists are saying our ability to focus is being undermined by technology, the fact that we have bursts of information coming at us almost literally at all times. Apparently it plays to a primitive impulse where we respond to immediate opportunities and threats. The pulse of information being pumped into us resembles this in that it produces a dopamine squirt, which can be addictive, and in its absence can leave people feeling bored. Technology is clearly rewiring the brains of the current generation. I think it's pretty obvious to any one of us, looking at most of the people in our parents generations and beyond that. Researchers say our need and love of technology compares to the stimulation's we get from food and sex, both crucial to our survival, but counterproductive at the same time. The main character in the article, the hard working family man, is constantly connected in some way. His own wife jokes that he values his technology more than his family. I think there's a limit when it comes to technological intake.. when it gets to the point where your own spouse thinks that you'd save your computer over her or the children in a housefire, maybe it is a problem? I don't know, who am I to say. It depends on the individual, I guess. Honestly, I believe this is just the next phase in the human evolutionary cycle. That's what nature is, right? Obviously we're going to adapt to our new ways of life the more we continue to live this way and evolve the technology itself. Quick example, though I have no references for this, just a thought I've concluded on my own.... How much did we all hear about carpaltunnel growing up as kids? "Don't type for too long, it'll happen." I've been typing for hours a day since the age of 12 and my wrists have only gotten stronger.. is this just one example of how the current generation is evolving to handle the new technologies and way of life? Anyway, end rant, I have to go to class...

Hi!!!

Hey, I'm Eric Van Horn... This is my blog, I guess...