Considering Types

This post will break down the ways in which I will consider developing my argument.

Willi Heidelbach "metal movable type" CC-BY SA 3.0

Position Argument: This is an interesting idea for argument that might work for me in which I argue for the idea that is held by myself and many prominent members of the technology community.  I think that this is my best option because it allows for a lot of variance and allows me to defend a viewpoint but also not focus on refuting, more on supporting certain positions.


Causal Argument:  This would not work for my argument.  The cause for my subject is difficult to pinpoint, and it would not be effective to prove my point and get my message across because the cause is simply not the focus.


Evaluative Argument: This also is also a type of argument that I don't think will serve well to my project. Mostly this is because this focuses on something that hasn't transpired physically, so it is important


Proposal Argument: I would have definite trouble coming up with a proposal that I or many other people interested in technology would be satisfied with.  There is nobody who can come up with a satisfactory proposal for technology that does not yet exist.


Refutation Argument:  I would not want to create a refutation argument because I think that while there are clearly viewpoints that are due to misinformation that could be cleared up I do not want to focus on refuting when it is more important to prove my own viewpoint.  Also, because the subject is highly theoretical, it is difficult to put down other arguments with confidence.

Reflection:
I commented on:

http://97laurenhart.blogspot.com/2015/10/considering-types.html?showComment=1446351318291#c6349368638208670285

http://adutcher109h.blogspot.com/2015/10/considering-types.html?showComment=1446351220215#c8475533258269447048

I noticed that generally causal arguments are difficult for people to feel confident about and generally feel like something is missing from them.  Although typically the rest of the subjects were considered equally.  I think that my subject is in a tough position where it is difficult for it to apply well to most of the types of arguments.

My Rhetorical Action Plan

This post is my general plan for my next project.

ActionFranceSAS "Action_Logo" Via Wikimedia Public Domain

1. Audience:  My audience will be people who are interested in technology.  Be it working in the field, studying it or simply having it as a hobby.

• Knowledge:  This is not intended for people who are experts, but also it intended for people who are at least interested in technology.  Because the argument itself is mostly conceptual it is not difficult to grasp and should not be inhibited by jargon or technical misunderstanding.
• Values: I know that the audience is interested in the future and most likely advancement of technology, alongside the fact that artificial intelligence is an extremely glorified and interesting topic to most people, especially those interested in technology.  Within the intended audience I am confident that there is a definite interest based on these values.
• Standards of argument.  Logic is almost definitely the primary contributing factor to an argument in this field.  I for example intend to use the logic of the possibility and inevitability of artificial intelligence to persuade my audience.  I think that trying to make an emotional appeal would be a waste of time in this context with my audience.
• Visual Elements: I think some sort of technology imagery or perhaps imagery of A.I. in popular media might make some sort of impression.  However I would not want to make it seem over dramatic with use of visuals.
• Purpose:  I want to raise awareness and expand understanding of an idea that is not particularly thought out. I want to bring some realistic conversation to something that is very often not taken seriously. 

2. Genre:

• Scholarly article (example 1) (example 2)
• I am interested in writing simply an academic piece that works to simply to provide a perspective and some information to think about.  
• The function of the genre is first and foremost to deliver the information and my opinion with very little filler content such as pictures that don't serve to add to my argument particularly well. 
•  The setting of the genre is within most academic subjects that are typically not as much political as they are theoretical.
• This genre relies mostly on logos, or logical arguments and appeals.  Ethos and pathos might actually take away from the arguments validity.
• I would only use visual elements where it is completely essential to add to information, such as a graph.  Otherwise I would use none.
• I would use an academic tone with this genre, because it is an issue that should be taken seriously but does not warrant a formal tone.
• Opinion Piece Article:  (example 1) (example 2)
• This is a less formal piece that is presented more as opinion.
• It is designed to effectively present an opinion to an audience, as it is labeled as an opinion piece, it is not meant to present something as fact.
• The setting of the genre is typically a website that published various articles.
• It is common for the opinion piece to have visuals, I would like for my piece to not rely on these and be light on them.  I think that it still applies that images can hurt an argument with my subject.
• The style is in between academic and conversational, as it is presenting information that is opinion, not fact but also is a serious presentation of information.

3: Responses/Actions:

Positive reactions:

• Acknowledge the issue and take it as a serious issue that should be addressed as soon as possible.
• Acknowledge the issue but disagree with the need to act immediately/as soon as possible.
• Acknowledge the issue but remain neutral as to the action to be taken.

Negative reactions:

• Do not acknowledge the possibility of the issue becoming a real threat.
• Rebuttal: Just because it does not affect humanity yet is not evidence against it, trends show that A.I. will come in time, and if it is human level it will need to be regulated.
• Acknowledge the threat and try to fight the creation of AI
• The benefits of AI are extremely high in potential, if humanity can focus on eliminating pitfalls it will change the very structure of society for the better and save lives, it is worth the effort. 
• Rebuttal: We should wait for the future before we impose anything.
• That is most likely what will happen and should happen, by presenting this issue I do not believe that we should act as though we know how to solve it, simply to prepare and educate ourselves for when the time that the public opinion is an important influence on the future of AI.

Analyzing Purpose

This post will analyze the purpose of my project 3.

Paul Downey "Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose" Via Wikimedia CC-BY 2.0

1. Freewrite: I want people to acknowledge that A.I. is a danger regardless of the timeframe in which it is created.  I think that there is a fundamental misunderstanding in many people when they think of the dangers of A.I.  This misunderstanding is that even though it is extremely likely that our generation will be dead before artificial intelligence could possibly pose a threat to humanity, it is important to act to ensure a degree of safety for when it inevitably comes.  I want the readers to understand why there is such a call for action when there isn't much of an effect of A.I. in society yet.

2. Plausible reactions:  I think the plausible reactions are either to agree and support the idea of acting preemptively, or to disagree and to believe that there is no reason to act before it is obviously needed.  Both of these are quite reasonable, as it is hard to determine what will happen as a result of either.  Not plausible:  I think it is unlikely for those who read my article to be turned off from the concept of A.I. entirely, as I have no intention to not showcase the incredible possibilities it presents to society.

3. The effects of this are more than likely not going to be visible for many years to come as technology continues to grow. This awareness could manifest in some form of bill or protection in another form that would persist into a future in which it applies.

4. It is undeniable that those who would be most interested in this cause and making a change in it would be those who are in the technology field.  Today, there is not a particularly large group of people who have the interest in the technology, and with issues like global warming at the forefront of threats to society it is without a doubt little more than an afterthought to most people.  That is why I think that the people interested in this are generally already invested somewhat in technology, perhaps more specifically computer science.

Analyzing Context

This blog is going to analyze the context of my projects debate.

"LogoFromConTEXt" Via Wikimedia Public Domain

1. Key perspectives and schools of thought:  Almost everyone realizes the extremely high potential that artificial intelligence has for bettering humanity.  There are those that believe that it is not even worth developing AI due to the possible downsides, but those are the minority, the most common thought is that AI is worth developing, but must be kept a close eye on.

2. Major points of contention: The most prevalent and important disagreement is where the source of potential dangers within A.I. is, and also the time frame in which worrying about these potential issues is warranted.

3. Possible points of agreement:  As stated in point #1, everyone agrees that A.I. could help society in a multitude of ways.  It is also generally agreed that there is the potential for danger.  The degrees in which these two points are true is the deciding factor of the argument.

4. Ideological differences: The key differences ideologically is between those who are afraid of change for the possibility of its threat to humanity vs those who are progressive towards the issue as they see the possible benefits outweighing the risks.

5. Generally the texts either urge the audience to acknowledge the dangers of A.I. or to urge them to calm down about it and to let time tell.

6.  I will give examples from multiple different opinions and backgrounds in order to provide perspective and who I think is generally in the right and who has the most merit in their argument.  I want to provide a relatively thorough perspective in order to allow the reader to decide for themselves without hiding information.

7.  I think that there is a degree of merit in every perspective on the topic due to the nature of the debate and it being an issue hard to quantify.  Therefore most perspectives hold water and are a threat, but not any more than my own perspective.

Reflection:
I commented on:
http://thomascortez.blogspot.com/2015/10/analyzing-context.html?showComment=1446335423023#c422465743394124251

http://mlubniewski.blogspot.com/2015/10/analyzing-context.html?showComment=1446335246060#c6127503813027979360

I found that their different perspectives were generally far more polarized than mine, which is unsurprising given the nature of their issues, one being debates between political parties and the other legalization of marijuana.  Both of these have sides that are more clear cut than my issue, but at the same time, I don't necessarily think that it affects my ability to write on the subject, as there is clear disagreement over it.

Audience and Genre

This is a post related to both my audience and genre.

Benjamin Franklin "FranklinBejaminJournalDeParis" Via Wikimedia Public Domain

Engineers:  They might be interested because engineers have many ties to the mathematical aspect that is very important to AI.  There is a lot of software connected to engineering as well, and are considered very similar to computer scientists in many ways.
1)http://www.scitechnol.com/applied-bioinformatics-computational-biology.php

• http://www.scitechnol.com/modified-image-compression-by-combined-neural-network-and-arithmetic-coding-processing-O34i.php?article_id=3320
• http://www.scitechnol.com/identifying-vulnerabilities-in-cloud-computing-using-penetration-test-4pQ5.php?article_id=3541

2)http://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/information-technology-software-engineering.php

• http://www.omicsgroup.org/editor-biography/Jing_Bo_Chen/

• http://www.omicsgroup.org/editor-biography/Jianwen_Fang/

Computer Scientists: Computer scientists are obvious as they are the direct group of people most connected to artificial intelligence.  Though not all computer scientists are working in artificial intelligence, they are often understanding of the basic idea better than most and will generally be more interested.
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/RecentIssue.jsp?punumber=69

• http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=7124472
• http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=7130644

http://www.journals.elsevier.com/information-systems/

• http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306437915000733
• http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306437914001288

Extended Annotated Bibliography

This is my annotated bibliography for project 3 questions.

"IEEE Logo" T.aliu Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported

[1] Cser.org, 'cser.org', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://cser.org/. [Accessed: 25- Oct- 2015].

This is an example of one of the places that talks of artificial intelligence happens.  It is in Cambridge and could be used as an example of somewhere working to gain a further understanding of A.I.

[2] Futureoflife.org, 'The Future of Life Institute', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://futureoflife.org/. [Accessed: 25- Oct- 2015].

This institute is another example of a center for A.I. studies and furthering of understanding.  I could use it as an example of some steps taken to prepare for the future.  It was funded by Elon Musk, which could be useful to add to my information.

[3]N. Bostrom, Superintelligence. .

This book is an important influence in informing many people about the potentials of AI for good and bad.  It could be useful in bringing up the various concepts that the book covers.  It also was an important early influence for those who are advocates of regulating AI such as Bill Gates and Elon Musk.

[4] Fhi.ox.ac.uk, 'Future of Humanity Institute | University of Oxford', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.fhi.ox.ac.uk/. [Accessed: 25- Oct- 2015].

This is the website to the institute at Oxford that is dedicated to existential issues such as the potential issues in A.I.  It could be another example of a place where people come together to discuss the possibilities for the future in a prestigious and academic environment, many of the people who would be discussing this are the future A.I experts of the world as well.

[5] MIT Technology Review, 'Are We Smart Enough to Control Artificial Intelligence? | MIT Technology Review', 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.technologyreview.com/review/534871/our-fear-of-artificial-intelligence/. [Accessed: 25- Oct- 2015].

This article helped answer a lot of general questions.  It also summarized many arguments in an effective manner while also providing new perspective.  I could use it if I want to cover the middle of the line perspective that the author maintains, as this is the only example of people not being heavily to one side or the other on the issue.

Narrowing My Focus

This post will narrow down two things that I would want to focus on to learn for my next project.

Uglowp "FocusTarget" Via Pixabay Public Domain

1) Is the time scale of the issue relevant? perhaps the future will give way to the answer of safe artificial intelligence. Why is it seen so important to address this now before we really have a comprehensive knowledge of what new information we could gain as our technology progresses?  I think that the state we are at is so primitive relative to the technological level we will need to implement human level AI that it is really difficult to get even a basic idea of what our issues with it will be.  So why is it that we do not wait for development? 

2) Are there places where people come together to discuss AI and its implications?  I have not yet found a common ground for great minds to consider these potential threats.  Without somewhere to collaborate, it will be relatively difficult for a real consensus to be reached.  Some sort of institution or group dedicated to the issue.

Questions About Controversy

This post will ask questions which address holes in my knowledge of a controversy.

Neutrality "Question Mark" Via Wikimedia Public Domain

Who is involved in the controversy: Who would be hurt, or is actively against the management of artificial intelligence?  Who is working in the forefront of AI and what is their opinion?  Are the any people in government that have given their opinion.

What is up to debate? What level of regulation is expected/needed?  Is there an argument to stop development of AI altogether?  Is the time scale of the issue relevant? perhaps the future will give way to the answer of safe artificial intelligence.

When?:  Is there a reliable way to gauge the path of artificial intelligence and how long its development will take?  When were the earliest forms of AI and how have they progressed?  What sort of artificial intelligence projects are in development are predicted to be created within a predictable time frame?

Where?:  Are there companies or certain studies where this potential of artificial intelligence was uncovered? Where are the primary locations where the research is being done?  Are there places where people come together to discuss AI and its implications?

How it has unfolded in media?  Are there forums in which debate is going on?  What reputable public sources have talked about the controversy?  Are there any media sites dedicated to the issue?

Reflection on Project 2

This post will consist of my reflection on my final project two grade.

Jurii "MakeUpMirror" Via WIkimedia CC BY 3.0

1.  I changed everything, after going through my source content and my draft, I realized that the issue I had chosen was not as easily reflected in a rhetorical analysis, so I changed sources and rewrote the entire draft.

2.  An obvious global change was the source content, which I changed, thus changing my essay entirely.  There were some overlapping themes, and I took the structuring advice given in the comments of my original draft into consideration on my final version.

3.  I did not feel as though my prior version addressed the issues enough to be considered a proper rhetorical analysis.

4.  I think they help my credibility because I ended up with a subject that presented an argument that could be analyzed sufficiently, whereas the other article was lacking in content to analyze.

5. I think that it is a more fitting topic that more people are interested in, I also think that it is more controversial of an issue that is more applicable to most people interested in technology.

6.  My sentence structure was a little bit too long so I structured them and broke them up to generally shorten them up.

7.  These changes should help to make the article more readable, and also break up different portions of my analysis which should make it easier to understand the purpose behind my writing.

8.  I constantly was considering the conventions of the rhetorical analysis and how I should be fitting that in with the fact that I was addressing the essay it self to other students, it resulted in a lot of changing structure in order to make it clear who the essay was intended for.

9.  My identity as a writer is conveyed well enough that I don't think that the reflection process makes me reconsider very much, although it makes me reconsider my writing styles.



Reflection:

Most people were similar to me in that they changed sentence structure around a lot.  I did not find anyone else who scrapped their entire project, but many people revised thoroughly.  I was interested to see that one of the projects revised their tone to sound more upbeat which i never would have thought to do.

Links to those I commented on: http://rachelbeardown.blogspot.com/2015/10/reflection-on-project-2.html?showComment=1445746896137#c5797372847446180254

http://jennifermbello.blogspot.com/2015/10/reflection-on-project-2_20.html?showComment=1445746709892#c7092787568707023625

Project 2 Final Version

This post contains the link to my final version of project 2.

Paramount Picture "TheFinalCountdownLogo" via Wikimedia Public Domain

Here is the link

Punctuation, Part 2

In this blog I will go over three more subjects of punctuation I studied in "Rules For Writers".

"Colon (Punctuation") Via Wikimedia Public Domain

1) "End Punctuation":  One interesting thing that is rather niche in its application is that periods used to abbreviate at the end of the sentence it should not be used twice.  An important distinction made about quotation marks is that a series of questions may be indicated with question marks without being complete sentences.

2) "Other" Punctuation:  The dash consists of two hyphens, the dash can be used to indicate material that is to be emphasized.  It also can be used to introduce a list or a shift in tone.  Brackets, unlike parentheses are used when one needs to insert their own words into text. I did not know that the word "sic" in brakets [sic] were used to indicate an error being properly quoted by the original source.

3) The Colon: The colon is most known for its usage to direct attention to a list, also in displaying the time and other practical uses.  However, the colon is often misused in situations such as in between a verb and its object, a preposition and its object, and after indicating phrases like "such as", "including" and "for example".

Paragraph Analysis 2

This post contains the link to my paragraph analysis of my project 2 draft.

Dale Mahalko "CT Scan" CC BY-SA 3.0

After going through my paragraphs, I have gotten somewhat of a better understanding of where they are lacking.  In general, the paragraphs have good focus and internal organization.  However they at times lack development and effective transitions.  The linking of ideas is usually present when necessary, for example in the conclusion.

Here's the link:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1R6GzxXr1TmkFNpzegON1b2v9ANJ0SSE0Rpbp5h-4zqM/edit?usp=sharing

Revised Conclusion

In this post I will break down and revise my conclusion to my project 2 draft.

Kalid Mahjood "Door in Rural Pujab" via Wikimedia CC BY-SA 3.0

Original

All of these rhetorical strategies work together in order to convince the reader of the importance of solving this issue that might otherwise go unnoticed or underestimated. They may not always be effective in the proving of Schliefers argument, but the essence of the argument is that action must be taken, and all of the rhetorical strategies that Schliefer utilizes in the article support the need to take action. This is successful usage of rhetorical devices, as the issue of cyber attacks on America is one that only directly affects a select group of people, only through specific use of rhetorical devices can the importance of the issue reach those outside of its direct influence.

Revised

The way these rhetorical strategies work in conjunction are essential in their ability to influence the reader of the article. Through his rhetorical strategies, he effectively brings this easily overlooked issue into the public eye. Although no direct plan of action is given by Schliefer, his use of rhetoric instills a call to action, and paves the way for the necessary actions and public interest for action to be taken.  Whether action is taken next week or in ten years, public knowledge and understanding is the first step.

Revised Introduction

This post will consist of my revised introduction for my project 2 draft.

"Door With Cat Hole" Via Wikimedia Public Domain

Original draft Intro:  In the aftermath of a high profile security breach, fingers will inevitably be pointed and questions will need answering. In the case of one recent cyber attack, author Theodore Schliefer argues that the finger should point back at the United States, with their lack of action as the main issue.  In his article, Schliefer draws on extensive use of expert opinions and firsthand accounts of those affected to support the validity of his views.  These rhetorical techniques are relied on throughout the article to build both his logical credibility and the emotional relatability to the audience by highlighting the emotion of those affected by the cyber crime.

Revised Intro: In the aftermath of a security breach of a "magnitude greater than any we have seen of its kind", tensions are high and accusations are abundant. In this uneasy time, author Theodore Schliefer makes the argument that the blame should rest upon America and their lack of countermeasures.  Rhetoric is essential to this argument,  and Schliefer utilizes it in a variety of ways to persuade and influence his readers.  In this essay I will analyze the various techniques such as use of expert opinion and firsthand accounts help to support his argument from a logical and emotional standpoint.


I prefer my second version because it is more direct, and more to the point.  It also has a more effective attention grabber. It uses phrases like "In this essay I will" which is definitely less passive phrasing.

Reflection on Project 2 Draft

This is my reflection to my project 2 draft.

Redlands "England Lake Reflection" via Wikimedia Public Domain

I reviewed Lauren Heart and Scott Norix's project 2 drafts.



Revision:

Do I have an identifiable thesis?:  Yes I have an identifiable thesis, it points to specific techniques aside from the typical "ethos pathos and logos" using none of those words.

How have I organized my essay?: I organized my essay in a way that separates the  various rhetorical techniques utilized by the author and their respective analysis into their own paragraphs. Three body paragraphs, each with its own subject and analysis that follows.

Did I analyze multiple elements of the situation/structure: Yes, but I am not happy with the way I did, I intend to change and add to many parts of this.

Did I explain how and why strategies were employed?: Yes I did, for each example I described exactly why the strategies were employed and their intended effects of the reader.  I did not go as in depth as I would have liked to, and will build upon it.

Am I thoughtfully using evidence?:  I am not satisfied with my use of evidence thus far.  I want to use it more effectively, and in ways other than quoting such as paraphrasing to find a better balance.

Do I leave the reader wanting more?: As my draft is it probably does not answer all the questions my reader might have, I need to fix this by the time my final draft is posted.

Punctuation Part 1

In this blog post I will go over the three sections of punctuation that I read in rules for writers, and what I found interesting and useful about them.

Jelte "Semicolon" Via Wikimedia Public Domain

• The Comma:  I use commas very often in my writing, which is why I picked this section to read.  I found it interesting that it is recommended to use a comma between all items in a series, including the last.  In prior years I had learned that it is generally not recommended to use a comma for the last item in a set, but this says otherwise.  Essential information is typically not enclosed within commas, but nonrestrictive and nonessential information is enclosed within commas.

• Semicolon: On the other end of the spectrum, the semicolon is a tool that I rarely use, if ever.  The passage clarified  the situations in which I should use a semicolon, and where to avoid them.  For example, one should never use a semicolon between a subordinate clause and the rest of the sentence, between an appositive and the word it refers to, or to introduce a list.  Independent clauses only rarely can be used alongside semicolons in the event that the independent clause contains internal punctuation.

•  Quotation marks:  Quotation marks are sometimes misused, and I wanted a better understanding of when it is right to use them.  The obvious usage is that they are meant to directly quote another source when applying it to your own works.  One interesting nuance that I found is that when a quote contains a quote, to use a single quotation marks to mark the second quote.  They can also be used to "set off words used as words" when the subject of the phrasing is about the word itself, however this is more commonly used with italics.  

Reflection:

Unsurprisingly, there was very little usage of semicolons, but I saw interesting variety of usage in comma's and mostly traditional usage of quotation marks.

"But more specifically, it is geared toward anyone who may have been excited about or supportive of Mars One, because the purpose of the article is to show what the situation really is." from the draft has usage of commas in the beginning and middle of the sentence. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mQxmOQKXx3ymizvft7RYYFhDbw4sN3oU2_kacM5puAY/edit

"The words, “we were all told,” create an aggressive tone that establishes a clear line between a hypothetical “them” and “us.” " from the draft has interesting usage of quotation marks in two places that are used to point out specific words. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EDzHLIiTnYuIHQ5aHD_Rog5HQ2t9HrDeNO4Wwm5lTzY/edit