Draft of Public Argument

Reneman "Icon Draft" Via Wikimedia CC-BY SA 3.0

This is my first draft of my project 3.


Here is the link:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vus_I_dz9ASSpkF4LsPkPEPGx_4NnYTzepLae4Bh2uk/edit?usp=sharing
There are a lot of things missing from this draft that I have every intention to add in (images etc) but most of the text that I plan on putting is in there, so criticism is welcome there.  I think that I will increase the length by one paragraph and change the organization of the text to be easier to read.

Considering Visual Elements

This post covers the visual elements of my project 3 draft

OpenClipArtVectors Via Pixabay CC0 Public Domain.

1) Shapes, Text Boxes, Headings and Lines: The most relevant thing that could be used here is the headings.  Headings are obviously useful at the start of a post, but also can be useful in breaking the text up further on into the document.

2) Image Selection: There is a very important balance that needs to be struck in my situation, less because of the genre and more because of the subject.  I do not want to over saturate my project with pictures that do not effectively contribute to my point, but if my whole project consists of data and tet then it will not be effective use of images and will turn readers away.

3) Image framing/anchoring: There image is typically located at the top of the article that is important to set the tone.  After this, it is important to frame images in relevant locations that does not break up the text in important places.  There is very little imagery that can be used in my instance that will directly add to the argument, so I will be light on them.

4)  Visual organization: It is important to section off my argument in a way that flows naturally, lines and section headings could be useful to transition.  I will take overuse of images into serious consideration, and omit any that make it over saturated.

5) Is the visual tone consistent?  I have to make sure that the visual "tone" is consistent in that it does not stray too much from a serious and realistic standpoint.  I think that going overboard with how dramatic my images are is a mistake that will take away from my credibility.

6) Are the consequences of not taking action clearly expressed?: Yes this is a highly emphasized part of my argument.  This is because this is a main point of contention and I think that this is where people tend to disagree and not believe the threats of AI.

Reflection:
http://adutcher109h.blogspot.com/2015/11/considering-visual-elements.html?showComment=1446946778153#c5087510461866259555

http://mlubniewski.blogspot.com/2015/11/considering-visual-elements.html?showComment=1446947178031#c6161211189558723484

Reading the other blog posts I saw a lot of projects that could be very beneficial to projects including mine.  They seem to be projects that have more political implications than mine, which historically are heavy on imagery. There was a definite lack of specifics though in the posts I read.

Project 3 Outline

This post will outline my project in various ways.

Mikael Haggstrom "The Man Shadow" Via Wikimedia Public Domain

Introducing your public argument:
World view:  I think that my argument is interesting because the bearing that it could have on humanity is huge, but it is an issue that doesn't affect us yet.  It is basically preparing for the future, and it is important to do so.

The situation:  The situations relevancy today is highly related to Stephen Hawking and Elon Musk bringing the situation further into the public eye, and an open letter signed by many figures concerning the future of AI.

Frame the Consequences: This is a very crucial part of my argument, because the short term consequences are low so people tend to ignore it, but the potential consequences are so high because it could effect the whole world and everyone in it.

Define or Narrow the Problem: The plan for action is to spread awareness in order to determine the path for the future of the technology, so that we can get on the right path before it is decided for us.  Basically, the people need to be educated on the subject preemptively so that we can guide its development in a productive and cautious way.

Developing Strong supporting paragraphs:

Supporting arguments:  There are many public figures in technology that have gone on record about the possible consequences of human level AI being developed haphazardly.  This is because there is concern about its implementation in military as an early potential consequence to it not being regulated, and in the long run there is an undeniable possibility of the AI progressing far beyond humanity and overtaking us, especially if it is not programmed with extreme caution.

Major Criticisms: Because we don't know how far into the future this will affect us, many people say that it is an overblown issue. It is also said that is is quite possible that we will never be able to reach this point for an extremely long time, and that the timeframe means that we should wait before taking any sort of action.

Rebuttals:  The time frame is not reason to discard the issue entirely, it can be comparable to knowing about global warming before it started affecting us, so that we can structure our society's structure in order to prevent the issue before it comes.  A.I. though it might be a distant technology is progressing steadily and all signs point towards it progressing to human level, potentially within our lifetimes, but whether it is within our lifetimes or not should not affect the direction it heads towards.

Topic sentence:  Time is not a large factor in the determining how important it is to keep a close eye and regulation on AI because we need to start onto the right path well before AI reaches a level where it poses a threat, and guide its development in a productive and cautious manner.

Evidence: There are quotes from many major figures in technology that support this viewpoint, however, I have not decided which ones to use yet because they have to specifically be used as a rebuttal to Rodney Brooks  and his viewpoint.

Map: https://coggle.it/diagram/Vj5l9zCrecoFNq8L/bf6a4623de9c4792ccfe72da025973e9a402a057a85f431335b9a99d43180f21

Concluding Strategies:

How to act on it: Simply by understanding today so that we can move into the future with caution and understanding is the best that people can do right now, future legislation may involve this as well.

Negative consequences: Though it may not affect humanity for many years to come, the consequences of carelessness towards AI could spell the end of the human race in the long term, but in the short term it could lead to deaths on a smaller scale if it is implemented in the military.

Positive Consequences:  If AI is developed properly, its affect on humanity is nearly endless, and could potentially solve many of the worlds toughest problems like unemployment and hunger if it is done right.

Common ground:  Nobody is saying that AI is going to kill us in five or ten years, and nearly nobody is arguing against its furthering and advancement.  There is simply a misunderstanding between those who take AI seriously today and those who think that it is simply "fear mongering" to feel this way.

Future of the debate: This debate is exciting because it is bound to grow in scope as time progresses with technology. This is just the very beginning of the debate, which is mostly going on based on theory, but as technology progresses it will get more and more specific and developed.

Analyzing My Genre

This is a post that analyzes the various aspects of my genre.

Steve Jurvetson "Friendwheel" Via Flickr CC BY 2.0

Examples of "Blog Articles"

• http://gizmodo.com/if-a-solar-plant-uses-natural-gas-is-it-still-green-1740719895
• http://www.zdnet.com/article/ios-9-1-better-but-still-broken/
• https://gigaom.com/2015/10/27/its-time-to-shake-up-the-enterprise-software-market/
• http://www.zdnet.com/article/tpp-isps-will-hand-over-copyright-infringer-details/
• http://mashable.com/2015/11/05/htc-apple-commercial/#MrHqiXF.GPqD

Social Context:

• Typical setting:  This type of post is typically included on some sort of blog publishing website such as Gizmodo, which aggregates blogs that pertain to technology.
• Subject:  The subject of the genre is very versatile and can cover just about everything because it is a blog, which tends to be good for whatever interests the blogger.
• Who uses it?: Almost anyone can use this genre because of what it can encompass, it is generally not used very academically though.
• When is it used:  It is used usually when there is a subject of interest to a person, and blogs allow for anybody to put there opinion into text, but in my case it is more formal.

Rhetorical Patterns:

• What type of content is included/excluded:  Generally, a blog is not a particularly research heavy medium, and its images usually are not data visuals but are typically used to simply give an idea of the subject and create an emotional connection.
• Appeals:  Most blogs are generally skewed towards having an appeal to ethos as opposed to logos, but generally speaking it varies a lot based on the subject.
• The organization allows for a lot of variation, with the exception of having a title and image at the top, which is exceedingly common.
• Sentence styles: In comparison to many other genres, blogs are relatively informal and this is reflected in the sentences structure.  It is generally not too high level language and it focuses on being relatively short and legible. As it is common to voice opinion there is a lot of emotion, and therefore it would be likely to find high amounts of exclamation points.
• Word choice:  There is generally not too high level of word choice, and is often informal, but because of the variation of the genre, if it is a specialized blog it would not be uncommon to find jargon in a blog.

Analyze What those Patterns Reveal about the Social Context:

• Who does the genre include/exclude: This genre is unique in that it includes almost anyone with an opinion.  However, it is not typically used as an academic source where a publication could be used.  
• What roles does this encourage?: This encourages a symbiotic role that is not common in most publications, because there is a comment section that is often used for discussion that partakes between readers and writers. 
• There are generally no values or beliefs that are assumed, aside from the demographic being younger than that of newspapers or other traditional forms of news such as television.
• The genre tends to treat emotional appeal more valuable because of the nature of the internet and blogs that attempts to appeal to the largest groups of people.

Reflection:

http://deweydecimatrix.blogspot.com/2015/11/analyzing-my-genre.html?showComment=1446777292553#c8846343527811186009

http://mlubniewski.blogspot.com/2015/11/analyzing-my-genre.html?showComment=1446776952074#c9110360453975680923

Reading the other blog posts was interesting specifically for their points on context, socially and more.  Reading about context though I found it interesting that in one of them it was noted that context is not always necessary to an extent, which I actually agree with if you know your audience well enough.

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.