Money… We all love money of course. A green paper that has an important figure in the “front” and the “back” with an important building/people/or a symbol or a sliver or copper coin. Family, friends, and relationships are corrupt maybe or mainly because of money. You could disagree or agree, but money breaks up bonds. But we never see the other side, money is destroying nature…

Margaret Atwood started off with the article where god was created and when Earth was all clean, green, and very optimistic imagery. However, as she proceeds throughout the four creations by humans, the realization of the non-realization begins to emerge. Money, the powerful tool we have created has destroyed the planet we are currently living in.

Money is so powerful, yet we can’t combat climate change in this world. It’s crazy what money is capable of and what the upper class have in mind to spend their money on. But for now, the Earth is not what we first started off and climate change is probably not going to go away any time soon.

This could be the movie we are watching in real time; on live.

Well, wasn’t that interesting to read… Nothing in the article that was said was un true. Wow I actually enjoyed this article. Anyway, as we ALL may know, everything revolves around money. Even in times where there wasn’t a small green slip made out of paper with a considered GOD stamped on it, there was always something that gave people power. Today, whoever has money, they can fly meaning they have great power over anyone. Currently according to the author, we are in stage 3 which I refer to as “Time of Regret.”

“Short and simple” plays big in attracting anyone to read anything. SO many events have happened in history but Atwood managed to narrow it down to four stages. FOUR. To add on, from her mood to her diction, she emphasizes that us, as humans, are stupid. Having to describe money as “god” shows that money is powerful. GOD, “powerful” would be an understatement. “It FEAST on famines, songs of joy, lamentations.” This is to show how powerful money can be. SO powerful it consumes what humans need.

(Image from https://www.istockphoto.com/photos/dead-planet)

To move on to stage 4, she doesn’t describe the planet as “dead.” She describes the series of events that now the planet is just a large patch of sand that surrounds what used to be nature. “we did not stop in our industrious creation of deserts.” The planet did not just “die.” We KILLED it. And thats our path as human society…

REPORTING DEAD FROM THE DESERT, I AM HUMAN, BACK TO YOU…

In his book, James Gee discusses how meaning is connected to goals and intentions in communication. Gee says meaning isn’t a fixed concept; it’s influenced by the context in which it’s situated. This means that the importance of a word, phrase, or message can experience modifications based on the individual situation in which it’s employed. For instance, the word ‘work’ in Physics versus its use in everyday language. The term ‘work’ has multiple meanings making it a homophone. Physics defines ‘work’ as the force over a distance, which clearly connects to the force formula. We also use the word ‘work’ to describe the things we do at our work place or at home on a daily basis. Physics and our lifestyle have different purposes and intentions, so even a simple word can have multiple meanings. Though there is some connection to gaming here in the sense that gamers also use various words depending on the game itself, there is still a wider application to this idea. For example, in coding, we have lots of unique phrases and words that sound extremely weird to those who don’t code. Words like “tools,” “control structures,” and “algorithm” have specific meanings in computer programming. The difference between a function and a variable is that a function is a block of code with a specific purpose. These terms have distinct meanings in the programming context, which differ from their everyday language usage. It’s one of the reasons why only .5% of the world’s population knows how to code. It’s easy to not do something difficult and put it off for a later time. As someone who is learning the basics, I often feel challenged learning about these abstract concepts like syntax rules. Nevertheless, we are dealing with something that has only recently become an integral part of society and academia, which makes programming a complex area of interest.

I have been using the internet for as long as I could remember. However, the longest I could truly remember is in the 5th grade when we were introduced to computers in English class to make our writing more quick and efficient. Whilst at first It seemed like the internet was helping me finish my work quicker, as time went by I realized that internet only heightened my procrastination because in my head I believe that since the internet is so easy, that I could always do my work later since it wouldn’t take much time. Now come to think of it, the most efficient I have ever been in a scholastic environment was before the 5th grade in which we would do our assignments on paper. Doing assignments on paper required me to use my brain a lot more since I didn’t have resources like the internet to rely on.

If I had to decide whether assignments should be digital or physical, I’d rather them be physical so that skills like your critical thinking won’t become weaker… but in turn, stronger. I find that when I do assignments on paper, I spend a lot more time thinking about what I have to say and the way I would say it, constantly finding new words and methods to use. On the contrary, writing papers online has hindered my literacy by a long shot. Whenever i’m confused, instead of trying to think it through, I enter my question in the search engine for a quick response. However, I’ve come to the realization that Google only helps for the short term.

In the text “Is Google making us stupid”, Nicolas Carr has similar standpoints. Within the introduction Carr states, ” Over the past few years I’ve had an uncomfortable sense that someone, or something, has been tinkering with my brain, remapping the neural circuitry, reprogramming the memory. My mind isn’t going—so far as I can tell—but it’s changing. I’m not thinking the way I used to think. I can feel it most strongly when I’m reading. Immersing myself in a book or a lengthy article used to be easy. My mind would get caught up in the narrative or the turns of the argument, and I’d spend hours strolling through long stretches of prose. at’s rarely the case anymore. Now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I’m always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle.” which ultimately explains that Google is making not only him, but us stupid.

I agree.

Starbucks is romanticized too much. From the overpriced coffee they serve to each visit being different, I find it hard to believe people have a life after doing any type of work there. I would say i’m closed off but not enough to prevent myself from having a conversation with someone. If it happens, it happens. Do I want it to happen? Who even knows (lol). Regardless of my opinion, I see why people choose starbucks and not just any type of location.

As a college student, I don’t want to get work done. Also, because I leave home early and come home late, I have to come up with a plan that allows me to do my work and study whenever I get the chance between my classes. I went to starbucks about 3 times during my break. The first time was good and peaceful. The second was in and out. The third one was with a friend and it was loud. I didn’t mind it at all as I did get work done. With decent wifi and conversation, it was a good experience. If i’m not with a friend chances of me talking to someone are very VERY slim. Not because of me but cause of others. No one has time to talk if they have they’re wired in with a laptop in front of them drinking their overpriced coffee than can put anyone in good health in cardiac arrest.

“https://mashable.com/article/diabetes-here-i-come-starbucks”

In terms of the article, yes people are loosing human touch/focus everyday. But its something that everyone has to fix personally because no one has the same schedule anyone or same ideas as before. We have to work now. Hang outs with friends are rare and if anything, a memory to always remember. Whatever the case is sadly, thats life. Welcome to the “American Dream”.

Dennis Barron’s article From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy Technology discusses the advancement we as humans have made in literacy. There was no debate on the uses of a pencil which is how most of our literacy began, however, the case is different with the use of computers. Many say computers hinder true literacy and we should stick to pencil and paper. On the other hand, for my writing processes, I prefer to use a computer for many reasons. With my computer, I can simply ramble or type for as long as I want on first drafts without getting hand cramps. But when I type at least a page on paper, my hand tends to feel like this:

Additionally, editing a rough draft on the computer is more convenient because we can type full detailed comments. When I would give peer review in a classroom through pencil and paper, I would have to then explain what I really meant to my peer. This was because I couldn’t fully write everything I saw correctly or incorrectly in their paper. Through the suggestions viewing on google docs, you can edit anything you want and it pops up as its own comment so then the other person can decide if they prefer your way or what they had already written. Lastly, the computer offers more organization than paper drafts or essays. If I had a huge writing assignment where I would go through multiple stages of review and drafts, I would end up with only half of my work. Losing paper is much easier than losing documents on a computer especially with Microsoft Word or Google Docs.

Stacy Pigg’s Transient Literacies in Action Chapter 2 talks about mobile surround. The mobile surround is simply people working in the same environment. My mobile surrounding is are Starbucks. I like to buy a drink after my studies or work session is done, a “reward.” Lighting also plays a big role for me to get my work done. The lighting at Starbucks is always so bright from the glass walls letting natural light in. In my room, it just isn’t that bright even with lights on. Since it’s not that bright it causes me to get sleepy and lose focus, it doesn’t help that my bed is only a couple of feet from my desk. The energy at Starbucks is unbeatable from the delicious smell of coffee and teas brewing, it sets the perfect vibe. Working at Starbucks causes me to be productive from seeing everyone working. It makes me feel ashamed to procrastinate, it forces me to work. Starbucks has the perfect amount of background noise. It isn’t too loud or too quiet. Silence is distracting for me even when I have my headphones on. I’m more focused on everything around me rather than the work in front of me. I have the mindset that I went out of my way to go out and carry all my things to go study. I made time out of my day, so I might as well not slack off. In my house it’s never quiet, it’s always so loud. My mom is always calling me to go do something. At Starbucks I can’t be sidetracked to do something else.

Photo Credit : Oh, Rachel, and Veena Vinod. “How to Solve the Perennial Problem of Seat-Hogging?” The Straits Times, 1 June 2016, www.straitstimes.com/singapore/manpower/how-to-solve-the-perennial-problem-of-seat-hogging.

Stacey Pigg’s “Transient Literacies in Action” covers the idea about the “mobile surround.” What she means by this is that people interact in a shared environment with the use of technology. When reading this article, I’ve realized that coffee shops could be a hit or miss when getting work done. Depending on the person and the work ethic of the group you are with, this will either create a really productive space or not. In my experience, Starbucks has been a fairly productive environment to get my work done. With the free Wi-Fi, the outlet plugs, and the iced brown sugar oat milk shaken espresso I could never say no to, these resources make getting work done there more worth it to me. I work best on my own or even with friend groups in the mornings when it’s usually not too crowded. This is because our surroundings are a lot quieter and easier to concentrate. I would prefer doing studying/group projects at Starbucks since I could also eat unlike in the library. 

However, when working with a group of people, especially with your friends, it’s a lot easier to get off tract. I admit that our Starbucks work days sometimes turn into side conversations and random rants/gossip totally unrelated to what we should be doing. Comparing my productivity at Starbucks to the school library, I would say I get more work done in the library since it is almost always in a quieter space where everyone else is also getting work done. Since Starbucks tends to get busy and is generally louder throughout the day, most of the time social conversations are being made rather than doing the actual work.

It would be great to find a balance with social interactions and being productive and I believe it is possible if everyone in your group is on the same page. Working efficiently together with a plan on getting the task at hand done is what’s most important. This means that the social place you’re in, whether it’s Starbucks or the library, mainly depends on you and your strategy in being collaboratively successful. It’s best to be flexible to your surroundings no matter where the social gathering is held. 

In Chapter 2 of Stacey Pigg’s “Transient Literacies in Action,” the notion of the “mobile surround” refers to the dynamic and ever-evolving digital landscape in which individuals interact with various forms of technology, especially mobile devices. As a college writer and literacy learner, I find myself constantly immersed in this mobile surround, which has a significant impact on how I encounter writing and literacy.

The concept of “mobile surround” encompasses a multifaceted landscape in which digital technology plays a central role in my academic life. As a college writer, the advantages of this mobile technology are evident in the flexibility and convenience it offers. Whether I’m on campus, at home, or anywhere else, my mobile device ensures that I’m always connected to the resources and tools I need for writing and research. Through mobile apps and web access, I can effortlessly retrieve scholarly articles, access library databases, and consult digital books, simplifying the research phase of my writing projects. Additionally, they allow me to engage with social media and online platforms to gain more insight into people’s thoughts and ideas on a certain topic I might be researching without conveying any bias.  This convenience has revolutionized the way I approach academic tasks, making it easier to stay organized and efficient in my work.

However, it’s important to acknowledge the potential disadvantages of the mobile surround. The constant connectivity and allure of social media notifications can lead to information overload and serve as a distraction, which may hinder deep engagement with academics. Technology has been seamlessly incorporated into my academic life as I navigate mobile devices as a college writer and literacy learner. However, it’s crucial to remain aware of its potential diversions and devise methods to strike a balance between the advantages and the difficulties, thereby ensuring that I make the most of this technology in my academic endeavors.

Without Google, the Internet most likely did not penetrate so deeply into our lives. Google has completely changed the way you interact with the world. Without it, you’ll have to remember more things, instead of just pulling out your phone and Google – you’ll have the answer right away. I am Google, I am God. A statement that seems too much, but it also partly shows the great shadow of Google in life where technology plays a key role, and everything has been digitized. What happens if Google no longer exists? Without Google, the Internet most likely did not penetrate so deeply into our lives. Maybe, it’s just possible that a dense network of smartphones will not be able to expand their influence today without Google’s utilities. Let’s try to think. Google has completely changed the way you interact with the world. Without it, you’ll have to remember more things, instead of just pulling out your phone and Google – you’ll have the answer right away. If you struggle for 5 minutes, instead of just 5 seconds of Google to find the answer, it is very likely that you will give up right from the thought of it. So what if Google still maintains its operations as a mere search engine – instead of a brand like today? What if another partner in Silicon Valley was quicker, bought the tool and steered it in a completely different direction? No one has an answer – things can get worse, but it’s also possible that you’ll have an even more engaging Internet experience than now.

Although using AI can be highly beneficial in finding information but it also makes us loose our ability to focus. Like if we read on longer articles, we tend to drift off into space rather than stay focused. As Nicolas Carr says, “I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do”. We have all faced this scenario at one point or another. This leads us to usually skim the text or not read it at all. This then tends to lead us to miss valuable information. Choosing to analyze texts ourselves will make our brains stronger since we will eventually be able to focus on longer articles.

Using AI can easily help us find information quicker than ever before but is it good for us? When we just copy paste, information are we really learning? No, we aren’t. We have the capability to change this. According to Nicolas Carr, our brains are like plastic. We can mold them to fit us. We can change our learning methods in order to actually retain information. Rather than getting all our information from the net, we can use our brainpower to think for a solution to our questions. Instead of information being handed down to us, we can choose to thoroughly read printed text.

Even though AI is widely known today it might be worth limiting our usage, so that we are still inputting our own perspectives into our pieces. We get the best of both worlds we can Use AI to help us but still maintain our ability to think deep thoughts. In this way, we are learning because we are actively making mistakes which means we have to learn how to fix them.

“Reading is fundamental” is what my friend in middle school told me after I told him that I don’t read because I get bored easily. Has anything changed since then? I’d be lying if I said “yes” but not entirely. I managed to break past my wall of procrastination and I got to WILLINGLY read a book. I never finished the book (LMFAO) but I did learn if I really wanted to do something, I would do it without complaint.

Now a days, I try to read more and more. But today… I just wasn’t feeling it. I wanted to take the easy way out and not do this assignment which lead to a heavy amount of procrastination. Skimming through the pages as Carr has said in the article. I could not have agreed with him more. After reading 2 paragraph I resulted in looking at my phone to see what notifications i have received out of bordem (there was nothing to see LMFAO). Switching the channel to the T.V after reading one sentence. Back and fourth throughout the whole article until i finished… or what I thought I had finished. “Wait… what did i just read” is what i told myself after skimming through the story.

Everything is advancing surrounding technology and if you’re not read like me, you just gotta suck it up sadly. I don’t read well and take notes properly when using modern technology as it creates so much distraction for me but because college consist of modern tech… do I even have to repeat it again (just gotta suck it up)? Humans are not suited to be a “machine memory” in terms of always having an answer to everything. Yes we should work hard to get what we want in terms of rewards but c’mon tech is makes us so lazy its horrible. Bring back old school textbooks and pen to paper notes so I can look forward to doing my assignments!

In sports there is always a certain level of active learning one must do. There is a different social discourse in sports because you not just have to learn how to play with different people, but you also need to understand the rules and any tactical ideas associated with the sport. Especially in the sport I play which is soccer. This can relate to the active learning referenced in James Paul Gee’s book “What Video Games Have To Teach Us About Learning And Literacy.” Active learning is when you experience the world and learn from it in that way. In soccer you can learn in a similar way. You have to experience the playstyle firsthand to understand it the best. Many different coaches have many different playstyles for different players to adapt to there is also the factor of different people and how they feel comfortable playing. For example, some players like to drop deeper and receive the ball while others would rather like to chase down the ball with their pace. This is a great example of active learning because you have to play with your teammates and learn in real time how to best play with them for the sake of the team. There is also a set social discourse to listen to the coach when he wants to play in certain ways. This usually doesn’t get challenged unless enough people feel like it has a negative impact. This also creates an active learning environment because the coach now has to learn how to use the players around him.

I used to participate in call kinds of performing arts within my middle school to high school experience. However, I was never really the outgoing type. Before starting my art hobby, I always had problems communicating with others and I lacked the social skills it took to have a conversation. Although sometimes I still have some moments in which I see that trait within myself, I’ve come a long way from then and the only thing I have to thank for that Is art, specifically theater arts.

From “What video games have to teach us about learning”, I took the topic at hand and kind of applied it to my real life. In the introduction of the text (Page 9), James Gee says “So, then, what determines how you read or think about some particular
thing? Certainly not random chemicals or electrical events in your brain, although you do most certainly need a brain to read or think. Rather, what determines this is your own experiences in interacting with other people who
are members of various sorts of social groups” which I thought was a fascinating thing to say. Previously on the topic of discourse, we covered that certain discourse communities can have an impact on your speech, mannerisms and overall ways of life. Comparing this to my own, I’ve found that acting has made me more social being that I was forced to be on a stage and communicate with other actors/actresses in order to actually succeed. Not only has it made me more social, but it’s made me emotionally intelligent. In my high school major, I was practically putting myself in the shoes of others since I began. This gave me a better understanding of how other people feel which led to better communication between myself and people in general.

Although I am not able to relate much with this text, I can see the point that James Gee was trying to convey when speaking about he influence that games have on our learning and how discourse communities can go hand and hand with how we, as humans, pick up new talents and skills.

Carr makes an amazingly great illustration of how clocks and the internet molded humans and how technology tends to facilitate this molding. The fact there is no real technological advance between Google and GPT is often not realized today. This ignorance leads to confusion about GPT molding humans. GPT is to Google what Command+F is to a website. It simply acts as a magnifying glass on whatever is thought of as pertinent information. Many people forget that the distinction between pertinent and impertinent cannot be made without a deep analysis of the text. GPT and Google necessarily bring analysis minus the depth. Carr cited Socrates and Plato’s eloquently translated prediction of the consequences of writing “‘[people would] receive a quantity of information without proper instruction… [and] be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant'” (12). GPT will almost certainly bring more of the ignominious type Socrates referred to, but there is no real technological or literary advancements in GPT, and thus there will be no real molding as a result of GPT.