Response to Artifact 8

I was surprised to find out just how vast the landscape of  health online has become. An astounding eighty percent of all web users, gather information online to self diagnosis possible medical issues that they face. I don't have a problem with people wanting to acquire facts about potentially life threatening illnesses (diabetes, aids, cancer etc..) that they may face but  serious problems can arise if a person  misinterprets or receives the wrong information from one of the nearly 6,000 sites dedicated to health online.  Even more alarming, online health sites have become more interactive and are largely composed of patient stories, patient symptoms, and patient suggestions. Not every human is the same. Some have allergens, some don't. Our bodies vary and respond differently to the volume of medicine we are prescribed.  For example, what may take 1500 mg of ibuprofen to relieve the inflammation in my joints may only take someone else 200 mg to relieve the same symptoms. If we both go online and make posts about what cured our pains , which dose of pills should someone with similar discomfort take? This scenario is just one of many that could arise when people go online and self diagnose themselves without input from a qualified medical professional. I'm not advocating that doctors are 100 percent correct in their assessments, I'm just suggesting that there is a higher probability that  a doctor could find the cause of a patient's ailments sooner than that patient could find it themselves with information from an online health site. With  advances in  technologies such as  MRI, cat scans, and short turnarounds on blood-work doctors can find those little things that can be the difference between life and death. In the past few years I have heard of people  going online after a bad fall when they hit there heads and self diagnosing themselves with a  mild concussion. In actuality these people experienced serious brain trauma which went untreated by doctors and the injured person subsequently died. The most famous case happened a couple of years ago when Liam Nesson wife died after a fall, initially she thought  she was OK and refused medical attention, unfortunately her injuries were more severe than she thought and she passed away a few days later. In my opinion these online health sites can be helpful but expert advice should always be sought after and a second medical opinion is always a plus.

The one aspect about online health websites that I find rather refreshing is the encouragement that people find through websites similar to Patientslikeme.com. With  so many social network sites filled with f lamming and outright attempts at character assassination/defamation, its good news to hear that there are still online communities were its  members sole intent is to uplift the spirits of those in the group.  Facing a chronic illness can be a daunting task; filled with bouts of anxiety, depression, or feelings of loneliness. All these feeling can be overcome when chronically ill people have someone to talk to or a shoulder to cry on. When a person knows thy're are not alone in their battle aginst a chronic illness and even more importantly when they can read about those who have come out on the other side ( victorious) it can really boost their morale.







           

Summary and Response to Artifact 7

In a 2008 article titled, Professors Use Technology To Fight Student Cheating, Kim Clark argues that recent anti-cheat technologies have empowered teachers and giving them the ability to catch students who don't uphold their schools academic integrity guidelines. Clark begins the article be reminding us that the landscape of higher education has undergone a dramatic change over the pas two decades. Nearly forty percent of all students have admitted to cheating in an academic setting and they also stated that cheating was made easier by using technologies such as "loaded" calculators & mobile devices. Clark claims that the internet is the main culprit behind this recent surge in student cheating. The internet is filled with how-to videos, where viewers can ascertain valuable knowledge on what tactics work best to achieve an A. What seems to be even more alarming to Clark, is that there are now dozens of websites where students can purchase custom made papers and use them as their own. These websites are known as paper-mills; students go there simply to cut and paste entire essays, students who visit these sites not only plagiarize but they fail to create any of their own original work.

The good thing to come from technologies that allow students to cheat, are the technologies that allow professors to be proactive in the war against academic dishonesty. Clark reports that more and more universities are installing anti-cheat software on their campus computers. This software only permits students to access the test they are taking. There is no internet access on these computers with anti-cheat software, no usb ports where flash drives can be inserted, and lastly some computers are even equipped with web cams-tracking both imagery and sound.  In addition to the new anti-cheat software, teachers are becoming more  tech-savvy. According to Clark, a growing number of professors are online under pseudonyms patrolling student activity. Instructors do promote student collaboration outside of class but they are aware that in these times students often concoct up ideas to cheat. By monitoring class discussion boards or student blogs, teachers can recognize students who need genuine help on assignments as well as they can thwart any attempts a student makes at illegally using information to get a head up on an exam/paper. Moving forward Clark observes that  tougher monitoring of students is a necessary step in order to shorten the gap between professors and students in the cheating arms race. Students are being asked to leave all electronics outside the classroom, put away all food/drinks, and most importantly remove all unnecessary clothing items (hats, scarfs, jackets) where notes can be stored. To conclude Clark insists that cheat proof homework and tests may be the answer to preventing students from copying from their peers. Randomly assigned questions coupled with mandatory outlines and rough drafts will not offer students any advantages if they do decide to cheat.

Overall Kim Clark's argument was credible. She did not use a wide range of rhetorical strategies to strengthen her claim, but the ones she decided to use were well developed. For example, throughout the article Clark injected a variety of quotes from both students and professors across the country. Theses quotes gave insight into the epidemic of student cheating.Clark also used great detail when describing some of the steps students took to smuggle information into the classroom. For example Clarke spoke of how students would get coke bottles, rip off the labels, scan them on their computers , insert new information on them , and finally print them off and take them to class. With Clarke giving so much detail about different instances of cheating , I as a reader was able to visualize what lengths students go to in order to cheat and I now understand why instructors have to take so many steps to ensure that their classrooms are free from cheating.

Response to Artifact 6

The one thing that I learned early in life is that there is always somebody watching. Whether it be at work , at school, or in the home rarely can someone's actions go unnoticed. The thought that a person can go about life in America with complete anonymity, is thrown out the door the day their born; given a name and assigned a social security number. From the time we are children, identity markers are attached to literally every aspect of our lives. We have student ids, employee numbers, license plate numbers, phone numbers , home addresses, and of course email addresses that allow people to identify us. Trying to achieve anonymity in the 21st century is almost beyond the bounds of possibility. I admire the creator of 4chan, Chris Poole for trying to do the impossible but I wonder just how anonymous the users of his sight really are.
It seems from the video, that the site is growing in popularity. It is empowering people to speak freely and  encouraging people to protest against various institutions of our society.  The empowerment this site has given it users could ultimately lead  to its downfall. From watching the video I felt like users of this site tend to challenge the the status-quo.By doing so they are going to step on a lot of toes and piss off a lot off people. It seems like in life when you began to ask too many questions or decide to "shine light" into dark places you get the attention of those in high places. I feel this site may come under the same fire that wiki leaks faced because of information streaming from anonymous sources. The site has already struggled to gain  corporate or commercial advertising dollars and  the site has been criticized for allowing child pornography to be viewed. Chris did acknowledge that he has opened up a Pandora's box he confesses that he does have some skepticism about what direction the sight is headed in.
Overall the video was interesting. The founder of 4 chan was well spoken and seemed to have the audiences attention throughout. The most intriguing  part of the speech is when Chris Poole mentioned that he created a list of rules to be followed by all. When I went online to investigate what they were I was shocked to find that a person can be banished from the sight for complaining about 4chan (its policies, moderation, etc.). In the video, Poole claimed that the sight had no barriers and it fostered discussion that was completely raw and unfiltered. That claim was not entirely accurate,  you can sound off about anything on 4chan except 4chan. If that is not a clear cut case of  hypocrisy, then I don't know what is.