Refuse It – To a Degree

Sven Birkert (Refuse It) and Kevin Kelly (Embrace It) both made good points in their respective articles; however neither one was able to completely convince me that either totally embracing or refusing technology is the right path to take. Things that were impossible 50 years ago, or even 20 years ago, are not possible. Access to information, the ability to quickly contact someone either by cell phone or e-mail, the power of a personal computer, etc have transformed our nation. Any attempt to totally “Refuse It” would be akin to reversing our transformation. Of the two ideas I lean towards a less radical mode of thought put forth by Birkert. He made a compelling argument that we are losing our very souls; “I believe that we are–biologically, neuropsychologically–creatures of extraordinary adaptability.” Do we allow ourselves to rely wholly on technology, and sacrifice our very humanity? “My core fear is that we are, as a culture, as a species, becoming shallower.” I must admit myself that I remember very few phone numbers any longer. They are stored in my Blackberry to be recalled when necessary. And that “Crackberry” is an umbilical cord holding me to work 24/7 – not the ideal situation if I would like to mentally leave work for a while. Birkert has some very good points that on the whole I agree with. And how many people spend hours at a time surfing the Internet or playing a video game, leading to a sedentary lifestyle? We have advanced to a point in society where technology enhances our very existence; and we have become dependent upon it in many ways.

As Kelly commented the Net truly has “reshaped our lives and the landscape of civilization.” He makes a very interesting point that is the other end of the spectrum from Birkert. “Instead of sucking the soul from human bodies, turning computer users into an army of dull clones, networked computers–by reflecting the networked nature of our own brains–encourage the humanism of their users.” He contends that we become more human as we use computers, not less so. I disagree with him on that point. Yes, we literally have power at our fingertips – such as typing this assignment on a word processor. However, look how many are reliant upon it for spelling simple words? Is that becoming more human or more dependent? Personally I’d rather not be wired into “one planetary soul.”

Ultimately, technology is here to stay. Few if any will seriously consider follow Birkert’s lead. We have become too reliant, indeed dependent, on our computers, cell phones, DVD players, etc. The key point is to be aware of the potential to lose our natural ability; to become so dependent on our “stuff” that we no longer think for ourselves. The potential for stagnation of our minds is arguably greater than ever. I wonder what Birkert thinks now in 2009 since his article was written in 1993? The changes in that short period are awe inspiring and (to those of his ilk) shocking.

10 Ideas

Mike Hartley

First opportunity to load this on…

10 issues

Right to carry a concealed handgun in all 50 states and cities

Why Afghanistan shouldn’t be called the next Vietnam

Why “rogue” countries such as Iran and North Korea should not have nuclear weapons

Everyone should be made to take an on-line test to show what their political ideology is before they can vote – apathy and ignorance!

Natural gas cars and the environment

Say no to ethanol!

US housing should be better insulated

Commercial long-line fishing quotas should be reduced

No fish traps or lobster/crab traps should be left in the oceans

All young American adults (after high school) should be required to serve 2 years in a branch of the armed services

2nd Paper pg 1 v2

The City of Houston’s Sign Code
Dear Mr. Morales,
As you likely are aware the City of Houston sign laws were enacted in 1980 and have been changed a number of times; the latest sign code change became effective on September 1, 2009. The latest sign law has a number of issues of concern; you deserve to have the misgivings of concerned constituents brought to you attention. One concern is that the new law will affect businesses in the district; something that needs to be considered in the current economic crisis. Also of concern is the reasoning of the necessity for the new law; the argument that it will beautify Houston, improve traffic safety, and increase property values in my opinion are difficult arguments to accept. Finally, though existing signs are presently allowable, they must meet code six years after the effective date; and the law does not accept altering of a sign except by permit allowing the sign council to determine if they should remain or be removed. Mr. Morales, the new law should be revoked, and one that does not unfairly affect businesses needs to be developed and passed.
This new law will undoubtedly affect businesses trying to survive in the current difficult economic times. Companies that are just now starting business are at a decidedly sign advertising disadvantage. “Those changes include major restrictions on electronic signs, reductions in the allowable size of on-premise signs and elimination of roof signs.” (Winstead Attorneys, 9/1/09) Electronic signs that many people take for granted showing the ambient temperature, time of day, date, and other useful information are not allowed; nor are any signs that blink, flash, etc. Many banks and other businesses have these signs that constituents enjoy for convenience; they are no longer allowable. And electronic signs that are deemed acceptable may only be 50% of the allowable area of the sign face; and cannot be larger than 100 square

2nd Paper pg 1 v1

The City of Houston’s Sign Code
As you are aware the City of Houston sign laws were enacted in 1980 and have been changed a number of times; the latest sign code change became effective on September 1, 2009. The latest sign law has a number of issues that concern me; I feel I have a duty as an informed member of your constituency to bring my misgivings to you attention. One concern is the constitutionality of the law when viewed in the light of the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights in our US Constitution. Another is that the new law will affect small businesses in the district and the sign companies as well; something that needs to be considered in the current economic crisis. I am also concerned about the reasoning of the necessity for the new law; the argument that it will beautify Houston, improve traffic safety, and increase property values in my opinion are difficult arguments to accept. Finally, grey areas exist in the law regarding which signs are considered commercial rather than non-commercial and therefore subject to regulation. The new law should be revoked, and one that does not unfairly affect businesses needs to be developed and passed.
The Bill of Rights was submitted on September 25, 1789 for ratification, and was adopted December 15, 1791. The primary reason for the Bill of Rights was to secure civil liberties; basic rights that the government can not infringe upon. The First Amendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (US Constitution, 12/15/1791) One concern is that free speech is being hampered by the new sign code. The code obviously favors non-commercial off-premise signs over commercial ones, as well as including arguable restrictions for on-premise signs. The constitutionality of the law was questioned in

Second Paper

I have chosen the new sign law that came into effect September 1, 2009. I see it as another stupid law that really doesn’t do anything; not well thought out.

The problem is a problem because the law restricts both on-premise and off-premise advertising by companies for commercial reasons, however it doesn’t restrict for non-commercial. Restrictive laws like this are seen by many as increased governmental control that doesn’t let the free market system flourish. And there are questions about it being non-constitutional; does it infringe on the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights since it differentiates between commercial and non-commercial? And signs that appear on the companies building should not be controlled so greatly; that stifles competition and freedom.
The law hurts small businesses and the sign companies; and it can be argued that consumers also are hurt.
The small companies are hurt because advertising which has proven effective is no longer accessible. And the sign companies are losing commercial customers; that has the effect of forcing higher prices to make a profit. And consumers also may be hurt.
The Houston City Council has the power to solve the problem.
According to the city council the problem of “billboard blight” is solved by reducing the number of billboards. Aesthetics, property values, and safety on the road are all addressed.
The problem can be solved by changing the law so that commercial signs are not biased any longer. There shouldn’t be favoritism. And governmental control such as this is seen by many as draconian; who cares if a company wants to put an electronic sign up showing the time, temp, and date, or if they want a sign over the 100 sq ft size? (On some buildings, that isn’t a very large sign…)
The costs associated are mainly administrative; change the law. The city council would bear the cost of that. However, they could put a 5% tax on billboards to make an additional revenue, which could be earmarked for community improvements.
The proposal should be enacted because it will be positive for small businesses. Particularly in a troubled economy they need every edge they can get. Since Houston is one of the leaders in job growth due to small businesses they should be doing everything possible to encourage companies to come here, not create a hostile environment.
Changing the law is better than keeping it as-is on the books. Already Houston is having to fight court cases which claim that it is infringing on their First Amendment rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. I am also concerned about the reasoning of the necessity for the new law; the argument that it will beautify Houston, improve traffic safety, and increase property values in my opinion are difficult arguments to accept since it only applies to commercial signs. Finally, grey areas exist in the law regarding which signs are considered commercial rather than non-commercial and therefore subject to regulation.

Oct 22 Assignment

The web page for The Houston Press was very busy and little jumped out at me. I finally got down to the Music section (I’m a music buff, just not Britney!!!) which allowed me to select “Alternative” and I hopped into there. One of my favorite bands is Alice in Chains, so I read up on what the Press had to say. They are a great group that has struggled after Layne Staley died and I am VERY glad to see them out with a new record and doing well.

In the Daily Cougar two articles immediately jumped out at me. Firstly is “Annise Parker: Economy a key priority for Houston.” Politics is very important to me, and after being disappointed repeatedly by Mayor White I am hopeful that the next mayor will take care of issues that are of concern to myself and others. I would have liked to have seen a statement regarding illegal immigration and the fact that Houston is a sanctuary city. However, the title included “Economy” and not much was touched on that subject which is obviously a crucial issue for everyone.

With my interest in politics I understand that there needs to be balance in life. So for some unfathomable reason I am an Astros fan. My first T-ball team was the Astros and I have been a fan since then. The past few years have been great disappointments; a lot of promise but no delivery and I am looking forward to the next few years with no small amount of fear and trepidation!

In the Houston Chronicle the first thing to hit me was the pic of Case Keenum, QB. They should have won that game easily, and would have been close to cracking the top 10. I would have liked to see him win against UTEP and be a frontrunner for the Heisman.

The other thing that interested me was the article “The Thinning of the Republican Herd Continues.” This is an obviously biased article with the intent to continue to weaken the opposition and at the same time give an air of strength to the Dems. I am a strong conservative, but at the same time I am sick and tired like many others of seeing each side taking pot shots at the other. Time to grow up boys and girls…

I think I would probably choose the Astros out of all of those topics. Firstly, politics can be a difficult topic to write about and leave me with any sanity left! (So…. Why am I considering it for my paper? Idiot.) My research question would be “What changes need to be made in the organization to achieve success?” I would need to compare the team now to that of current successful teams and see where the holes are. I would use the team page as one source, and perhaps see if I can get an interview with one of the staff members as well. There are a number of commentaries also in sports related publications that can be used as expert analysis; comments by guys that live and breath baseball.

One other local issue I am considering is the new city ordinance that all signs for businesses be a particular size. That is one of the most ridiculous things that I have heard of in a long time. It will impact not only the businesses themselves but also the sign companies themselves. Does the ordinance require all signs to be replaced? What on earth is the reasoning behind such a dumba** law? I care about that because it is another form of governmental control and hurting the free market. That stifles development, something that at this time is needed greatly as the jobless figures continue to grow. Hurting small businesses (something that my wife and I are starting) hurts the city.

For my first major essay, the causal paper, the topic I have chosen are the factors that lead up to the Civil War and how the polarization of the two factions did not allow them to converse or even hear each other. I will then tie the inability of those two factions into where the US seems to be at present; that the hard left and hard right do not listen to each other or attempt to give a little to gain a little.

 

My research question is “Polarization in today’s political environment resembles in some ways the pre-Civil War era politics.”

 

This topic is interesting to me because firstly I am a military history buff, and secondly I am aware of the need for differing views in politics but also aware of the need for the parties to work together for the good of their country rather than for personal reasons.

Firstly I am going to run through some of the events leading up to the civil war. I will likely comment on the settlers in Virginia and the role that tobacco played in setting that area up as a slave society and how it is contrasted with the settlement in Plymouth where slavery was not needed. The 3/5ths compromise showed that the founding fathers felt that slavery would die out on its own and didn’t address slavery in the Constitution (“Slavery is a necessary evil that will whither and die.” Patrick Henry), and when cotton then became the staple export with the invention of the cotton gin slavery took on a new life. Expansion of slavery became a heated topic with the discovery of gold in CA where slave owners felt slaves were property. The Missouri Compromise line of 36º 30º supposedly answered the expansion of slavery, but it only delayed the problem. Some such as John C. Calhoun and Fitzhugh defended slavery as good, pointing to the conditions in the northern factories and argued against the 36º 30º line since territory was conquered by all (mostly southerners though…) people should be free to bring their property anywhere. Abolitionists campaigned against slavery. Other topics to mention are the Kansas/Nebraska act and Bleeding Kansas, the Wilmot Proviso, the caning of Charles Sumner, the fugitive slave law, Uncle Tom’s Cabin, the Dred Scott case and resulting shudder down the backs of Northerners, the theory of a slave power conspiracy, John Brown’s raid, and Lincoln’s narrow victory though he didn’t carry any Southern states.

I then plan to make some comparisons to today; how then the factions did not work for the good of everyone and could not communicate with each other and how that seems to be the norm today also. It is an appeal to both sides today to attempt to compromise for the good of the country.

Flier

I saved as a .pdf, but it still didn’t show up. Attempted a .jpg but confusion reigns!!!

How do I do this???

 I can’t figure out how to insert my flier. I will keep trying and make sure I bring a copy to class with me.

Glee

Before I formally write a response, please allow me to make the caveat that I don’t watch sit-coms so I have little to directly compare the pilot episode with.

The new drama-comedy Glee is simply rehashing tired old stereotypes with not only stock characters but also a predictable and boring story line. The character list has no interesting, unusual differences from other shows. The main character is, predictably, the good guy. The teacher puts himself aside for the glee club remembering the good times he had as a student; he has a strained relationship at home that will likely end at some point in the series and of course has a “secret” admirer in the staff. Little miss perfect was raised by two gay guys (and doesn’t know who her dad is) and has been spoiled rotten to the point that she has an over inflated ego and is convinced of her innate perfection as much as she is convinced in the opposite of those around her. The jock turned glee club star and the issues that has with the rest of the football team and his girlfriend are tired and predictable. The rest of the faculty is also uninspiring. The football coach, cheerleading coach, principal, and others do little to shake the “been there done that” feeling of the pilot of the series. Even the germ phobic faculty member with eyes on the “hero” comes across as dull and unimaginative; though I must admit that it was a good attempt. The characters all feel like they are coming directly out of one of the tired teen movies, as does the plot. The basic story line is unfortunately conventional; take a high school setting and attempt to weave a plot together that captivates the audience and keeps them coming back week after week. There will undoubtedly be friction between the jock and the rest of his football team till he wins them over. It reminds me of some of the movies like American Pie. What would a drama-comedy series be without a budding relationship within the club itself? While the music and choreographing are at times interesting they do little to bring life to an otherwise poor excuse to waste an hour of my time. I have no doubt it will do well and have avid followers; the real question is does it deserve it? In my opinion, honestly, no.