End. Nov 18th 2:30 PM.
For my ecological footprint I found that I take up 3.5 earths which was very sade for me, I immediatly wanted to know how to make things better. I started with the recycleing which is a big thing for me and I think I made improvements. I drink alot of gatorade and i ussualy can't find a good rycelcing so I would just toss them out. now i am now saveing them and whenever I go to copper hall I bring my collection of bottles and news paper to the area to toss them in the recycleing cans. I also now am very careful with my electronic use and i no longer listen to music when i study to improve my focus and cut down on electricity. I also make sure to take the bus or hitch a ride from friends to cut down on car travle so i don't waste gas on unessasary trips. i like this new way and i think i'll try to work on it to make sure i save on my ecolgical footprint.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Monday, November 17, 2008
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Day Of No Technology, 2
End, 8:50 Nov 11, 2008
Well it's been a dayon none of my many electronic toys and I have been very bored. I have had many days where I have been ethier on holiday or camping where technolgy has no place in my day but without my technology in college I have had less distractions. So without technology I had to sufice with dividing my time between eating and studying for me many classes (time which was not squandered). After looking back I see that i rarely use my phone (know because I hardly felt bad about haveing it off) and that I waste alot of time on the internet looking at assignments and studying online when i can easliy reveiw notes for the same affect. I think as a technoloical generation we tend to over look already existing materials ( such as printed material and editorials ) and we use the internets vast powers to do things easier and faster. This is good but we should never become to dependent on our electonic toys to an extent when we hurt ourselves. Like in real life we should never become to dependent on anything and we shouldn't put to much meaning in their values. Personally I think it was a good thing to break from technology and it gave me insite as to what areas i can cut form my technology beingeing and focus on more useful endevors.
Well it's been a dayon none of my many electronic toys and I have been very bored. I have had many days where I have been ethier on holiday or camping where technolgy has no place in my day but without my technology in college I have had less distractions. So without technology I had to sufice with dividing my time between eating and studying for me many classes (time which was not squandered). After looking back I see that i rarely use my phone (know because I hardly felt bad about haveing it off) and that I waste alot of time on the internet looking at assignments and studying online when i can easliy reveiw notes for the same affect. I think as a technoloical generation we tend to over look already existing materials ( such as printed material and editorials ) and we use the internets vast powers to do things easier and faster. This is good but we should never become to dependent on our electonic toys to an extent when we hurt ourselves. Like in real life we should never become to dependent on anything and we shouldn't put to much meaning in their values. Personally I think it was a good thing to break from technology and it gave me insite as to what areas i can cut form my technology beingeing and focus on more useful endevors.
Monday, November 10, 2008
Sunday, November 9, 2008
One Challenege
The problem that may most affect me in the next 4 years would most likely be the war in the Middle East. I am hoping to join the military after my college years as a translator and hopefully leave to do diplomatic work the Middle East region. I think that for me the way America and the future administration handles the current situation it will deeply affect how my career will go and how future Americans will deal and be dealt with by that area.
The soon to be in office administration (headed by Democrat Barack Obama) has stated many times that upon entry into office that they will begin a pull out of Iraq in a period of 14-16 months, this would free up waves of troops to be deployed to Afghanistan. This move would prove beneficial for Afghanistan and will definitely help with the rebuilding and securing of the area from terrorists and militants that are against the west. However this would leave the fledgling democracy of Iraq possibly vulnerable to influence of terrorists or Iran like policies of aggression. The main question is that if we pull out to focus of Afghanistan will our investment in Iraq crumble or be able to succeed. If it does succeed it will mark a turning point in the war on terror and eventually lead to our victory in Afghanistan and over terrorism. If it doesn’t then it is highly possible it will hurt Obama’s administration as well as the credibility of the United States for going into a country and leaving with finishing the job resulting in chaos for the country. This will also require a possible U.S reentry that will be needed to restore order. One thing that we should all hope that is we should not have any “do overs” in the Middle East which could cause even more U.S embarrassment and hurting our nations influence of the world. So in terms as what might affect us most in the next few years as a whole country will be the handling of the Middle East and how our nation can survive as the “worlds police”
My family as well as every family has or has had members in the military and we have to be careful on how far we use them, we cannot afford to irresponsibly use them. This area needs to be taken very close car of because it affects all American families with members in the service as well as the international markets and policies we have. Failure in the Middle east could mean higher gas prices, problems in the military, and a huge impact on the nations economy with how much we spend on damage control. If we are to make the wrong mistake then this house of cards we have built ourselves could come tumbling down. This action is so broad that it affects many of our aspects in life and its why it is so important for us to be careful and mindful of our actions. As citizens we have to be sure in what we want our leaders to do and sure that our leaders can carry those wishes out. The goal for our nation must be to achieve victory in one form or another and for us to pull together so that America can stand up to all things.
The soon to be in office administration (headed by Democrat Barack Obama) has stated many times that upon entry into office that they will begin a pull out of Iraq in a period of 14-16 months, this would free up waves of troops to be deployed to Afghanistan. This move would prove beneficial for Afghanistan and will definitely help with the rebuilding and securing of the area from terrorists and militants that are against the west. However this would leave the fledgling democracy of Iraq possibly vulnerable to influence of terrorists or Iran like policies of aggression. The main question is that if we pull out to focus of Afghanistan will our investment in Iraq crumble or be able to succeed. If it does succeed it will mark a turning point in the war on terror and eventually lead to our victory in Afghanistan and over terrorism. If it doesn’t then it is highly possible it will hurt Obama’s administration as well as the credibility of the United States for going into a country and leaving with finishing the job resulting in chaos for the country. This will also require a possible U.S reentry that will be needed to restore order. One thing that we should all hope that is we should not have any “do overs” in the Middle East which could cause even more U.S embarrassment and hurting our nations influence of the world. So in terms as what might affect us most in the next few years as a whole country will be the handling of the Middle East and how our nation can survive as the “worlds police”
My family as well as every family has or has had members in the military and we have to be careful on how far we use them, we cannot afford to irresponsibly use them. This area needs to be taken very close car of because it affects all American families with members in the service as well as the international markets and policies we have. Failure in the Middle east could mean higher gas prices, problems in the military, and a huge impact on the nations economy with how much we spend on damage control. If we are to make the wrong mistake then this house of cards we have built ourselves could come tumbling down. This action is so broad that it affects many of our aspects in life and its why it is so important for us to be careful and mindful of our actions. As citizens we have to be sure in what we want our leaders to do and sure that our leaders can carry those wishes out. The goal for our nation must be to achieve victory in one form or another and for us to pull together so that America can stand up to all things.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Ethics in Video Games
Blog Posting for Essay 2. On Ethics of Mercenaries in
“Army of Two”
1. The positive portrayal of mercenaries in the video game “Army of Two” is questionable when compared to the real life counterparts in today’s world.
*The game shows us a romantic view of mercenaries and shows them almost as the worlds needed super soldiers as we see them fight America’s greatest enemies. However in real life mercenaries can be one either the side of good or evil and may not be as they seem in this game.
2. Like the video game “America’s army”, “Army of Two” is set up to portray modern mercenaries as all but good, but is this an accurate portrayal of a tool of propaganda.
*This game sets up mercenaries as good and makes us feel as though this is a good career and a good thing. But from research of the real life mercenaries its hard for us to latch on to these characters in the game. Why do we see mercenaries fighting America’s enemies instead of our own soldiers, and is this game a tool of recruitment.
3. In ethics even this game has the argument on wheatear the use of mercenaries is good or if we are really selling out to the soldiers of fortune.
*The game has two key characters arguing on wheatear its ethically right for a country to employ mercenaries and that is a argument that is going on today. We see these characters in the game fighting on our side and our enemies but in the real life we see them all over the place and some even fighting for dictators and for the price of blood diamonds. Does this game accurately portray them?
“Army of Two”
1. The positive portrayal of mercenaries in the video game “Army of Two” is questionable when compared to the real life counterparts in today’s world.
*The game shows us a romantic view of mercenaries and shows them almost as the worlds needed super soldiers as we see them fight America’s greatest enemies. However in real life mercenaries can be one either the side of good or evil and may not be as they seem in this game.
2. Like the video game “America’s army”, “Army of Two” is set up to portray modern mercenaries as all but good, but is this an accurate portrayal of a tool of propaganda.
*This game sets up mercenaries as good and makes us feel as though this is a good career and a good thing. But from research of the real life mercenaries its hard for us to latch on to these characters in the game. Why do we see mercenaries fighting America’s enemies instead of our own soldiers, and is this game a tool of recruitment.
3. In ethics even this game has the argument on wheatear the use of mercenaries is good or if we are really selling out to the soldiers of fortune.
*The game has two key characters arguing on wheatear its ethically right for a country to employ mercenaries and that is a argument that is going on today. We see these characters in the game fighting on our side and our enemies but in the real life we see them all over the place and some even fighting for dictators and for the price of blood diamonds. Does this game accurately portray them?
Monday, October 13, 2008
2 Online Articles
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/2181/ethics_of_game_design.php
This first article immediately puts forth the argument on how far games are entitled to go by definition of the first amendment and the responsibility’s of the game designers to not abuse that right. The article brings in the legal action politicians have taken to muzzle some of the content of games and has show that the first amendment has so far throated any attempt to accomplish that. To me this is a good point that game designers should address as to how far the should go as to portraying sex, drugs, and alcohol as well as violence in their attempts to make the game seem “realistic”. It gave the example of the game “Men of Valor” and the attempts of the game designers to make the game realistic with the use of language and violence but limiting it as to not offend people enough to harm the games sales. I think this is a good example of responsible game design that shows that the industry does have insight as to how far they can go. But this also brings up a question, if game designers continue to try to push the envelope to try to develop more intense games then little by little will games become more graphic to violence and crime as to influence us all to accept it more in our daily lives. To me although we don’t have any standards or boundaries to the games content we mush each look inward and decide for ourselves what is acceptable to portray in games.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=196237
This article sights a specific problem with a game in an international sense and how our games could be viewed by the international public. Mercenaries 2 takes place in South America and its opened to destruction and mayhem as if we are in real life going to do just that. At least that’s the argument of Hugo Chaves, this was also brought up when Ghost Recon chose to base its game in Mexico. We have to look at our games and realize that they speak for our nation and we have to try to find a way to balance our fun and our view of the world. After all we kill Germans in our games on WW2, we even kill our own police men in some of our own games and I ask how much of these games can we allow to showcase and should we at least consider how others view them. To us they may be fun but for a war that ended 60 years ago is it really necessary to continue to produce games where you can decimate legions of German soldiers or is it just to much fun? Our video games do have influence over us and we have to be careful as to how far we can let them go.
This first article immediately puts forth the argument on how far games are entitled to go by definition of the first amendment and the responsibility’s of the game designers to not abuse that right. The article brings in the legal action politicians have taken to muzzle some of the content of games and has show that the first amendment has so far throated any attempt to accomplish that. To me this is a good point that game designers should address as to how far the should go as to portraying sex, drugs, and alcohol as well as violence in their attempts to make the game seem “realistic”. It gave the example of the game “Men of Valor” and the attempts of the game designers to make the game realistic with the use of language and violence but limiting it as to not offend people enough to harm the games sales. I think this is a good example of responsible game design that shows that the industry does have insight as to how far they can go. But this also brings up a question, if game designers continue to try to push the envelope to try to develop more intense games then little by little will games become more graphic to violence and crime as to influence us all to accept it more in our daily lives. To me although we don’t have any standards or boundaries to the games content we mush each look inward and decide for ourselves what is acceptable to portray in games.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=196237
This article sights a specific problem with a game in an international sense and how our games could be viewed by the international public. Mercenaries 2 takes place in South America and its opened to destruction and mayhem as if we are in real life going to do just that. At least that’s the argument of Hugo Chaves, this was also brought up when Ghost Recon chose to base its game in Mexico. We have to look at our games and realize that they speak for our nation and we have to try to find a way to balance our fun and our view of the world. After all we kill Germans in our games on WW2, we even kill our own police men in some of our own games and I ask how much of these games can we allow to showcase and should we at least consider how others view them. To us they may be fun but for a war that ended 60 years ago is it really necessary to continue to produce games where you can decimate legions of German soldiers or is it just to much fun? Our video games do have influence over us and we have to be careful as to how far we can let them go.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)