Don Fowler & TWIT

Don Fowler's presentation on IT consulting was really interesting, because I always thought I knew what it entailed, but there are many aspects that he presented that I never really considered. The fact that what an IT consultant does now used to be done by others such as accountants, shows just how important technology is to businesses now, such as Accenture. There is so much we do online now through the use of the digital world that IT consulting provides many opportunities and paths, and the ability to use information technology for all of these businesses to operate more efficiently is very effective. 

Also, one of the interesting aspects of the field that Mr. Fowler pointed out was that IT consultants are needed at all times, both economically good and bad, and cannot operate without computers, which are the basis for the job. IT consulting also offers many options within information technology, making it an option for various types of tech-savvy people. Mr. Fowler also touched on outsourcing and moving these jobs abroad, because of the cheaper labor, but also because technology has made it easy to communicate and operate from all over the world and with different clients. I think this is one of the especially important aspects of info technology, because not only were we at first connected with our computers to more sources, but now the ability to do this anywhere and in any capacity makes it even more powerful. 

I thought the issue of newspaper/print publishing in This Week in Tech was really interesting. It's obvious that as more and more data, books, and other information moves from print, to print and online, to just online, that newspapers and books will no longer be as widely used and primary sources. People receive their information online in a faster way, and also in most cases are able to get this information for free. Also, with the ability of users online to publish their own information, more and more becomes available online, offering more perspectives. This has therefore led to a decrease in the number of jobs available for those working in the print publishing industry, and also in the importance of their jobs. 

Online sources make it much easier to look for whatever the user is interested in, given the chance to bypass whatever they feel is unimportant, which is often much harder in print sources. Many people on the other hand do not want to look at a screen all day and like to see the new things they might have otherwised missed online, through print books and papers, as well as just be able to physically have these things (although still others do not like to take up space with all of these books and papers). People also feel that we are wasting paper by keeping so much in print, which is a valid point if we are trying to "go green." Many may only want to read one article and then throw away the rest of the paper, which is where the internet can minimize this significantly. Also, with the fact that information is become so portable, with the ability to get it on our phones and laptops wherever we go, people can have what they want right away, and not have to wait for a copy of an article or book to get to them. Therefore I think that with the way things are going, even if there are benefits to having things in print, soon enough everything will be online for us and paper versions will completely fade away.

Virtual Reality & DIVE

After hearing the lecture in class and going to the DIVE I realized how many different kinds of (important) real world applications virtual worlds have. The way in which immersive virtual environments work and make the user solely interactive is something that simpler virtual, 2-D worlds have not acheieved. At the DIVE, being able to BE the avatar and interact with things/people as if it is real life and we were actually the avatars is something that is not possible in 2-D virtual worlds where we just instruct our avatars to do these things. This different representation allows us to understand the information in a new way that is more comprehensive because it is right there for us to see, be, etc., as well as understand different ways/processes in which these things work. Everything feels very real and natural although it is just a simulation. 

These virtual environments therefore could be very useful and important to many real life applications, especially in the sciences and with medicine and education. Being able to physically go through molecules, experience things in history, explore viruses and body parts, etc. is something that you cannot do by just look at a 3-D image on a screen, and could help us to find out much more through exploring different views. This is also especially helpful for students who are learning these things and can have a range of motion that will help them interact more thoroughly. 

I think that one of the downfalls of these virtual environments is that they have to be in confined spaces, so it is not as smooth as if we were in the real world where we can avert walls and immobile objects to get around, which was the case in the DIVE. Also, creating these spaces and the money it takes up may not be practical. However, while there are these "kinks" to work out I think that in the future these environments will definitely become more widespread and incorporate more 3-D aspects to improve the ways in which they are used and the ways in which virtual worlds that already exist operate.

Visualization Information: Professors Schwartz-Bloom & Halpin

I don't think it is alway necessary to have more than one way to look at data, but it does help to have different representations. Many people may not be able to understand one way something is shown, so by having a different way to look at it, they can better understand the data being presented. Also, by seeing data in different perspectives, people are able to pick up on things they may not have noticed in the other representations, which can help them understand it better and notice different things to help them remember it. 

I think this is more true for information that is more complex and abstract, than something that is straightforward and well-known, which probably would not need more than one representation. If it is already simple, trying to show it in different forms might just make it more confusing for the viewer because they may think they are supposed to get something more out of it than is really there. And if there is a lot of information detail in something, it can cover up what the representation is really trying to show and get across. 

Multiple representations of data are seen very often in science, which Professor Schwartz-Bloom talked about. Viewing proteins, neurons, bond/bond angles like Professor Schwartz-Bloom showed, it helps to have different representations, both 2-D and 3-D, as some people may not be as receptive to certain visualizations. However, other data such as simple information being charted or graphed out does not necessarily need more than one representation.

One of the things I was taught in high school that really stuck out for me was in biology (a subject I really don't like so all the more props to it!), when we were learning about cell divison. My teacher put up a picture of a cycle of a frog/tadpole and then used the mnemonic device"I Promote Making Another Tadpole Creature" to stand for Interphase, Prophase, Metaphase, Anaphase, Telophase and Cytokinesis. The picture and mnemonic together helped me remember the stages and what was involved in each one.