W12: What is “quality” for our societies? / Lee ye han

Summary

Usually, 'quality' is the evaluation of the level of good or bad for a good or service. Quality does not always have the same standards, but can always be changed and relative. For example, the latest smartphone purchased today is the best, but it will not be the best performance in just a year, and it may seem to be of poor quality. As such, standards for quality vary with time or with acceptors.


Interesting point

Our society pursues what is considered the best 'quality' of its time. So I think the development of the Internet and media has been able to achieve tremendous growth in a short period of time. Internet speed that used to be 2G and 3G exceeds LTE and can be used up to 5G now. As a result, people's lifestyles and behaviors have changed a lot from analog to digital. For example, the act of writing a letter or sending a text message is replaced by Kakao Talk or SNS messages. 

Some people say that the "quality" of life has increased due to technological development, but on the contrary, people's emotions have decreased and the "quality" has decreased. The quality of thinking will vary depending on what is important in life.


Discussion Point

Do you think the 'quality' of life has increased due to the development of technology? Or do you think it's lowered?

Perhaps both gained and lost exist.

Comments

  1. Hyeonsu jeongMay 23, 2021 at 4:17 AM

    As you said, the quality of life both gained and lost. About gathering information, the quality is gained. People can enter any information on some clicks. However, this accessibility also lowers the quality of life. People don't know what's important because they can easily find any information. It brings about fatigue.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W7: GFC book notes By 'William S. Kowinski' , 'Cory Doctorow','Piotr Konieczny' and 'Paul Youngquist'/ 진신

Summary- William S. Kowinski: The true exception is the innovative success of a collaborative effort that has prime online reference work called Wikipedia. This book is not meant to be biography or reportage, but contemporary ethnography or study of a culture. What this book does well is describe how Wikipedia works and what issues have arisen.  It's short on drama and personality，and so it's probably destined to be a source document. Since that seems unlikely, this may remain the best opportunity for learning about this remarkable project. Summary- Cory Doctorow: Reagle makes an excellent case that this assumption of good faith is particularly powerful when it comes to dealing with those who lack good faith — it creates positive outcomes for arguments with everyone from neo-Nazis to political hacks who're whitewashing their boss's entries. Wikipedia's most fascinating and unprecedented aspect isn't the encyclopedia itself — rather, it's the collaborative cu...
Read more

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

 Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? In terms of the comprehensiveness of the content, we have to admit the advantages of Wikipedia. For example, Wikipedia is undoubtedly my first choice when I don't understand an event at all. It is convenient, fast and comprehensive, and I can spend the least time to understand the whole content of this fact as comprehensively and neutrally as possible. But in the process of in-depth learning, Wikipedia can only be used as an introductory content, because in learning we need to understand this fact as much as possible, and we need to understand the different views of scholars in different regions on the same event. There will be different theories. Some theories seem to be not neutral or even discriminatory or ethnographic at present (such as Marxism and Marxism in China), and it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Be shown. In short, Wikipedia has a very low threshold for users. It assu...
Read more

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary  The Internet has changed our culture so much. First, through the Internet, we can meet people regardless of distance. People in each country communicated over the Internet and reduced the barriers to distance by creating relationships. Also, the Internet has let us stay away from books. When we want to find expertise, we can get it from Wikipedia or Google. Even information in books can be obtained through e-books, reducing access to libraries and paper books. 2. Interesting point Further to the above, our brains are gradually degenerating because we don't have to remember information. We are constantly interrupted by SNS notifications ringing on our phones when we do something, so our concentration and attention are being reduced. Furthermore, the ease of obtaining information online is causing our short-term memory to decline. 3. Discussion point I think the Internet has made it easy to sever a relationship with a person because we can meet another person simply...
Read more