Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts with the label IEEE

Featured Post

On Trust, Bias, and Privilege: my Response to 'Anti-Blackness is no glitch'

In Winter 2020, Stephanie T. Jones and Natalie Melo wrote ‘Anti-Blackness is no glitch’: The need for critical conversations within computer science education . Jones and Melo mentioned, “The conversation around and application of computer science often reinforces neoliberal ideals” (Jones, Melo, November 25, 2020, pg. 42). Jones and Melo were saying this: the computer science revolution and organizational IT network futuristic left-wing best standards access is telling. For Trust, I am Checking my Privilege But this is not excluding contemporary conversations: any futuristic conversation based on personal interpretation is not from ABBA, so it is not prophecy (NIV, 2 Peter 1:20). For your review, Peter wrote, "For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from [ABBA] as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:21). You, reader, can predict something shall happen, but prediction is uncertain: it is a terminating series ca

On Self-Driving Vehicles, Re-evaluating Automation Levels

On October 18, 2020, Erik Stayton wrote "It’s Time to Rethink Levels of Automation for Self-Driving Vehicles" in the IEEE Society, SSIT (Society on Social Implications of Technology), and the magazine, Technology and Society. On media, regarding the future, Stayton agreed with Lee Vinsel. Regarding standards, Stayton wrote, “As the historian Lee Vinsel argues, standards are not just ways of classifying things. They are also attempts to shape the technological future. Thinking about how the structure of our standards contributes to their use is therefore crucial for making better policy decisions” (Stayton Sept 2020). Stayton was saying this: of the future, technology shall remain a part, but not its complete whole. Against humanity’s centralism is this: in authority, an ultimate media exchange. Without humans, media is another entity’s claimable target, but all human records are the bounty’s contents, too. As a history-based tool, its potency, replacing a human, is not really

On Patent Investing: Whether Industry or Academia, Invest

In the September to October 2020 edition of IEEE (Institute for Electricians and Electrical Engineers) Potentials, Raymond E. Floyd wrote Industry or academia. With the full article title being Industry or academia: Where are the innovators, Floyd explained two different words. Floyd wrote, “Innovation has two common definitions: 1) a new idea, device, or method 2) the act or process of introducing new ideas, devices or methods. In contrast, research is defined as the systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources to establish facts and reach new conclusions” (Floyd, September 2020). Floyd was saying this: for the most people, a supposed new idea or thing, or a supposed new idea’s or thing’s introduction is average innovation description, but research is a system-level investigation, and research might involve discovering or inventing new evidence-based results. To patent-producing research corporations, Floyd applied this knowledge. Floyd stated IBM (International Bu

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *