Disagree

1. Facebook Is Considering Facial Recognition For Its Upcoming Smart Glasses

I do not believe that facial recognition will be publicly accessible in smart glasses due to the ethical implications of privacy that may be infringed upon causing safety issues, but rather, if this technology was produced, it would only be provided and disclosed to military/police personnel. I think that this technology is something that is easy to produce if privacy wasn’t a concern which is what makes it very interesting. As a society, privacy is valued to a high extent which may cause technology to advance in a slower manner or not advance at all. Because of this, I think that a lot of technological ideas may be revolutionary, but the revolutionary idea may be deterred due to self-interest of humans for freedoms and liberty.

2. 87-Year-Old Man’s Lifelong Dream Of Hiking The Grand Canyon Made Possible Through VR

I don’t agree that VR can solve dreams of traveling, especially those that require movement as the experience is just a close-up video that people don’t even need to move their hands or feet to move which makes it no difference from tourist videos on Youtube. This video features a man sitting in a chair and proclaims that his dream is fulfilled where he hiked the Grand Canyon in VR. This, however, cannot be the case as the basic feeling of hiking must come from your feet moving. When you are sitting down and watching a video, you feel nothing more than a video experience like a 4D ride. This ride, no matter how they put wind/scent, can never resemble real life experience, thus this comment that VR can realize traveling dreams can’t be true unless the person truly believes so, but if they believe so, they can also fulfill their dream through Youtube and TV’s.

3. When the Artificial Is Natural: Reconsidering What Bionics and Sensoria Do

The article argues that deaf people can hear for the first time through bionics which I disagree with as deafness isn’t not being able to hear, but rather it’s hearing in a different manner such as through touch as sound is just vibrations. Rather than making this blatant claim that people can hear with a device, I think that it’s more accurate to say that they can transfer the soundwaves to sound. While it is possible for deaf people to hear through vibrations, this allows them to hear through their ear where information can be transmitted to the brain. For this article, I’m not arguing that Bionics do not help hear, rather I argue that people don’t hear for the first time because of Bionics. 

Agree

1. How Snap aims to turn augmented reality into a monetization machine

I agree that augmented reality already is and will be a huge source of monetization due to it being the next spectrum of possibility that can be explored as current technology in computers has already reached a point where improvements can only be made to the processing features. I think that Snap makes a good point that Snapchat and other companies are already utilizing augmented reality as a means for monetization. Having such platforms popularize and normalize augmented reality would only make it more acceptable in the future which would allow for monetization in the future as well. 

2. The First Desktop 3D Hologram Printer – by LitiHolo

I think that this is a genius invention that will push forth the steps needed to fully develop such technology in the future. Having a printer that can create such a visual effect that’s easy to use is so powerful for creating new technology in the future such as architectural plans that can be viewed at different angles. I believe that in 5 years, this advancement would be seen as something that redefined the possibility of holograms much like Apple’s iPhone. Moreover, in 5 years, this technology may be advanced to the VR schemes that are seen in videos.

3. Billionaires See VR as a Way to Avoid Radical Social Change

I agree that VR can’t cause any social change, but rather will emphasize discourses in society as there is nothing that VR does that will stop human behavior in a certain manner such as presentation of avatars as flawless, without gender, skinny, and same height. Even if the interaction is human to human, there is a disconnection with the actions of humans in real life and in virtual reality. In virtual reality, people may take on personalities to try to stand out, but their treatment of others in real life may still be the same. If Facebook emphasizes using avatars in virtual reality where it can be designed to anybody’s will, what changes can be made regarding appearances? It seems more like the issues that arise from appearance are being ignored such as race, gender, and defects. I recall that in the avatars that were shown in Facebook’s videos, none of the characters have defects and only have upper bodies. They do not have legs and are the same height. If everybody appears the same or without flaw, how can change be implemented. This is the reason that I think that VR can’t change anything.