Project 1

The Potential Danger of Artificial Intelligence: Everything an Earthling Needs to Know

When most people think of artificial intelligence, they think of Terminator and Wall-E. These fully operational robots are capable of existing as if they were real humans, but in reality, our technology is not quite that cool yet.

While the abilities of artificial intelligence are not up to movie standards many are concerned that they could be in the very near future. Fears of robot takeovers and a world run by our own creations float around the internet and our news sources.

So someone uninformed on the subject of artificial intelligence might ask themselves, “Should I be worried about artificial intelligence? Will there be a robot apocalypse in a few years?” Unfortunately, I cannot provide a concrete answer to these questions. I can, however, lay out all the available facts and expert opinions available to the general public regarding artificial intelligence and its potential danger.

To begin, what is artificial intelligence exactly?

Artificial intelligence (AI) is intelligence as exhibited by some form of machine or computer. AI can exist in many different forms and can be used for many different purposes. The simplest of AI can decide what move is best in a game of tic-tac-toe. The most complex AI can manage human employees in a warehouse or measure gas flow and adjust an entire system to accommodate for fluctuation or even write award-winning poetry.

    Screenshot of AI poetry, 9/12/2015, via screenshot from my computer

Would you have guessed that this was written by a computer program? If not, then this computer program would have passed what is called the Turing test. The Turing test is a test where a machine attempts to exhibit intelligence that makes itself indistinguishable from an actual human. The test is simple. Take a blind test subject and have them interact with the machine. If the human test subject believes they are interacting with another human, then the test is passed. So, another definition of artificial intelligence is any machine that can pass the turing test.

In summation, artificial intelligence is the ability for some machine or computer to think independently and perform an action based on what it determines is optimal for the given situation.

An example of AI that many of us use everyday is our great friend, Siri. Not only does Siri take our inputs and come up with the appropriate response, but Siri also evolves and adapts based on each user’s tendencies when using her.

Here’s an interesting thought experiment. If Siri were given a more human voice and set up for a Turing test would you believe she was a real human? It’s hard to deny Siri’s irresistible charm and great sense of humor.

So you might be wondering, “aside from Siri, what other forms does today’s AI take?”. And the answer is pretty incredible.

What is AI capable of right now?

While the state of AI development has not reached levels illustrated by science fiction movies, AI is still capable of performing incredible acts.

First and foremost, artificial intelligence is capable of logical thinking. A few types of logic the AI can exhibit are fuzzy logic and propositional logic. Fuzzy logic (a value based logic system) has been used to predict earthquakes, improve the efficiency of high-speed trains, and adjust gas flow mechanisms. Propositional logic is slighlty different, and is based on taking premises and drawing logical conclusions from these premises. For example, if our two premises are “if it’s raining it’s cloudy” and “it’s raining”, then our conclusion is “it’s cloudy”.

An example of these logic systems lies in the technology that allows the disabled to speak. Stephen Hawking’s inability to speak is remedied by a computer system that senses Hawking’s cheek movements and utilizes a constantly evolving word prediction system. This predictive word system is an example of AI because it performs an action (in this case selecting words) based on what it logically deduces as optimal.

Neural networks, an up and coming branch of AI, describe machine systems that function similarly to a real brain, learning and constantly evolving. These systems take several different “neuron like components” that exchange information between each other and come up with an appropriate action or output. Below is a link to an example of a neural network where a computer learns to perfectly play a level of Super Mario.

Screenshot from the neural network video, 9/12/2015, via my computer

While a computer can now play Super Mario better than any human, perhaps what is more important is what AI is not yet capable of.

What is AI not yet capable of?

AI has yet to become true artificial general intelligence (AGI). This is the type of AI displayed in fictitious novels and books, and it is defined as the ability of a machine to exhibit complex, human-like decision making and cognizance. The distinction between artificial general intelligence and neural networks is the level of cognizance in the machine. A machine exhibiting AGI has a much deeper understanding of its surroundings as compared to a machine running on a neural network. AGI is yet to be achieved by any man-made machine, mainly because we have no idea how to create such technology.

Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen doesn’t believe this type of intelligence will occur in this century unless there are "unforeseeable and fundamentally unpredictable breakthroughs" and we stumble upon a "scientifically deep understanding of cognition". As a co-founder of one the greatest technology companies of all-time (and a current industry leader in artificial intelligence) , Allen’s opinion is hard to ignore.

Writing in The Guardian, roboticist Alan Winfield claims “the gulf between modern computing and human-level artificial intelligence is as wide as the gulf between current space flight and practical faster than light spaceflight.” Winfield is far less proven in the technical world than Paul Allen, but the roboticist’s input still carries weight.

Even though experts believe sci-fi artificial intelligence is far from reality, there’s a general sense of worry about a robot-driven future.

Who is weary of artificial intelligence and why?

A large majority of those fearful of artificial intelligence are average people with little to no knowledge of artificial intelligence and the extent to which it is developed. Many of these people have simply never been exposed to the realities of this extremely technical field. Much of the fear this group has stems from unfamiliarity with technology and what technology is truly capable of. This type of fear has been labeled “tech paranoia” and does not carry weight considering it is not based on facts.

Another key factor contributing to the AI hysteria is social media. Blogs, articles, tweets, videos, and all other forms of social media are often created to attract the most attention possible. And few things attract more attention than a terrifying headline such as “AI is as Dangerous as Nuclear Weapons”.

Twitter is a popular outlet for expressing fears towards artificial intelligence. Adrian Shaughnessy, like many others on twitter, is not a computer scientist. Adrian is, however, convinced our machines are “already beyond control”. It’s difficult to give any credit to opinions such as Adrian’s, considering Adrian is a journalist and has no professional background related to artificial intelligence.

Screenshot of fearful tweet, 9/18/2015, via my computer

Although most of the skeptics of artificial intelligence have limited knowledge on the subject, there do remain a significant amount of respected scientists, software developers, and even AI developers who are fearful of what advanced AI may do to our society.

Stephen Hawking, a world-renowned theoretical physicist, has gone so far as to say in a video interview with BBC ,“...I think the development of full artificial intelligence could spell the end of the human race.” The way Hawking phrases his concern, saying AI could literally threaten our entire existence, aims to create a deep impact on his audience. Hawking’s words appear to be deliberately chosen to alarm and create a sense of urgency and awareness in those unfamiliar with AI. Hawking’s concern with our species’s well-being carries significant weight as a greatly respected and renowned scientist.

Other respected scientists also share Hawking’s concern.

Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX and Tesla, stated in an interview “[I] think that there should be some regulatory oversight, maybe at the national and international level, just to make sure that we don’t do something very foolish.” Musk’s concern is very practical in nature; he has donated millions to the development of AI that is safe. His words seem to be chosen carefully so that his opinion is clear, but he does not come off as arrogant. Musk is a rather credible source on the matter of AI, considering he sees the issue from both sides. He values the potential in AI, while still expressing concern for its dangers.

While many members of the scientific community are skeptical of artificial intelligence’s place in our world, many others disagree.

What is this great potential in AI? So far, it sounds like a lot of danger.

Mustafa Suleyman, head of applied AI at AI company DeepMind says that, “The way we think about AI is that it’s going to be a hugely powerful tool that we control and that we direct, whose capabilities we limit...We’re building [AI] to empower humanity and not to destroy us.” Suleyman’s strategically uses the phrase “empower humanity” to bring light to all the potential good that AI can produce. Suleyman, and many members of the scientific community believe that AI will produce far more benefits than drawbacks.

Russ Altman, a professor of bioengineering, medicine, and computer science at Stanford, said in a speech at a robotics convention “Artificial intelligence (AI) has astounding potential to accelerate scientific discovery in biology and medicine, and to transform health care.” Altman’s words are aimed at convincing his audience of the benefits of AI. Altman’s belief in the potential of AI is significant considering his status at one of the top universities in the world.

At this point in time, it is difficult to ascertain exactly how dangerous AI could be. Some members of the scientific community are optimistic about AI, others believe it could ruin us. It may be difficult to take a side.

In conclusion, should I be afraid of artificial intelligence?

While it is difficult to say whether or not artificial intelligence will eventually reach dangerous levels of development, it is safe to say we have little to worry about for many years to come. The most harm AI can do to you now is write superior poetry or beat you at chess.

However, it is imperative to stay updated on technology’s most current developments and progress. It is our civic duty to stay informed on topics that will influence the world around us. Stay up to date. Follow the progress of artificial intelligence in journals such as IBM Journal of Research and Development and IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, as well as in online articles and videos.

So in conclusion, unless a completely unexpected breakthrough occurs in our pursuit of artificial general intelligence, we have no reason to look out for threats like Arnold Schwarzenegger in a robot suit shouting "hasta la vista, baby". Even though that would be kind of cool.

Evaluation of Rhetorical Situations

In this blog post I'll take three acts of public speech by members of the computer science field and evaluate them. I'll look specifically at the text's speaker, audience, and context and evaluate these aspects of the text in detail.

Stuart Russell on lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS)

Stuart Russell is the speaker of this public interview/article. From the article, we're informed that Russell is an expert on artificial intelligence, specifically the field of LAWS. We know Russell is a credible source based on his status (professor) at the University of California, Berkeley. Whatever Russell has to say on the subject should carry great weight.

The audience of this piece is those concerned with our nation's safety. Perhaps the piece, given it is on the internet, is more specifically aimed at those below the age of 40 or so. There are no dead-giveaway signs for who the piece is intended for, but it is reasonable to assume Russell is primarily addressing younger Americans concerned with technology and the country's safety.

To provide some context on the article, the piece was published on May 27, 2015 in Nature, a weekly science journal. This piece is informational and is aimed at informing the audience of the most current information and opinions on LAWS. One reason this article is relevant is due to the constant concern for international safety. The United Nations has taken up a key role in determining the fate of LAWS and their international status. Some events that have shaped this event are conflicts like the Cold War and World War II.


Hadi Partovi on computer science education

Hadi Partovi is the speaker in this TEDx talk posted to YouTube. At the beginning of the talk, we learn that Partovi is from the Middle East and is a successful leader in today's tech industry. Partovi began his education in computer science at a young age, and wants others to have the same opportunity he had. Partovi is absolutely qualified to be speaking about computer science education.

The audience of this talk is anybody concerned with public education. Specifically, Partovi is talking to those with an ability to influence our public education. There are no instances where Partovi explicitly states his audience, but it is reasonable to assume he is targeting influential people involved in public education.

To provide some context, computer science is a rapidly expanding field. Even though the number of computer science students is increasing rapidly, the demand for computer scientists is growing even faster. To compensate, Partovi is advocating the implication of computer science education at all levels of education. This piece is informational, persuasive, and very opinionated. Partovi is heavily involved in a program called "one hour of coding" where students are given the opportunity to learn computer science for just one hour. This program is going around the country and fueling the desire for more education in computer science.


Robert Morris on internet privacy

Robert Morris is the speaker in this blog post. In the "about me" section of the blog, we learn that Morris is a computer science graduate student at Penn State, researching aspects of internet privacy. Morris may not be the most credible source, given he is still just a student. However, since his focus is on internet privacy, it is reasonable to assign him a fair amount of credibility on that subject specifically.

The audience of this blog is anybody who owns any form of social media. This is fairly obvious considering Morris directly addresses our use of phones and forms of social media like Google and Facebook. The audience is more targeted at a young demographic since more young people will have social media than older people will.

To provide some context, several internet privacy scandals have arisen in recent history. Edward Snowden's reveal of NSA activity has caused great concern in American citizens. Many are concerned with maintaining privacy, and it seems to be becoming more and more difficult to do that. Morris's piece is mostly his opinion on the subject. Morris believes the lack of privacy is extremely concerning and needs to be addressed further by government agencies like the NSA. This issue is relatively new, given the rise of technology in the past half a century.

EDIT:

After reading Swati's and Elliot's posts, I learned a few things. One is that my own evaluation was on par with my classmates'. I also learned that an effective rhetorical analysis can only be done on pieces with at least some level of complexity. If the piece you're trying to analyze is straightforward with its rhetoric, there is no point in analyzing the piece.

For my project, I'm going to make sure the piece I analyze has significant depth and complexity, otherwise I might struggle to write a complete rhetorical analysis.

Developing a Research Question

In this blog post I will list several potential research questions that pique my interest. I'll also explain further why I might want to pursue answering these research questions.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/26/2015

One interesting subsection of artificial intelligence I encountered was the development of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS). There is great debate over these weapons systems that may have the potential to independently target and fire upon enemies on the ground. One of the biggest points of contention is whether or not LAWS should be able to make the decision to potentially end human lives. The disconnect between man and machine here is of great debate.

From this controversy, I've come up with two research questions:

"What role does and should ethics play in the implication of LAWS? Are we crossing a moral boundary when we allow machines to make the decision to potentially kill a human being?"

"How should LAWS be handled by the United Nations and other international regulation groups? Should the development of LAWS be banned all together?"

I feel like this topic is extremely interesting and will likely base my second project on one, or both of these research questions.


However, if I don't choose to pursue LAWS as a topic, I will likely fall back to the subject of internet privacy as it pertains to computer science. Many people are concerned with their privacy online, as a result of scandals related to the NSA and cloud storage invasions. It would be interesting to further explore this topic and understand more of how these scandals took place.

A research question for this topic is:

"Are agencies such as the NSA justified in their actions or have our rights been infringed upon? What actions, if any, should be taken to prevent more privacy infringements?"

Reflection on Project 1

In this blog post I will be reflecting on our first project. Specifically, I will discuss the challenges I encountered, the successes I had, and many other things about the project.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/26/2015

• What challenges did you face during the Quick Reference Guide project and how did you deal with them?

A big challenge I faced when writing my QRG was effectively condensing lots of information into one, brief piece of writing. Artificial intelligence is a very complex, deep topic with endless amounts of information on the subject. After finishing my project, I realize my topic may have been better suited for a conventional research paper as opposed to a QRG.

• What successes did you experience on the project and how did they happen?

Some successes I experienced was the formatting I originally planned out and used in my rough draft. I believe the format of my QRG was very effective and communicated information smoothly and logically. This success occurred as a result of doing pre-writing exercised like the online cluster.

• What kinds of arguments, rhetorical strategies, design choices and writing practices did you find the most effective for your project? Why?

For my project, I found the use of quotations as a very effective way to format my arguments. It's difficult to refute an assertion when it's backed up by top experts in the field you're covering. I also found that adding frequent hyperlinks shortened my QRG greatly. With such an extremely technical topic, it would not be practical to spend endless pages explaining various terms in detail. I found it more effective to give an extremely brief explanation of terms and then hyperlink the more extensive explanations.

• What kinds of arguments, rhetorical strategies, design choices and writing practices did you find were not effective for your project? Why?

I found that long introductions and conclusions were very inappropriate for this genre. Looking back through my initial drafts, I had many unnecessary introductions for my sources. I cut most out and my paper became much shorter and easier to read. 

• How was the writing process for this project similar to other school writing experiences you’ve had in the past?

The writing process at its core was very similar to other research projects I've done in the past. Gathering information, pre-writing, writing a rough draft, and revising is the typical path for research projects, and was exactly what we did for the QRG.

• How was the writing process for this project different from other school writing experiences you’ve had in the past?

This project was different due to how much I had to actually cut out from my QRG. In the past, I've struggled with getting enough information and ideas into my writing. With the QRG, I had to to do the exact opposite.

• Would any of the skills you practiced for this project be useful in your other coursework? Why or why not?

Many of the skills practiced will be useful for other coursework. Especially in computer science, being brief and clear are of the utmost importance.

Reflection

After reading Casey's and Evan's reflections, I learned that others had similar troubles to mine. For example, Casey's topic was rather complex and difficult to condense into the QRG format. I had the same issue.

I also learned that others had completely different roadblocks. Evan's topic was the exact opposite and had limited content. I suppose this made me realize that everyone is going to run into some kind of issue, regardless of the topic you choose. This gives me a greater respect for the whole process of writing a QRG. It is never easy.

Clarity, Part 2

In this blog post I will be taking four new topics from the Clarity section in Rules for Writers and discussing what I've learned.

Screenshot from my computer. 9/26/2015

Active verbs

Active verbs are an interesting aspect of writing I often fail to consider. Writing in the passive voice is very natural to me, but I see how writing in the active voice can be more optimal. I really need to train myself to think more in terms of active voice, since that creates an interesting sense of urgency effect in writing.

Variety

Variety is another aspect of writing that I neglect. Switching up the structures of sentences and their lengths are easy ways to add lots of spice to writing. I really just need to keep this in mind when I write, until it becomes natural for me to just switch things up every now and then.

Misplaced modifiers

This is one of my worst enemies when it comes to writing. I'll write a sentence in my head first and then copy it down onto the paper, but it doesn't always translate. Meaning something that makes sense in my head won't always make sense to the reader. Misplaced modifiers can lead to great confusion in the reader, a cardinal sin in writing. I need to pay more attention and make sure my writing is crystal clear.

Shifts

Shifts are another aspect that I need to work on. Making my writing as clear and as smooth as possible is my top priority. Watching my tense shifts is something I rarely pay attention to, it's just something I assume I do. Looking back at my writing I know this is not true! I will pay close attention to that in the future.

Examples from draft

" AI can exist in many different forms and can be used for many different purposes."

This is a great example of where I could incorporate more active verbs. Rather than saying "can exist" and "can be used" I might say "exist" and "is used".

"Would you have guessed that this was written by a computer program? If not, then this computer program would have passed what is called the Turing test. The Turing test is a test where a machine attempts to exhibit intelligence that makes itself indistinguishable from an actual human. The test is simple."

In this instance, I feel like I did a good job of adding variety to my sentences. I have several different kinds of sentences in this short paragraph. I have a question, a couple longer, explanatory sentences, and one short declaration. This type of variety makes reading a piece of writing much more interesting.

Identifying Basic Grammar Patterns

In this blog post, I will take the longest paragraph in my QRG and perform an analysis of the structure and conventions of that paragraph. Specifically, I will look at the parts of speech, sentence structure and several other aspects of the paragraph. I will also reflect on my paragraph dissection and think about what it taught me.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/26/2015

Reflection

Unfortunately, google docs was being weird for me so I did the analysis by hand. I did, however, learn important things about my writing from this exercise. For one, I learned that my sentence variety was quite poor. I'll certainly be looking at changing sentences throughout my QRG to make it easier to read and more engaging. That's really the only grammatical change I feel needs significant work.

Parts of Speech

Noun - Artificial intelligence (line 1)

Verb - exhibit (line 3)

Pronoun - we (line 7)

Conjunction -  and (line 2)

Article - the (line 1)

Adjective - human-like (line 3)


Three sentence patterns

"AI has yet to become true Artificial general intelligence(AGI)" (line 1)

"This is the type of AI displayed in fictitious novels and books, and it is defined as the ability of a machine to exhibit complex, human-like decision making and cognizance." (lines 1-3)

"The distinction between artificial general intelligence and neural networks is the level of cognizance in the machine. (lines 3-5)


Subordinate word group

"of a machine" (line 2)

Sentence structures

Compound - "This is the type of AI displayed in fictitious novels and books, and it is defined as the ability of a machine to exhibit complex, human-like decision making and cognizance." (lines 1-3)

Complex - "AGI is yet to be achieved by any man-made machine, mainly because we have no idea how to create such technology." (lines 6-8)

Sentence purposes

Declare - "A machine exhibiting artificial general intelligence has a much deeper understanding of its surroundings as compared to a machine running on a neural network." (lines 5-6)

Imperative - "AI has yet to become true Artificial general intelligence(AGI)" (line 1)

Paragraph Analysis

In this blog post I will link and then reflect on the paragraph analysis I did of my QRG.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/19/2015

After doing the paragraph analysis of my QRG, I learned a few important things about my paper. One of them is that my paragraphs don't link together as well as they should. The QRG should flow seamlessly from paragraph to paragraph and from idea to idea. The QRG should build on itself in an effective and smooth way. This is one aspect of revising I need to pay special attention to.

Also I learned that my paragraphs focus rather well on my main topic (as they should). I'm happy to see I did not have any paragraphs that rambled or got off topic. This leaves one less thing for me to worry about when revising. 

Lastly, this exercise taught me that every paragraph should serve a distinct purpose. If a paragraph is not developing the main point, giving more information, linking ideas together, or doing anything else of use, then it is unnecessary. These unnecessary paragraphs always need to be deleted, especially when writing in the fast-paced QRG genre.

Reflection on Project 1 Draft

In this blog post I will answer the bulleted questions on "audience" and "context" from Student's Guide. The two peers whose papers I edited were Samantha and Victoria.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/19/2015

Audience:

Who specifically is going to be reading this essay? Who am I trying to reach with my argument?

People concerned by or interested in the future of artificial intelligence will be reading my essay. I'm trying to reach a wide variety of people with my QRG, but primarily I am trying to reach as much of the general public as I can.

What are their values and expectations?

The values of this group invested in the future of artificial intelligence value the safety of mankind and security. The group expects a concise, yet detailed QRG that gives them all the information they need on the subject. It is important to keep the values and expectations of the audience in mind when writing and revising my QRG.

How much information do I need to give to my audience? How much background information or context should I provide for them without insulting their expertise?

I need to give a significant amount of information to my audience since a large majority of people are not familiar with the exact technology behind artificial intelligence.

What kind of language is suitable for this audience?

A more professional and serious tone is more suitable for this audience since many readers are likely to be paranoid about the dangers of artificial intelligence before reading my QRG.

What tone should I use with my audience? Do I Use this tone consistently throughout my draft?

I should use a serious tone with my audience. I fail to use a serious tone on several occasions throughout my draft. This is something I now realize I must revise.

Context:

What are the formatting requirements of the assignment? Do I meet them?

The formatting requirements include usage of short paragraphs, sub-topics, images, and introductory paragraph. I meet all of these requirements.

What are the content requirements for the assignment?

The content requirements for this assignment are to fully report on your topic/controversy. I feel like I do a good job of giving both sides of the argument and giving a complete overview of the controversy.

Does my draft reflect knowledge or skills gained in class in addition to my own ideas and voice?

My draft absolutely reflects skill gained in class such as usage of captioned images, short paragraphs, and quotations. I also incorporated much of my own ideas and voice from previous experience in writing.

Have I addressed any grammatical issues that my teacher highlighted in class or in my previously-graded assignments?

No grammatical issues from my teacher come to mind, but I do plan on taking the advice of my peers when revising my grammar.

Clarity, Part 1

In this blog post I will be discussing four topics from the Clarity section of Rules for Writers.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/19/15

Wordy Sentences:

One thing I learned was how dangerous wordy sentences can be. This particular section of the book gives great insight on how to reduce the wordiness of sentences. Something I could definitely improve on is simplifying the sentence structure of my work. I don't have to make every sentence short and simple, but every now and then including a brief sentence would be great for clarity of my writing.


Exact Words:

The section on exact words also spoke to me. I struggle with finding the perfect word to use in my writing on a consistent basis. This is most likely due to my unimpressive vocabulary. I have been using FreeRice.com recently so maybe things will turn around.


Parallelism:

This section also had great ideas about maintaining parallelism in my writing. I usually write my sentences without a lot of planning and as a result, break rules of parallelism often. Specifically my verbs tend to get thrown into non-parallel form in a long and complex sentence. This could easily be remedied with more careful revisions while paying attention to parallel structure.


Emphasis:

I probably have not used a semicolon in 5 years because I never really saw a point. I always preferred to just use two sentences or a comma with a conjunction. This section opened my eyes to using colons and semicolons effectively in order to emphasize certain ideas over others. I'm going to try to implement both types of punctuation where applicable.


Reflection:

While peer reviewing Samantha's and Victoria's QRGs, I learned even more about the importance of clarity and how the previously stated aspects of clarity each play a key role.

While Samantha's draft was very successful overall, one sentence lacked clarity due to poor word choice. "There is an undoubtable need to reform the school system and its goals and methods...", stated Samantha toward the end of her QRG. The word "undoubtable" could be replaced with many other words that would have a far better impact and make the sentence more clear. Words such as "undeniable" or "irrefutable" would have been great.

Victoria's draft was also successful. However, I saw a few instances where Victoria's wordiness compromised the clarity of her work. For example, Victoria wrote "Online fads always come and go so quickly, but he is trying to make the need for organ donors stick in people’s minds just like another tweet or Facebook post their friend might have drawn." I feel like this idea would be more successful if Victoria cut out the last part of the sentence, "just like another tweet or Facebook post their friend might have drawn.". Victoria also could have broken this sentence into multiple sentences in order to make her work more clear. This reinforced the idea that I have to watch out for wordiness in my own writing.

Thoughts on Drafting

In this blog post, I'll be reviewing the Student's Guide reading (pages 49-58) and discussing the relevance of the advice given as it pertains to the Quick Reference Guide genre.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/19/2015

Drafting a Thesis Statement

Writing paragraphs in PIE format

Writing introductions

Organizing information

Writing conclusions

1. What parts of the book’s advice on the above bulleted topics are helpful for writing in this genre?

For writing within the QRG genre, much of what was said about the bulleted topics is relevant and helpful. In the QRG, it is essential to establish the central idea of your writing immediately. The reader needs to know up front what they are going to be learning about. Introductions are also crucial when writing a QRG. If what you're writing about is not properly introduced, the content will be more difficult to understand.

Organization is perhaps just as important as thesis statements and introductions. The way we organize the content we present in the QRG is what dictates the flow of ideas and allows the reader to understand the content more easily.

2. What parts of the book’s advice on these topics might not be so helpful, considering the genre you’re writing in?

The advice on writing in PIE format is not as relevant as some of the other topics covered in this part of the book. PIE format is usually an extensive explanation of a point you are trying to make. If a QRG contained many uses of the PIE structure, the QRG would most likely be too long and contain too much information. 

Also, writing conclusions may not be as relevant to the QRG genre. While it may be a good idea to quickly summarize main ideas at the end of a QRG, writing a lengthy conclusion could limit the success of a QRG.

EDIT:

After reading Mira's and Swati's, posts, I learned even more about the QRG genre. Specifically, Mira's post reminded me of the importance of keeping a sense of urgency when it comes to keeping the attention of the reader. The QRG is meant to be a very fast paced genre, and if the QRG becomes slow or boring at any point, the reader could be lost. I also learned that the thesis/introduction paragraphs will be slightly different in a QRG. The thesis should be more broad since the whole point of the QRG is to give both sides of an issue.

Things to revise:

1. Make all information I give sound active as if it's happening right this instant. 

2. Cut out all unnecessary information/words/quotes

3. Keep the introduction broad yet detailed so that I address all sides of my issue

Draft of Quick Reference Guide

In this blog post I'll be posting my draft for my quick reference guide on artificial intelligence. It's important to note that this rough draft is a skeleton for my final draft and contains less content than I would like. I still need to include more pictures, quotes, and general information on my topic. I broke the draft into sections, primarily laying out the two stances on the controversy. I struggled most with organizing my thoughts in an effective manner in the QRG, so I suppose that is what I would like peer editors to pay closest attention to. All criticism is more than welcome. Feel free to rip up my paper and tell me what needs to be changed.

Practicing Quoting

In this post I will be practicing quoting opposite opinions on an issue regarding artificial intelligence(AI). I will be comparing quotes given by Stephen Hawking, theoretical physicist, and Mustafa Suleyman, head of applied AI at DeepMind.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/12/2015

QRGs: the Genre

In this blog post I will be dissecting the quick reference guide (QRG) genre. There are five questions about the QRG genre that I will be answering.

1. What do the conventions of this genre - the Quick Reference Guide - seem to be?

There are several conventions of the typical QRG. They include an informative title, relevant images/graphs/statistics, questions asked and then answered by the author, short paragraphs, and an introductory paragraph.

2. How are those conventions defined by the author’s formatting and design choices?

The format and design choices made by the author will define how each of the conventions of a QRG exist in that specific piece of writing. If, for example, an author chooses a format that is confusing, such as placing all informative graphs and images at the beginning and all text afterwards then the QRG will be far less effective. The format and design must appeal to the reader and aid them as they read through your QRG. If the conventions are used improperly, the QRG may fail to inform the reader.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/12/2015

3. What does the purpose of these QRGs seem to be?

The purpose of these QRGs is to inform the reader on a topics that cannot easily be understood by reading one article or listening to a news report. QRGs generally cover topics with some level of complexity and depth in a clear and concise manner, giving you all the important information on the subject.

4. Who is the intended audience for these different QRGs? Are they all intended for similar audiences? Or different? How & why?

The intended audiences for these QRGs have similarities and differences. They are similar in that all the intended audiences are not well informed on a certain subject. The audiences are different in regards to their interests and what topics are relevant to them. Each QRG is written to inform a certain audience on a topic they are not likely to know a lot about, but each QRG targets a certain group of people who would be interested in learning about a certain subject matter.

5. How do the QRGs use imagery or visuals? Why do you think they use them in this way?

The QRGs use visuals for a variety of reasons. One of them being to help the reader better understand or contextualize the information. For example, the writer of a QRG could list relevant statistics on their topic, or they could have a graph or image that more clearly illustrates the information. Of course, the latter is better. Images are also great for keeping the reader interested and engaged. Imagine an online article with just walls and walls of black text. Not too appealing. Instead, writers add interesting visuals to keep the reader interested and connected to the text. 

EDIT:

After reading Casey's, Bri's, and Sam's analysis of the QRG, I learned a few things. Most importantly, I learned how important formatting is on a blog post like this. Sam's blog post specifically was laid out very well, in a way that conveyed information smoothly and effectively. Organization has been something I've always struggled with, and I could learn a lot about it from my peers. I also learned about the importance of writing for your specific audience when writing a QRG.

Cluster of My Controversy

In my Cluster, I laid out the basic foundation of my quick reference guide on artificial intelligence. I broke up the involved parties into two groups, the skeptics/opposed and the developers/supporters. Within each group, I listed major speakers, the main ideas they express about artificial intelligence, and their outlets for getting their opinion out to the general public.

Screenshot from my computer, 9/12/2015

EDIT:

After viewing Evan's and Laurence's clusters, I learned that I should probably add more supporting details to my own cluster. Laurence's cluster was mostly topics, and I liked the way all the main ideas were laid out. Evan's cluster was a bit more detailed, and used colors and different branches to lay out his ideas in a neat manner. I plan to go back into my own cluster to hopefully reorganize some information and add details to my main topics.

Annotated Bibliography in IEEE Style

In this blog post I will be making an annotated bibliography in IEEE style. Here is an example of an annotated bibliography entry in IEEE style. See page 36-37 for the example. Here is the link to my annotated bibliography.

EDIT:

After reading Namratha's and Victoria's annotated bibliographies, I realized that many styles of writing annotated bibliographies share many of the same traits. However, I also learned of some crucial difference between styles that can make or break the bibliography. Even within the IEEE citation style, there is variation in how citations are made. Namratha, who also did her annotated bibliography in IEEE style, found a slightly different variation of the annotated bibliography. This made me realize just how careful I have to be when trusting sources claiming to have the correct format for that style of citation. By reading Victoria's bibliography, I saw how different formats of annotated bibliographies could lend themselves more to different fields of study. While it was tedious seeking out the specific citation style I needed, I see the importance of having specific styles for specific types of writing.