Embedded Technology, by Noah Steinberg

6 Responses to "Embedded Technology, by Noah Steinberg"

Marissa Liebman says:

May 10, 2014 at 3:20 pm

I think this is the most interesting video I’ve seen. You did a good job making the clarification of what you were going to focus on up front. I’d say that was a good call because as you showed, there were a lot of options to talk about. I didn’t know that pacemakers could be nuclear nor did I know that tongue electrodes exist. There were a lot of really interesting examples in here. I liked your use of videos ranging from the locked in syndrome to rock climbing while blind. Your videos and speech flowed seamlessly. Likewise I was interested by your arguments of human vs machine, healing vs enhancing, and where do we draw the line? I have a feeling DARPA isn’t interested in where we draw the line, I would expect the media to draw attention to that first. I also liked that you noted Adderal as an attention enhancer, I think it skips by a lot of people as being part of an idea embedded in our society and see it mostly as a spawn of the pharmaceutical industry. My improve to you would be to have a citations/references page at the end.

Reply
Addison Wechter says:

May 10, 2014 at 4:46 pm

I thought your slidecast was very interesting and I learned a lot about embedded technology. Similar to you, I thought of embedded technology as some form of medical implants and things of that nature. So, I found it interesting to see the search results you originally got from Google. I liked that you took the time to clarify what type of embedded technology you were going to talk about during your slidecast. The examples you used were fascinating and appropriate to your discussion. It was helpful to draw the distinction between human and machine, and how we handle that as humans. The videos you used were very cool and helped me understand the points you were trying to make. The flow of your slidecast was great and the videos were seamlessly embedded into your video. You had a lot of great pictures and an amply amount of information. It would have been nice to include some type of bibliography at the end of your video. But, you really did a great job.

Reply
Drew Beyer says:

May 11, 2014 at 6:13 pm

The first thing I noticed was that you were talking the whole time, and I was continually interested in what you were saying. The slides moved along at the exact right times and the videos segwayed into your slidecast seamlessly. This presentation was very polished and professional. I was fascinated by the technologies I had never hear of before like the tongue electrode. Your progress question slide really helped put this technology in perspective for me, and I also appreciated the question of where do we draw the line with this? I learned a lot from your presentation and am excited to see controversy over questions like these in our future. Its a tricky thing, but exciting nonetheless. Great job!

Reply
Brandon Smith says:

May 12, 2014 at 12:49 pm

I really enjoyed this slidecast. I had forgotten that the actual definition of embedded technology is about computers embedded in other technical systems. I’m glad you made that distinction at the very beginning. I hadn’t known about Erik Weihenmayer before, but his tongue electrode is very cool. Like in your first slidecast, I really liked the background music. I was also very impressed by the smoothness with which you included videos and transitions between topics. With only six minutes and forty seconds, you were exceptional at keeping focused while also moving naturally from one topic to the next. Your points on the controversy between healing and enhancement were fantastic and illustrated the difficulty of classing things as progress. I honestly can’t think of anything in this slidecast that could really use improvement. This was definitely an amazing slidecast. Well done!

Reply
Owen McCann says:

May 12, 2014 at 2:55 pm

Your report was very well done. You managed the time excellently. I do not think there was a time in your report where there was a silence. The fact that you kept talking helped to keep my attention at all times. The fear of missing out on an awesome fact in your report made me hang on to every word as you spoke. The story of Erik was unbelievable too. I think you did a great job using footage of him to help make your point. Watching him reach out of things, as if he was questioning if they were really there, was amazing to watch.

I have no negative comments to make about your report. Everything was extremely well done, from the visual images used to support your report to the constant feed of information. You did an amazing job with this presentation, and it was a pleasure to watch it.

Reply
Jacob Haase says:

May 12, 2014 at 3:24 pm

This was an excellent slide cast presentation. At points it seemed as if you produced a movie as opposed to a slidecast. You raised some excellent points, the most important and the most thought provoking being where do we draw the line between enhancement and healing. You spoke very clearly and provided plenty of information and details. I greatly appreciated your stylistic approach of eliminating silence in between slides. This alone made the presentation flow very smoothly and is perhaps what made it fee like a movie. I really liked how you focused on a few examples of embedded technology as healing and examined them in depth. Some of those stories were pretty incredible. The only even remotely critical comment I have on this presentation is about the background music. It wasn’t loud at all, but I am easily distracted and I found it a little hard absorb the constant flow of information with music in the background. But that is only minor. Your presentation overall was fantastic. Well done!

Reply

Leave a Reply to Brandon Smith Cancel reply