2014년 11월 29일 토요일

Final draft

 The 'transformer' movie is a 2007 American science fiction action film based on the transformer toy line. Interestingly, in the film, there are many strange cars which can transform into robots. And the robots have the power to protect themselves meaning that they are semi-autonomy. They can think and do something like real humans. As robot technology has been developing, we, human, can not foresee the limits of the robots. Therefore, we can not sure whether the robots would develop like the 'transformer' robot. If robots had the AI(artificial intelligence), the shape of the world would be changed in many respects, people would say it is an AI revolution, following industrial revolution and information revolution. In terms of military, it would also lead to a revolution. However, whether military robot is effective is must - have discussion. And I don't agree with the idea of military robot.
 Military robots date back to world war 2 and the Cold War in the form of the German Goliath tracked mines and the Soviet tank. The U.S.Military is now investing heavily in research and development towards testing and deploying increasingly automated systems. The most prominent system currently in use is the unmanned aerial vehicle (IAI Pioneer& RQ-1 Predator) which can be armed with Air-to-ground missiles and remotely operated from a command center in reconnaissance roles. DARPA has hosted competitions in 2004 & 2005 to involve private companies and universities to develop unmanned ground vehicles to navigate through rough terrain in the Mojave Desert for a final prize of 2 Million. Not only U.S military but also other nations are now starting to research this field.
In the book called 'the Harvard sampler' said that there is something robot cannot follow human. And I research about them too. According to science news, It talks about what the robot can not follow human. Firstly, the mimicking evolution in the physical manifestation is hard. What tends to happen is natural systems have lots of little joints, lots of little muscles that pull and tug and make a motion. And if you start introducing that many joints and that many motors in a synthetic thing, your cost goes up exponentially as the complexity keeps growing. At the same time, the reliability goes down. If any single joint fails, your whole thing is going to fail. So that makes it very hard to mimic nature.
 On the brain side of things, it is also hard. A lot of us teach ourselves how to reason, how to think, how to analyze new information and make sense of it. However, those have been very difficult for robots to be able to do. So people will try to program different contexts and different scenarios for what a robot should do, but that way of doing it is simply not scalable. You don’t have enough time and manpower to code up all the possible scenarios that a robot would encounter and what it should be doing. People have made very tiny steps toward reasoning and learning, but in general robots do not yet know how to learn.
 And this asked me a question that nowadays, many nations have made lots of the robot soldier for effectiveness. In this book, however, there is something robot can not follow human. And in terms of military, there are also many things military robots can not do. Not only this reason but also other reasons do disagree with the military robots
 Before arguments, I would define the robot and military robot. These are from powerful dictionary company. And I would list them. According to Doosan dictionary, it says that a robot is The machine that automatically process or work the given tasks by itself retained ability. Also, according to the Oxford dictionary, it says that robot is a machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, especially one programmable by a computer. And, according to the Wikipedia, A robot is an automatic mechanical device often resembling a human or animal. According to the dictionary, it says the characteristics of the robot. Firstly, robot should work or help out human. Secondly, work automatically Lastly, react itself to the surroundings.
 And there is few definitions of military robot. According to Wikipedia, military robots are autonomous robots or remote-controlled devices designed for military applications. Such systems are currently being researched by a number of military.
Until now, we have learned the definition and the issue on military robot is important because many nations now start to research this field. This would conclude our future war.However, there are also some doubts of using this. And I disagree to military robot too. There are three reasons; lack of judgment, possibility to be insensitive to war for people and doubts about flexibility of it.
 Firstly, it lacks judgment compared to human soldiers. Even though robots developed, there is a question: Can computers and robots be truly trusted even though they are not humans? Actually, while discovering the latest technology, according to CBC News Broadcast Documentary team,they came up with a serious question that needed to be answered. This question was as follows; what are the new rules of engagement for robots that kill humans in wartime? This is a major disadvantage of question associated with military robots. If the future holds independent, acting robots acting on their own how would they be able to decide right from wrong? Would we hold a robot accountable for a death that shouldn’t have occurred or could we even conclude that? These are a few scenarios that one must consider as disadvantages for future military robotic use.
 Secondly, we could be insensitive to the war. According to P. W. Singer, he once interviewed a drone pilot. And he said that "You’re going to war for 12 hours, shooting weapons at targets, directing kills on enemy combatants. Then you get in the car and drive home, and within 20 minutes you’re sitting at the dinner table talking to your kids about their homework." If soldiers are using the military robot instead of human continuously, they think war is just a game to play and become insensitive to it.
 Lastly, however they developed, there are limits that robot can not follow human: delicate physical manifestation and human brain. According to Satyendra Gupta from science news, even though they are developing, they lack creativity and adaptation to changing situation. In war, similarly, there is many unsuspected variables. And it requires creativity and adaptation which robot does not have. In battlefield, therefore, military robot could be ineffective.
 Although many nations have made lots of military robots, it would just waste of money and time because they will never be as effective as the human soldiers. Some would argue that military robot would save many human soldiers. To be exact, it will save many human soldiers. However, the purpose of existence of soldiers is to defend its enemies. If two each nation fought only by military robots, it would be unmeaning war. And eventually innocent people would die. Isn't it paradoxical? In the result, it just saves human soldiers not citizens. Then where is the meaning of soldiers? On the other hand, some would argue that military robots are preceding human soldiers in terms of environmental, functional capability. I also  agree with it. Sometimes, robots can do things a human can not. However, it is different in war. Some silly people think that victory and defeat from war would be concluded by superior weapons. Of course, we must not ignore it. However, decisive factors of outcome of a war are other things such as the times, general(human), flexibility( the most important thing). And there are many various examples from history. In addition, robots will have no flexibility however they develop. Therefore, these arguments are just short-sighted way of thinking.
 As I speak, many nations have made lots of military robots competitively. And this is crucial issue because it will decide our future war. However, this process is a short - sighted. They don't think the negative effects of it. Even though they are developing and seems to have many merits superficially, there are actually many problems and can not precede human soldiers in the end.
                                                               


                                                    references



[네이버 지식백과] 로봇 - 인간을 꿈꾸는 로봇 (시사논술 개념사전, 2010.5.14, (주)북이십일 아울북)
[네이버 지식백과] 로봇 [robot] (두산백과)

Peer review for 20425한희주

Peer Review for 20425한희주

Grade
According to the rubric above, what grade would you give this essay? Why?
4. I think the structure is clear she has adequate evidences. But each arguments of confirmation is a little similar.

How does this essay need to improve to get a better grade?
I think it needs another reasons.Thesis
What is the thesis?
Utopian can not exist.

Is the thesis clear and debatable?
I think the definition of the Utopian is ambiguous.

If you (The reviewer) wrote this essay, how would you have written the thesis?
i think she selected difficult thesis. At first, it is different from people what the Utopian isAny other thoughts?
nope.Classical Argument
Can you easily identify the 5 parts of the classical argument? If no, what parts are missing?
Yes. I can clearly identify the 5 parts of the classical argument

Does the introduction catch your attention? Does it comfortably lead to the thesis? 
 I think the introduction is sufficient to direct the attention.

Does the narration give all the necessary background information to understand the topic?
 She tried to explain what the Utopian is. However, I think it is still very difficult to define itDoes the confirmation adequately support the thesis?
Yes. it support the thesis adequately. However, I think the arguing is similar. Eventually, it said that people have different ideals and they are naturally selfish.

Does the refutation and concession address a realistic counterpoint? Does it adequately dispute the counterpoint, or respond in a reasonable manner?
Yes. she refutes them adequately.

Does the conclusion summarize the article and address the larger significance of the thesis? 
 Yes, it does.What suggestions do you have for improving the classical argument structure?
I think she needs another more confirmation. Eventually, it said that people have different ideas and they are naturally selfish. And it needs one more reason.Persuasion
When you started reading the essay, did you agree or disagree with the thesis? 
 No, I was just wondering what the exact definition of the Utopian is. 

When you finished the essay, did you agree or disagree with the thesis?
 My thought was not changed

If your mind changed, why? What parts of the essay were persuasive?


How could the author enhance the persuasive parts of their essay?
 I think it is paradoxical because she said that people have different ideals. However, she is arguing about the Utopian.

Research
Is the author using research effectively? 
 Yes, she is using it effectivelyIs the research from appropriate sources?
 Yes, the research is from appropriate sources.
Are the sources obvious?
 I don't think the sources are obvious because some sources are a little old.
Are the pieces of evidence relevant to the thesis or essay?
 yes they areAre there any parts of the essay that need evidence to support the claims?
 I think the sources are appropriate. But some sources are a little old.

Peer review for 20424최예은

Peer Review for 20424최예은

Grade
According to the rubric above, what grade would you give this essay? Why?
 3. Its thesis is clear. But I think the introduction(the introduction and narration) is long and the evidences are too many.

How does this essay need to improve to get a better grade?
 Shorter introduction and apparent evidencesThesis
What is the thesis?

Sport psychology is much more important than physical training :psychology has a great impact on sports as much as physical ability.

Is the thesis clear and debatable?
yes it is

If you (The reviewer) wrote this essay, how would you have written the thesis?
 Much shorter introduction and apparent evidences.
Any other thoughts?
  nope.Classical Argument
Can you easily identify the 5 parts of the classical argument? If no, what parts are missing?
 I think the introduction is too long. To my sorrow, I can not distinguish between the introduction and narration.Does the introduction catch your attention? Does it comfortably lead to the thesis? 
 I think she leads to the thesis apparently.

Does the narration give all the necessary background information to understand the topic?
 As  I said I can not distinguish between the introduction and narration. But I think the introduction part generally gives necessary background information.

Does the confirmation adequately support the thesis?
Yes Through 4 reasons, she leads the confirmation adequately to support the thesis. However, in the end, there are unnecessary examples. Of course, those examples support the confirmation. But, I think it is too many. 

Does the refutation and concession address a realistic counterpoint? Does it adequately dispute the counterpoint, or respond in a reasonable manner?
I think she finds good refutations. It is a realistic counterpoint. 
And I think she refutes it reasonably. But I think it is better to find much more refutations that refute the four reasons she argued.Does the conclusion summarize the article and address the larger significance of the thesis? 
Yes it is. She apparently does it. And the latest paragraph is clear and logical

What suggestions do you have for improving the classical argument structure?
I think she will be good if she make the introduction part shorter and lessen the examples for the reasons.Persuasion
When you started reading the essay, did you agree or disagree with the thesis? 
 I agreed with her. I thought that psychological things can affect the games as much as the physical thingsWhen you finished the essay, did you agree or disagree with the thesis?
I agreed with her.

If your mind changed, why? What parts of the essay were persuasive?
I agreed with her.

How could the author enhance the persuasive parts of their essay?
 I don't think the introduction part should be long. The most important parts of the essay is the confirmation and refutation. For better essay, therefore, it should be short.Research
Is the author using research effectively? 
 I think she uses the research effectively. But apparent evidences are needed.Is the research from appropriate sources?
Yes. The research is enough to support the argument.

Are the sources obvious?
   Yes. I think the sources are logical and obvious.

Are the pieces of evidence relevant to the thesis or essay?
  Yes. They are relevant to the essay.Are there any parts of the essay that need evidence to support the claims?
There is no need much more evidence. But I think the evidence is too many. I want much more clear and shorter essay.

2014년 11월 14일 금요일

Second draft

 The 'transformer' movie is a 2007 American science fiction action film based on the transformer toy line. Interestingly, in the film, there are many strange cars which can transform into robots. And the robots have the power to protect themselves meaning that they are semi-autonomy. They can think and do something like real humans. As robot technology has been developing, we, human, can not foresee the limits of the robots. Therefore, we can not sure whether the robots would develop like the 'transformer' robot. If robots had the AI(artificial intelligence), the shape of the world would be changed in many respects, people would say it is an AI revolution, following industrial revolution and information revolution. In terms of military, it would also lead to a revolution. However, whether military robot is effective is must - have discussion. And I don't agree with the idea of military robot.
 Military robots date back to world war 2 and the Cold War in the form of the German Goliath tracked mines and the Soviet tank. The U.S.Military is now investing heavily in research and development towards testing and deploying increasingly automated systems. The most prominent system currently in use is the unmanned aerial vehicle (IAI Pioneer& RQ-1 Predator) which can be armed with Air-to-ground missiles and remotely operated from a command center in reconnaissance roles. DARPA has hosted competitions in 2004 & 2005 to involve private companies and universities to develop unmanned ground vehicles to navigate through rough terrain in the Mojave Desert for a final prize of 2 Million. Not only U.S military but also other nations are now starting to research this field.
In the book called 'the Harvard sampler' said that there is something robot cannot follow human. And I research about them too. According to science news, It talks about what the robot can not follow human. Firstly, the mimicking evolution in the physical manifestation is hard. What tends to happen is natural systems have lots of little joints, lots of little muscles that pull and tug and make a motion. And if you start introducing that many joints and that many motors in a synthetic thing, your cost goes up exponentially as the complexity keeps growing. At the same time, the reliability goes down. If any single joint fails, your whole thing is going to fail. So that makes it very hard to mimic nature.
 On the brain side of things, it is also hard. A lot of us teach ourselves how to reason, how to think, how to analyze new information and make sense of it. However, those have been very difficult for robots to be able to do. So people will try to program different contexts and different scenarios for what a robot should do, but that way of doing it is simply not scalable. You don’t have enough time and manpower to code up all the possible scenarios that a robot would encounter and what it should be doing. People have made very tiny steps toward reasoning and learning, but in general robots do not yet know how to learn.
 And this asked me a question that nowadays, many nations have made lots of the robot soldier for effectiveness. In this book, however, there is something robot can not follow human. And in terms of military, there are also many things military robots can not do. Not only this reason but also other reasons do disagree with the military robots
 Before arguments, I would define the robot and military robot. These are from powerful dictionary company. And I would list them. According to Doosan dictionary, it says that a robot is The machine that automatically process or work the given tasks by itself retained ability. Also, according to the Oxford dictionary, it says that robot is a machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, especially one programmable by a computer. And, according to the Wikipedia, A robot is an automatic mechanical device often resembling a human or animal. According to the dictionary, it says the characteristics of the robot. Firstly, robot should work or help out human. Secondly, work automatically Lastly, react itself to the surroundings.
 And there is few definitions of military robot. According to Wikipedia, military robots are autonomous robots or remote-controlled devices designed for military applications. Such systems are currently being researched by a number of military.
Until now, we have learned the definition and the issue on military robot is important because many nations now start to research this field. This would conclude our future war.However, there are also some doubts of using this. And I disagree to military robot too. There are three reasons; lack of judgment, possibility to be insensitive to war for people and doubts about flexibility of it.
 Firstly, it lacks judgment compared to human soldiers. Even though robots developed, there is a question: Can computers and robots be truly trusted even though they are not humans? Actually, while discovering the latest technology, according to CBC News Broadcast Documentary team,they came up with a serious question that needed to be answered. This question was as follows; what are the new rules of engagement for robots that kill humans in wartime? This is a major disadvantage of question associated with military robots. If the future holds independent, acting robots acting on their own how would they be able to decide right from wrong? Would we hold a robot accountable for a death that shouldn’t have occurred or could we even conclude that? These are a few scenarios that one must consider as disadvantages for future military robotic use.
 Secondly, we could be insensitive to the war. According to P. W. Singer, he once interviewed a drone pilot. And he said that "You’re going to war for 12 hours, shooting weapons at targets, directing kills on enemy combatants. Then you get in the car and drive home, and within 20 minutes you’re sitting at the dinner table talking to your kids about their homework." If soldiers are using the military robot instead of human continuously, they think war is just a game to play and become insensitive to it.
 Lastly, however they developed, there are limits that robot can not follow human: delicate physical manifestation and human brain. According to Satyendra Gupta from science news, even though they are developing, they lack creativity and adaptation to changing situation. In war, similarly, there is many unsuspected variables. And it requires creativity and adaptation which robot does not have. In battlefield, therefore, military robot could be ineffective.
 Although many nations have made lots of military robots, it would just waste of money and time because they will never be as effective as the human soldiers. Some would argue that military robot would save many human soldiers. To be exact, it will save many human soldiers. However, the purpose of existence of soldiers is to defend its enemies. If two each nation fought only by military robots, it would be unmeaning war. And eventually innocent people would die. Isn't it paradoxical? In the result, it just saves human soldiers not citizens. Then where is the meaning of soldiers? On the other hand, some would argue that military robots are preceding human soldiers in terms of environmental, functional capability. I also  agree with it. Sometimes, robots can do things a human can not. However, it is different in war. Some silly people think that victory and defeat from war would be concluded by superior weapons. Of course, we must not ignore it. However, decisive factors of outcome of a war are other things such as the times, general(human), flexibility( the most important thing). And there are many various examples from history. In addition, robots will have no flexibility however they develop. Therefore, these arguments are just short-sighted way of thinking.
 As I speak, many nations have made lots of military robots competitively. And this is crucial issue because it will decide our future war. However, this process is a short - sighted. They don't think the negative effects of it. Even though they are developing and seems to have many merits superficially, there are actually many problems and can not precede human soldiers in the end.

Self evaluation

1) What score do you think you deserve? Here is the rubric:
2 points - The first draft is thoughtful and a good start to an effective persuasive essay. It demonstrates an understanding of the classical argument.
2) What did you do well?
 I did well in researching and examining a question from various angles.
3) What could you have done better?
I could have done better in conclusion.
4) Which part of the classical argument did you use the best?
The confirmation, which lays out in a logical order (usually strongest to weakest or most obvious to most subtle) the claims that support the thesis, providing evidence for each claim.
5) Which part of the classical argument did you use the most poorly?
The summation, which provides a strong conclusion, amplifying the force of the argument, and showing the readers that this solution is the best at meeting the circumstances.

6) What's your strategy to make your second draft better?
As teacher pointed out, I 'll try to clear my conclusion.My narration is strong. I do a good job explaining the foundations of the issue, and I prepare my
 audience to hear my argument.

2014년 10월 25일 토요일

First draft ( this is the very first draft)

 The 'transformer' movie is a 2007 American science fiction action film based on the transformer toy line. Interestingly, in film, there are many strange cars which can transform into robots. And the robots actually have the power to protect themselves meaning that they are semi-autonomy. They can think and do something like real humans. As robot technology have been developing, we, human, can not foresee the limits of the robots. Therefore, we can not sure whether the robots would develop like the 'transformer' robot. If robots had the AI(artificial intelligence), the shape of the world would be changed in many respects and people would say it is a AI revolution, following industrial revolution and information revolution. In terms of military, it would also lead to a revolution. However, whether military robot is really effective is must - have discussion. And I don't agree with the idea of military robot.
 
 Military robots date back to world war 2 and the Cold War in the form of the German Goliath tracked mines and the Soviet teletank. The U.S.Military is now investing heavily in research and development towards testing and deploying increasingly automated systems. The most prominent system currently in use is the unmanned aerail vehicle (IAI Pioneer& RQ-1 Predator) which can be armed with Air-to-ground missiles and remotely operated from a command center in reconnaissance roles. DARPA has hosted competitions in 2004 & 2005 to involve private companies and universities to develop unmanned ground vehicles to navigate through rough terrain in the Mojave Desert for a final prize of 2 Million. Not only U.S military but also other nations are now starting to research this field.
In the book called 'the harvard sampler' said that there is something robot cannot follow human. And I research about them too. According to science news, It talks about what robot can not follow human. Firstly, mimicking evolution in the physical manifestation is hard. What tends to happen is natural systems have lots of little joints, lots of little muscles which pull and tug and make the motion. And if you start introducing that many joints and that many motors in a synthetic thing, your cost goes up exponentially as complexity keeps growing. At the same time, the reliability goes down. If any single joint fails, your whole thing is going to fail. So that makes it very hard to mimic nature.
 On the brain side of things, it is also hard. A lot of us teach ourselves how to reason, how to think, how to analyze new information and make sense of it. This has been very difficult for robots to be able to do. So people will try to program different contexts and different scenarios for what a robot should do, but that way of doing it is simply not scalable. You don’t have enough time and manpower to code up all the possible scenarios that a robot would encounter and what it should be doing. People have made very small steps toward reasoning and learning, but in general robots do not yet know how to learn.
 And this asked me a question that nowadays, many nations have made lots of robot soldier for effectiveness. In this book, however, there is something robot can not follow human. And in terms of military, there are also many things military robots can not do. Not only this reason but also other reasons do disagree with the military robots
 
 Before arguments, I would define the robot and military robot. These are are from powerful dictionary company. And I would list them. According to Doosan dictionary, it says that robot is The machine that automatically process or work the given tasks by the itself retained ability. Also, according to the Oxford dictionary, it says that robot is a machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, especially one programmable by a computer And, according to the Wikipedia, A robot is an automatic mechanical device often resembling a human or animal. According to a dictionary, it says the characteristics of robot. Firstly, robot should work or help out human. Secondly, work automatically Lastly, react itself to the surroundings.
 And there is few definitions of military robot. According to Wikipedia, military robots are autonomous robots or remote-controlled devices designed for military applications. Such systems are currently being researched by a number of military.
Until now, we have learned the definition, The issue on military robot is important because many nations now start to research this field and this would conclude our future war.However, there are also some doubts of using this. And I disagree to military robot too. There are three reasons ; lack of judgment, possibility to be insensitive to war for people and doubts about flexibility of it.
 Firstly, it lacks judgment compared to human soldiers. Even though robots developed, there is a question : Can computers and robots be truly trusted even though they are not humans? Actually, according to CBC News Broadcast Documentary team traveled all over various countries in the world, also entering the Pentagon, robotic production facilities and cutting-edge research laboratories (Mair 2011) While discovering the latest technology, they came up with a serious question that needed to be answered. This question was as follows; what are the new rules of engagement for robots that kill humans in wartime? This is a major disadvantage associated with military robots. If the future holds independent, acting robots acting on their own how would they be able to decide right from wrong? Would we hold a robot accountable for a death that shouldn’t have occurred or could we even conclude that? These are a few scenarios that one must consider as disadvantages for future military robotic use.
 Secondly, we could be insensitive to the war. According to P. W. Singer, he once interviewed a drone pilot. And he said that “What one Predator drone pilot described of his experience fighting in the Iraq war while never leaving Nevada: ‘You’re going to war for 12 hours, shooting weapons at targets, directing kills on enemy combatants. Then you get in the car and you drive home, and within 20 minutes you’re sitting at the dinner table talking to your kids about their homework.’” If soldiers are using the military robot instead of human continuously, they think war is just a game to play and become insensitive to it.
 Lastly, however they developed, there are limits that robot can not follow human : delicate physical manifestation and human brain. According to Satyandra Gupta from science news, even though they are developing, they lack of creativity and adaptation to changing situation. In war, similarly, there is many unsuspected variables. And it requires creativity and adaptation which robot does not have. In battlefield, therefore, military robot could be ineffective.
 
 Although many nations have made lots of military robots, it would just waste of money and time because they will never be as effective as the human soldiers. Some would argue that military robot would save many human soldiers. To be exact, it will save many human soldiers. However, the purpose of existence of soldiers is to defend its enemies. If two each nations fought only by military robots, it would unmeaningful war. And eventually innocent people would die. Isn't it paradoxical? In a result, it just saves human soldiers not citizens. Then where is the meaning of soldiers? On the other hand, some would argue that military robots are preceding human soldiers in terms of environmental, functional capability. I also absolutely agree with it. Sometimes, robots can do things human can not. However, it is different in war. Some silly people think that victory and defeat from war would be concluded by superior weapons. Of course, we must not ignore it. However, decisive factors of outcome of war are other things such as the times, general(human), flexibility( the most important thing). And there are many various examples from history. In addition, robots will have no flexibility however they develop. Therefore, these arguments are just short-sighted way of thinking.
 
 As I speak, many nations have made lots of military robots competitively. And this is very important issue because it will decide our future war. However, this process is a short - sighted. They don't think the effects of it. Even though they are developing, there will be many problems and lastly it could not precede human soldiers.The

Conclusion

Conclusion


As I speak, many nations have made lots of military robots competitively. And this is very important issue because it will decide our future war. However, this process is a short - sighted. They don't think the effects of it. Even though they are developing, there will be many problems and lastly it could not precede human soldiers.