What signals a person that a certain car is their perfect set of wheels? Is it the model? The GPS system? Or is it some deeper connection, a sensation that just screams "I want you. You shall be mine. We will make sweet drives together." Well, there are many factors that effect people when choosing a car. According to one study, gender is one of the most domineering factors. In a 2008 study, (http://www.autospies.com/news/Recent-Study-Shows-Certain-Cars-Are-Gender-Specific-28278/) many cars were found to be gender-specific based off of anonymous statistics gathered by InsureMe, an insurance referral company. From their data, the sample of customers showed that 86% of Ferrari, Maserati, and Lamborghini drivers requesting insurance were male, and 74% of consumers requesting insurance for Volkswagon Beetles were female. Similarly, brands like Kia, Saturn, and Hyundai, which are considered more affordable and less sporty , were much more likely to have female owners; in fact, Kias and Saturns were twice more likely to be owned my females than males. The data supports that men are more likely to splurge on more expensive, higher performance cars, indicating a high risk incentive in males. Females, on the other hand, more often own practical, affordable cars. Surprisingly, the Hummer, which is commonly considered the auto-epitome of masculinity, showed almost no difference in gender ownership, with only a 3-to-2 male-to-female ratio.
In my opinion, gender does not play a large part in choosing a car. Maybe a long time ago it played a part due to unequal rights and what vehicle was deemed appropriate for women, but nowadays women can get the biggest, bossiest vehicle they desire. For example, my mom owns a huge Toyota SUV. Despite the gas-guzzling motor, its a pretty awesome car, with excellent 4-wheel drive, huge amounts of storage space, and enough seats to carry the whole family. Now, when I'm behind that wheel, I feel like a king. I dominate the road; if anyone crashed into me, I'd feel bad for them because I probably wouldn't feel it! (The latter was an exaggeration, I would most likely feel it, but you get my point)
Age and experience also plays a major part. My mom drives an SUV now, but I'm sure when she was young she wanted a really cool sports car, just like most teens do today. I know for a fact she rode motorcycles all the time; I'm a guy and I've never done that (except that one time for 10 minutes)! One of my good friends is a car fanatic; she is constantly changing her mind about which cool car she wants. First its a red Mustang, then a silver Audi, and the list is going to keep growing. So, truthfully, although some gender trends can be found, they can be discovered in almost anything, and shouldn't be counted on for in depth data. The real money can be found in the driver's personality and self-esteem, which can arise consciously and subconsciously.
Now, when I drive my mom's SUV, I said I feel like the king of the road. That's because I like to have fun; I enjoy looking down at the small cars and pretend their drivers are beneath me, laughing at their futility when they try to cut me off. In my own car, the ES330 Sportsdesign Lexus, I never have that feeling of superiority. I'm on the same level as most of the other cars, so that thought doesn't cross my mind. So, although the driver may choose the car, the car also effects the driver's feelings and thoughts.
In a 2009 study, (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31766031/ns/business-autos/) Dennis Slice, an analysis researcher, remarks that the front end of cars often resemble human or animal faces, and these faces may project traits that different consumers find appealing. These anthropomorphic facial features offer clues into drivers' sex, age, emotions, and intentions, making it easy to judge how people drive. For example, as the article states, you sees an aggressive-looking car, like a Hummer, in the rear-view mirror, e would let them pass by because the driver is characteristically known to be forceful and commanding. But if the car behind you is a Mini Cooper, one would probably not feel any anxiety. Now, the car doesn't always characteristically mark the driver. One of the nicest girls I know drives a very large, rather scary-looking truck, yet she is less than 5'4". Another example, I myself came to own my grandmother's car, the Lexus; I didn't choose it, it was the one she owned already. Fortunately, it is a very nice car, but I wouldn't say it fits my personality not does it have a gender-specificity related with it. It's a nice silver-gray car with a GPS system, 6-disc CD changer, smooth driving, and fancy finishes. I don't see a face when I look at the front, but I certainly think my car expresses my confident, yet safe and relaxed nature. And that doesn't even scratch my true self. Sure, when I drive, I drive safe and never text or call or do anything that's possibly dangerous. But when I'm out of the car, I am usually spontaneous, unplanned, and looking for a fun time. I'm sure I'm not the only one who has a car that doesn't express their entire nature; but like many people, I have a car that is right for me, that has the things I deem important.
Finally, another research study found that car colors can display a lot about a driver's personality, sometimes even influence it. Although many people don't choose their cars, the color can affect people's moods and emotions and even represent their psyche and temperament. Red cars are associated with high-energy people with sex appeal, though they have very high crash rates. Yellow cars have joyful drivers with upbeat attitudes, though some studies suggest they have low confidence. And the yellow car crash rate is even higher than that of the red cars, attributed to the over-optimistic nature of their drivers. Blue cars have varied drivers based on the type of blue: light blue is associated with quiet and calm while dark blue is associated with credibility and confidence. Green cars have whimsical drivers prone to mood swings, purple cars have creative drivers, gray cars have sober, pragmatic drivers (and low crash rates!), white cars have fastidious, status-seeking drivers, cream cars have reserved drivers, black cars have empowered, aggressive drivers, silver cars have cool, detached drivers, orange cars have fickle, fun-loving drivers, brown cars have down-to-earth drivers, and, finally, pink cars have gentle owners. These are traditional views on most of the colors and their relations to drivers. Again, just because a person drives a red car doesn't make them really cool people, nor does a orange car mean its driver is fickle, but they're prone to be that way. My Lexus is coal-colored, which is like a shiny black-gray. Does that mean I am both pragmatic and aggressive? To be honest, I can't really call myself pragmatic, but once in awhile I pretend, in a sense, to be aggressive. I'll think that I'm driving fast and cutting off cars, which kind of feeds my ego, but, in reality, I'm driving around the speed limit and just switching lanes. So, it may be the car that's influencing me, or it just may be me trying to have fun. Also, gray cars have very low crash rates, but black cars have quite high crash rates, so I don't know what that says about me. Fortunately, I'm a pretty cautionary driver. Interestingly, my girlfriend owns a white Acura, and white car drivers tend to be fastidious, which perfectly describes Melissa (though, of course, her personality delves far beyond that); so there is some truth to the car color/personality relation.
All in all, people buy cars for many reasons; their model, brand, unique features, design, ratings, etc., but the cars often reflect and affect an owner's personality, whether they know it or not. The car's color and "face" can influence the buyer, but they don't control the buyer in any way and there isn't any statistical evidence identifying, for example, how likely an aggressive driver drives a black car. The personalities associated with the car drivers and colors are merely stereotypes, but there is some truth, which is why they became stereotypes in the first place. As for gender-related car choices, faster, sportier cars were bought more by men because men have a tendency (more like a need) to express their pride and supposed coolness. Women often bought, and still buy, more practical cars because they don't possess a need to be so flashy. But, these gender-specific traits really don't account for much anymore because men and women commonly oppose these expectations. I believe gender has a very low association with car purchases, and should really be contributed to lifestyle choices, which really play a part in car selection. A family will more likely have affordable, family-friendly cars than two-seater speedsters.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
The Personalities Behind The Screens: Who Texts and Why?
Communication is one of technologies most important and widely used aspect. Everyone nowadays uses a phone daily and most carry a mobile phone around with them. Many people also use instant messaging systems for quick responses or texts for slower chatting. It is not surprising that different forms of technological communication appeal to different types of people.
The study in article 3 made many claims in their discussion concerning who uses what technologies to communicate. The article found that disagreeable individuals use calls and IM more often, rather than face-to-face interaction. It makes sense that they don't meet people head on or text because, normally, disagreeable people don't like confrontation. Calling and IMing allows for a sense of detachment while also allowing quick responses and long conversations to express their (disagreeing) thoughts. Texting lacks that conversation appeal as people can respond whenever they want without a true obligation. It is much more believable to say "my class started and I couldn't respond" in a text rather than an IM.
The study also proclaimed extraverts use more texting and neurotics use IM and texting very often. Extraverts like talking to as many people as possible while moving as fast as possible, which makes texting an obvious choice. Calling is too exclusive and time wasting and IMing involves staying in one location, which is not optimal for social butterflies. Neurotics both text and IM because they need to be on top of things. Calling wastes time, whereas a combination of texting and IMing allows for optimal time management.
Finally, the study concluded that those with high self-esteem (and high neuroticism) have stronger mobile phone addictive tendencies and disagreeable people with low self-esteem have stronger IM tendencies. Neurotics with self-esteem would use the phone more often because that provides a slightly personal form of communication, in between that of actual face-to-face interaction and secluded IMing. Texting and calling someone gives a better understanding of another's feelings. Disagreeable individuals with low self-esteem would definitely use IM because it allows for quick responses with no confrontation at all. One can be angry at another, but, in quick messages, a lot of the anger is lost in translation. Despite all the findings, there is a fair amount of variability that personality can't cover due to situational discrepancies and other environmental differences.
The study is far from complete though- such a broad study must be carefully examined and further researched; it would be best if the data could also enter a qualitative style, as that would account for further personal matters. It is also important to recognize that personality and self-esteem are not strong predictors of tech use; other areas must be examined, such as control perceptions, to develop a comprehensive method of diagnosing communicative tech addictions.
Although there are many controversies on the subject, the use of the term "addiction" is often approved, especially because those who suddenly can't access their cell phones or internet often become irritable, show signs of craving, and even lose control of themselves. A "research paper, published in 2007 in the Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology by a psychiatrist at Tel Aviv University, recommended that Internet addiction be regarded as an extreme disorder on par with gambling, sex addiction and kleptomania" (http://www.livescience.com/technology/080125-tech-addicts.html). In this study, "addiction" is replaced with "addictive tendencies" in order to dispel any arguments over the term; "addictive tendencies" conjures the thought that communicative technology is something one relies on often, but remains slightly below that of a true addiction. Personally, I don't think tech should be considered an addiction. We use tech every second of the day; for example, while I'm typing this thread, I'm watching the Olympics on my high-definition TV and listening to music on my stereo- 3 technologies at once. Despite this constant usage, most everyone can survive without communicative technologies for days on end, though people feel bad about it because they miss out on things beyond their field of vision. In rare cases, people can become quite angry when unable to use texting or IM to communicate, but I believe that these cases can be explained by other reasons beyond addiction.
This study, although somewhat short, does get across many key facts that I agree with; it does an adequate job supporting its claims and research. I agree with the conclusion dealing with personality traits, but I wish it went into a little more depth. There's a lot left unexplained.
The study in article 3 made many claims in their discussion concerning who uses what technologies to communicate. The article found that disagreeable individuals use calls and IM more often, rather than face-to-face interaction. It makes sense that they don't meet people head on or text because, normally, disagreeable people don't like confrontation. Calling and IMing allows for a sense of detachment while also allowing quick responses and long conversations to express their (disagreeing) thoughts. Texting lacks that conversation appeal as people can respond whenever they want without a true obligation. It is much more believable to say "my class started and I couldn't respond" in a text rather than an IM.
The study also proclaimed extraverts use more texting and neurotics use IM and texting very often. Extraverts like talking to as many people as possible while moving as fast as possible, which makes texting an obvious choice. Calling is too exclusive and time wasting and IMing involves staying in one location, which is not optimal for social butterflies. Neurotics both text and IM because they need to be on top of things. Calling wastes time, whereas a combination of texting and IMing allows for optimal time management.
Finally, the study concluded that those with high self-esteem (and high neuroticism) have stronger mobile phone addictive tendencies and disagreeable people with low self-esteem have stronger IM tendencies. Neurotics with self-esteem would use the phone more often because that provides a slightly personal form of communication, in between that of actual face-to-face interaction and secluded IMing. Texting and calling someone gives a better understanding of another's feelings. Disagreeable individuals with low self-esteem would definitely use IM because it allows for quick responses with no confrontation at all. One can be angry at another, but, in quick messages, a lot of the anger is lost in translation. Despite all the findings, there is a fair amount of variability that personality can't cover due to situational discrepancies and other environmental differences.
The study is far from complete though- such a broad study must be carefully examined and further researched; it would be best if the data could also enter a qualitative style, as that would account for further personal matters. It is also important to recognize that personality and self-esteem are not strong predictors of tech use; other areas must be examined, such as control perceptions, to develop a comprehensive method of diagnosing communicative tech addictions.
Although there are many controversies on the subject, the use of the term "addiction" is often approved, especially because those who suddenly can't access their cell phones or internet often become irritable, show signs of craving, and even lose control of themselves. A "research paper, published in 2007 in the Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology by a psychiatrist at Tel Aviv University, recommended that Internet addiction be regarded as an extreme disorder on par with gambling, sex addiction and kleptomania" (http://www.livescience.com/technology/080125-tech-addicts.html). In this study, "addiction" is replaced with "addictive tendencies" in order to dispel any arguments over the term; "addictive tendencies" conjures the thought that communicative technology is something one relies on often, but remains slightly below that of a true addiction. Personally, I don't think tech should be considered an addiction. We use tech every second of the day; for example, while I'm typing this thread, I'm watching the Olympics on my high-definition TV and listening to music on my stereo- 3 technologies at once. Despite this constant usage, most everyone can survive without communicative technologies for days on end, though people feel bad about it because they miss out on things beyond their field of vision. In rare cases, people can become quite angry when unable to use texting or IM to communicate, but I believe that these cases can be explained by other reasons beyond addiction.
This study, although somewhat short, does get across many key facts that I agree with; it does an adequate job supporting its claims and research. I agree with the conclusion dealing with personality traits, but I wish it went into a little more depth. There's a lot left unexplained.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
My Car: My Pride and Hatred
I love my car. I inherited my grandmother's 2004 ES330 Sportsdesign Lexus after my family decided she was no longer a safe driver. Although it had some interior stains and required some check-up maintenance, I soon felt the same exhilarating feeling all car owners have- the excitement of having your own car, your own vehicle. It represents freedom, trust, responsibility, and, more importantly, freedom (so important, it must be stated twice). No longer must I wait for a ride to school, a ride to my girlfriend's house, a ride to the movies, a ride to a friend's house, and so on. I could go wherever I wanted, and I could do it in style. I love my car's smooth acceleration, the roar of the engine, the classic 6-disc CD changer, and the feeling I get when I get up, shower, and go driving without any particular destination in mind. I love my car. I get angry when other people drive my car (especially without permission). I take pride in my car. I hope I will always have my car. But, at the same time, I have a problem with automobiles in general.
There is nothing out there to challenge the automobile. And, with all the current and future innovations, nothing may ever even hope to challenge the car. This powerful industry has no competitor; yes, there are rival companies within the industry, but all sell the same products- cars. This doesn't mean the car industry is by any means unsuccessful. It is one of the most successful and dominating industries on Earth. But where is he fail safe? In the future, when innovation slows and the automobile just can't be improved on, what will we do? What will humans use for public transportation when resources for these future cars run out? When a system failure results in cars becoming nonfunctioning? We have no way out as it stands currently. In a way, I am approaching this industry like the world should have approached global warming. It didn't seem important a hundred years ago, but now its a global issue. I don't think the car industry will have an issue in one hundred years, but how about 200? Or 300? Even if there is no problem 1000 years, shouldn't we get started on a fail safe now? If we had countered global warming hundred of years ago, we could have an almost pollution-free environment now. Or, if no solution existed, we could have moon colonies set-up as a last resort. The car industry needs competition so the human race can go beyond the illusion of security and have a real long-term plan.
I love my car. You love your car. we have our cars thanks to the automobile industry- therefore, we have the automobile industries to thank for our freedom (in a sense). Nevertheless, the auto industry needs a rival. It needs an opponent to drive it further, to make it think outside the box. It needs to create different forms of travel beyond that of a four-wheeled car (or however-many-wheeled bus) or at least have a rival doing that job for it. There needs to be variety beyond different brand names so that the human race gains a tangible security.
-This post inspired by my girlfriend, Melissa Augustino (Happy 18th Birthday, Love!)
There is nothing out there to challenge the automobile. And, with all the current and future innovations, nothing may ever even hope to challenge the car. This powerful industry has no competitor; yes, there are rival companies within the industry, but all sell the same products- cars. This doesn't mean the car industry is by any means unsuccessful. It is one of the most successful and dominating industries on Earth. But where is he fail safe? In the future, when innovation slows and the automobile just can't be improved on, what will we do? What will humans use for public transportation when resources for these future cars run out? When a system failure results in cars becoming nonfunctioning? We have no way out as it stands currently. In a way, I am approaching this industry like the world should have approached global warming. It didn't seem important a hundred years ago, but now its a global issue. I don't think the car industry will have an issue in one hundred years, but how about 200? Or 300? Even if there is no problem 1000 years, shouldn't we get started on a fail safe now? If we had countered global warming hundred of years ago, we could have an almost pollution-free environment now. Or, if no solution existed, we could have moon colonies set-up as a last resort. The car industry needs competition so the human race can go beyond the illusion of security and have a real long-term plan.
I love my car. You love your car. we have our cars thanks to the automobile industry- therefore, we have the automobile industries to thank for our freedom (in a sense). Nevertheless, the auto industry needs a rival. It needs an opponent to drive it further, to make it think outside the box. It needs to create different forms of travel beyond that of a four-wheeled car (or however-many-wheeled bus) or at least have a rival doing that job for it. There needs to be variety beyond different brand names so that the human race gains a tangible security.
-This post inspired by my girlfriend, Melissa Augustino (Happy 18th Birthday, Love!)
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Pitstop: Let's Stop the Car And Talk About Academic Blogs
This is an academic blog, no way around it. It is a semester-long project for JOUR289I (Information 3.0), its purpose being to teach students how to maintain and coordinate a blog, learn about a specific field of study and its relation to technology, and inform the public about your own unique opinion on this field. As you know, my field is the automobile industry. This week, one of my posts must address how my field effects education. I have scoured my mind to try and figure out how automobiles effect education; honestly, I can't get anything beyond a car or bus is often used by students and faculty to get to class. So, the other option for this blog is to address whether an academic blog is a useful education tool or a waste of time. In my opinion, this blog project is one of the most useful and efficient academic assignments given to students.
In the given article , Sarah Lohnes clarifies that the academic blog must not be characterized in the context of an everyday "authentic" blog, but should be accepted as its own hybrid nature- a blog covering the rift between life in school and life out of school. This hybrid nature lays the foundation for what this academic blog should be- despite having no school for over a week, I find myself constantly planning when to write a new post and not just because I have its an assignment. I honestly love having a blog, even if it has to be educational. This blog requires me to learn more about my topic, analyze it, and write my opinion on it, all while keeping my absolute interest.
A traditional blog has a purpose, an inspiration, and an opinion. This academic blog has all those things, but with a direction- always bring the post's subtopics back to technology. Sometimes that requirement is challenging; sometimes I just want to write about my feelings towards cars and the auto industry. But, by forcing me to study up on my topic, I become very knowledgeable on the subject at hand- with this knowledge, I can not only provide an opinion, but I can back it up with data and research. Some "authentic" bloggers may disagree with the practice of "inauthentic" academic blogging, but, to be quite honest, it doesn't matter what others think. The only thing I should be concerned with is my opinion and the audience, which, surprisingly, is what "authentic" bloggers care about as well.
In the given article , Sarah Lohnes clarifies that the academic blog must not be characterized in the context of an everyday "authentic" blog, but should be accepted as its own hybrid nature- a blog covering the rift between life in school and life out of school. This hybrid nature lays the foundation for what this academic blog should be- despite having no school for over a week, I find myself constantly planning when to write a new post and not just because I have its an assignment. I honestly love having a blog, even if it has to be educational. This blog requires me to learn more about my topic, analyze it, and write my opinion on it, all while keeping my absolute interest.
A traditional blog has a purpose, an inspiration, and an opinion. This academic blog has all those things, but with a direction- always bring the post's subtopics back to technology. Sometimes that requirement is challenging; sometimes I just want to write about my feelings towards cars and the auto industry. But, by forcing me to study up on my topic, I become very knowledgeable on the subject at hand- with this knowledge, I can not only provide an opinion, but I can back it up with data and research. Some "authentic" bloggers may disagree with the practice of "inauthentic" academic blogging, but, to be quite honest, it doesn't matter what others think. The only thing I should be concerned with is my opinion and the audience, which, surprisingly, is what "authentic" bloggers care about as well.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
CARS: Clumsy Automobile Reeks in Snow
This weekend, there was a major snowstorm in Maryland, burying the state in over 2 feet of snow. The storm also made its way up the East Coast, covering areas in at least 6 inches of the white powder. On my drive home from Penn State (I was visiting my girlfriend over the weekend) on Sunday, I was hindered by a horse-drawn carriage. This carriage, although slow, was doing a very good job staying quite steady in the snow-covered streets. My car, on the other hand, was not doing so well. I made it home fine, but my car had some trouble in areas when the tires weren't touching actual pavement. Many snowplows were hard at work on the sides of the road, pushing towering walls of snow into ditches and carrying heaping mounds of powder off the highway. Of course, there were many crashes, which caused for even further delays. In fact, on my way to College Park, I passed a car completely engulfed in flame, smashed into a wall of snow. Even with its 4-wheel drive, 5-star crash test rating, and anti-lock brakes, this SUV found itself helpless in nature's grasp. I truly hope the owners of the vehicle got out safe.
Nowadays, we have many new technologies that help drivers deal with the snow. But lets take a look back in time when cars first started out. There were many worldwide attempts at making an efficient automobile, but I won't get into details just yet. The Duryea Motor Wagon Company became the first automobile manufacturing company of America in 1893, but it was quickly overtaken by the Olds Motor Vehicle Company, with the creation of the Oldsmobile, in 1902. Ford and Cadilac were only a year behind, and soon these car companies were producing thousands of cars a year. Back then, innovation was fast because there was so much to improve on; the earliest cars didn't even have windshields. Back then, breakdowns were standard, tires were regular rubber, fuel was scarce, drivable roads were rarely found, and rapid innovation (meaning the invention of a windshield, for example) made the preceding cars obsolete. Now add snow to the mix. Cars were worthless when it snowed in the early 1900s. There was no such thing as snow tires, 4-wheel drive, windshield defrosters, seat warmers, seat belts or even windshield wipers. And according to the "Air Conditioning Timeline" on the "Greatest Engineering Achievements of the 20th Century" website (), the first air conditioning unit was made available in a Packard automobile in 1939; most automobiles didn't have air conditioning until 1969. There must have been many cold drivers in the 1900s. All in all, driving in the snow back then was horrible, no doubt about it.
Unfortunately, even with all the new automobile technology, winter causes hundreds of thousands of deaths in America every year thanks to snow storms. No matter how technologically advanced we've come, we still can't surpass the harshness of mother nature in winter. Will the car ever be safe in the snow? As an on-campus student, I don't have to drive to school, but, for many off-campus students, the car is the only option to get to campus. And because the roads leading to campus have to be as clear as the ones within campus, classes can't be held knowing that main off-campus roads are still covered in snow, preventing students, and even faculty, to go to school. UMD has been shut down for 4 days now, and, even though the majority of students either live in campus or take the underground metro to school, it can't be reopened until all students and faculty who drive a car or take the public bus can safely arrive on campus. 100 years after its invention, the automobile still can not be driven safely in the snow.
Nowadays, we have many new technologies that help drivers deal with the snow. But lets take a look back in time when cars first started out. There were many worldwide attempts at making an efficient automobile, but I won't get into details just yet. The Duryea Motor Wagon Company became the first automobile manufacturing company of America in 1893, but it was quickly overtaken by the Olds Motor Vehicle Company, with the creation of the Oldsmobile, in 1902. Ford and Cadilac were only a year behind, and soon these car companies were producing thousands of cars a year. Back then, innovation was fast because there was so much to improve on; the earliest cars didn't even have windshields. Back then, breakdowns were standard, tires were regular rubber, fuel was scarce, drivable roads were rarely found, and rapid innovation (meaning the invention of a windshield, for example) made the preceding cars obsolete. Now add snow to the mix. Cars were worthless when it snowed in the early 1900s. There was no such thing as snow tires, 4-wheel drive, windshield defrosters, seat warmers, seat belts or even windshield wipers. And according to the "Air Conditioning Timeline" on the "Greatest Engineering Achievements of the 20th Century" website (), the first air conditioning unit was made available in a Packard automobile in 1939; most automobiles didn't have air conditioning until 1969. There must have been many cold drivers in the 1900s. All in all, driving in the snow back then was horrible, no doubt about it.
Unfortunately, even with all the new automobile technology, winter causes hundreds of thousands of deaths in America every year thanks to snow storms. No matter how technologically advanced we've come, we still can't surpass the harshness of mother nature in winter. Will the car ever be safe in the snow? As an on-campus student, I don't have to drive to school, but, for many off-campus students, the car is the only option to get to campus. And because the roads leading to campus have to be as clear as the ones within campus, classes can't be held knowing that main off-campus roads are still covered in snow, preventing students, and even faculty, to go to school. UMD has been shut down for 4 days now, and, even though the majority of students either live in campus or take the underground metro to school, it can't be reopened until all students and faculty who drive a car or take the public bus can safely arrive on campus. 100 years after its invention, the automobile still can not be driven safely in the snow.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
The Automobile Industry and Me!
As you know from my first post, this blog will cover all aspects of the auto industry in the USA. What you don't know is me, the writer, the idea man, the great creator, the omnipotent savior to all those who follow this blog- not that there are any yet, besides my loving (and beautiful) girlfriend- Hi Melissa! Now, you may be asking yourself, is the writer that full of himself? Or is he just trying to set a funny, casual mood for his blog? Well, mostly it's the latter reason, but it's also because this is my blog, and, because I write it, I can really say whatever I want; but of course I know I won't get much of an audience if I don't write what the people want to hear. Fortunately, I think I can do that- especially if you're into cars!
Although I have a profile on my site, I feel I should give a slightly more detailed account of myself. My full name is Daniel Marvin Schuldenfrei. I am an eighteen-year-old freshman at the University of Maryland: College Park, majoring in Physiology and Neurobiology. I hope to be a veterinarian in the future and possibly focus on neurobiological research. As I mentioned, I have a girlfriend named Melissa (Augustino), and, although this blog's topic has nothing to do with her, I must mention her because she is truly my better half (and because she'll be the first to read this post). She is a freshman Microbiology major attending the Schreyer Honors College at Penn State- she's even smarter than me, and I'm not afraid to admit that. Moving on- I am a self-proclaimed movie and television buff. I truly enjoy watching anything- old television shows to dramas to monster movies-, as television shows and movies provide an excellent service- silent communion, followed by active discussions. My favorite movie is "Pulp Fiction," directed by Quentin Tarantino, and my favorite television shows include "Arrested Development," "Scrubs," "Lost," "Community," and "Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia." I am also an avid singer- I have participated in the Maryland All State Choir for three years, performed in a barbershop quartet (The Naturals) for five, and sang for roughly 13 years of my life. Lastly, my favorite books are the "Pendragon" series, an excellent collection of fantasy novels, and "Crime and Punishment," the classic by Fyodor Dostoevsky. All in all, I am a pretty well-rounded person- better yet, I have roughly no background knowledge of cars.
This blog, inspired by my Information 3.0 class, is a semester-long project, requiring me to post a couple educated posts a week. As I said, I really don't know anything about cars beyond how to drive one (well, I might add). Today, coincidentally, my father gave a run-through of what I needed to check my car for in order to visit my girlfriend at Penn State this weekend. And to be quite honest, I had almost no idea what he was talking about. I believe at roughly 9 o'clock tonight I became more knowledgeable about cars then I've ever been before. Despite my lack of technological knowledge, this blog will truly be brimming with note-worthy posts concerning everything from past automobile technologies to future developments to major players in the industry. I will post as I learn, and I will learn many things every week. Fortunately, I do have knowledge about the industry and, more importantly, I have an opinion and ideas. And that's what a blog is- a news feed with striking opinions. Now, I never would have dreamed I would be a blogger. I actually didn't know much about it until I saw "Julie and Julia," a very good movie following the realization of a young chef's dream to become a top chef. In that movie, the main character (Julie) blogged to make known her fantastic goal. I also have a goal. I am going to explain, criticize, commend, thoroughly crush, praise, and again crush the auto industry, their products, and their actions so that you, the reader, can create your own opinion of big business, new and old auto technologies, and the road that our nation is currently driving down. Is it paved with new-age tech as far as the eye can see? Or has our nation passed the yellow "No Outlet" sign?
Although I have a profile on my site, I feel I should give a slightly more detailed account of myself. My full name is Daniel Marvin Schuldenfrei. I am an eighteen-year-old freshman at the University of Maryland: College Park, majoring in Physiology and Neurobiology. I hope to be a veterinarian in the future and possibly focus on neurobiological research. As I mentioned, I have a girlfriend named Melissa (Augustino), and, although this blog's topic has nothing to do with her, I must mention her because she is truly my better half (and because she'll be the first to read this post). She is a freshman Microbiology major attending the Schreyer Honors College at Penn State- she's even smarter than me, and I'm not afraid to admit that. Moving on- I am a self-proclaimed movie and television buff. I truly enjoy watching anything- old television shows to dramas to monster movies-, as television shows and movies provide an excellent service- silent communion, followed by active discussions. My favorite movie is "Pulp Fiction," directed by Quentin Tarantino, and my favorite television shows include "Arrested Development," "Scrubs," "Lost," "Community," and "Its Always Sunny in Philadelphia." I am also an avid singer- I have participated in the Maryland All State Choir for three years, performed in a barbershop quartet (The Naturals) for five, and sang for roughly 13 years of my life. Lastly, my favorite books are the "Pendragon" series, an excellent collection of fantasy novels, and "Crime and Punishment," the classic by Fyodor Dostoevsky. All in all, I am a pretty well-rounded person- better yet, I have roughly no background knowledge of cars.
This blog, inspired by my Information 3.0 class, is a semester-long project, requiring me to post a couple educated posts a week. As I said, I really don't know anything about cars beyond how to drive one (well, I might add). Today, coincidentally, my father gave a run-through of what I needed to check my car for in order to visit my girlfriend at Penn State this weekend. And to be quite honest, I had almost no idea what he was talking about. I believe at roughly 9 o'clock tonight I became more knowledgeable about cars then I've ever been before. Despite my lack of technological knowledge, this blog will truly be brimming with note-worthy posts concerning everything from past automobile technologies to future developments to major players in the industry. I will post as I learn, and I will learn many things every week. Fortunately, I do have knowledge about the industry and, more importantly, I have an opinion and ideas. And that's what a blog is- a news feed with striking opinions. Now, I never would have dreamed I would be a blogger. I actually didn't know much about it until I saw "Julie and Julia," a very good movie following the realization of a young chef's dream to become a top chef. In that movie, the main character (Julie) blogged to make known her fantastic goal. I also have a goal. I am going to explain, criticize, commend, thoroughly crush, praise, and again crush the auto industry, their products, and their actions so that you, the reader, can create your own opinion of big business, new and old auto technologies, and the road that our nation is currently driving down. Is it paved with new-age tech as far as the eye can see? Or has our nation passed the yellow "No Outlet" sign?
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
The Automobile Industry: Driving US Into the Ground
"Have you ever wondered what would happen if cars became unusable? There are many possibilities that could potentially cause this crisis- overwhelming gas shortages, environmental laws deeming cars illegal, consumers can’t afford them due to recession. If anything was to happen to the car industry, our economy would plummet into the depths of recession and traveling anywhere beyond one’s neighborhood would be nearly impossible. This blog is not meant to undermine or disclaim the automobile industry; the goal of this blog is to encompass the industry’s rise to power, learn about the changes in technology, and, at the same time, present an unfortunate possibility- our nation would be in shambles if the auto industry failed. Fortunately, this possibility will most likely never become a truth thanks to the innovative technologies continuously created specifically to solve automobile concerns. Researchers are avidly searching for new car materials and gas substitutes, and constantly creating new gadgets designed to make the automobile more accessible. Because of these new innovations, the auto industry will fortify its grasp on our lives.
In my blog, I will start from the beginning of the industry, going over the founding brands, the original assembly line, early technologies, and primary public responses, and follow with the present automobile, describing basic package features, current global use, environmental effects, and the current prominent industries. I will take a step further by describing future technologies, such as facial recognition, new energy sources, lead car platoons, and automated highways.Throughout this blog, my key feature will be analytical disassembly of the automobile industry as a whole, pointing out how and why this global industry will only continue to grow, potentially monopolizing the world.
But there actually is an unfortunate truth- because the auto industry has developed such a hold on our economy and our lives, there is no room for change. Yes, new cars will always be developed, each one surpassing its predecessor, but the car will always be the American (and global) main source of transport. By ignoring other possible public fields of transport, such as the metro system and even fantasy transport systems (I know I’m not the only one who wants to ride in a giant bubble), we are digging a hole for ourselves without an escape ladder. If, by some chance, cars actually failed, metros would become absolutely overcrowded, planes would be even more unaffordable and, again, overcrowded, and human-powered vehicles, like bicycles and skateboards, would not make the cut when faced with traveling beyond one’s own city limits. The auto industry, despite its production of useful vehicles, simply serves to drive the United States people into the ground. And when we run out of digging tools, what are we going to do?
In my blog, I will start from the beginning of the industry, going over the founding brands, the original assembly line, early technologies, and primary public responses, and follow with the present automobile, describing basic package features, current global use, environmental effects, and the current prominent industries. I will take a step further by describing future technologies, such as facial recognition, new energy sources, lead car platoons, and automated highways.Throughout this blog, my key feature will be analytical disassembly of the automobile industry as a whole, pointing out how and why this global industry will only continue to grow, potentially monopolizing the world.
But there actually is an unfortunate truth- because the auto industry has developed such a hold on our economy and our lives, there is no room for change. Yes, new cars will always be developed, each one surpassing its predecessor, but the car will always be the American (and global) main source of transport. By ignoring other possible public fields of transport, such as the metro system and even fantasy transport systems (I know I’m not the only one who wants to ride in a giant bubble), we are digging a hole for ourselves without an escape ladder. If, by some chance, cars actually failed, metros would become absolutely overcrowded, planes would be even more unaffordable and, again, overcrowded, and human-powered vehicles, like bicycles and skateboards, would not make the cut when faced with traveling beyond one’s own city limits. The auto industry, despite its production of useful vehicles, simply serves to drive the United States people into the ground. And when we run out of digging tools, what are we going to do?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
