My panel group will be on surgeons. I found the role of surgeons in the 21st century very interesting. As technology has advanced, so has surgical tools. Surgeons must use these tools in order to successfully perform certain high risk surgeries like open heart and prostate surgery. Surgeons must be trained on how to use these tools and computer software. While operating, they literally resemble a cyborg, as they are temporarily attached to these instruments that are crucial to the welfare of their patients. Surgeons have even requested haptic feedback, a type of technology that vibrates when a human touches the object. This interests me as we have discussed in class the human need to be more and more connected to technology.

 So far, our conversation on gender and information has left an impression on me that was quite different than the one I initially entered with. When it came to gender, I often did not realize how much of an influence our society has on what is appropriate behavior for a man or woman. I often believed it was genetic, and that the fact that men and women typically behave a certain kind of way was scientifically determined. After readings from Roughgarden and other writers, I began to realize that humans have a much more complicated code of behavior than other animals. Information on the other hand, I began to understand depended on who the intended audience was, as information is often delivered in codes that are coded to reach a certain audience.

I decided to do my presentation on the restrictions that our perceptions of gender has on the individual. These perceptions of how men and women typically think, I.e. men are typically left brained, women are typically right brained, are not actually indicative of how people actually process information. I took two web quizzes that claimed to tell me whether I thought more like a man or woman, and I scored right in the middle. I wanted other members of the class to take the quiz and compare their results. I was hoping it would start a conversation about whether the results were actually in line with how they really processed information, and whether that may be due to gender differences that are scientifically determined or socially programmed. 

 For my final performance, done with Toan and Kerlyne, we decided to focus on randomness and chance. Those topics were ones that we felt stuck with us and impacted us greatly. It is also a topic that still perplexes me. In order to show how randomness is still very much "controlled" by other factors, we decided to choose ten different topics (covered in class) to put in a hat (or basket, rather). Then, we assigned random numbers to each student, and this was done by having them count off. Professors Dalke and Grobstein each chose two numbers (from one to however many students in class) and those four students randomly chosen picked out of a hat and randomly chose a topic.

For my Final "Performance" I opted instead to create rather than to perform. Darwin, the large paper mache pigeon that you all saw in class, is the final product. My presentation was very short, but that is because I really wanted to just present the fruit of my labor and make sure the bigger groups had enough time to perform their presentations. He took 5 days in all to make. First, I applied strips of newspaper dipped in a flour/water mixture to the exterior of two inflated balloons(one for the head and one for the body). I let that dry for 24 hours before attaching the two with newspaper, tape, and superglue. Then I started painting his head and neck. After letting the paint dry, I painted his eyes and made a beak out of newspaper and superglued it to his face.

I greatly apologize for this late post. I have lost the document I wrote notes in -mainly because I'm still getting used to macs.. and I just managed to find it. Here it is: