Daily Archives: April 1, 2026

student blogs

Blog Post #10 Article Reaction

Song of the Day: oDsbm – WODS91

I will admit, reading the article “AI-generated contradictions for environmental democracy” was so well-written that I didn’t understand much of the big words involved. I did understand parts of it and agree that AI has major impacts on the environment which in turn impacts society down to a safety level. While my blog is posted after Sarah’s presentation, Sarah’s presentation really helped me understand the topic and article better. It’s almost sad to see people forget how beautiful the world is, and I will admit I forget at times too. But preserving nature and the environment is more than just it’s sight. It’s protecting the cycle humans are a part of. Without a place for nature to grow, the plants will struggle which will decrease eating for certain species which causes a chain effect for the whole cycle of animals. Not to mention plants are the literal reason we breathe.

student blogs

When “Help” Starts to Feel Like Control

Reading Richard Sťahel’s article reminded me that AI is never just about convenience. It is not just about students finishing work faster or teachers saving time. It is about power. Who has it, who controls it, and who gets trained to depend on it.

That is what I found most striking in this piece. Sťahel argues that AI is not politically or environmentally neutral, and honestly, that feels obvious once you sit with it. These tools are built by corporations, not democratic communities. They are designed around growth, data, attention, and dependence, not around truth, equity, or education. Schools may use them, but schools did not shape their values.

As a teacher, I see a smaller version of that problem every day. Students already treat AI like an authority figure. If it gives them a polished answer, they trust it. If it sounds smart, they assume it is right. The issue is not just cheating. It is that AI can train students out of the habits real learning requires: questioning, struggling, revising, and thinking for themselves. I have read work that sounded brilliant on the page and completely collapsed the second I asked the student to explain one sentence out loud.

The article also pushes beyond the classroom and into something bigger. AI is sold as sleek and efficient, but it has real costs. Environmental costs, political costs, human costs. It depends on physical infrastructure, massive energy use, water, materials, and systems most ordinary people have no control over. So while society keeps marketing AI as the future, very few people are asking what that future is made of and who pays for it.

That is why this reading landed for me. It names something that gets buried under all the hype: AI does not just help people do things. It shapes habits. It shapes trust. It shapes dependence. And in a classroom, that matters. If students keep learning that every hard task should be outsourced, then we are not just changing how they work. We are changing how they think.

So no, I do not think the answer is panic. But I also do not think the answer is blind excitement. Students do not just need access to AI. They need literacy about it, boundaries around it, and enough confidence in their own minds to know that fast, polished, and confident are not the same thing as true.

That connects directly to the videos. Every single one shows what happens when systems meant to “help” start watching instead of trusting.

The first video, #tresdancing, hit the hardest for me. I understand the frustrations of at home testing. Not having the space to test effectively, people passing while I’m testing, having to show everything on camera. I have literally had to take my glasses off and show the camera that they were regular glasses and show them each piece or scrap paper I was using. And I have like the worst test taking anxiety known to man. One time I was having technical issues, reached out to the proctor, they took forever to get back to me, so the time lapsed and I could no longer take the test and I never got a refund. The test was 250. So I understand the lengths of what a person might go through to not experience that again. At some point, it stops being about fairness and just feels like punishment.

Blaxites hit in a different but just as real way. Don’t get me started on the medical field and their requirements for medication. I’ve had my share of constantly having to change medication multiple times because of insurance authorization, just to get what I need. I’ve even had to forfeit medication because companies were doing too much. Our health is just numbers and dollar signs instead of just helping. So the idea that your social media could determine your care does not even feel far off, which is the scary part.

A Model Employee really did piss me off. The job market in this day and age is so hard to get into. People are trying to meet or surpass expectations that barely pay a livable wage. And when we do everything in our power to get more money or move differently, then it’s a crime or a problem. Being tracked through wearable devices just adds another layer of pressure, like you are never off, never trusted, always being measured.

Then Frames kind of brings it all together. You have this all-knowing system that is supposed to understand everything, and it still fails to understand a person. That says a lot. You can collect all the data you want, but you still miss context, intention, and humanity.

Across both the reading and the films, the biggest thing I kept coming back to is this: all these measures put in place to help eventually harm. They start with good intentions or at least good marketing, but they end up creating systems where people feel watched, controlled, and misunderstood. And once that becomes normal, it is hard to question it, because it is everywhere.

So for me, this is not just about AI or surveillance as separate issues. It is about what happens when we replace trust with constant monitoring. And what that does to how people learn, work, and live.

student blogs

The Plot Thickens

Watching AI unfold in such a grave manner has been nothing short of unfathomable. I’ve gotten to thinking about how fast it dug its hands in everything. But then again, we’ve all known technology wasn’t the greatest thing for the environment. Far before AI. As a kid, I was really curious about the need for solar panels. Why some houses had them and why mine didn’t. I brought my concern to my parents, who quickly brushed me off by saying they’re too expensive… My curiosity didn’t end there. I found out about all the benefits and from then on, would count all the houses I saw with solar panels on any outing and would wonder why they made them so damn expensive. 

I’ve never seen Wall-E (going on my watchlist), but doesn’t the plot consist of humans turning Earth into a wasteland, then leaving? I think deep down, I know that’s where it’s always been heading; it’s just jolted up much farther than anyone could have suspected.​

It’s the AI revolution, after all… 

Two weeks ago I was talking to my sister and her boyfriend about AI. I went on this tangent about who owns what and what they gain and what it does to your brain and what it does to your parents electricity bill and what it does to the environment (the whole “water bottle” spiel), and I finished by telling them, “If you find yourself needing to use it, use Claud instead…”

This weekend, I overheard him talking about how easy it was to get his workout routine by asking ChatGPT and then went on to explain to my sister what questions and information you need to enter to get herself a perfect routine. I thought I really got through to them. I mean, they looked genuinely concerned, but no. And honestly, what can I do? People really don’t know what they’re signing themselves up for. They don’t understand gravity. And still, I understand them… It’s just how the system has been set up.

And well, of course it’s a democratic concern. I’d go far enough to say these companies have made a puppet out of democracy. They’re constantly platforming quibblers and putting an obscene amount of sparklers as the powerful walk on stage just to see how much can get through to the audience as plausible.

I’m a declared cynic. Not by choice, but because that’s the kind of mindset being a citizen of this world has led me to absorb. I like to think I know how people work.

At the end of the day, most people, in most circumstances, are not going to consider all the directions their bad decisions can take people other than themselves. As much as we hope they’ll someday do. They’ll swipe on some warping filter and get on with it. Or they’ll just avoid asking or looking into anything because, unlike the people who do know the scary facts, they don’t want to feel impending doom 24/7. 

And I’m not innocent. I’ve used these AI platforms outside of simple curiosity too. I’ve scrolled past news articles far too devastating for the sake of a “good state of mind”… Most people will opt into “technological optimism.” It’s an entirely frustrating conversation to have, because I think we all know where all this will eventually lead us. All we can do is (with composure) spew out all our knowledge about the cons, have hope, and try to be compassionate (although it’s hard… and not a right reserved for Aiden Cinnamon Tea).

“the prophecy of doom is to be given greater heed than the prophecy of bliss” (Jonas 1984, p. 31)… !!!

As for the short film, “Frames”… just the talk of government surveillance makes me feel really uneasy. It’s kind of baffling how someone’s relationship with technology can be so polarizing. We’re afraid of the implications that come with our government closely surveilling us, but seem optimistic about a world where our tech knows us so well, it lives all around us, conforming to our every need. Makes me think of  “There Will Come Soft Rains” by Ray Bradbury. 

Anyway, looking forward to the conversation to be had in class… till then 🙂

Adamari Peralta 

4/1/2026

student blogs

Weekly Blog #10

Scary!!! If there were any doubts of the power of AI in our lives and whether or not we are being watched, I think watching these short films might have cleared up that mystery. Most of us try to take necessary precautions to protect ourselves from having data collected on us. Unfortunately, we do not have control of every system, nor do we have the manpower to fully prevent it. In the short film, Frames, we can see how we are being monitored and not even be aware of it. Everytime we swipe that card, perform a google search, or simply have a conversation in our private space, there is always the risk of giving up more information than we intended to share. This reminds me of one of our class discussions when the Professor, and CJ talked about a couple situations that made them feel as though their conversations were being monitored. I remember a few years back when Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) wallets became extremely popular. Those are the wallets and purses that use electromagnetic shielding materials to supposedly protect your credit cards and other documents in your wallets from being scanned for financial gains and data collections. Although they were a bit more expensive than your average ones, people were buying them because they were willing to do anything to protect their privacy. As frightening as it may seem, we cannot stop living life, and they know it.

While listening to the radio on Sunday, I heard that ‘23 and me’ is going out of business. The  company is known for providing genetic ancestry history through saliva samples. What has consumers worried now is that whoever ends up buying the company, there’s the great possibility that their data will also be transferred. In an effort to protect its previous customers, 23 & is now urging everyone to delete all of their data, however, customers have doubts on whether or not they will still be protected if they do delete their personal data. It is unfortunate that we are living in a world where it’s almost impossible to shield and protect ourselves because we are overthrown by AI systems.

student blogs

blog 6

“AI-generated contradictions for environmental democracy” was quite an interesting read. Learning that these AI technologies are completely controlled, operated and very much BELOVED by corporations, who “-do not have the internal mechanisms of self-limitation,” is sadly very much unsurprising.

We see this every day in the news, just like those in power wield their money, office or status to help themselves or their buddies out- so does AI. It reminds me of the one time I spotted the mayor of my town driving into my local Acme. I saw, with horrified eyes, him not only parking in the handicap spot (as someone who is not handicapped)… but DOUBLE park in the handicap spot………. in the broad daylight. No self-limitation. If he could’ve taken up 3, 5, even 10 handicap spots I think he would’ve.

Ik this may seem silly for a sec, but hear me out. This moment I witnessed is one small part of essentially a huge, blood sucking, narcissistic power machine. This translates to those in office taking up as much space as possible for them n their besties- money and places and things they do not necessarily need whatsoever, but still hoard because it makes living life the smallesttt bit easier for them. This takes jobs away from us, the little guys, and kills our environment- with lower-income cities taking the greatest hits.

It was eye-opening to learn in this piece the manner in which they weild AI to take n take from others, including “-expand[ing] control over the activities and thoughts of citizens rather than… expand[ing] their participation in governance.”

Now, what is esp spooky about this, imo, is that the so-called double-parked mayors are not using AI to just SWAY the public’s perception of candidates, policies, whatever to get their votes…. no… they are doing so to get them to straight up NOT participate. But… someone has to vote? Right? Idk.

Either way, we can end up with a society that straight-up doesn’t care about their right to vote, and any slimy leader can slink into power… ew… OR we get a society where only the ppl billionarie slimeheads WANT to be politically literate (men, rich ppl, the elderly, ur pick) vote. Either way, yikes.

“Frames” was also so thot-provoking to watch; it reminded me a lot of Black Mirror’s “Nosedive.” However, what made it stand out as the big dog compared to “Nosedive” was the lack of dialogue in this film, which added to the eerie element.

We always hear the phrase “actions speak louder than words,” and I agree with that saying to an extent. However, when words and rhetoric and tone and sarcasm all have so many layers and layers, and such layers are comprehended differently from culture to culture- human to human- speaking and using our words to reach out to other ppl is always somehow a risk. A risk we will be misunderstood. Still, because of its authenticity and personalization to us and our unique communication styles- at least for me- it is the method of comfort n connection many fall back on most often.

But add in some AI surveillance slop, and all innuendoes, sly remarks, and subtle vocal gestures can easilyyyy be misunderstood. In a world where one is trying to build as much “Community Cohesion” as possible… the only way they really can show the cameras comfort n kindness likely is thru gestures such as straight up sending money stranger’s ways.

Ya… sorry college students hahhaha

student blogs

Blog 10

This weeks read and movie offered some interesting things to consider in regards to AI. First, “AI-generated contradictions for environmental democracy” provided some really nice insight on the major shortcomings surround tech companies and their rapid growth through new technologies. The author brought up the idea that democracy wasn’t really made with modern day issues in mind. With the way that many of out institutions are made up, (the laws, government, etc, none of them are really positioned to protect us from these companies from only working in their best interest. On the other hand, dispute the fact that many of these tech companies talk about making life better for their users, their practices in many ways hurt the environment and contribute to major social and economic issues for those same users. These companies are built for profits, not for out benefit. I felt that this article articulated this crazy dynamic in a nice and clear way. After reading, I’m kind of left with one question on my mind, “What’s the point in giving so much power to institutions that cannot address the the elephants that standing in the room with them”.

Frame

The short film, Frames was also an interesting watch. Despite its brief runtime, it definitely me something to think about. One thing that was on my mind was the reason behind the monitoring. The smart city can see everything, measure the weather, people’s income, scores their interactions and even gives live odds on if people will connect with each other. But in the end whats the point of it all. All of that information served no real purpose at the end of the day. All of it meant nothing and did not lead to people living better are being happier. The monitoring couldn’t even save a life if it had a chance. So in the end, whats the point of it all? Why have lenses everywhere if life ultimately stays the same.

student blogs

Until the end of time!

The screening surveillance videos show the literal reason why I don’t have a Ring doorbell or cameras inside the house.

I really liked the fact that Frames was a silent video; I think it gives a sense of disconnection between the humans. Even when receiving a $5k tip, the excitement is contained. As if controlled by the system. Artistically speaking, I think it’s a very creative choice. Starting, it just looked like what I think government cameras show, but shortly I started questioning who was actually the beneficiary of all the specific data and demographics. I imagine this would be an invention (or decision) of capitalism for capitalism. The companies maximize their profits as civilians lose control, privacy, and physical connection.

Based on the introductory text, this is a machine (AI) that “fails to understand the actions of a civilian,” but to me, the machine, at least this one in particular, doesn’t have to understand the data it collects and assigns to the people walking by, that’s the responsibility of a human in power or another machine that specific companies use to tailor their marketing plans. I think this could be a system implemented in the future to control and sell to the population; it would evolve until there’s just one person in with all the data and the world’s power (or the country, but you know what I mean).

“AI‑generated contradictions for environmental democracy” was a little hard for me to fully follow along because of the vocabulary, but what I think this text confirms is that not only are we killing the environment with our technological advances, but it is also illegal by the same rules we created for ourselves. Ironic and tragic. True.

Just today, I was talking to a different professor about Kean’s broad acceptance of AI usage, despite it holding a proud chest for its sustainability practices. How does replacing disposable to-go trays in the cafeteria with reusable plastic ones compare to most (since this class proves not all) of the student body uses AI every day for their assignments? Hell, even in classes where the topic is not AI or computer science or anything, the use of generative AI is expected. Not necessarily by the professor, even though some care little about whether an assignment is AI-generated or not, but by the students. “It’s okay, will put it on Chat, and it will give us the abstract.” No matter how much I tried for us to actually write it, the majority of the group chose AI slop.

The fact that people don’t even want to try anymore by themselves before using AI is tragic, but it’s even more tragic that the system that sustains our education doesn’t care for it either. Our problems are local, national, and global.

Maybe Nick Cave was right, the apocalypse is near.

student blogs

Blog 10

Reading articles like this always make me wonder how people can still go so hard for AI and its “benefits”. Are there some pros? Yes. But when everything is all laid out like in the St’ahel article , how can we still feel like those benefits are still worth the damage it’s causing to the environment and our democratic systems? The argument that AI undermines democracy by concentrating power in the hands of large technology corporations is extremely valid. When we give the power to money hungry corporations that allow AI to increase surveillance, manipulate information and limit genuine public participation, it challenges the idea that AI is beneficial in any way. We rely on technological advancement without questioning who is actually benefitting from it which is exactly what these corporations want. 

You know how when we were younger and we tried to predict what the world would look like in 20 years, everyone’s answer was “flying cars”? These days the short film “Frames” is what I imagine the world will look like (with the exception of falling into the river). The lack of dialogue made it extra eerie because I also don´t think it´s too far-fetched from what the future looks like. With technology doing absolutely everything in the snap of a finger, who needs small talk right? The generous spending of her money makes me wonder if falling in the river was really an accident or not. They say people who plan on ending their life typically spend their last days giving away all of their stuff so I wonder if that’s what that was (sorry, a little dark). The AI having every single bit of information pertaining to her accounts, her rent, her coffee “user level” seems a bit absurd. It kind of encompasses how AI collects information from us anytime we even breathe towards ChatGpt. “Coffee aficionado” seems like something AI would list when you use the “how would you describe me?” prompt that we tested in class (even though all you asked for was “best places to get coffee from in my area” once 10 months ago). 

student blogs

AI and Democracy/Surveillance

For Sarah:
I was not expecting this paper to go over democracy; I thought we were going to be discussing just the environmental aspect of AI. I am very happy I was wrong, because this paper had some good stuff.

“… most frequently used AI technologies are almost exclusively created and operated by corporations, which means by institutions that are neither established nor governed by democratic principles and practices. Therefore, they do not have the internal mechanisms of self-limitation that would make it possible to assume that they will not abuse the power they have.” We might have mentioned something like this before. I can’t really remember all the garbo Cinnamon said, but I think something about AI would just keep advancing was mentioned. However, I do not recall it being blamed on the companies and them not having limitations, but it makes so much sense. AI did truly just happen as this brand new thing everyone wanted to use, without anyone stopping to think about the consequences. No one put any limitations on it and just let it go wild. We joke about the AI slop all the time, but there are some videos out there of humans that you have to look super close to see if it is AI. The companies put barely any limits on it, and it has been kind of a free-for-all. That being said, I have been more focused on the customer side of the free-for-all. With it not being governed, companies can sorta do whatever with AI. Like how it isn’t much of a choice where AI pops up: your emails, searches, social media, etc. The company side of things is something I never really considered. I always blamed the humans for using it and not the cause of how or why they were using it.

“Given the long-term, often unpredictable implications of new technologies for the maintenance of conditions suitable for truly human life on Earth, Jonas articulated the need to approach them from a perspective in which “the prophecy of doom is to be given greater heed than the prophecy of bliss” (Jonas 1984, p. 31). The aforementioned Doomsday Clock Statement approaches AI technologies from this perspective.” I once did an AI debate in a class with Dr. Guitar. This girl got SO heated that my side (AI is bad) was using too much fear. She blamed us for being fearful of AI and went on and on about how we shouldn’t let our fear limit this new technology. I still think she is wrong. Fear can limit things in bad ways. I am not saying everyone should be fearful of everything. I do see how fear can be harmful. I am not going to say that fearing new technologies is the thing to do. I am not going to fear the Switch 2, I will hate it for other reasons, but I won’t fear it. But AI? Something that isn’t needed in some places, but having access to everything? Something that can generate whatever someone wants? Yeah, I will fear that. Glad to see research has some fear to it, too.

“It turns out that Jonas’s approach is justified. Expectations that AI will be able to solve serious societal, or at least scientific, problems are confronted with a reality in which the current level of AI use is already generating many risks.” So real. “at least scientific.” My stance exactly. This entire time since the first documentary. This quote was picked just cause I agree with it a lot, nothing really new to add, since I yapped about AI harms already.

“… on the limitation and control of weapons of mass destruction will resist the temptation to use AI in the military, in the development of new nuclear or biological weapons, or in the monitoring of the communications and activities of citizens and public institutions or in the manipulation of public opinion, both of their populations and of the populations of countries that they consider hostile.” I’m sorry what. I have never considered this. The military could use AI too. That… that is a scary thought. The military is already a big boooo in my book, and now you can use AI??? I already disagree with harming citizens and other military people just because we can (there is never a good reason for war), and now AI can be involved? That just sounds like a mistake waiting to happen. All of that sentence was a not good future for us.

“The desire not to be left behind in this never-ending modernization race is then forcing even small countries to invest more and more financial, human, raw material, and energy resources in digitalization. As in the past, existing social relations, civil rights, and freedoms are being sacrificed to this externally imposed modernization, as well as the quality of the environment—nowadays, above all, the commitments arising from the Paris Climate Agreement (UN 2015).” This is yet another thing I did not consider. That people might see what is happening elsewhere and just jump onto the trend without realizing how bad it could be. This is a problem I never thought of, that other countries could also be advancing with AI or other problematic things to keep up with other countries, and now we are in deeper problems. While joining countries can be good, like health organizations that share cures or climate change things, this is bad when it comes to joining AI trends.

“Thus, digital empires are emerging (Harari 2024), which have a far greater capacity to monitor, extract, and manipulate information than any totalitarian regime of the last century had at its disposal.” How amazing (I say as a joke). Just putting this quote here cause it is also bad news. We love our information being stolen or sold, how joyous.

“while democracy is meant to guarantee basic human rights, in practice, it is often shaped by the interests of powerful technological giants.” More bad news. Hate this for us. I mean, that is how things go typically, the big, rich things in life control aspects. But it still sucks. I would love to get more into this, but I wanna give some attention to Oliver, so hopefully Sarah has some discussion questions for us cause this paper was very interesting.

For Oliver:

Imma be yapping as I watch. First of all, giving Black Mirror. So, hopefully it is just as good. I think it is interesting this possible camera has something in the top right that is like a schedule. “Dentist cancelled”. Why a camera needs this information is weird. Not helpful to the person in the house. I don’t see how it is helpful to anyone who is watching either. “Human objects” is funny to me cause does that mean it counts anything that is human like? The camera also tells the wind and temp. Again, not every helpful to the human in the house. Cause I assume that means they have to look at the camera to see this. Dang okay it can sense your apartment, rent, and if you paid it. Interesting. I guess all this is helpful to security? Not sure why the amount of rent is needed or if it is paid or not. Not really anyone’s business but the landlord. At least the place looks rich and nice. It has that going for it. I like that it is showing the different rent status so we can see they are possibly at different stages of life. Very big elevator to fit three people side to side.

All this fancy tech and no one can figure out a shoveling system?? This person having to walk through all this snow. I can not read the screen well enough to understand what happened when the person gave up their seat. DANG that person got a huge new balance, hello. Waiting for this to turn bad and I think it might soon. Tracking what you buy already happens, so nothing too new or scary here. I have things that email me of “it has been a while since your purchase” so the tracking last bought was also not too scary. Suggested items, just how we live today. I guess in the grand scheme of things that is scary and weird, but I kinda like when it knows what I want (usually just more Funkos or Sabrina Carpenter albums). It may make shopping easier for people who dislike it, but I can see why it is creepy to have something know you so well.

The books still being around in this time was hard to believe but okay. What is going on with this rich person? This may be dark of me, but are they like going to give up on life and that is why the money is being spent like crazy? Also what are we paying for? If it was the book or coffee, why not pay earlier? Are we paying to stay in places in this world? Now why is the camera concerned about the transaction? I feel like so many other things should be concerned. The bank, the restaurant, the waiter. Not the camera. Oh I see the thing now, if you are a good person, you get points for something. Are points money? Is that how people get rich? Ya know what, sign me up for that life. All that surveillance, but I get rich for being kind, say less. I mean, there could be problems with a system deciding what is kind or not, and that if you are having a bad day you could lose a lot of points based on accidents. But it seems sorta good…

I like that it somewhat shows how surveillance can be good and bad. Yes, all this watching is scary. But the camera was able to predict if there was going to be conflict. In times of crime, it can be a good or bad thing. Good if you were the victim, so that it isn’t a “he said she said” type of situation. Bad if you did something by accident. Surveillance is either good or bad, depending on where you are in a situation. Could be super helpful in saving your life or if you didn’t do something, bad if you are caught at a bad time or just don’t want to be watched.

Um. Okay. So it can watch all this stuff but not see her fall into the water and get help? Bad kind of surveillance. I thought it would be helpful in any sort of way. But noo. It did a bunch of watching and nothing else. Also, I called it.

Anyways, I like what the caption says, “A smart city tracks and analyzes a woman walking through the city. Things she does are interpreted and logged by the city system, but are they drawing an accurate picture of the woman?” Does anyone draw an accurate picture of us? Aren’t we always showing different sides of ourselves depending on the situation? This was a very good question to have in the caption, because it leads to a bunch of other questions. Hopefully, Oliver brings it up amongst other things, because this whole thing of surveillance is a popular topic when tech keeps advancing. In fact, this was one of the many topics talked about at the conference I went to on Saturday, but this topic got people heated. I wonder if the same thing will happen in class.