1. write a one paragraph summary statement about the article characterizing the main message of the article?
The main message of the article is that, the new techonologies of 21 century like the nanotechnology, robotics, and genetic engineering, are dangerous to our(human) existance. These technologies which are more of commercial than military , makes it hard to control growth of these technologies putting the human existance in danger. So we need to put a break on the growth of these technologies.

2. Who is Bill Joy?

Bill Joy is the cofounder and Chief Scientist of Sun Microsystems. He was cochair of the presidential commission on the future of IT research, and is coauthor of "The Java Language Specification".

3. what did you find

3.1. interesting about the article?
The fact(or i don't know) that these 21st century technologies can so so dangerous to our existance made me think hard and fast. That these technologies can be developed so that they can replicate themselves was very interesting. I mean I have seen movies and thought of those as mere fiction, but for them to become real and people like Bill Joy expressing concern about this was interesting to read.

3.2. not find interesting about the article?
Nothing, the articel was very interesting to read.

4. with which arguments (focused on predicting future developments) do you

4.1. agree
I agree with the fact that genetic engineering can get out of our hands and become a threat to our existance.
"Genetic engineering promises to revolutionize agriculture by increasing crop yields while reducing the use of pesticides; to create tens of thousands of novel species of bacteria, plants, viruses, and animals; to replace reproduction, or supplement it, with cloning; to create cures for many diseases, increasing our life span and our quality of life; and much, much more. We now know with certainty that these profound changes in the biological sciences are imminent and will challenge all our notions of what life is." I agree with this above paragraph that genetic engineering will improve our life butI also agree with the fact that more dangerous bacteria which are imune to the antibiotics we have today will evolve.

4.2. disagree
I kind of disagree with this message of the article that, the technology like Robotics will lead to human extinctioin. In the article they talk about the knowledge based mass destruction. Pursuit of knowledge leading to destruction is something i don't agree with.

5. does the article relate to

5.1. other topics / themes you have studied at CU?

Since I am a computer science major's student, I have taken classes where in we learn how to make better and faster programs. I have also taken other humanities courses which has tought me to think as a non technical person and which has developed my sense for other areas of studies like ethics.

5.2. to your personal interests and life?

My interest is to become a teacher and at this point I dont know how this article would relate to my interest.

6. how should we react to this article

6.1. on an individual basis?
We should be concerned about ones own existance if all that is said in the article is true. For me I will be concerned about genetic engineerin, it is basically going against the nature.

6.2. on a societal basis?
We should be concerned on a societal basis too. As a society we should take steps to see that no danger is posed to human existance.

7. which concepts /names mentioned in the article did you not understand?
I don't know much about the nanotechnolgy.

8. would you consider yourself

8.1. a techno-utopist (“glorifying the future”)

8.2. a techno-pessimist (“glorifying the past”)

8.3. or how would you characterize your own position?
I classify myself as both techno-utopist and techno-pessimist. Technology has made our lives better without question so I am techno-utopist. At the same time I am techno-pessimist because I like the nature and believe that nature should not be manupulated too much so that it will turn against us.

9. how well have futurists succeeded or failed to predict the disappearance in the digital age of

9.1. paper
They have failed, because we still use paper for day to day writing or even making notes if not writing long essays. Even with lot of information on the internet some people still like to have hardcopy of it so they print out the material.

9.2. books
The have failed or succeeded, because we still treasure books at the same time we have access to online books and reading material.

9.3. physical libraries
I think they have succeeded since due to the internet so widely used to get any knid of information. I mean you don't have to go to the the library to find some information because that can be done on your own laptops at your convenience.

9.4. distances between people
They have succeeded if we are talking about the physical distance between the people but if we are talking about distances between people in a sense of information sharing then the futurists have failed. With the invention of internet and electronic mail facilities people have gotten close to each other. People who are half way around the world can communicate with people here with ease.