My articles from the IEEE Computer Society have all followed roughly the same structure. A problem, a hypothesis, and what the future of it may be. There may be a new technology coming along to replace an old one, which they explain. They then go into details as to how it can be improved, and why. Finally, they give us a test of how the new technology might look and feel when it actually gets here. Most of the articles followed this same structure, especially being that they were all scientific entries about computer technology.
This brings up the next point, reference. As mentioned above, no technology is scrapped, only added upon. In one post I talk about Web 3.0, which is Web 2.0 upgraded. Each article mentions how the technology can be improved upon, never just thrown out. In the oil spill article, they look at the problem and find out how to fix it, as opposed to simply creating an entirely new software system for oil rigs.
The language used in each article can be read by anyone who is familiar with technology. Some of the content may only make sense to someone in Computer Science like me, but most of it is for the layman. All of the writing if scientific, there is really know humanistic or philosophical point of view. It is all to the point and laid out easily.
Although some articles were difficult to fully comprehend, even to me, I feel like the scientific journals provided were interesting and really brought life to my major and where it is going...
No comments:
Post a Comment