This close interconnection between human feelings and hopes made me think of the documentary Social Dilemma again. In the film, one of the main themes is the effects of technology on society and individuals.

The media industry is changing rapidly, and human attention has become the product sold to advertisers. Experiments on users have led big companies to optimal ways to get users to do what the companies want. Over the last few years, psychology has been built into technology, so another important shift in the Internet is that a tool-based environment became addiction-based.

Until recently, middle schoolers did not have access to social networking sites, and their self-esteem and identity did not depend on likes and comments on the Internet. Rewarded with short-term signals, people correlate it with truth, and this is especially dangerous for teenagers whose self-worth had not developed yet.

In the USSR, the changes in the general system of mass media began during the period of "Perestroika" (Rebuilding), when the foundation for democratization and freedom of speech was laid. Later, this foundation served a more liberalized society whose needs were largely met by the Internet after the Soviet Union collapsed.

This seems to be a turning point where the Internet gained some independence from human will. While at the beginning humans were considered to stimulate all changes and developments on the Internet, later it became evident that some online trends could be unexpected and uncontrolled. Similarly, now, it still remains unclear why certain things become viral on the Internet and why the online space sometimes behaves in unanticipated ways.

For the most part, online algorithms are regulated by powerful AI that learns users' behavior to make technological advances on a platform and build a more personalized virtual experience. However, the Internet as a whole is not ruled by one mechanism. Instead, it is a multiplicity of platforms, themes, and user behaviors.

This made me think of radio amateurs who also largely contributed to the development of the technology through experimentation and enthusiasm. Similarly, they took advantage of the lack of governmental control to test their ideas and promote the prosperity of the new media.

It is fascinating how fast the development of the internet and the reconsideration of its role were. According to Moore's law, technologies develop exponentially, and the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit grows twice every two years. I knew that technological advancement proliferates at extreme speeds now, but I would not have thought that the Internet could transform so drastically just in 4 years during the early stages of its development.

I like the viewpoint that the influence is two-sided. Undoubtedly, culture and technology are closely intertwined now, so each of them has an impact on the other.

Recently, I discovered a theory that describes the influence of media on society: the agenda-setting theory of Maxwell McCombs & Donald Shaw. It states that over time, the media agenda shapes the public agenda.

A great way to see this theory manifest in practice is the documentary Social Dilemma. There, it is claimed that social media have become a new tool to manipulate public opinion. Social media platforms make it possible to spread manipulative narratives with phenomenal ease and without much money, which gives them many advantages over television and other traditional media. Media suggests what the issue is through the use of selection, emphasis, exclusion, and elaboration. Algorithms and manipulative politicians became experts at manipulation, which allows them to set agendas quickly and easily. A frustrating tendency is that fake news spreads 6 times faster and catches more attention, according to the movie.

While this film focuses on the impact of media on society, it is evident that the members of that society, in turn, shape the media technologies that they use.

Before the consideration of the internet as a tool of influence and control, similar contemplations were applied to earlier media, especially to television and radio. They were critical instruments of control, and this trend can be clearly traced through the power dynamics during the cold war.

In 1950, President Truman delivered a speech on propaganda and truth. The president claimed that freedom was being challenged by communism, which posed a crucial threat to the nation. He highlighted the fact that propaganda was one of the most powerful weapons. In addition to describing the ongoing political and ideological challenges, the President elaborated on the efforts that the nation could make to promote the truth. He put a special emphasis on the role of public information in ideological confrontation: newspapers, magazines, radio, and motion pictures. By stating that Americans “must make [themselves] heard around the world,” President Truman laid a foundation for the active shaping of public views through mass media. (PublicDomainFootage, 2022)

Learning from the past, we can definitely notice some similarities between how the Internet is also used to promote specific beliefs and gather communities of people. During the Cold War, it was more difficult for the US to spread its ideology to overseas audiences. However, with the rise of the Internet nowadays, this problem can be totally overcome. Reaching audiences from all over the world is no longer complicated. Thereby, while the Internet provides the opportunity for free speech and the diversity of viewpoints, it has also become a more powerful influence tool that can reach a very extensive audience worldwide.

Humans definitely play an immense role in the development of the Internet, and human feelings and emotions shape some of the key trends associated with this technology. However, emotional intelligence is usually valued less than rationality. This trend can be traced back to the Greeks. In Plato's Republic, Plato's threefold structure of the soul is described. According to his theory, the soul consists of 3 components: the appetitive soul which relates to physical activity, the spirited soul linked to emotional activity, and the rational soul connected with intellectual activity. Plato believes that the rational part should be dominant and should coordinate a person's decisions in life, while other parts can be dangerous and can lead to unintended consequences. It is interesting to trace how rationality tended to be placed above emotions throughout time and cultures and how it still manifests today. While emotions and rationality are often contrasted, the term "Structure of Feeling" seems to bring them closer together.

This term is very interesting because it combines the two words that are usually used in opposite contexts. Feelings are natural, uncontrolled, and pristine, while the structure is usually associated with systematization and control. Perhaps, these two words were put together on purpose to highlight the multifaceted and sometimes controversial nature of the Internet.

Cyberculture is a fascinating phenomenon that can be observed in the show Black Mirror. There, the plots of the episodes are not connected but the central theme in all of them is how technology can be integrated into society in near future. In one episode, technology was implanted into people's heads to record and replay all memories. In another episode, a technological device was a permanent companion of every person and provided them with a fixed predetermined time for every relationship. Another story shows how a mother controlled her daughter through an experimental device that allowed her to view what the daughter sees at all times along with all her activities and health indications. Black Mirror usually shows a negative view of the pursuit of technological advances and cyberculture. Most of the episodes end unhappily, especially for the characters who are the most influenced by futuristic technologies. This show is not only entertaining to watch but it also makes the audience question their involvement in cyberculture.

I think it may be even harder to abandon control than to come up with a new policy sometimes. Introducing regulation for the Internet was not the same as the regulation of other media, and it definitely required extensive discussion and research. However, the fact that Maganizer was able to leave the conference after initiating the discussion demonstrates an important trend of more flexible regulations.

This reminded me of a similar issue that rose with TV regulation around the same time in Great Britain. In the article Британская модель вещания в конце ХХ-начале ХХI вв. [The British Broadcasting Model in the Late 20th and Early 21st Centuries], Lyubimov explains what role Margaret Thatcher played in turning broadcast television into a commercial market. In 1990, when the Conservative government led by Margaret Thatcher introduced a new Broadcasting Act through Parliament, containing a program for the accelerated commercialization of British broadcasting and the development of multi-channel television and radio broadcasting.

The bureaucratization of the BBC, as well as the overly stable commercial television system, where the licenses of companies that had been broadcasting in their regions for several decades were renewed almost automatically by the Independent Broadcasting Authority.

Margaret Thatcher's concept of turning all broadcasting into a commercial market, where programs would only be a commodity, provoked resistance from supporters of the theory of social responsibility of the media. Those supporters claimed that television and radio were also public platforms where different points of view should be presented along with serious discussions on relevant issues.

The result was a compromise in which state control of commercial broadcasting was maintained but in a somewhat weakened form. This was taken over by a new regulatory body, the Commission on Independent Television. It was also responsible for designing and running the first (and, as it turned out, the last) auction of commercial television licenses in the history of the UK.

I love this question! Instead of regretting the failure of Friendster, people can study this case to make their own conclusions.

I would conclude that the death of a platform is its social death. If the platform still functions but has a very disparate purpose and audience from what it originally was, it is not the same platform anymore.

Technological death is a complex combination of factors, in my view. Had only one of them been present, Friendster would have probably survived hard periods and stagnation. However, when several problems intertwined, they inevitably led to the failure of the platform.

Friendster is some sort of an experimental site for the social media platforms that are popular now. Friendster was managed by people with different visions and strategies, so that other social networking sites could refer to both successful and unsuccessful examples prior to building their own strategies.

It is hard to find a balance in experimenting with new approaches to better fit in the market because it can also lead to a chaotic strategy with elements suggested by multiple people.

I think it indeed played a big role in preventing Friendster from a steady development. With frequent changes in management, it is hard to accumulate the resources for the company and put efforts in one direction. When actions are not coordinated properly and the company does not react to the changes in its user base, "death" follows sooner or later.

In my view, one of the main problems of this company was that it was not ready to adapt. They had one ideal strategy in mind from the very beginning but were not ready to adjust it to the changing circumstances. Had they been more flexible and reactive to the new conditions, such as the growing audience in the Philippines, they could have probably precluded the decline of the platform. Flexible planning is crucial in business and technology. One of the most popular flexible planning systems is AGILE. Agile planning is the evaluation and planning of work and its results under conditions of increased uncertainty. It is suitable for a quick and relatively accurate assessment of the complexity of existing tasks.

They could have opened a branch of their company in Southeast Asia and made much profit instead of ignoring the users from those regions. The problem was not that those users prevailed but that the company did not know how to monetize the international clientele. Thereby, with an appropriate marketing strategy, Friendster could have focused on both the US and Southeast Asia and developed a customized strategy for each of these regions.

I feel like this theme is not developed enough in the article. The popularity of Friendster in Southeast Asia is unique and very interesting to explore, and I do not entirely understand why some classmates groups in the Philippines loved Friendster so much. The ratios highlight that the user base in Southeast Asia was enormous compared to the American one, and it is hard to believe that just one actress in San Fransisco could have contributed to such popularity of the platform in that region.

That's what I thought too. Friendster probably was not unique in its rapid gain of popularity, and some other social networks faced the same pattern in their early development but managed to overcome the associated technical difficulties. I think that there are certainly more layers to Friendster's death that just technological issues.

This problem does not seem impossible to solve. It does not involve any social factors. The only necessary thing was to enhance the technical capacity of the platform with the help of programmers and IT specialists. In the book Blue Ocean Strategy that I mentioned earlier in my annotations, there was an example of a company that provided currency exchange services during the early stages of development of this service. They analyzed what the users actually cared about instead of focusing on employees' opinions. As a result, they removed some advanced functions that seemed to provide advantage to the company but indeed were not popular among the users. Instead, they found out that the users wasted a lot of time to call the agent and make sure that their transaction was completed. Therefore, the company was the only one among its competitors who embedded an instant confirmation of transaction on the page, and it gave them significant advantage. Probably, if Friendster did something similar by focusing on its users' actual needs, it would have had a chance to survive and transform further.

I love the choice of interview questions used in this study. They seem to provide a comprehensive review of the situation.

Failures are a crucial part of history. They teach inventors valuable lessons and stimulate the development of more successful technologies. Similarly, in everyday life, humans grow and develop by learning from their own mistakes and changing their focus or strategy accordingly. Avoiding failures is bad because it leads to stagnation within the comfort zone. Recently, I encountered another example of a commercial failure that can be used as a lesson for other companies. The firm still exists but the approach that it wanted to test turned out to be a complete failure. JCPenney, an American clothing and footwear manufacturer, tried to stop lying to customers, and it backfired. The management announced that there would be no more discounts and coupons: they would simply cut prices because in any case, almost all sales in department stores were deceitful. (Tuttle, Why JCPenney’s ‘No More Coupons’ Experiment Is Failing, 2012) Ostensibly, no one really gets a 70% discount - the retail price was deliberately set high to convince shoppers it was a bargain, but the discounted price was its real value. JCPenney's honest direction was morally right, but it didn't work out in the end. In 2012, JCPenney stopped talking about "fake prices." Instead, they built a new pricing structure that set initial prices at least 40% lower than previous ones so that customers no longer had to rely on sales or coupons. However, when the company released its first quarter results, it posted a net loss of $163 million. (Tuttle, Why JCPenney’s ‘No More Coupons’ Experiment Is Failing, 2012) Such big failures are not futile: they provide valuable insights into customer behavior, market mechanics, and specific conditions of the chosen approach. Both JCPenney and Friendster can be thoroughly analyzed by managers and marketing specialists to better understand what might work out for their company or product.

I like how the author considers the role of language in the discourse of technological death. As a person who knows 4 languages, I definitely agree that language significantly shapes our perception of the world and various phenomena. Some languages are gendered, some are more emotional, and others are very complicated in terms of grammar. In my view, a similar concept can be applied to professional language: depending on one's position or relation to the platform, this person would use different words describing Friendster's death.

While human reincarnation has a lot of spiritual and mythical connotation, the reincarnation of a technology can be described as a very logical phenomenon. If the company or society manages to come up with new ways and forms for the platform to function, it can be transformed into a new product and gain a new life.

This potential makes us question the concept of death and failure. Failures are not intrinsically bad: they can teach us valuable lessons and make us grow professionally and personally. Apparently, the same applies to technology: if employees adjust their collective effort accordingly, the period of decline of the technology is not always detrimental.

According to Roland Barthes' Semiotics Theory, myth is a connotative meaning of signs. Ideology can be perceived as a system of converged meanings and signs associated with them. However, not every sign is associated with ideologies: some of them are emotionally neutral and called denotative. On the contrary, a connotative sign system is associated with mythic signs that lost their historical referents. It is interesting to apply these concepts to Silicon Valley as a very unique socio-economic group. Its members likely resort to a peculiar set of symbols and words that only they can understand in a specific technological or personal context. indeed, group members’ meanings, emotions, motives, and actions can be traced through their ideologies and related myths. This article elaborates on the thought that Friendster is a useful example of a platform that first faced exponential growth and then failed dramatically. I suppose that people in Silicon Valley often focus on unsuccessful examples of startups to draw conclusions and prevent similar failures, and relevant meanings and myths emerge in this process.

A company failure is preceded by a period of crisis which indeed can be diagnosed. The crucial thing in a crisis is to adjust the management strategies so that the failure of the product or company can be precluded. The ambiguity of such strategy is determined by the dual nature of any crisis that simultaneously creates and destroys, i.e. prepares the conditions for further development and releases from the previous business strategy. Some theories regard crisis as a detrimental process, while others see it as a tool for transformation. Theories that focus on the destructive function of the crisis suggest that the crisis should be perceived as a situation that acutely threatens the existence of an enterprise. The crisis situation in this case requires immediate overcoming and localization of the consequences by the methods of anti-crisis management. In contrast, there are theories that consider the crisis as a phenomenon focused on breaking the old and developing something new. According to them, the basis is not the fight against the crisis, but the restructuring of the system, corresponding to the new circumstances. In my view, the second strategy would have probably saved Friendster from complete failure. The platform could have been transformed into some other viable form instead of a gaming website without social features. The necessary element for such transformation should have been a consistent management strategy instead of scattered efforts in different directions.

I love the analogy between theories and lenses that the author uses here, and I have encountered it earlier in the book "A first look at communication theory" by Griffin E.M., where the author introduces the notion of theories as lenses. According to her, many scholars consider theories to be somewhat similar to the lens of glasses or a camera. Thus, lenses influence our perception by focusing attention on specific features of a phenomenon while ignoring other features. "Two theorists could analyze the same communication event—an argument, perhaps—and, depending on the lens each uses, one theorist may view the speech act as a breakdown of communication or the breakup of a relationship, while the other theorist will see it as democracy in action. A danger of the lens metaphor is that we might regard what is seen through the glass as so dependent on the theoretical stance of the viewer that we abandon any attempt to discern what is real or true." (Griffin, 2006, p. 5). Thereby, I find the use of the term "lens" very appropriate for assessing technological death as a discourse. Focusing on specific elements of the failure of Friendster can help understand what the key mistakes were and preclude them in current social media development.

It is interesting to analyze death not as a fact but as a multi-step process. If the platform is used as a social media, society plays a crucial role in maintaining and fostering the development of this platform. It's interesting to make an analogy with relationships here: the break-up moment signifies the formal end of a relationship. However, it is usually preceded by emotional and/or physical alienation when partners feel that their bond is not the same anymore. Such alienation is usually based on a range of factors: lack of effort and time, fear of speaking up, denial of existing problems, and others. Similarly with Friendster, even before the platform stopped its operation, it underwent a few stages of disintegration, and several problems had to occur before the website was actually considered dead.

This was probably a significant mistake in their marketing strategy. Instead of ignoring the audience, they could have come up with ways of monetizing it. The company could have studied the demographic of those regions and implemented the most relevant ads on their platform. Also, they could have added some paid features, such as promoting one's profile in others' feeds, seeing advanced information on other users, adding music to one's profile, etc. They could have also introduced closed communities for users who are ready to pay for "premium" connections on the website. I found an example of a dating app that incorporates a lot of paid features - Hinge. It is marketed as a dating app designed to be deleted. Fewer weird people are on the app, and premium features can save time. Another example of a dating app is Raya. Not everyone can get there: a person has to send a request first and can gain access to the app if they are accepted. This app is mainly for influencers and celebrities, and the limited access is aimed at a specific target audience who is interested in more "high-quality" communication and dating experience.

I suppose that the time restriction was a smart decision because it limited one of the main advantages of the radio: promptness. For many people, getting the news fast was probably a significant factor in choosing where they get the news from. Also, the time before 9:30 in the morning is probably the most popular for news broadcasting because most people have not started work yet and have time to read the news or listen to them when they eat breakfast or get ready.

Competition in the market is a way for companies to grow and perfect their strategies. Within a monopoly, the dominating institution does not have enough incentives to develop further and provide more benefits to the public. I think that the press-radio war has had an overall positive impact both on radio and the press. Even if the press lost its dominance, this industry transformed significantly and the publishers learned to compete. Later, this experience will help them when more types of media are introduced (broadcast television, internet, etc.) The print media has lost its value today but the publishing companies who learned to adapt to the public needs managed to transform their businesses into new engaging formats such as online magazines or multimedia.

It seems that stopping the broadcast from rapid development and success was impossible. All the constraining rules could slow down its progress but not control it completely. Similarly, when strict parents forbid something from their child, the child takes time to come up with sophisticated strategies not to be caught, they just have to be more wary and quick-witted. Likewise, restrictions put on radio stations could limit them for some time but they managed to reach the vast public and prosper anyway.

Propaganda has always been a very powerful tool of governmental control. In every culture, storytelling in media has a dramatic influence over public opinion and actions. Stories that are heard on the radio or read in the newspapers build identities, behaviors, and aspirations. Being constantly exposed to propaganda creates new patterns in one's brain and affects how this person interacts with the world and perceived opposing opinions. Many global conflicts today have underlying reasons that have been caused by continuous propaganda over the years. Even though freedom of speech and the diversity of media exist nowadays, every government still aims to instill certain beliefs and ideologies in its citizens to a certain extent. Many people have been affected by propaganda and continue to convey similar ideas to younger generations. Governmental propaganda contributed to cultural differences and conflicts of opinion that can further lead to global confrontations and even wars.

The press-radio war is somewhat similar to the Cold War: each side was trying to come up with more sophisticated solutions and gain more influence over the public. The meeting of the ANPA reminded me of the report by National Security Council (1950) called NSC 68: United States Objectives and Programs for National Security which I read for my research. The initial objective of this report is to promote national security and address the major threats connected with the rise of communism. The report states that the "hostile design" of the USSR presents a warning threat to the US, and the reinforcement of the US military should follow. NSC-68 points out four courses of action: the continuation of existing policies, isolation, war, and “the rapid building up of the political, economic, and military strength of the free world.” Some assumptions about the Kremlin's reactions and strategies are present as well. Other important elements of the report are US intentions and capabilities as well as the description of the underlying conflict of ideas and values. The press and the radio were fighting not for actual security but for their viable positions on the market. During this confrontation, they constantly perfected their strategies and tried to foresee the opponent's steps, while focusing on the influence that they have on the public attention. However, contrary to the USSR and the US during the Cold War, the two media did not have a conflict of ideas. Instead, they were covering the same events and had very similar content. This fact did not allow them to set the public attitude against the opponent. They were fighting for the same audience and the same ideas.

It seems to me that politics and media have always been closely interconnected. Politics shaped the media of a given time period and vice versa. Politics is what plays a role in every citizen's life, no matter what their personal interests or hobbies are. Therefore, political news and programs have a large audience, and sharing them with the public in a prompt and accurate manner makes a publishing or broadcast company more successful. Similarly to the importance of politics on radio and in newspapers, the first programs on broadcast television mostly depicted important political events. For example, one of the first broadcasted videos on British television was the 1937 coronation televised by BBC.

The tactics of both the press and broadcast mostly accounted for revenue and competition, without building a long-term strategy based on the audience's preference. Each medium was trying to overpower the other, but not all the efforts led to the expected results. I think that taking public opinion into account could have changed the game significantly. If either newspapers or radio owners accounted for the audience's preferences, they could have gained a larger portion of the market. For example, they could have made a public poll or a simple version of analytics to gain insight into the public reaction to the introduced changes.

Indeed, the multimedia format is often beneficial both to the public and the company. I remember a journal from my childhood that I really enjoyed. It was called Skazochnik ("Storyteller") and included both a printed journal and a CD disk with the same fairy tales. I loved both reading and listening, and combining these two formats made Skazochnik unique and very successful at that time. Similarly, companies that were both publishing and broadcasting the news could have a larger and more loyal audience.

I think this slowness, or maybe even procrastination, greatly contributed to the decline of the press. Had the publishers been more reactive and vigilant, they could have probably come up with smart decisions during the first stages of the press-radio war. Admitting that radio was a serious threat could have helped the publishing houses to have more time to adapt their strategy and propose unique benefits to the public.

Today, in the ever-growing market, the most successful companies constantly generate new ideas on how to distinguish themselves from others and provide unique benefits to users. I read a book by W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne called Blue Ocean Strategy, where I learned a lot about the companies that drastically change their industry or even create a new industry. They always think ahead of time and do not follow the routine standards that other companies use. For instance, Apple created a "blue ocean" with the introduction of iTunes. Before the emergence of this service, illegal music could be downloaded from the Internet for free and overpowered the legal music business that sold albums. iTunes created a compromise: all their music was licensed and legal but it was much cheaper than in the rest of the industry. iTunes was the first music service that allowed one to download tracks individually instead of paying for an entire album. At the same time, all tracks were very high-quality and easy to download, contrary to pirate websites.

Reading this sentence, I considered an analogy with the modern media platforms that brands and public figures use. Each medium or platform has its own advantages and a specific target audience. A smart marketing strategy would not focus on one platform but aim at a presence on multiple sites that complement one another and create a consistent media image. I often notice that influencers and brands take advantage of the unique features of different social media and send traffic from one social networking site to another as part of cross-platform marketing. Similarly, companies that owned both a publishing house and a radio station in the 1930s could have a significant advantage in the industry: no matter which of the two media was more successful, such companies would have profited anyway.

Similar to the confrontation between the press and radio, we observe how different platforms and services compete on the market today. We can remember when Instagram first introduced the format of Stories, which basically copied the unique feature of Snapchat. Snapchat was still trying to keep the users on their app but definitely lost to the rapidly growing Instagram which allowed for many more functions. Later, Youtube introduced YouTube shorts as well. Therefore, Snapchat lost its uniqueness just like the press lost its dominance in disseminating the news.

As it was mentioned at the beginning of the text and as you were telling us in the lectures, many people who actually played a major role in the development of media and technology are not appreciated enough. We have to value their contribution because without them, we would not have the scale of technological and cultural advances that we have now.

As it was mentioned at the beginning of the text and as you were telling us in the lectures, many people who have played a major role in the development of media and technology are not appreciated enough. We have to value their contribution: without them, we would not have the same scale of technological and cultural advances that we have now.

It seems like an advantage, but at the same time, working for 10 hours straight and sometimes even at night (1-7 am as the text mentioned) is too much and can be exhausting. Exercise is good for young boys but in the right amount. I suppose that most of telegraph boys had a lot of physical responsibilities at home in addition to their active work. However, it was still a great opportunity for children to help their families with finances.

I did not understand what exactly the demand for the telegraph service depended on. What factors throughout the year made this industry more or less popular throughout different seasons?

The system of keeping garments clean seems logical on one side but I still don't get how it could be effective. Even when the boys were not playing in their uniforms, they were still running around the city trying to make more money for a bigger number of messages delivered. They could definitely fall or touch a dirty object while running, so their uniforms could not be perfectly clean anyway.

Finally, the third similarity with my job. The company finds it reasonable to invest time, resources, and effort into its employees' training because it will definitely pay off when those employees bring effective results to the company. In my case, being a senior mentor, I am managing a team of 10 junior mentors and I am partially responsible for their training and practice before they begin to work with clients. If the company does not spend time on training the workers, it will likely lose some profit when those workers make mistakes or cause clients to leave the company.

In addition to my previous annotation, I can draw an analogy with my online job here as well: we have a similar control system consisting of excel sheets and the requirements to send documents in the work chat to monitor each employee's engagement and performance. I think that it's especially important for an online job because the owner and the managers do not see their employees in person and are not able to control their daily tasks without such a structured system. I find it so interesting that even back at that time, the systems for motivation, training, and control of telegraph boys were so well-thought and contributed to the company's success through systemized daily routine.

It seems to be a reasonable system of motivation. I work online as a creative producer and mentor in an international company, and the principle is the same for me: I get paid depending on how many minutes of business calls I have, how many documents I make, etc. I find this approach fair because an hourly salary does not always reflect the amount of effort and commitment that different workers put into their job within the same amount of time.

Once again, this phrase proves that being a telegraph boy was an extremely responsible job with very tight timing. When I imagine that 2 seconds for opening an umbrella could make a difference in how much the boys earn and how prolific their day is, I admire their commitment and industriousness even more. We tend to think that 2 seconds is nothing, but when it comes to professional sport, for instance, every decimal point matters. Before reading this text, I would never imagine that it was similar for the telegraph boys in New York.

It's interesting that the telegraph boys and their uniforms were part of brand identities and brand status. But only the companies who used costly telegraph services obtained high status, not the boys themselves.

In this passage, I noticed the contrast placed between businessmen and business boys. The importance of the latter was not valued enough, but without the business boys, the businessmen would not have achieved the same level of success. Communication through the telegraph was critical for most industries and kinds of business, but society still did not consider telegraph boys as essential figures in technological development progress. I can draw an analogy between the telegraph boys at that time and workers in the service industry now. Oftentimes, they are not valued and respected enough but they do play a major role in our everyday lives. Without them, our society would literally collapse. I believe that you can tell a lot about a person by watching how they treat waiters, administrative workers, and other employers of similar fields. If they don't treat them with respect and appreciation, it is definitely a bad sign. Such workers may seem to perform simple tasks but their significance in society is still huge.

Cross-functional skills are vital in any professional field. Along with using historical knowledge to build one's career strategy, it is possible to combine skills and knowledge from different spheres to reach better results in anything. For example, an artist who is also an expert in international economics can merge those areas of interest to successfully market their art worldwide and find the best promotion strategies for different world markets. Similarly, historical knowledge can be applied to benefit one's professional development.

There is a negative side to this point: sometimes, historical facts and events are manipulated to a certain extent in historical books and in mass media to influence the public and raise commitment to national royalty and pride. For example, the countries from the Grand Alliance tend to put an emphasis on their contribution to the victory in World War 2, showing how much impact their country had while not exposing facts that could diminish their country or reveal that their role was not actually the biggest compared to the collective effort.

This point resonates with me a lot. I think most of the role models in our society are modern people, mostly stars, influencers, singers, artists, businessmen, etc. People tend to admire them because of how they live, look, dress, and behave. I feel like the reasons we admire such people are more materialistic, but when it comes to historical figures as role models, the reasons for our affection or admiration are usually much deeper. We pay attention to what is really crucial in human beings: their dedication, bravery, intelligence, and other important qualities. Through learning the stories of ordinary people who left a mark in history, we can find more value and meaning in our own lives and get inspiration to act right and be more decisive.

I love this analogy with a laboratory! The important factor in such experiments is the specific conditions. Learning from history does not mean interpreting current events only through finding similar ones that happened in the past. Indeed, many intertwined factors, such as the state of society at that time, an individual's inner motivations and relationships with others, and even such factors as public literacy or climate may play a role in analyzing an event, its causes, and consequences, as well as comparing it to similar situations in the modern society. For example, drawing conclusions from Japanese culture to interpret a modern phenomenon in Western Europe is very complicated, and most likely will yield erroneous results.

I think the main products of historical study are: - theories about the present and the future - interconnections between social, cultural, political, artistic, and many other factors - learning cause and effect relationships - critical thinking - comparative analysis of multiple perspectives Thus, in addition to history's value for our future, we acquire a set of "products" that are not tangible but still very useful. They contribute to the formation of valuable soft skills that can be further used in almost any other discipline.

I think I first comprehended the importance of history and its role in shaping our present and future when I learned about the ancient historian Thucydides. He was pragmatic and realistic. He was fascinated by “otherness” and “diversity,” and these concepts still play a crucial role in our modern society. Thucydides believed that the human condition remained the same and that situations were likely to repeat in the future. Therefore, history is a lesson for future generations. This principle can be also traced through a video that I watched about the Thucydides trap by Graham Allison where he is investigating the relationship between the US and China and comparing them to what happened between Athens and Sparta leading them to the Peloponnesian war. According to the lecturer, China's power is rising rapidly, and the US is unlikely to let another country dominate the economy, technology, and other fields. The lesson we should take from this is that if we make the same mistakes our ancestors did, it will lead to similar destructive circumstances. Thucydides was of the same opinion and often resorted to the conception of "eikos" which reflected what could be reasonably expected in certain circumstances. If we apply this concept now, we can change negative patterns from our past.