Transparent point in their conducted research.

More demographic specifics.

No margin of error mentioned but they give a very in depth description of what their research was doing.

Specifics in age groups.

Transparency of adding this is also important.

Builds credibility by adding credentials of who was doing the experiment.

This is a valid testing group that is very clear about their group and the specifics of size and audience.

In my opinion, it is ultimately the deadliest combination.

I would really also like to include the affect that algos have on this topic as well because its not just the people that cause it, it is the platforms that tolerate so much aggressive discourse.

This is another huge idea that I am very interested in. I frequently hear about a "silent majority" from either side though I have come to learn that that majority is those who are moderate and sick of either radical side. The ones who have to pick one way or the other even if they don't want to and who can be swayed.

Well, this just confirms the idea that I was getting at haha. I couldn't agree more. Maybe I could focus on this like the more psychological ideas behind why people are so passionate about politics and in what ways.

Emphasis on my point above.

This whole study is interesting because I believe the outcome is what is the most confusing to me about the topic that I picked. Do we know what is best? Are we too far gone to become more moderate? For example, seeing opposing posts, are we too far gone in a way that we are just more defensive of our views? Perhaps the constant defensiveness is what causes the most political polarization.

I think this is what I want to go for rather than the age idea. I just thought I could tie it in as I am the age demographic that I believe social media polarization has affected the most. Of course, I have no proof but my personal experience - I can share some of that as well just not make it my topic.

I appreciate that they are trying to help them in the mental space rather than just telling them to suck it up and do their job. Though it is a tester, there is nothing to say that it won't help even just a little bit.

I can for sure see this being both a good and a bad thing. My brain kind of thinks about what if it makes the home/earth sickness worse because its bringing things that would otherwise only be in their imagination to them.

This makes me wonder if that is one of the top issues. I only say this and I have zero backing behind it but I feel like they definitely have to test the psyche of astronauts planning to going into space for long periods of time.

important to note, especially as an advancement in VR education.

I find the phobias to be the most interesting as having used a VR headset once or twice myself it kind of freaks me out more I'd be interested to see what the treatment looks like for that.

For specifics in the blog - maybe quote or paraphrase

I feel like I have seen this becoming more of an issue with increasing news coverage. I feel like this could be a good thing to help solve this problem from a far.

I would like to stay with this topic so I thought this is a cool way to incorporate new issues with the VR developments.

For me personally, this is the development that piques my interest the most because this is the kind of stuff that we see in movies keyed as 'outlandish' and 'futuristic.'

Important to note and talk about the current state of these devices as well as what the large tech companies are looking to doing in the coming years.

This would also be good to incorporate into the blog as well as its a mixture of the two main topics. It also seems like the difference between VR/AR is work-based vs game-based.

This is a really cool concept - I had never heard of this prior to finding this topic. Still not super sure of what the difference between AR/VR is but hopefully through this it will make sense.

These are more of the developments that I wanted to look into - the more work aspect of things because I feel as if the initial developments were more video game-oriented.

It is crazy to think about the fact that people were thinking about virtual reality before technology of that level wasn't even in the early stages yet and it resulted in the 3-D image.

A detail I would like to add in my blog. I thought that AR/VR technology was already pretty widespread but maybe it will just become less gaming-focused and more 'responsibility' or 'task completion' oriented if that makes sense.

Not sure why this topic grabbed my interest other than its just different from what anyone has presented on so far (unless I missed one) but I also don't know much about the technological logistics behind this concept and I am looking to learn more.

haha - I don't know why but that phrase is funny to me. I can just picture Zuckerberg looking as freaky as ever enthusiastically saying this one-liner.

This is great for brands as it makes the creating and rolling out process the easiest for them especially by adding reminders.

I honestly think this is one of the more efficient ways that I see AI being helpful in the technological world.

Essentially what the other article is saying but goes more into depth.

This article now explains this whole ad campaign as more of a convenience idea for advertisers rather than the users. Though there are benefits to both it seems.

THIS THIS really makes me think about TikTok shop and why its being pushed so hard right now.

learning about how TikTok personalizes your ads through the terms of service just makes this whole article come together more and make ideas like this make more sense.

Comparing to other platforms in a way showcases the idea that everyone kind of steals ideas and makes them their own. Maybe that's a bit dramatic but it seems to be the case frequently in the tech world.

At least they're upfront about wanting to make money. I mean at the end of the day they are a business but does it make it morally correct? Using people and their data for monetary gain?

Use this article to expand on the TikTok side of things.

Most similar to Meta in this way I think

I feel like this is the fine print that no one really pays attention to. Very interesting nonetheless

This makes me question the algorithm a little more as a lot of my ads are repeats and not something that I am typically interested in or would be willing to go out of my way to buy

This makes a lot of sense from a personal experience perspective.

This is definitely the first I've heard about this at all but I feel like this could be a good thing for everyone involved depending on the outlook you may have on it.

This is a little confusing of an idea but also seems to help more with the personal algorithm of users rather than the brands or maybe this is a positive for all three parties involved.

I find this to be a very interesting but insightful takeaway from the author.

Same thing I said ^

Essentially an acceleration of monetization for both Meta and the product companies.

I find it the most interesting that Meta chose to wait until the beginning of the holiday season to work with brands to promote a multitude of products. Benefitting both parties but not really including that third party of the consumers.

This is the article I decided to build my blog post off of. My goal with this is to expand on why specifically Meta promotes ads in the way that they do. Across all Meta platforms (main focus on Facebook and Instagram). I would also like to incorporate the TikTok ad perspective as well though Meta doesn't own that app.

Off the bat, the main goal is increasing the engagement and monetization for both Meta and the brands that they are working within the provided ads. This is meant to benefit two of the three parties involved. Meta and the brands - but is it benefitting the users?

This is the initial article that sparked my blog topic. I would like to focus on what the companies are doing with Ads and the intentions with each new development. I think I'll mainly stick to the Meta company since they own Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok and leave X(Twitter) be. I may mention it as a contrast - they're beginning to put out Ad free options (with a fee of course).

This is kind of the pinnacle of the point I was hoping to bring into question while analyzing Apple as that of a monopoly. With all of these new things that keep being added to their ecosystem, why doesn't anyone ask what their impact on society may be? Do they have a responsibility to minimize negative impact or is it not their problem?

A big point to reiterate as Apple sets trends but is never really the first to create anything.

This section was important to reference as Apple is a customer-pleasing company. They want to do what the consumers will buy and socially that is what's best for their country.

I chose only a small portion of this paper to focus on as it is able to give a more scientific and research-based approach to the ideas that I was digging into during my writing.

This is the first additional benefit that I have seen that differentiates from the other iCloud plans.

Comparing the new $59.99 price to the original $9.99 price is an absolutely brutal look.

I chose this article as it gives a brief overview and allows me to gain another perspective from the opinions of the general public.

From what I've been gathering from those who have been writing since the release of this information - a good amount of what the benefits would be seem to be unclear.

I just want to know what the enhancements that they promise would be.

As you can see, the services are the exact same as the other storage plans and the only difference is the size that is allowed with iCloud storage.

I decided to go right to the source for the services that they would be providing through iCloud and compare it to the other storage prices.

Interesting to note that it wasn't the first iPhone but the first popular one.

Seems to me like this was a large turning point for their company to not only get their name out there, but to also sell products at the same time.

Steve Jobs infamous name though I wonder why I don't hear the other Steve being talked about much.

I didn't even know that they made headsets as this is one of the newer forms of technology that Apple hadn't perfected yet.

I would say the most iconic Apple product that people know the name of because it was the first computer to break ground it seems.

Hearing that they weren't inventors but rather, the ones who just got to the advancements first is very interesting to me that I feel like not many other people know that.

This is the article that I chose to be able to learn and understand the history of Apple better.

Kind of seems like a lazy way out if you ask me.

This alludes to the reasoning behind pushing for the purchase of iCloud+ as not a large population is going to buy a brand new phone every time they do a product drop.

Talking about tech company Apple by referring it to an ecosystem is wild to me. I mean I guess we do really have Apple in one part of our lives or another.

Very interesting wording here.

This is the original article that piqued my interest as paying $60 for something that isn't even physical in regards to technology is just something that I had not really seen before.