So cool how their are trying to reach things outside of this universe which could make all aspects of communication way more interesting.

Using other people to help you find better multimodal research for what you are looking for helped Pescovitz.

Their reaction to the new ways they were finding out how you can better here things and how much of a impact this was gonna have on the research of this audio.

How they found the original piece. An archivist found it and it must have been hard to find knowing it was put underground somewhere.

Visual aspect will also change the text when putting it onto vinyl. Everyone will see it differently than before especially if you were around during the time period the original one was being talked about.

Spatial communication and others are being used to move the record to vinyl whihc is changing a big physical arrangement of the text.

a hypothetical or fictional being from outer space, especially an intelligent one.

The visual aspect that was on the original book will not be able to be apart of the vinyl but can be sent to you anyways through paper.

Using spatial communication to rearrange it onto something else. was an audio and now for the first time put onto golden vinyl.

This is the Aural part of the communication since the vinyl record will have no images but just music and sounds.

Gestural and Linguistic communication is what have helped people be able to have this vinyl for sale now. it use to not be allowed to anyone but now can be bought online by anybody.

Why cant he have what he is in charge of producing? Doesnt he already know what the content contains and is about. Its NASA's property but it doesnt make any sense why he cant have a copy for himself.

Involves with all 5 modes of communication and has something to do with how these things came about through different communications.

Ball says, "A text can be anything from a lolcat to a concert tee shirt to a dictionary to a performance."This means that this golden vinyl record can also be interpreted as a text.

This can be good for the developing world because things can be made to make their life better and have better materials. Making 3-D things to help develope a country even more can show how an object can be embodied into a culture just from the helpings it brought them.

I guess this could be cool because you can eventually make an object and become culturally involved with it. Maybe it has culture through the 3-D printing world and is known for special reasons. You can make the first of something and that can be culturalized into history.

This could be related to the Haltman text when he says, When we study an object, formalizing our observations in language, we generate a set of carefully selected nouns, adjectives, adverbs, prepositions, and verbs which effectively determine the bounds of possible interpretation. This is why the words we choose in saying what we see have such far reaching importance. It is out of our paraphrase of what we see that all interpretation grows". This relates because it says what the makers movement needs to do is embrace more views. Ths can come with just getting as many views as you can on something. The more words that are being used to describe an object will make it more intelligent in its own way to others. People will see every object differently so its good to learn and think about someone elses interpretation.

Gentle or kind.

When Haltman says, "Material culture begins with a world of objects but takes place in a world of words" it makes me think that these objects need words to be described, valued, and even how their made, which is true. Taking peoples jobs and pushing aside labor problems is where this connects with the Haltman text. I dont think it would be okay to Haltman that this is going on because like he says you need words for these objects and taking them away or not worrying about them wouldnt solve any issues. Like talking with Mrs.A she says she has a bigger vocabulary than me so she can see and describe an object way better than I can. Words are powerful with objects.

A number of different things or parts that are put or grouped together to form a whole but remain distinct entities.

I think this part is an example of when Haltman talk about the authenticity of the original object. Although you can remake the object it wont be the same as the original. Most people dont really care if the object have a meaning to it unless its part of their "material culture"

This is a part in the text when I was reading I thought was the opposite point of view than the Haltman text. Although he does start off by kind of agreeing, he wants to give a reason as to why maybe people that are opposed to it will maybe see a different point of view. Gives an example saying it discounts the very public contribution to science.

Where people are gonna have the biggest issue with this printer. Boundaries can easily be broken with pattens on things and regulations as well. guns will be able to be made and the government will have no idea.

One of the main things the Haltman text talks about his how the value of an object can not just be recreated into another object. It wont have the same authenticity. Material culture comes from things that people adore and can embody in their culture in some way of their own. Things being made by this machine will have no material culture when it starts to make "everything".

When people actually started looking at 3D printing seriously because it could have effected a lot of things, which would have resulted in bad terms for people who liked the Hallman text.

This is like the Haltman text when they describe how you want to look at an object and get the cultural information about it. But why would they want to refer to this as a crayon rather than just a mineral they used a long time ago? There referencing it back to what we have today, a colorful red crayon, which looks nothing like the picture. They could also think this "crayon" has a cultural meaning also because of the other objects they found in this area.

Basically is just creating new objects that are 3 dimensional through a printer to replace old items or to just make more of what you need without going shopping for it.

Think this was the coolest sentence in the whole paper when talking about how we really should see objects and how they really do have an effective meaning.

Subtle shade of meaning or expression

Pleasure when trying to translate an object into narrative description i think is one of the reasons the people have that are against the Makers movement. When giving an example they talk about the printing of a 3D gun which is something that would be a big topic in the world if it was allowed.

Giving reasons as to why it might be so important to you and the certain components that are most important to you. People that have an object that they have had for years might not be replaceable through a 3D printer because it wont have the same value.

When reading this in comparison to the online 3D printing article it shows more of how a person comes and believes in an object culturally. Rather than printing an object because you dont have to go to the store and you just want it from scratch. Like the makers movement this is one of the problems they were facing from people.

Things that could be printed through a 3D printer but wouldnt be as authentic to the culture as if it were its normal self. This relates to material culture and how objects help people understand certain things about a culture.

To think and visualize what is actually going on in their stories instead of being told about an epidemic through a website with multiple opinions.

The supplemental text i chose to incorporate with this text was "3-D print your way to freedom and prosperity". Tis online article involves pictures,and can be updated and accessed by whoever. While the Hallman text is online its on a link you would have to look up or randomly come across.