República Bolivariana de Venezuela.

Ministerio del Poder Popular para la Educación.

Universidad Nacional Experimental Politécnica.

Antonio José de Sucre.

Vice-Rectorado “Luis Caballero Mejías”

Ingles III
Ingeniería de Sistemas

Word Order

Docente: Alumno:

Milagros Palencia. Rodolfo Ramirez C.I 27.007.142 EXP: 2017203066

Caracas, Julio de 2022

Article Analysis
Ted talk conference.

When we take a look to different written texts, it is common to see that they follow
organizational patterns in order to communicate the message clearly. So, we can
mention chronological order, comparison and contrast, order of importance, cause and
effect, as common organizational patterns that are used in different kind of texts like
novels, essays, articles, etc.
In this case we took an example of a speech from the worldwide recognized Youtube
Channel “Ted Talks”.

In this speech, it is possible to observe that the principals organizational patterns shown
are: comparison and contrast, definition, cause and effect. Here we took some
examples.
“I want to talk to you today about something the open-source programming world can teach
democracy, but before that, a little preamble. Let's start here. This is Martha Payne. Martha's a
9-year-old Scot who lives in the Council of Argyll and Bute. A couple months ago, Payne
started a food blog called NeverSeconds, and she would take her camera with her every day to
school to document her school lunches. Can you spot the vegetable? (Laughter) And, as
sometimes happens, this blog acquired first dozens of readers, and then hundreds of readers, as
people tuned in to watch her rate her school lunches, including on my favorite category, "Pieces
of hair found in food." (Laughter) This was a zero day. That's good. And then two weeks ago
yesterday, she posted this. A post that read: "Goodbye." And she said, "I'm very sorry to tell you
this, but my head teacher pulled me out of class today and told me I'm not allowed to take
pictures in the lunch room anymore. I really enjoyed doing this. Thank you for reading.
Goodbye."You can guess what happened next, right? (Laughter) The outrage was so swift, so
voluminous, so unanimous, that the Council of Argyll and Bute reversed themselves the same
day and said, "We would, we would never censor a nine-year-old." (Laughter) Except, of
course, this morning. (Laughter) And this brings up the question, what made them think they
could get away with something like that? (Laughter) And the answer is, all of human history
prior to now. This is something we've faced several times over the last few centuries. When the
telegraph came along, it was clear that it was going to globalize the news industry. What would
this lead to? Well, obviously, it would lead to world peace. The television, a medium that
allowed us not just to hear but see, literally see, what was going on elsewhere in the world, what
would this lead to? World peace. (Laughter) The telephone? You guessed it: world peace.”
“Even the printing press, even the printing press was assumed to be a tool that was going to
enforce Catholic intellectual hegemony across Europe. Instead, what we got was Martin
Luther's 95 Theses, the Protestant Reformation, and, you know, the Thirty Years' War. All
right, so what all of these predictions of world peace got right is that when a lot of new ideas
suddenly come into circulation, it changes society. What they got exactly wrong was what
happens next. The more ideas there are in circulation, the more ideas there are for any individual
to disagree with. More media always means more arguing. That's what happens when the
media's space expands. And yet, when we look back on the printing press in the early years, we
like what happened. We are a pro-printing press society. So how do we square those two
things, that it leads to more arguing, but we think it was good? And the answer, I think, can be
found in things like this. This is the cover of "Philosophical Transactions," the first scientific
journal ever published in English in the middle of the 1600s, and it was created by a group of
people who had been calling themselves "The Invisible College," a group of natural
philosophers who only later would call themselves scientists, and they wanted to improve the
way natural philosophers argued with each other, and they needed to do two things for
this. They needed openness. They needed to create a norm which said, when you do an
experiment, you have to publish not just your claims, but how you did the experiment. If you
don't tell us how you did it, we won't trust you. But the other thing they needed was speed. They
had to quickly synchronize what other natural philosophers knew. Otherwise, you couldn't get
the right kind of argument going. The printing press was clearly the right medium for this, but
the book was the wrong tool. It was too slow. And so they invented the scientific journal as a
way of synchronizing the argument across the community of natural scientists. The scientific
revolution wasn't created by the printing press. It was created by scientists, but it couldn't have
been created if they didn't have a printing press as a tool.”

“So I study social media, which means, to a first approximation, I watch people argue. And if I
had to pick a group that I think is our Invisible College, is our generation's collection of
people trying to take these tools and to press it into service, not for more arguments, but for
better arguments, I'd pick the open-source programmers. Programming is a three-way
relationship between a programmer, some source code, and the computer it's meant to run on,
but computers are such famously inflexible interpreters of instructions that it's extraordinarily
difficult to write out a set of instructions that the computer knows how to execute, and that's if
one person is writing it. Once you get more than one person writing it, it's very easy for any two
programmers to overwrite each other's work if they're working on the same file, or to send
incompatible instructions that simply causes the computer to choke, and this problem grows
larger the more programmers are involved. To a first approximation, the problem of managing a
large software project is the problem of keeping this social chaos at bay. Now, for decades there
has been a canonical solution to this problem, which is to use something called a "version
control system," and a version control system does what is says on the tin. It provides a
canonical copy of the software on a server somewhere. The only programmers who can change
it are people who've specifically been given permission to access it, and they're only allowed to
access the sub-section of it that they have permission to change. And when people draw
diagrams of version control systems, the diagrams always look something like this. All right.
They look like org charts. And you don't have to squint very hard to see the political
ramifications of a system like this. This is feudalism: one owner, many workers.”
“Now, that's fine for the commercial software industry. It really is Microsoft's Office. It's
Adobe's Photoshop. The corporation owns the software. The programmers come and go. But
there was one programmer who decided that this wasn't the way to work. This is Linus
Torvalds. Torvalds is the most famous open-source programmer, created Linux, obviously, and
Torvalds looked at the way the open-source movement had been dealing with this
problem. Open-source software, the core promise of the open-source license, is that everybody
should have access to all the source code all the time, but of course, this creates the very threat
of chaos you have to forestall in order to get anything working. So most open-source projects
just held their noses and adopted the feudal management systems. But Torvalds said, "No, I'm
not going to do that." His point of view on this was very clear. When you adopt a tool, you also
adopt the management philosophy embedded in that tool, and he wasn't going to adopt anything
that didn't work the way the Linux community worked. And to give you a sense of how
enormous a decision like this was, this is a map of the internal dependencies within
Linux, within the Linux operating system, which sub-parts of the program rely on which other
sub-parts to get going. This is a tremendously complicated process. This is a tremendously
complicated program, and yet, for years, Torvalds ran this not with automated tools but out of
his email box. People would literally mail him changes that they'd agreed on, and he would
merge them by hand. And then, 15 years after looking at Linux and figuring out how the
community worked, he said, "I think I know how to write a version control system for free
people.And he called it "Git." Git is distributed version control. It has two big differences with
traditional version control systems. The first is that it lives up to the philosophical promise of
open-source. Everybody who works on a project has access to all of the source code all of the
time. And when people draw diagrams of Git workflow, they use drawings that look like
this. And you don't have to understand what the circles and boxes and arrows mean to see that
this is a far more complicated way of working than is supported by ordinary version control
systems.”

Link:
https://www.ted.com/talks/clay_shirky_how_the_internet_will_one_day_transform_g
overnment/transcript
 Organizational Pattern
Signal Word Spanish-Paraphrasing
Cause and Effect • As a result • Se crea un sistema
• Because de control de
versiones como
resultado de dar
instrucciones
incompatibles
creadas por varias
personas en un
proyecto de
programación.
• Linux es exitoso,
porque su creador
“Linus Torvalds”
encontró la
solución al
movimiento de
código abierto.
Comparison and contrast • Different • La revista
• Similar científica es más
rápida que la
imprenta.
• La programación
es similar a un
organigrama.
Definition • For Example • Martha comenzó
un blog de
comida, por
ejemplo, “Piezas
de cabello
encontradas en
comida”
• El teléfono
globalizaría la
industria de las
noticias, tal como,
la paz mundial.