CST300: Module 8 (Week 8)

Part 1: Review Other Teams' final video projects

Preventing Cyber Attacks with the Use of AI by Code Busters

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i3bgh1ClTs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4WZz3PkMGQ

1. is the topic well covered?

They covered this topic well.  They have a clear intro and conclusion and made sure to cover the nature of cybersecurity threats and how AI can be used to prevent and detect threats.  They also included the challenges that have to be overcome to implement high quality AI solutions in this domain.

2. is the presentation clear?

Yes. The audio and video were of good quality and the slides were easy to read. They formatted key points as bulleted lists so that it was easy to follow.

3. how is the quality of the research?

Excellent. They have clearly done their homework.

4. how is the quality of the video production?

The video resolution was good and the slides were easy to read. In the video targeted at professionals, background music was not intrusive and was a good audio filler.

5. is the video engaging and interesting?

Yes. AI is on everyone's mind because of big company's in the news, the potential impact on the job market, and its use in industry and academia. Cybersecurity is very relatable for anyone who uses phones and computers for social networking, online purchases, or any other purpose that involves personal or sensitive information. It was more engaging because the slides were laid out well and even though it was information rich, the delivery good.  No jargon, good speaking pace, clear audio.

6. is the team work evident?

Yes.  They clearly collaborated to form the outline and fill it in.  The presentation flowed well and was not redundant.

7. is the video appropriate to the audience (either general public or technology professionals)

Both videos were formatted appropriately for their intended audiences.  The short form video still touched on the key points and the animated gifs were well placed without being distracting.  The longer video had a lot of good information and nothing felt like filler. A technical audience would appreciate this.

USA vs China in the Race for Artificial Intelligence

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uAP4zkGJocQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY9x0RyxVPE

1. is the topic well covered? 

Yes. The long form video did a good job of taking different approaches to looking at the state of the AI development race.  They covered the topic from an anecdotal, historical, technical, political, and business angle.

The only question I would have is if the political component could be expanded on. As in, China can be better than U.S. at in one area or another but why in particular does being outpaced in AI constitute a national security threat?

2. is the presentation clear?

The presentations were very clear and easy to understand. The pints were easy to follow and made sense.

3. how is the quality of the research?

The research quality was good and they present it in a way that is not overwhelming even though a lot of ground was covered.

4. how is the quality of the video production?

The video production quality was good. Wootark's intro was very well done though it did feel a bit long. Michael's presentation was good in that it was a relaxed approach to some technical topics. As a technical person I appreciated Valentina and Brandon's portions, particularly there use of charts and illustrations.  Valentina did a noteworthy job with that. I took note for next time I ever have to prepare a presentation.

The only minor suggestion would be for Brandon to consider purchasing a chair-mounted portable green screen to mask the background.  I recently saw them on Amazon and thought they were a great alternative to a big clunky green screens.

5. is the video engaging and interesting?

Yes, not just because the topic is something that both laypeople and academics hear about often, but because of the format.  You can tell that each person had creative license over their portion.  I found the mix of presentation styles very engaging.

6. is the team work evident?

Yes. They weren't stepping on each other as far as topic coverage and they covered the essential points of the topic.

7. is the video appropriate to the audience (either general public or technology professionals)

The short video was very good but even for a general audience I think that it could have touched on some of the technical point.  For example, mention that software and hardware(chips) are a focal point. Possibly, briefly mention that beyond competition, the race is seen as a matter of national security on all sides.

The long video was good in that it covered some of the history of AI along along with technical details on the current state of the art.

Quantum Computing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YnhLbABcWQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xedIU8Ir14

1. is the topic well covered? 

Very much so.  They covered traditional computing, quantum computing and its physics, its applications, its advantages, and what the future may look like.

2. is the presentation clear?

Yes, they presented the topics in well defined sections with good use of visual aids and bullet point format.

3. how is the quality of the research?

It's obvious that they did their research and they did an excellent job with the delivery.  The technical details included in the presentation were enough to offer a good high level understanding of quantum computing.

4. how is the quality of the video production?

The video production was good. There was no embedded video or animations but it did not need any. The video resolution was good and the audio was clear.

5. is the video engaging and interesting?

Yes. It is an interesting topic whether you're interested in computer science and physics or someone who is just curious about the future direction of computing.

Though the speaker's presentations were good, there were occasions where the pace and tone made it clear that they were just reading. It's hard to do but my minor suggestion is to try speaking in such a way that it gives the impression that you are speaking extemporaneously. That will help with listener/viewer engagement. 

6. is the team work evident?

Yes.  They covered a lot of key points but had clearly delineated subtopics. The presentation was smooth and did not seem disjoint.

7. is the video appropriate to the audience (either general public or technology professionals)

Yes, a technical audience would absolutely enjoy the long form video and the way it presents the information.  The short form video managed to cover the essential points without going deep enough that it might cause a non-technical viewer to disengage.

Part 2: Keep Up With Your Learning Journal

Pro: https://youtu.be/zbHw68x0-vQ

General: https://youtu.be/2n71AXy3teg

The video project was difficult because we are all very busy so planning and stitching everything together was a challenge but it worked out in the end. I am proud of my team's work given the timeline.

In this class I learned a lot about time management and what my time commitment will probably look like for the remainder of this program.  My team conducted our communication via discord and shared a Google slide deck.  We created an outline in Google docs, and once we agreed on it, we populated our slides based on research we did for each of our portions of the outline.  We divided time equally based on the guidance for the presentation length. Ideally, if we have more time and availability it would be great to be able to spend more time making adjustments after we put our work together. That just wasn't possible in this case.

CST300: Module 7 (Week 7)

 Part One

Reflect on your team's Final Research Video Project Planning.  How did you collaborate?  What tools did you use to communicate and produce? Is the process smooth, what will you do differently next time in large collaborative projects?

My team and I continued to keep in constant contact on Discord. We had drafted an outline in a shared Google doc and each of us took ownership of a different part. We took the time limit for each presentation and divided by four to work out how much time we each had for our sections. We used a shared Google Slides presentation and and added our content to the slides that we owned.  We set up a Google Drive folder to host our voice recordings.  The process works however, the timeline made it difficult to coordinate.  Speaking for myself, I was VERY busy with work over the last two weeks, along with our essay being due last week.  I would have preferred to finish the presentation 3 days before the deadline and have the chance to polish the integrated work and make changes if we saw fit. There was unfortunately no time for that. That said, I am still very proud of our team and the work that we did.

Part Two

Please reflect on the Lecture readings in this section and what you have learned from this week's activities.

I think that the presentation tips from Toastmasters International was excellent. They're traps that I've seen presenters fall into.  At the end of the day, it comes down to preparing a presentation that is in a format that you feel comfortable delivering but maintaining focus on the reason why you're delivering it. To convey some idea.

I watched a Ted Talk from Dr. Peter Attia a surgeon turned health and longevity expert. I like his presentation in that it was engaging because he talked about a relatable topic, health.  I connected with it emotionally because he had some vulnerable moments. I like the delivery because he was clearly confident in the topic. He didn't rush and he spoke clearly.

The video and article from this week that stuck out for me was the deep fake video. There were a lot of deep fake videos posted on YouTube and elsewhere a couple of years ago and I think people are right to be asking questions about the ethical use of deep fakes. As with any new technology, bad actors will find negative uses for it but this case the potential violations are outsized. There are few things as valuable to a person as their identity, the potential to steal and exploit that understandably frightening.

CST300: Module 6 (Week 6)

 Part 1: Help Your Teammates to Develop Capstone Ideas

We discussed some of our ideas but there were no definitive outcomes.  We discussed ideas that centered around Multiplayer Online Battle Arena (MOBA) game development.  Other options related to streamlining, securing, or democratizing applications that center around social networking. One of my initial contributions to the conversations was to suggest taking my hardware-dependent ideas with a grain of salt since some of them hardware represents an obstacle. Meaning, the barriers to implementation are greater. It was also noted that what ever concept we choose should be something that a corporation or government would want to buy.  I agree with this sentiment in that it speaks to the salability of a product. If the goal is to build something that many people would find useful, then it cannot merely be a pet project.  There will be more follow-on conversations to come.

Part 2: Keep Up With Your Learning Journal

My view on the career guide (cover letter & resume) may be unique in that I have been working in the field for years at this point. I completed the assignment from the perspective of an experienced engineer writing an updated resume and cover letter and not that of a new grad or intern. I appreciate that it reminded me to think about how a hiring manager might interpret my message. I usually do not include a cover letter with my resume when I apply for positions but I will at least polish one off and save it for an opportunity where it might be useful.  I have always been interested in the hardware/software interaction and in what Linus Torvalds describes as "interacting with hardware from a software perspective."

Using the chosen topic, we setup an outline - introduction, conclusion, and the points in between.  We populated the bullet points to get a high level understanding of the structure and flow of the presentation.  We also started working on gathering resources to inform our research.  We looked at previous cohort presentations and discussed optimal approaches to this project.  We want to avoid monotony, be engaging, use visual representations when it is useful, along with other methods to maintain audience attention.  We are now settling on who will be responsible for each portion of the presentation.

CST300: Module 5 (Week 5)

Part One: Comment on Teammate Posts

https://liamccsonlinelearningjournal.blogspot.com/2025/01/educational-goals-career-goals-ets-comp.html

https://ethancsonline.blogspot.com/2025/01/week-4.html

https://keshabneupane2001.blogspot.com/2025/02/week-4.html

Part Two: Possible Capstone Ideas

Personal Cookbook App: I cook and have a lot of bookmarked recipes saved in my browser from different sites.  With this app, recipes are sourced from partnering cooking/recipe sites.  That includes the ingredient lists and measurements, the instructions, author/chef commentary, etc. Regardless of the original site (allrecipes.com, epicurious.com, simplyrecipes.com, etc), the recipe is presented in a consistent format. Lack of consistent presentation is a pet peeve of people who hunt for recipes online.

-attribution and compensation to the originator/site

-comment section for recipes

-customization feature to add personal touches to existing recipes and make your changes shareable

-a mechanism to add ingredients to your preferred store's shopping cart and order them for pickup or delivery (Albertson's, Ralph's, Vons, Amazon Fresh, Instacart, DoorDash, etc.).

-revenue comes through ads and partnered grocers

Video Caller: A video calling tool targeted for use by elderly, visually impaired, less tech savvy users, and people who want a cheap simple way to use their TV for video calls.  Smaller than a set top box and connects to a TV.  Allows users to use the larger screen offered by a TV.
-Uses Google Meet and Google Assistant.
-Synced with Google Contacts
-Voice command to call specific contacts.
-Simple hardware and software interface for elderly and visually impaired.

CAN Bus Filter: A tool that is placed inline between two CAN bus nodes that can filter or modify CAN bus frames in transit.  Useful for debugging and fault injection for testing purposes.
-Block/discard frames with fields set to specific values. For example, discard frames with specific CAN IDs.
-Modify fields of CAN bus frames in transit.  For example, changing CAN IDs.
-[FUTURE] Logging CAN traffic with tools like Wireshark.

Part Three: Lessons from this Week

I am considering graduate school but it very much depends on my situation after graduation.  It is a massive commitment of time and energy so if I don’t believe that it will help my career going forward, then I will probably decide against it. If my career trajectory and industry trends justify additional schooling, then I will commit to it. I also hope to find an employer that has tuition reimbursement to help mitigate the cost.

This week is the first time that I have used an LLM. I knew that these models had come a long way so even though I was not surprised, I was impressed by the output. I do not plan to rely heavily on tools like this going forward. That said, t I can absolutely see myself using tools like ChatGPT when there is no ethical conflict and it is a task where there is little benefit for me to complete it on my own.

Industry Expert Interview - Founder at GrowTech

*I am using a fictitious interviewee name and company name to insure the interviewee's anonymity;

Industry Expert Interview

My interviewee was Jacob.  He is a CSUMB alumnus and is the co-founder of GrowTech. GrowTech provides monitoring and automation solutions for farming/agricultural applications. I reached out to Jacob 1)  because he is a business owner and 2) because he developed and works on a product that is both software and hardware. These are things that I am interested in so I knew that I could gain some useful insights from our conversation.

Jacob has been interested in technology and farming since long before he attended CSUMB. He started building robots in high school.  After high school he worked in commercial and consumer gardens before going on to secure a position in product development at an electronics company. He eventually rose to the position of Product Development Manager. By the time that he enrolled at CSUMB, he already had well over a decade of work experience. However, not having the academic credentials and having some knowledge gaps was limiting his career growth. He rectified that by earning his CS degree. I found this highly relatable and encouraging. I have been working in tech for many years but I know that not officially having a degree is a limitation. Hearing about Jacob’s path to get where he is was reassuring.

GrowTech’s product is not just software, they also build the hardware.  For example, farms and vineyards use GrowTech hardware to monitor moisture levels in soil, control irrigation pumps, monitor weather sensors, etc. The centerpiece of these systems are the GrowTech hubs that manage the telemetry data from sensors and other devices at the site. Knowing that hardware design is not necessarily covered as part of our curriculum, it was heartening to see an example of someone who went beyond the scope of our coursework to learn what was necessary and bring an idea to life.  He did not need to have a formal education in electrical or electronics engineering.

If a client already has sensors, irrigation pumps, or other components GrowTech will integrate them with their equipment and software.  They will fabricate housings and assemblies to allow them to work with GrowTech’s automation and monitoring suite. I.e., they will work with the customer to build out a custom solution. This is another key takeaway for me. It speaks to being willing and able to be flexible to the needs of the customer. It made me reflect on the pros and cons of building that type of flexibility into a technical product from the outset versus building a product, waiting until it attains some degree of success or market acceptance, then adding flexibility. There are quite a few factors to consider but it definitely gave me food for thought.

Jacob’s team of 8 to 10 people at GrowTech includes at least one of his former CSUMB classmates.  They participated in an incubator program sponsored by another university.  GrowTech was a product of that experience.  I read this as an example of the proverb, “no man is an island.” Sometimes I get nervous about working in groups. Sometimes I don’t know at what point it is ok to ask for help. Sometimes I put too much on my plate. Jacob recruited other people to help make his vision a reality and through the incubator, sought the advice of industry veterans in order to make good business decisions. This is a reminder for me that teamwork, collaboration, and good guidance are invaluable. It is absolutely possible to breathe life into an idea, if I look beyond myself.

Jacob’s capstone project was a garbage bin monitor that would send an app notification if a bin was full. He entered this project in a business plan competition and won. CSUMB had planned to use these sensors on campus but unfortunately, the pandemic put an end to those plans since no one was on campus.  However, Jacob took what may have looked like a failure and rolled it into something else. The same fundamental technologies that he used for that project are the ones that he used to build the GrowTech’s product line. I see this as another lesson in flexibility. An example of how being able to pivot can mean the difference between failure and success.

Jacob and his success as a founder, non-traditional student, and a scientific generalist is inspiring. His story offers a lot of insights about collaboration, flexibility, and perseverance on the path to reaching a goal. That is regardless of whether the challenge is in industry or academia. As I progress on my own path, a cycle of advancing, reassessing, and recalibrating, I am certain that I will find value in recounting the lessons and insights that I took from this conversation.

CST300: Module 4 (Week 4)

 Part One: Set Your Educational Goals

My educational goal is to complete the CS online program with at least a B+ GPA and with a strong understanding of the fundamentals of computer science.  Depending on how well I perform and my life circumstances at the end of this program, I would like to go on to complete a master’s degree in either computer science or computer engineering.

Part Two: Set Your Career Goals

My career goal is to work in the embedded software and systems engineering domain.  Ideally, in the space technology industry.  Once I feel that I have enough knowledge and experience, I would like to start my own company building any one of the consumer devices that I have been thinking about for some time. 

Part Three: Take a wild guess of your percentile of the ETS Computer Science test

I hadn’t heard of the ETS Computer Science test before completing this module but I think it’s good that a test like this was developed for CS.  It has been a very long time since I took courses in systems architecture and discrete structures so I expect that those will be my weak points.  My guess is that I will score at about the 80th percentile.

 Part Four: Keep Up With Your Learning Journal

I had two major takeaways from this module.

I gained a lot of insights about my teammates.  I appreciate that we have diverse personalities and strengths. I would not like to work with three other people who were exactly like me. I would miss out on a lot of learning that way.  I can see that we will get along well because we’re willing to make room for everyone to make their best contribution.

My essay topic is about the ethics of using AI for purposes of warfare.  In doing the reading, I learned a lot about the history of AI in international conflicts and about the state of the art.  I learned about different ways that using a weapon in battle doesn’t just negatively impact the people being targeted.  It can also negatively impact the people wielding the weapon - in many ways.