Well, the semester is finally coming to a close, and I have to admit, I am kind of sad as I write this last post. Despite my initial hesitations I had about this class, I made it through, completed every assignment, and I feel like I learned alot in the process. Not only has it opened my eyes to the new technologies available to us, but it also opened my eyes to the benefits of these technologies, how they are really affecting our lives, and most importantly, how they will affect our future. I always considered myself someone who didn't know much about technology, and I always dismissed it, never thinking I really needed to know anything about them. I realize now that I was very wrong, and I am very thankful for this experience. This class was not what I expected and I am very glad!
For my last post I thought I would share what I decided to write about for my NeoVox article. This one was hard, I feel like I have so much information going through my mind, I couldn't focus on just one. However, I think I found a topic we all can connect to.
Online Education.
It is something I always considered to be less valuable than an in-class education. Some research I have done, and my own personal experiences in this class have proved otherwise. I found an excellent article that addressed 15 benefits of an online education. I thought I would use those as a guide to help me through my NeoVox and hopefully produce a final assignment that has really proved how much I have learned in this class.
First of all, did you know that there are most than 4 million students participating in online education programs? I didn't, and that number is growing each and everyday. One of the most obvious benefits of taking classes online would be how easy it is to access the course material. Being able to do your homework and get resources anytime day or night and anywhere you have internet connection is incredibly convenient. It allows flexibility that the rigid classroom structure does not. With the growing number of non-traditional students who are trying to balance going back to school with other responsibilities such as families, it makes perfect sense that more and more individuals would rather take an online course. It also allows students to make the most of their most productive times. I know that I work best in the afternoon, however, not all classes are offered in the afternoon. This class has allowed me to complete my work when it is best for me, and I think that has made the work I have done in this class much more valuable because I am putting more thought and effort into it.
Another reason, that I can relate to most, would be the fact that learning online can be much less intimidating. I know that it takes alot for me to feel comfortable participating in the regular classroom. I am not an outgoing person, but with the online class, you can speak your mind more freely. Not only does this increase the number of people contributing, but with a greater number of individuals contributing comes a wider spectrum of opinions and knowledge that may not have been brought forth otherwise. In addition, everyone can contribute to the 'lecture'. There is always one person in a classroom that seems to feel the need to contribute compulsively, so much so that others may not get any opportunties to share opinions or valuable information. Online everyone has a place for contribution if they wish to take advantage of it. Also, I don't know about everyone else, but sometimes I find professors to be a little bit intimidating. It is hard for me to go to office hours, not only because of the time constraints with my other classes, but because of my own nervousness about sitting down with them. As silly as that may be, this class has made it easy for me to keep in touch with prof. Reid. I can email him anytime day or night and I feel much more at ease doing so. In the same instance, I feel like it is easier to reach my classmates and I am more inclined to do so. We can connect at anytime anywhere and talk about what's going on in the class, not just when we all have a free minute to meet on campus which let's face it, is pretty much never. There is definately more teamwork. It is very ironic to say considering that I have only met one of my 'classmates' face-to-face, but I feel like this is the most intimate classroom setting I have ever experienced. I feel connected with everyone and I feel very confident in my ability to be a valuable member of this class. I feel as though my opinions are respected, and I am not alone. That is something that is rare to find in the regular classroom setting.
Finally, I think online learning is valuable because of it's ability to offer a greater variety of course material. The fact that it can be taught anywhere, at anytime, by anyone allows professors who might not have been able to hold a regular class to reach students, and those teachers may have a whole new knowledge base to share with students that could be really beneficial. Also, the way that the course material is provided to the students allows for a whole new set our resources. It is no longer a lecture which can be incredibly boring day after day, it is multi-media and very engaging. This way each student has the ability to learn in their own style. In addition, learning online introduces you to a whole new world of technologies that will be useful in the future. I know that this class has really opened my eyes to what is out there. I now know how to podcast, make and edit movies (which I found out is so fun and easy!), have my own blog, and use webct. I don't have to just email anymore! Technology is changing and growing so fast it's important that we keep up with it. This class has done just that for me. These technologies we have been using will become more and more valuable in the future and it's good to learn about them now. I can't imagine this class being taught any other way than online. There is no better way to learn about writing online that actually writing online.
I just wanted to thank professor Reid and everyone in this class for making this experience a really good one. I wish everyone the best in the future and good luck with finals!
Sunday, May 6, 2007
Saturday, April 28, 2007
Virtual Reality is Real!
The deeper I delve into this book, the more I realize just how real virtual reality is becoming. Not only does it offer jobs that individuals can enjoy while supporting their families, but Dibbell proves that it can form real relationships and have real conflicts.
Yes, people can make money and earn and 'honest' living, as Dibbell is trying to do, but there are also people who can cheat, like Lee Caldwell. They see holes in the system and they take advantage of them. They cheat others and work the system to earn millions. Sounds alot like the real world doesn't it?
We see the relationship that formed between Dibbell and Radney. Two people in the game to make money working together in his first semblence of a partnership to improve one another's bank account balances. Again, real world. I would have to say, though, that it really hit me that these are people playing these games which makes the game more real when he discussed an instance in which Radney asked for advice from Dibbell. This young kid was having girl problems and he chose to ask his the man he shared a virtual house with and did trading with to give him some advice. Real again. Dibbell explained his confusion with the situation in Chapter 19, "But, why me? And what to make of the trust he placed in a 40-year old half-stranger he happened to share an imaginary mansion with (pg. 148)?" This didn't surprise me when I read it. Dibbell was doing business with this young man. They were trusting eachother, a real relationship was forming between two people even though it was in the midst of a virtual game. I think it is easy for people to get caught up in the virtual aspect. When most people first think of video games and computer games that company's such as UO produce, you think of people sitting mindlessly for hours and hours in front of a screen becoming one with the computer, becoming "dehumanized" like we've talked about it class. I think that it's easy for most people to dismiss these individuals and not reckognize that there is actual human interaction going on here in the games. Dibbell's friendship with Radney is the perfect example. They may be interacting in a virtual world but their social (human to human) interactions are real, and doesn't that make this world they are living in real as well?
There is REAL money to be made, relationships to be formed, business to be done, the system can be cheated and when it is cheated there are 'police' to come in and stop forces like Blacksnow. Virtual reality isn't as mindless as many think it is. It is more real than I think anyone realizes, even Dibbell when he first started to get involved in this new 'business.' It's the people that make virtual reality real. These games exist for our amusement and now they just happen to have opened up new job market. Virtual reality wouldn't exist if it wasn't for us, so, in a slightly confusing way, virtual reality is real. Sure, we can't touch it, we can't hold it in our hands, but we control it.
Yes, people can make money and earn and 'honest' living, as Dibbell is trying to do, but there are also people who can cheat, like Lee Caldwell. They see holes in the system and they take advantage of them. They cheat others and work the system to earn millions. Sounds alot like the real world doesn't it?
We see the relationship that formed between Dibbell and Radney. Two people in the game to make money working together in his first semblence of a partnership to improve one another's bank account balances. Again, real world. I would have to say, though, that it really hit me that these are people playing these games which makes the game more real when he discussed an instance in which Radney asked for advice from Dibbell. This young kid was having girl problems and he chose to ask his the man he shared a virtual house with and did trading with to give him some advice. Real again. Dibbell explained his confusion with the situation in Chapter 19, "But, why me? And what to make of the trust he placed in a 40-year old half-stranger he happened to share an imaginary mansion with (pg. 148)?" This didn't surprise me when I read it. Dibbell was doing business with this young man. They were trusting eachother, a real relationship was forming between two people even though it was in the midst of a virtual game. I think it is easy for people to get caught up in the virtual aspect. When most people first think of video games and computer games that company's such as UO produce, you think of people sitting mindlessly for hours and hours in front of a screen becoming one with the computer, becoming "dehumanized" like we've talked about it class. I think that it's easy for most people to dismiss these individuals and not reckognize that there is actual human interaction going on here in the games. Dibbell's friendship with Radney is the perfect example. They may be interacting in a virtual world but their social (human to human) interactions are real, and doesn't that make this world they are living in real as well?
There is REAL money to be made, relationships to be formed, business to be done, the system can be cheated and when it is cheated there are 'police' to come in and stop forces like Blacksnow. Virtual reality isn't as mindless as many think it is. It is more real than I think anyone realizes, even Dibbell when he first started to get involved in this new 'business.' It's the people that make virtual reality real. These games exist for our amusement and now they just happen to have opened up new job market. Virtual reality wouldn't exist if it wasn't for us, so, in a slightly confusing way, virtual reality is real. Sure, we can't touch it, we can't hold it in our hands, but we control it.
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Play Money- 2nd Section
I just finished 3 more parts in Play Money, and I am so confused! haha I never imagined all this talk of video games and making money online would be quite so complicated. I understand the general idea of real money being exchanged for virtual goods and the different currency systems between the real world and the virtual world and how there are certain exchange values and what not. I also undestand that money takes many forms and virtual money is just another one of these forms. Dibbell loses me, though, when he starts talking specifics. The general idea I understand, but I am really not enjoying the specifics that he goes into. I am enjoying the book, overall, I think it is important to explore the newest things happening in our culture, however, I get somewhat bored when he starts talking about exchange value and how much money he can make from each online book he sells on eBay and how that money will grow towards his future investments in the game.
"The last investment I'd placed with him, 500,000 gp, had netted me 300,000 in two weeks, for a 60 percent ROI. If he did as well this time, my 2 million gp would become 3.2 million, which with any luck I could eBay for $64, an 88 percent return on my $34 (pg. 80-81)."
HUH?
Yeah, this kind of thing is totally lost on me, but I think I'm getting alot out of the rest of the text that gives more background, history, and current events. I've said it before and I will say it again, his discussion of play is so interesting to me, and I think this is a great book to follow A Whole New Mind, it really augments what Pink didn't have time to really go into depth about. I think there is great validity in these author's theories that will continue to present themselves throughout our culture as time passes. On page 54 he discusses how civilization is not made from war and religion, they are too serious. Our civilization (defined as: "an advanced state of human society, in which a high level of culture, science, industry, and government has been reached (dictionary.com.") is created by play which I think is, essentially, how we cope with these more serious areas of life. Play gives us character and makes our civilization unique. " Civilization is, in its earliest phases, played... It does not come from play.. it arrises in play, and never leaves it (pg. 50)." Play is much more important than many of us think it is, and if play is part of who we are, why not play for money as well? He made a good point by saying that the internet introduces and possibly, perfects, the idea of productive play. It finally allows to multitask, and by multitask I don't mean getting 3 projects done at once while on the phone with your boss and IMing your business partner about your next meeting. I mean multitasking our lives, who we are. We can now play and produce a source of income for our families. Those who enjoy video games and enjoy creating them, right brainers, can finally prove to the world that they will rule the world one day.
I also liked his point about games often, modeling the real world. Not all the time of course, however, how many racing video games are out there? What about military games (fighting)? These are things that many of us cannot do in real life. It involves too much risk, not only risking our lives, but risking our income and livelihood if we were to abandom our own careers to follow our secret dream of being the next Nascar driver. But, these games allow us to live our dreams without the consequences, as Dibbell says. We can escape our realities, if only for a moment, and do things we never would be able to otherwise. His idea of 'suspension of disbelief' also stood out for me. We talked about this idea in my fiction class recently. I thought it was interesting that the same term was used and is very applicable in both contexts. You want the reader or the player, to believe that the reality you have created is real, in that moment. It allows a greater connection with the book or the game, I think that plays a big part in the fascination with video games and the goal of achieving this suspension is what keeps video game designers not only employed, but in high demand. The transition of video games from just games into a form of employment and income might be due to a greater suspension of disbelief, a more broad form that is expanding into the lives of its players. It has become such an important part of our culture that we have, in a way, turned this disbelief into belief. It is a world that so many people live in everyday that it is no longer not real. It is very real to many people and adding monetary value to that only enhances the idea of virtual reality becoming more and more real in the lives of everyone. I am really enjoying the layers Dibbell is adding to what many of us consider "just a game" before we started this book. There is so much more to it and I'm glad I'm becoming more aware of it because who knows what the future holds for us.
"The last investment I'd placed with him, 500,000 gp, had netted me 300,000 in two weeks, for a 60 percent ROI. If he did as well this time, my 2 million gp would become 3.2 million, which with any luck I could eBay for $64, an 88 percent return on my $34 (pg. 80-81)."
HUH?
Yeah, this kind of thing is totally lost on me, but I think I'm getting alot out of the rest of the text that gives more background, history, and current events. I've said it before and I will say it again, his discussion of play is so interesting to me, and I think this is a great book to follow A Whole New Mind, it really augments what Pink didn't have time to really go into depth about. I think there is great validity in these author's theories that will continue to present themselves throughout our culture as time passes. On page 54 he discusses how civilization is not made from war and religion, they are too serious. Our civilization (defined as: "an advanced state of human society, in which a high level of culture, science, industry, and government has been reached (dictionary.com.") is created by play which I think is, essentially, how we cope with these more serious areas of life. Play gives us character and makes our civilization unique. " Civilization is, in its earliest phases, played... It does not come from play.. it arrises in play, and never leaves it (pg. 50)." Play is much more important than many of us think it is, and if play is part of who we are, why not play for money as well? He made a good point by saying that the internet introduces and possibly, perfects, the idea of productive play. It finally allows to multitask, and by multitask I don't mean getting 3 projects done at once while on the phone with your boss and IMing your business partner about your next meeting. I mean multitasking our lives, who we are. We can now play and produce a source of income for our families. Those who enjoy video games and enjoy creating them, right brainers, can finally prove to the world that they will rule the world one day.
I also liked his point about games often, modeling the real world. Not all the time of course, however, how many racing video games are out there? What about military games (fighting)? These are things that many of us cannot do in real life. It involves too much risk, not only risking our lives, but risking our income and livelihood if we were to abandom our own careers to follow our secret dream of being the next Nascar driver. But, these games allow us to live our dreams without the consequences, as Dibbell says. We can escape our realities, if only for a moment, and do things we never would be able to otherwise. His idea of 'suspension of disbelief' also stood out for me. We talked about this idea in my fiction class recently. I thought it was interesting that the same term was used and is very applicable in both contexts. You want the reader or the player, to believe that the reality you have created is real, in that moment. It allows a greater connection with the book or the game, I think that plays a big part in the fascination with video games and the goal of achieving this suspension is what keeps video game designers not only employed, but in high demand. The transition of video games from just games into a form of employment and income might be due to a greater suspension of disbelief, a more broad form that is expanding into the lives of its players. It has become such an important part of our culture that we have, in a way, turned this disbelief into belief. It is a world that so many people live in everyday that it is no longer not real. It is very real to many people and adding monetary value to that only enhances the idea of virtual reality becoming more and more real in the lives of everyone. I am really enjoying the layers Dibbell is adding to what many of us consider "just a game" before we started this book. There is so much more to it and I'm glad I'm becoming more aware of it because who knows what the future holds for us.
Friday, April 20, 2007
hmmm
Well, I was totally stumped as to what to write about this week. Officially at a loss for words. All week Ive sat with this screen up trying to conjure up something creative from my right side... but nothing. That was until I decided I was bored enough to surf the net. All this talk of games made me want to play one. I went to a couple different sites and settled on online billiards. Sure, it's nothing compared to Dibbel's virtual life, but nonetheless, I became completely wound up in it. Before I knew it an hour had passed and I was still clicking away at this little green, virtual pool table. I was talking to few people online at the time... I had totally forgotten about it and they were starting to get mad at me for failing to respond. When I looked at the clock and realized just how much time I wasted I made myself drag my mouse up to the X and just like that, I was released from the powerful hold of online gaming.
After I was finished I got to thinking. I also got to my work. For the hour lost in the game, I spent another very productive hour getting alot of homework done. Homework that didn't even need to be done for another week. Even extra credit! I thank the game. Maybe that hour wasn't a waste of my time.
I think that what Pink was trying to get to with all his talk of play has finally sunk in. After allowing myself to think of nothing but the game in front of me, I felt more relaxed and more prepared to take on my work. There is certain release that games allow, and I think that is what people keep coming back for time and time again. It allows you to become completely engrossed. Letting the rest of the world fall away. I wasn't thinking about a paper I have due next week or a huge test I have yet to study for. However, I was thinking. My mind was engaged for that hour. I wasn't staring at the wall without a thought in my head. I was deciding which position would allow for the best shot and based on the that position and the distance from the target ball, just how long I would have to hold the mouse to apply the right amount of force to the cue ball to send the target into the hole, upping my point value.
A lot of people, adults mostly, see young kids playing games such as these. Lost in the Xboxes and playstations and they consider it a waste of time. They think these kids are mindlessly engaged in something completely unproductive. But, Pink was right. Gaming is productive. I know when I was finished I felt refreshed, a bit more creative, and with a new attitude I took on the work that needed to be done. Therefore, I have come to the conclusion that play is essential for work! And I think I will engage in play a bit more often. I think simple gaming would be a great way to take study breaks. Instead of staring at the tv, maybe I will try playing a few games. It's amazing to think that a few minutes of "unfocused" thought could accomplish so much. It most certainly accomplished this post! Now that we are reading A Whole New Mind and I have just gone over Dibbel's discussion of play, I think we are going to see a big change in the way people are thinking. I was unaware of it until I started reading this books, however, these are ideas that will change the way we think, work, and play. It won't be long before they spread like wildfire, and who knows, maybe there will be a mandatory 'play' break in every office from here to California!
After I was finished I got to thinking. I also got to my work. For the hour lost in the game, I spent another very productive hour getting alot of homework done. Homework that didn't even need to be done for another week. Even extra credit! I thank the game. Maybe that hour wasn't a waste of my time.
I think that what Pink was trying to get to with all his talk of play has finally sunk in. After allowing myself to think of nothing but the game in front of me, I felt more relaxed and more prepared to take on my work. There is certain release that games allow, and I think that is what people keep coming back for time and time again. It allows you to become completely engrossed. Letting the rest of the world fall away. I wasn't thinking about a paper I have due next week or a huge test I have yet to study for. However, I was thinking. My mind was engaged for that hour. I wasn't staring at the wall without a thought in my head. I was deciding which position would allow for the best shot and based on the that position and the distance from the target ball, just how long I would have to hold the mouse to apply the right amount of force to the cue ball to send the target into the hole, upping my point value.
A lot of people, adults mostly, see young kids playing games such as these. Lost in the Xboxes and playstations and they consider it a waste of time. They think these kids are mindlessly engaged in something completely unproductive. But, Pink was right. Gaming is productive. I know when I was finished I felt refreshed, a bit more creative, and with a new attitude I took on the work that needed to be done. Therefore, I have come to the conclusion that play is essential for work! And I think I will engage in play a bit more often. I think simple gaming would be a great way to take study breaks. Instead of staring at the tv, maybe I will try playing a few games. It's amazing to think that a few minutes of "unfocused" thought could accomplish so much. It most certainly accomplished this post! Now that we are reading A Whole New Mind and I have just gone over Dibbel's discussion of play, I think we are going to see a big change in the way people are thinking. I was unaware of it until I started reading this books, however, these are ideas that will change the way we think, work, and play. It won't be long before they spread like wildfire, and who knows, maybe there will be a mandatory 'play' break in every office from here to California!
Friday, April 13, 2007
Play Money- 1st section
Well, I just finished reading the first couple parts of Play Money, and I really dont understand what all the fuss is about concerning the video-gaming phenomenon. I've taken a look at some of the class debates and I really have never felt that video games are such a negative thing. I've never been one to really play them myself and, don't get me wrong, I am not in support of games that teach violence and criminal activity to young children, however, I think that they can be a very good thing for kids and for adults. My cousin was always playing video games throughout his teen years, constantly, and my whole family was worried about him because that was all he did all the time, literally. He is now 23 and going to school for game design. He is taking something that he was passionate about and loved and making it into a career, and with the way the video game industry has taken off over the years, it looks like it will be a very lucrative career. As long as someone enjoys what they do for a living and are not engaging is some illegal activity while doing it and they are making enough money to support themselves... who cares whether they play video games or crunch numbers in a cubicle all day like a robot. Video games are engaging, and the couple times I have played them, I find them to be a way of relaxing, "blowing off steam" I guess you could say.
I was really interested when Dibbell started discussing psychology and why people play video games. In these games that he describes he says that there is no ultimate goal and no winner or loser to speak of. If there is no winner and loser and no huge prize or accomplishment to aspire to, then why do people keep going back? I started thinking about reinforcement, something that they never fail to bring up in ANY psychology class you take, and think that is what Dibbell may have meant in all this talk of psychology. People are reinforced on a small scale regularly throughout the game. They are able to raise certain scores or obtain certain goods, and while they are only small gains, they make you feel productive. Your rewards are small but constant, unlike the daily grind where your reward comes once a week or once every two weeks when you get your paycheck. I think it fills a void in a lot of people's lives. People who engage in everyday work that truly has no meaning to them. They don't have jobs they love and they work simply for the check and because that is what society expects us to do. I think it's like Pink's idea. We need to use the right side of our brain to be fulfilled. We need to connect with what we are taking part in emotionally and it needs to have meaning to us for us to truly love it. Video games connect with the right side of the brain and give individuals an outlet that they wouldn't normally have.
I also really liked his talk about economy. The idea of scarcity. I have never really heard of this theory before, if it even is a theory, but I thought it was really new, refreshing, and true! Sure, we always think the grass is greener on the other side and we complain about work and school and responsibilities. I think most people, including myself, would describe their paradise is a place where they do nothing all day and night and have everything they need laid out before them. It seems great right? But actually think about. Sure, that would be great for a couple weeks or so, but what happens after that? What do you have to keep you going? What gets you out of bed in the morning. I think of it like stress. I am a very stressed-out person. But when I have 4 tests, a research paper, and about a million pages of reading to do in one week, yes, I am ready pull my own hair out and completely break down but I don't, the stress of the situation, being right there on the edge is when I do the best. My highest scores on tests are when I have had at least 2 other tests in the same week or when my blood pressure was at its highest. I know, it sounds a little crazy, but people don't thrive in a paradise where they do nothing all day, they thrive in a world where they have expectations, responsibilities, and a reason to roll out of bed each morning. No one wants to be bored all the time. So I guess, in a twisted way, we bring about our own stress and we do enjoy scarcity and the stress that comes with it. We have learned to love it, we have learned to thrive under it's conditions. It makes us productive, but this is the world that we have created and its not going to change any time soon.
As far as making real money selling fake goods is concerned, yeah it is a little crazy. I had trouble wrapping my head around the idea in these first few chapters. I immediately thought of a recent addition to Facebook. There is this new thing now where everyone has a 'gift' they can give someone. Its like a little clipart picture you can send to someone. You get to pick your own out of ones that the company has designed so they are tailored to the individual you would like to give the gift to. Its a cute idea, someone has a birthday, you can send them a little pic of a cupcake with a candle on it. When you are picking out your 'gifts' though, there is a little line... the first gift is free, after that they cost $1 each. At first, it made no sense what so ever to me now, but now that I see how the virtual world is becoming reality, it doesn't seem that crazy.
Video gaming is becoming a way of life just like any other job is, things are changing as Dibbell said from 'manual to mental labor.' It only makes sense that the concept of money and what y0u can buy with it would change too. It is an abstract concept to buy fake good for real money, but when you think about it, money is an abstract concept in its own way. Maybe I'm going a little too far out there but, to me, money only has meaning and value because we give it meaning and value. The only reason that we think money is so concrete is because we have assigned it to paper and coins. What is to say that these goods don't have value, just because we don't have something that we can hold in our hands that represent them? Virtual reality is becoming a real place to us, no matter if it's in front of our faces or in our minds. We have created it and made it what it is, it is real to all those people out there who love to play these video games, so why can't we encorporate a way for people to make a living in this other new world that is becoming part of our culture?
I was really interested when Dibbell started discussing psychology and why people play video games. In these games that he describes he says that there is no ultimate goal and no winner or loser to speak of. If there is no winner and loser and no huge prize or accomplishment to aspire to, then why do people keep going back? I started thinking about reinforcement, something that they never fail to bring up in ANY psychology class you take, and think that is what Dibbell may have meant in all this talk of psychology. People are reinforced on a small scale regularly throughout the game. They are able to raise certain scores or obtain certain goods, and while they are only small gains, they make you feel productive. Your rewards are small but constant, unlike the daily grind where your reward comes once a week or once every two weeks when you get your paycheck. I think it fills a void in a lot of people's lives. People who engage in everyday work that truly has no meaning to them. They don't have jobs they love and they work simply for the check and because that is what society expects us to do. I think it's like Pink's idea. We need to use the right side of our brain to be fulfilled. We need to connect with what we are taking part in emotionally and it needs to have meaning to us for us to truly love it. Video games connect with the right side of the brain and give individuals an outlet that they wouldn't normally have.
I also really liked his talk about economy. The idea of scarcity. I have never really heard of this theory before, if it even is a theory, but I thought it was really new, refreshing, and true! Sure, we always think the grass is greener on the other side and we complain about work and school and responsibilities. I think most people, including myself, would describe their paradise is a place where they do nothing all day and night and have everything they need laid out before them. It seems great right? But actually think about. Sure, that would be great for a couple weeks or so, but what happens after that? What do you have to keep you going? What gets you out of bed in the morning. I think of it like stress. I am a very stressed-out person. But when I have 4 tests, a research paper, and about a million pages of reading to do in one week, yes, I am ready pull my own hair out and completely break down but I don't, the stress of the situation, being right there on the edge is when I do the best. My highest scores on tests are when I have had at least 2 other tests in the same week or when my blood pressure was at its highest. I know, it sounds a little crazy, but people don't thrive in a paradise where they do nothing all day, they thrive in a world where they have expectations, responsibilities, and a reason to roll out of bed each morning. No one wants to be bored all the time. So I guess, in a twisted way, we bring about our own stress and we do enjoy scarcity and the stress that comes with it. We have learned to love it, we have learned to thrive under it's conditions. It makes us productive, but this is the world that we have created and its not going to change any time soon.
As far as making real money selling fake goods is concerned, yeah it is a little crazy. I had trouble wrapping my head around the idea in these first few chapters. I immediately thought of a recent addition to Facebook. There is this new thing now where everyone has a 'gift' they can give someone. Its like a little clipart picture you can send to someone. You get to pick your own out of ones that the company has designed so they are tailored to the individual you would like to give the gift to. Its a cute idea, someone has a birthday, you can send them a little pic of a cupcake with a candle on it. When you are picking out your 'gifts' though, there is a little line... the first gift is free, after that they cost $1 each. At first, it made no sense what so ever to me now, but now that I see how the virtual world is becoming reality, it doesn't seem that crazy.
Video gaming is becoming a way of life just like any other job is, things are changing as Dibbell said from 'manual to mental labor.' It only makes sense that the concept of money and what y0u can buy with it would change too. It is an abstract concept to buy fake good for real money, but when you think about it, money is an abstract concept in its own way. Maybe I'm going a little too far out there but, to me, money only has meaning and value because we give it meaning and value. The only reason that we think money is so concrete is because we have assigned it to paper and coins. What is to say that these goods don't have value, just because we don't have something that we can hold in our hands that represent them? Virtual reality is becoming a real place to us, no matter if it's in front of our faces or in our minds. We have created it and made it what it is, it is real to all those people out there who love to play these video games, so why can't we encorporate a way for people to make a living in this other new world that is becoming part of our culture?
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Brainstorming
Well, after meeting with my partner for the video project and talking all of what we want to do out, I think that this video project could actually be done! haha. I have to admit I was totally scared of it when I saw it on the syllabus, but 3-4 minutes shouldn't be bad and I feel like we have a topic and idea to present it that could be fun and interesting. I was doing some brainstorming for the video and thought I would sort out my thoughts here.
So, our proposal is to ask Cortland students to give us their take on technology. We thought that technology is changing so fast that we are going to have to become much more flexible and open to change with it. I know that I have little knowledge of the newest developments out there, so I wanted to know if my peers were as clueless as I was before I started taking this class. Also, we decided that we wanted to get a feel for how much students use these new technologies, like their cell phones and what not, and where they think they will go in the future (ie. will computers be obsolete?)
We thought that we would start by creating a base of questions. We thought 6 would be a good number to cover with a few people in the short time we have. It was hard since we have to cram all these ideas into a measly 4 minutes (but I'm not complaining, I don't have time for much more!). Since we are going through all this talk of Second Life we decided to ask them 1) what their definition of virtual reality and 2) explain Second Life briefly and get their thoughts. Then we decided we would 3) ask how often they use their cell phones and 4) what do they think cell phones will be like in the future? Then, because neither of us had a clue about blogging or podcasting or anything that, we wanted to 5) ask if they know what blogging is? do they blog? how often? and if not, do they think it is a good idea? and finally, we wanted to ask an all-inclusive question about technology as a whole and where they think it is going. So we thought of something along the lines of 6) how do they see themselves interacting with technology in the future? what about your children? etc...
We are trying to create a short but sweet introduction to really summarize why we are making the video that we are. I think that our video idea is something that everyone could find interesting because it involves us! Things are changing and we need to change with them, I realize that now that I have been introduced to all of these new technological trends. Some of our peers will be creating these new technologies, like Second Life, and all of us will have to use these technologies unless we plan to live under a rock for the rest of our lives. I think it will be interesting to ask these questions to our peers and take a look at the video 5 or 10 years from now and see how things have changed. It would be a really good 'time capsule' I guess you could say. Things are changing everyday we step out the door and by buying these new cell phones and using these new computers and participating in these new trends like blogging, we are being active members of these changes and where they will go in the future. I think it's important for our generation to understand that. We buy, buy, buy and use, use, use without actually thinking about our role in technology. I know I am more aware, and maybe making things like this video will bring a little enlightenment to others as well.
So, our proposal is to ask Cortland students to give us their take on technology. We thought that technology is changing so fast that we are going to have to become much more flexible and open to change with it. I know that I have little knowledge of the newest developments out there, so I wanted to know if my peers were as clueless as I was before I started taking this class. Also, we decided that we wanted to get a feel for how much students use these new technologies, like their cell phones and what not, and where they think they will go in the future (ie. will computers be obsolete?)
We thought that we would start by creating a base of questions. We thought 6 would be a good number to cover with a few people in the short time we have. It was hard since we have to cram all these ideas into a measly 4 minutes (but I'm not complaining, I don't have time for much more!). Since we are going through all this talk of Second Life we decided to ask them 1) what their definition of virtual reality and 2) explain Second Life briefly and get their thoughts. Then we decided we would 3) ask how often they use their cell phones and 4) what do they think cell phones will be like in the future? Then, because neither of us had a clue about blogging or podcasting or anything that, we wanted to 5) ask if they know what blogging is? do they blog? how often? and if not, do they think it is a good idea? and finally, we wanted to ask an all-inclusive question about technology as a whole and where they think it is going. So we thought of something along the lines of 6) how do they see themselves interacting with technology in the future? what about your children? etc...
We are trying to create a short but sweet introduction to really summarize why we are making the video that we are. I think that our video idea is something that everyone could find interesting because it involves us! Things are changing and we need to change with them, I realize that now that I have been introduced to all of these new technological trends. Some of our peers will be creating these new technologies, like Second Life, and all of us will have to use these technologies unless we plan to live under a rock for the rest of our lives. I think it will be interesting to ask these questions to our peers and take a look at the video 5 or 10 years from now and see how things have changed. It would be a really good 'time capsule' I guess you could say. Things are changing everyday we step out the door and by buying these new cell phones and using these new computers and participating in these new trends like blogging, we are being active members of these changes and where they will go in the future. I think it's important for our generation to understand that. We buy, buy, buy and use, use, use without actually thinking about our role in technology. I know I am more aware, and maybe making things like this video will bring a little enlightenment to others as well.
Thursday, April 5, 2007
A Whole New Mind- 7,8,9
After finishing a whole new mind, it may sound cliche, but I feel like I have a whole new view of how we live as a society and how I live as an individual. I found the book to be very englightening yet very simple. There are so many things that I want to try, like walking a labyrinth. Pink explores entirely new ideas and he doesn't leave anything out. I thought it was very impressive to see him flawlessly combine things such as business, spirituality, laughter, empathy, design, economy, and even metaphors into one book that has so many practical applications that we can all use to augment our everyday lives.
These final chapters were, by far, my favorite. The discussion of Empathy, Play, and Meaning spoke to much deeper levels within myself. I think the best part of this book is how Pink makes you re-examine your own life. For example, while I was reading the chapter on Play and thinking about laughter clubs I started asking myself questions. When was the last time I really laughed? What does it really feel like to laugh? What makes me laugh? When Pink explained laughter on a much deeper level I was fascinated. He said, simply, that when we laugh our right side is activated, and our right side is unlimited in its abilities (unlike the left) therefore when we are experiencing laughter and joy our abilities are unlimited. It's so simple yet so perfect. I definatly think the world would be a much more productive, creative, and enjoyable place if we all laughed more. I also liked the connections he made between humor, the workplace, and productivity. He said laughter is one of the highest forms of intelligence and at first, I admit, I was like, 'yeah, ok.' But as he went on I got it. Humor is usually complex, sure there are blatantly funny things we laugh at, but a great deal of the jokes that we make and the subtle remarks that can make someone laugh consist of several components. In addition, we usually tell jokes or make these remarks to make people laugh, therefore, we don't usually laugh alone, and when we laugh others often laugh with us (it is contagious) therefore laughter is a cohesive force. Laughter is also sensative. We have to be sure that we are making people laugh for the right reasons and we have to be careful of the feelings of others around us as we tell our jokes, we also have to be sure that it fits the context of the conversation or else it won't be funny! If we want to see more cohesion and feelings of togetherness and teamwork in the workplace or any place we may go, it would make sense to encourage humor. With one simple idea (laughter) we can increase cooperation with its cohesive force, stimulate creativity with its complexity, and teach us to be more emotionally intelligent with its need for correct timing and placement within a conversation and context. I definately think he is right. Laughter may just be one of the highest forms of intelligence.
On to Empathy... I think Empathy is a rather simple idea that many people complicate, confuse, and ultimately misinterpret. I liked how he explained it as not feeling bad FOR someone, but feeling bad WITH someone. I wish all definitions were this simple, then maybe everyone would be more aware of their own empathetic abilities. I thought it was also important how he brought up the fact that facial expressions are universal. Therefore, using our right brain to interpret facial expressions and ultimately, exhibit Empathy is a HUMAN ability. It isn't a result of our culture or our learning, it sets humans apart. I think it also is important to note that this means that all individuals are capable of it and feel it (unless damage to a specific area of the brain also damages this ability) we have no excuse for being 'inhuman'. This also sets us apart from computers. It is our ability to thrive in this new R-directed thinking world that is emerging. Engaging in careers that play to our human instincts and abilities are our best bet and beating our competitors overseas and making ourselves valuable in the new world. It makes sense that nurses, teachers, caregivers are becoming some of the most sought after professions. They use are innate abilities in a practical way that will allow us to make a good living to support our families and also enjoy the lives we share with those families.
The more I read this book the more I got the feeling that so many of us, including myself at many times, are so focused on getting somewhere in life and less focused on the journey. The final chapter really struck a chord with me. I had a moment of clarity I guess you could say, where I said, I do all this work and wish each day to go by faster and faster and hope to just get through this test or get through this week. Where am I in such a rush to go? We live in such a fast paced world that we can't help but get caught up in living our lives in a race. Once I get through this semester there will be another and another and another. Once I graduate I must go on to grad school. Once I finish grad school I will need to start looking for a job. Once I look for a job I need to work as hard as I can to make sure I am preforming my duties to the best of my abilities, and so on and so forth. Life should not be a race to the finish line. There is no where that we NEED to be and there is nothing that we HAVE to do. Sure, we have goals to accomplish, but with time and hard work we will achieve them. Life is a journey and we should enjoy that journey. It doesn't have a finish line... we will never feel like we have reached that point where we can just stop. Once we get somewhere there will be somewhere else to be. We need to take more time to enjoy this moment, take it in, learn from it, and eventually move on, taking a piece of it with us as we experience new things in the future. I think this is what Pink is saying in the final chapter about Meaning. He emphasizes spirituality, not religion, a higher quality of life, more self expression, and ultimately... happiness. My favorite quote was when he stated that we have "enough to live but nothing to live for." We need purpose. We need quality. It is so easy to become absorbed in 'stuff', in demands, in unpleasantness. We need to take more time to make sure that 'stuff' has meaning and will add to who we are.
In the L-directed world we are moving away from I think we had this idea that money/success will bring happiness. However, I like Pink's idea much better. Happiness will bring money/success. Being fulfilled as an individual comes first. That is how we should live our lives.
These final chapters were, by far, my favorite. The discussion of Empathy, Play, and Meaning spoke to much deeper levels within myself. I think the best part of this book is how Pink makes you re-examine your own life. For example, while I was reading the chapter on Play and thinking about laughter clubs I started asking myself questions. When was the last time I really laughed? What does it really feel like to laugh? What makes me laugh? When Pink explained laughter on a much deeper level I was fascinated. He said, simply, that when we laugh our right side is activated, and our right side is unlimited in its abilities (unlike the left) therefore when we are experiencing laughter and joy our abilities are unlimited. It's so simple yet so perfect. I definatly think the world would be a much more productive, creative, and enjoyable place if we all laughed more. I also liked the connections he made between humor, the workplace, and productivity. He said laughter is one of the highest forms of intelligence and at first, I admit, I was like, 'yeah, ok.' But as he went on I got it. Humor is usually complex, sure there are blatantly funny things we laugh at, but a great deal of the jokes that we make and the subtle remarks that can make someone laugh consist of several components. In addition, we usually tell jokes or make these remarks to make people laugh, therefore, we don't usually laugh alone, and when we laugh others often laugh with us (it is contagious) therefore laughter is a cohesive force. Laughter is also sensative. We have to be sure that we are making people laugh for the right reasons and we have to be careful of the feelings of others around us as we tell our jokes, we also have to be sure that it fits the context of the conversation or else it won't be funny! If we want to see more cohesion and feelings of togetherness and teamwork in the workplace or any place we may go, it would make sense to encourage humor. With one simple idea (laughter) we can increase cooperation with its cohesive force, stimulate creativity with its complexity, and teach us to be more emotionally intelligent with its need for correct timing and placement within a conversation and context. I definately think he is right. Laughter may just be one of the highest forms of intelligence.
On to Empathy... I think Empathy is a rather simple idea that many people complicate, confuse, and ultimately misinterpret. I liked how he explained it as not feeling bad FOR someone, but feeling bad WITH someone. I wish all definitions were this simple, then maybe everyone would be more aware of their own empathetic abilities. I thought it was also important how he brought up the fact that facial expressions are universal. Therefore, using our right brain to interpret facial expressions and ultimately, exhibit Empathy is a HUMAN ability. It isn't a result of our culture or our learning, it sets humans apart. I think it also is important to note that this means that all individuals are capable of it and feel it (unless damage to a specific area of the brain also damages this ability) we have no excuse for being 'inhuman'. This also sets us apart from computers. It is our ability to thrive in this new R-directed thinking world that is emerging. Engaging in careers that play to our human instincts and abilities are our best bet and beating our competitors overseas and making ourselves valuable in the new world. It makes sense that nurses, teachers, caregivers are becoming some of the most sought after professions. They use are innate abilities in a practical way that will allow us to make a good living to support our families and also enjoy the lives we share with those families.
The more I read this book the more I got the feeling that so many of us, including myself at many times, are so focused on getting somewhere in life and less focused on the journey. The final chapter really struck a chord with me. I had a moment of clarity I guess you could say, where I said, I do all this work and wish each day to go by faster and faster and hope to just get through this test or get through this week. Where am I in such a rush to go? We live in such a fast paced world that we can't help but get caught up in living our lives in a race. Once I get through this semester there will be another and another and another. Once I graduate I must go on to grad school. Once I finish grad school I will need to start looking for a job. Once I look for a job I need to work as hard as I can to make sure I am preforming my duties to the best of my abilities, and so on and so forth. Life should not be a race to the finish line. There is no where that we NEED to be and there is nothing that we HAVE to do. Sure, we have goals to accomplish, but with time and hard work we will achieve them. Life is a journey and we should enjoy that journey. It doesn't have a finish line... we will never feel like we have reached that point where we can just stop. Once we get somewhere there will be somewhere else to be. We need to take more time to enjoy this moment, take it in, learn from it, and eventually move on, taking a piece of it with us as we experience new things in the future. I think this is what Pink is saying in the final chapter about Meaning. He emphasizes spirituality, not religion, a higher quality of life, more self expression, and ultimately... happiness. My favorite quote was when he stated that we have "enough to live but nothing to live for." We need purpose. We need quality. It is so easy to become absorbed in 'stuff', in demands, in unpleasantness. We need to take more time to make sure that 'stuff' has meaning and will add to who we are.
In the L-directed world we are moving away from I think we had this idea that money/success will bring happiness. However, I like Pink's idea much better. Happiness will bring money/success. Being fulfilled as an individual comes first. That is how we should live our lives.
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
A New Way of Connecting
The other day I was at my house doing laundry catching up with my mom and little sister when I heard a really strange noise coming from the other room. At first I thought it might be my cell phone but I checked and it was on silent. I asked my sister, where is that coming from. She said, "Oh, the office. It's the computer." It was very strange, our computer was ringing, and I couldn't figure out why. Finally, realizing just how slowely I was putting this all together, my sister told me that my Dad put this new program called Skype on our computer. I had no idea what it was until recently when I remembered a conversation me and my dad had. So I looked at the computer and clicked on the my the picture of my Dad's face that had popped up on the monitor, letting us know it was him who was 'calling.' Almost instantly I heard his voice and the voices of several other people in the background greeting me. Sure, it wasn't perfect reception and I had to ask my dad to repeat himself several times, but we were able to have a conversation on the computer. I could hear his voice and he could hear mine, just like a phone. For some reason, I was fascinated!
My dad works in the music industry and tours alot all over the world. He travels for months at a time and it is always difficult to get ahold of him because of time differences and the cost of international calls. He is also from England and we have a large number of family members there we talk to about once a month, once again, because of the cost for both ends. However, Skype is telephone on the internet and its free and it is international. As long as you have a computer and have downloaded the program and the computer you are communicating with has done the same, you can speak into a microphone and have a regular conversation anytime day or night. Me, being the technological know-it-all that I am, was amazed. We can now talk to my grandfather, uncle, and cousin in England anytime we want for no cost, and we don't have to go weeks without talking to my dad when he is a way.
Maybe my fascination with this is just because I am so out of the loop most of the time when it comes to the latest technology trends, but I just thought this was such a great example of technology making communication easier in more ways than one. Connecting people across the globe. I know that it has brought our family closer in just a matter of weeks without worrying about costs or whos turn is it to call who. Anytime we want to talk to my grandfather we just hop on the computer and turn on the mic. It brings a whole element to communication. It proves that technology can connect people despite place and even economic status.
A service like this could do so many great things for so many people. I think technology should be used more in this way. It should not be just for those people who can afford it, it should aid those people who cannot. Staying in touch with family members should not come with a price tag or limitations, neither should services such as these. I think as technology becomes more advanced and prevelent (more and more people have access to computers everyday, for example) we will see it becoming more helpful throughout all communities in the world. I think it's going to start doing many more 'good deeds' if that's the right way to phrase it. Everyone will have a chance to take advantage of it and more and more people will benefit from it no matter what.
My dad works in the music industry and tours alot all over the world. He travels for months at a time and it is always difficult to get ahold of him because of time differences and the cost of international calls. He is also from England and we have a large number of family members there we talk to about once a month, once again, because of the cost for both ends. However, Skype is telephone on the internet and its free and it is international. As long as you have a computer and have downloaded the program and the computer you are communicating with has done the same, you can speak into a microphone and have a regular conversation anytime day or night. Me, being the technological know-it-all that I am, was amazed. We can now talk to my grandfather, uncle, and cousin in England anytime we want for no cost, and we don't have to go weeks without talking to my dad when he is a way.
Maybe my fascination with this is just because I am so out of the loop most of the time when it comes to the latest technology trends, but I just thought this was such a great example of technology making communication easier in more ways than one. Connecting people across the globe. I know that it has brought our family closer in just a matter of weeks without worrying about costs or whos turn is it to call who. Anytime we want to talk to my grandfather we just hop on the computer and turn on the mic. It brings a whole element to communication. It proves that technology can connect people despite place and even economic status.
A service like this could do so many great things for so many people. I think technology should be used more in this way. It should not be just for those people who can afford it, it should aid those people who cannot. Staying in touch with family members should not come with a price tag or limitations, neither should services such as these. I think as technology becomes more advanced and prevelent (more and more people have access to computers everyday, for example) we will see it becoming more helpful throughout all communities in the world. I think it's going to start doing many more 'good deeds' if that's the right way to phrase it. Everyone will have a chance to take advantage of it and more and more people will benefit from it no matter what.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
A Whole New Mind- 4,5,6
I really enjoyed the everyday applications Pink provided in these next chapters as he introduced us to Design, Story, and Symphony- 3 of his six senses. I think it is not only important that he provided us with his own explanation, but he also gave us real life examples and suggestions for how we can develop these senses of our own. I feel as though this book is very practical and will prove useful for all of us as our society changes.
The first sense he discusses is Design. Here, he emphasizes the importance of not only creating something, but creating something that has beauty, something that is unique, and something that you connect with emotionally. "Utility enhanced by significance (p. 70)." These elements help to set your creations apart from those in this time of abundance. In order to become successful, in business especially, you must set yourself apart with your products. I was really intrigued by his observation of how artistic people are viewed these days. He gave an example of children refusing to admit to being artistic in a classroom by sixth grade. You can't help but think of the stigma that is still seen today, when someone says that they are an artist or a musician. I think a lot of the times it is assumed that you are "suffering for your art." When society thinks of 'artist' they think of someone tortured or broke or even uneducated. Children are encouraged to be doctors and lawyers or study business. More and more often these days, it is exactly the opposite. I like how Pink addressed the fact that design enhances life therefore it is not insignificant. If we seek to enjoy our lives on a deeper level, live more for family and experience than for money and career opportunities, it is important to surround ourselves with things we enjoy. Designs that we can connect with on a deeper, emotional level, and designs that not only allow us to accomplish our everyday tasks (utility) but help us to enjoy them and bring meaning from them (significance). Artists today could be designers for businesses and yet they are not really seen as artists... they work in business. It almost seems like a euphemism to me. I know that my sisters is looking into art school and she is an amazing photographer and we are so excited for her future because we know there are enough opportunities for her today to get an excellent education, find a well paying job, and live a more fulfilled life.
The second was Story- which I really identified with because I use story when I study! Pink says that we have an "internal story grammar." We have an automatic ability to tell stories in order to share our experiences. When we tell our friends about our day we don't give them the simple, robotic facts, we share our feelings that connect with what actually happened, our reactions, our dialogues, we provide a setting and a time frame, etc... I loved how he said that telling a story is the ability to place facts in contexts, once again adding meaning to our lives and our experiences. He primarily relates story to persuasion when discussing the importance of story in business practices these days, saying is "supplements analytical thinkin by enabling us to imagine new perspectives and he worlds (p. 108)." It should also be used to attract consumers, enhancing their buying experience- making it personal. I think it is wonderful to see modern medicine undergoing a change as well. I don't know how many times I have walked into a doctors office and felt completely unimportant, even as the patient. My experience, how I was feeling, what led up to my sickness didn't matter. The fact that I was sick was all they needed. I'm very excited for the change that Pink describes. The new practices that doctors are taking part in. I think it will be very beneficial for everyone's experience.
Finally, Pink introduces the idea of Symphony. He describes it as "seeing the big picture." He primarly relates this to automation and jobs moving overseas. Because so many L-directed jobs are seeing their jobs given to individuals overseas who can preform them faster, just as well, and for less wages, he gives value to having the ability to provide services that cannot be replaced overseas... making yourself valuable in different ways. Because our lives have so many demands on them these days, he says that it is important that we can attend to all of these demands. Specialization is no longer the key to success like L-directed thinking has led us to believe. In a world of 'multi' we need to be 'multi'. He also includes reckognizing patterns and seeing relationships. This ability to see new and different connections will allow us to be more creative and more able to relate seemingly unrelated items to eachother discovering a new and deeper level of meaning, yet again enhancing our experiences. I love his emphasis on unconventionality and his new take on brainstorming. I know that when I am tryign to come up with a great idea I put a great deal of pressure on myself. Pink says we should go for quanitity instead of quality so we will have more ideas to work from. Also, we should be extreme in these ideas. It is much easier to make an extreme idea workable than make a boring and conventional idea interesting. By far my favorite part of Symphony is his emphasis on metaphors. I had never really thought about it before, but I thought it was so interesting to see how we really do live according to metaphors. They help us to make sense of our experiences and help us to relate to eachother. It's not just an annoying literary element in English class anymore. They help us to describe how we feel not only to ourselves but to others. It helps us to me make connections and see relationships.
I can already see this book changing the way I look at the world in so many different ways. It amazes me that it is such a thought provoking, forward-thinking novel while maintaining simplicity and practicality. I keep thinking that this is so simple, it has always been right in front of us, why did it take us this long?
The first sense he discusses is Design. Here, he emphasizes the importance of not only creating something, but creating something that has beauty, something that is unique, and something that you connect with emotionally. "Utility enhanced by significance (p. 70)." These elements help to set your creations apart from those in this time of abundance. In order to become successful, in business especially, you must set yourself apart with your products. I was really intrigued by his observation of how artistic people are viewed these days. He gave an example of children refusing to admit to being artistic in a classroom by sixth grade. You can't help but think of the stigma that is still seen today, when someone says that they are an artist or a musician. I think a lot of the times it is assumed that you are "suffering for your art." When society thinks of 'artist' they think of someone tortured or broke or even uneducated. Children are encouraged to be doctors and lawyers or study business. More and more often these days, it is exactly the opposite. I like how Pink addressed the fact that design enhances life therefore it is not insignificant. If we seek to enjoy our lives on a deeper level, live more for family and experience than for money and career opportunities, it is important to surround ourselves with things we enjoy. Designs that we can connect with on a deeper, emotional level, and designs that not only allow us to accomplish our everyday tasks (utility) but help us to enjoy them and bring meaning from them (significance). Artists today could be designers for businesses and yet they are not really seen as artists... they work in business. It almost seems like a euphemism to me. I know that my sisters is looking into art school and she is an amazing photographer and we are so excited for her future because we know there are enough opportunities for her today to get an excellent education, find a well paying job, and live a more fulfilled life.
The second was Story- which I really identified with because I use story when I study! Pink says that we have an "internal story grammar." We have an automatic ability to tell stories in order to share our experiences. When we tell our friends about our day we don't give them the simple, robotic facts, we share our feelings that connect with what actually happened, our reactions, our dialogues, we provide a setting and a time frame, etc... I loved how he said that telling a story is the ability to place facts in contexts, once again adding meaning to our lives and our experiences. He primarily relates story to persuasion when discussing the importance of story in business practices these days, saying is "supplements analytical thinkin by enabling us to imagine new perspectives and he worlds (p. 108)." It should also be used to attract consumers, enhancing their buying experience- making it personal. I think it is wonderful to see modern medicine undergoing a change as well. I don't know how many times I have walked into a doctors office and felt completely unimportant, even as the patient. My experience, how I was feeling, what led up to my sickness didn't matter. The fact that I was sick was all they needed. I'm very excited for the change that Pink describes. The new practices that doctors are taking part in. I think it will be very beneficial for everyone's experience.
Finally, Pink introduces the idea of Symphony. He describes it as "seeing the big picture." He primarly relates this to automation and jobs moving overseas. Because so many L-directed jobs are seeing their jobs given to individuals overseas who can preform them faster, just as well, and for less wages, he gives value to having the ability to provide services that cannot be replaced overseas... making yourself valuable in different ways. Because our lives have so many demands on them these days, he says that it is important that we can attend to all of these demands. Specialization is no longer the key to success like L-directed thinking has led us to believe. In a world of 'multi' we need to be 'multi'. He also includes reckognizing patterns and seeing relationships. This ability to see new and different connections will allow us to be more creative and more able to relate seemingly unrelated items to eachother discovering a new and deeper level of meaning, yet again enhancing our experiences. I love his emphasis on unconventionality and his new take on brainstorming. I know that when I am tryign to come up with a great idea I put a great deal of pressure on myself. Pink says we should go for quanitity instead of quality so we will have more ideas to work from. Also, we should be extreme in these ideas. It is much easier to make an extreme idea workable than make a boring and conventional idea interesting. By far my favorite part of Symphony is his emphasis on metaphors. I had never really thought about it before, but I thought it was so interesting to see how we really do live according to metaphors. They help us to make sense of our experiences and help us to relate to eachother. It's not just an annoying literary element in English class anymore. They help us to describe how we feel not only to ourselves but to others. It helps us to me make connections and see relationships.
I can already see this book changing the way I look at the world in so many different ways. It amazes me that it is such a thought provoking, forward-thinking novel while maintaining simplicity and practicality. I keep thinking that this is so simple, it has always been right in front of us, why did it take us this long?
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Who is Smarter?
As I was reading today a question, quite possibly a future debate, sparked in my mind. I think I may post it on WebCT too just because it could be an interesting debate. So here it is...
With all this discussion of R-directed vs. L-directed thinking Pink has concluded that both sides of the brain are crucial for everyday life, however, while they are both important does that level the playing field as far as careers are concerned? If they are both valuable does that mean astrophysicists and designers are equal? What about architects and accountants? Does one out weigh the other? The people in the world deemed the smartest in the world are oftentimes mathematicians or scientists - where do R-thinkers fit into this genius catagory?
I did a google search and came across several websites linking high intelligence to the 'smartest person in the world.' These were specialized websites, however, when I looked at more publicly viewed websites I found one with a poll. This suggested people like Noam Chomsky, Shakespeare, Leonardo Divinci, and even Martha Stuart as the smartest people in the world! I thought it was interesting that the public is catching on but those who actually test and publish results consider IQ only. If the way we think is changing, shouldn't these changes be reflected in our considerations for who the smartest individuals in the world are? I think these tests should not only include math/science problem solving skills, but they should have some sort os asthetic component, possibly a component that measures social skills. ( I don't even know if this is possible but I'm just throwing it out there).
Now, even as I'm writing this I am redefining my own definition of "smart." In school the smartest of my friends were those who did the best on tests and had the highest GPA and could get an A in a chem. test. That is changing for me. I think smart is so many different things. Smart is contributing to the world, thriving in it, maintaining relationships, living a fulfilled life... people who are the happiest are the smartest to me now. Life involves so many different skills, knowing how to solve the most complex math equasion in the world won't help you when you have children, while you could be the Divinci of our generation, you still need to use your L-directed thinking to balance your checkbook. Many people would say that the person who is going to go on to do the best in college and get a great job in the future would be someone like the valedictorian. They have the highest grades right, that should get them far enough? But what if they have no social skills? It all balances and I think smart shouldn't be considered just IQ anymore by anyone. I think there are also problems relating to this with the testing in our public school systems, but thats another issue for another day.
With all this discussion of R-directed vs. L-directed thinking Pink has concluded that both sides of the brain are crucial for everyday life, however, while they are both important does that level the playing field as far as careers are concerned? If they are both valuable does that mean astrophysicists and designers are equal? What about architects and accountants? Does one out weigh the other? The people in the world deemed the smartest in the world are oftentimes mathematicians or scientists - where do R-thinkers fit into this genius catagory?
I did a google search and came across several websites linking high intelligence to the 'smartest person in the world.' These were specialized websites, however, when I looked at more publicly viewed websites I found one with a poll. This suggested people like Noam Chomsky, Shakespeare, Leonardo Divinci, and even Martha Stuart as the smartest people in the world! I thought it was interesting that the public is catching on but those who actually test and publish results consider IQ only. If the way we think is changing, shouldn't these changes be reflected in our considerations for who the smartest individuals in the world are? I think these tests should not only include math/science problem solving skills, but they should have some sort os asthetic component, possibly a component that measures social skills. ( I don't even know if this is possible but I'm just throwing it out there).
Now, even as I'm writing this I am redefining my own definition of "smart." In school the smartest of my friends were those who did the best on tests and had the highest GPA and could get an A in a chem. test. That is changing for me. I think smart is so many different things. Smart is contributing to the world, thriving in it, maintaining relationships, living a fulfilled life... people who are the happiest are the smartest to me now. Life involves so many different skills, knowing how to solve the most complex math equasion in the world won't help you when you have children, while you could be the Divinci of our generation, you still need to use your L-directed thinking to balance your checkbook. Many people would say that the person who is going to go on to do the best in college and get a great job in the future would be someone like the valedictorian. They have the highest grades right, that should get them far enough? But what if they have no social skills? It all balances and I think smart shouldn't be considered just IQ anymore by anyone. I think there are also problems relating to this with the testing in our public school systems, but thats another issue for another day.
Monday, March 26, 2007
A Whole New Mind- 1st Response
During the first 3 chapters of his book, Pink gave us a brief introduction to the brain and to our society. First, he explored the basic facts of how the different hemispheres of our brain work and interract with our body. He established simple facts such as, the right hemisphere controls the left side of the body and the left hemisphere controls the right side of the body. Then he introduced us to the really interesting stuff. By giving us a background of information about how the different hemispheres of the brain were view many years ago, he then leads up to the newest idea and his own theory. The right and left hemispheres each have their own way of processessing information, and both hemispheres are important in all tasks we preform. I enjoyed how he did not denounce the left brain, but rather defended the right and maintained that we need BOTH sides of our brain. The title of the book is a little deceiving.
I always knew that the right and left hemispheres were different. They teach you that in every psychology class and in most of the my speech classes. However, in our speech classes we have a strong emphasis on the left hemisphere because it houses the language centers crucial for the actual production of speech (Wernicke and Broca's Areas). We get so caught up in the actual, sequential process of how speech is produced that we sometimes overlook how important our prior knowledge and emotions are when it comes to what we actually end up saying.
Pink states that the left hemisphere is sequential while the right hemisphere is simultaneous (p. 18). Therefore, the left hemisphere is used for things like reading, writing, and talking while the right hemisphere is used for things like interpreting facial expressions and reckognizing context and shaping how we say things. "The left hemisphere handles what is said; the right hemisphere focuses on how it's said-the nonverbal emotional cues delivered through gaze, facial expression, and intonation." So, without proper function of our right brain, we would be able to preform the task of speaking, however, there would be no augmentative elements to that speech. No intontation, no changing rates (prosody), no facial expressions or emotional reactions. The world would be very different without the right brain. But, without the left brain we wouldn't be able to talk at all. Both sides are crucial for adequate communication.
I can't help but draw a parallel here between this book and my speech classes again. I just find it fascinating. There is a great deal of emphasis on the left brain, however, during my fluency class (addresses theories for cause and possible therapy implementations for stuttering) we talked a great deal about the right brain. Many theories actually state that children stutter because of an over-activation of the right side of the brain and under-activation fo the left side of the brain. Therefore, when a child talks they experience delays in their speech (left side) and because of those delays their emotions heighten and interfere with further production until normal disfluencies in a child's speech develop over time into a disorder of stuttering. I think this is a perfect example of right and left brain function. Speech is considered to be housed in the left side of the brain and stuttering is considered a disorder of speech, however, this disorder is actually theorized to be caused by right brain activity. A disorder of the left side is caused by the emotions of the right side. Of course, no one knows the definite cause of stuttering and these are just theories, but how cool is that! Sorry if I have rambled, I'm sure not everyone is interested in speech disorders, but that theory is much more valid to me now.
Anyway, back to Pink. This is definately my favorite book so far. It applies to everyone and this complex topic is written in such simple terms. I also like the links he makes to society: Abundance, Asia, and Automation. "...the very triumph of L-Directed Thinking has lessened its significance (p. 33)." I absolutely love this ironic observation. The world is changing so fast and we need to change with it. We need to be more creative so we stand out in a crowd where everyone is the same and we need to use our right brain to do it. Our old sequential, book-learned skills are not enough to keep our jobs from traveling across seas to India and China. Computers will never be enough.
I was left with a lot of questions after reading Smart Mobs and throughout this course. We talk alot about dehumanizing and ask questions like, will computers take over? I think Pink is starting to answer those questions for me. I never really took into account, when asking these questions, the fact that we would continue to evolve. I also couldn't see where we could evolve to. However, we are taking what sets us apart from computers and technology, our right brain, and developing it, incorporating it into how we do business and how we communicate. Technology is continuing to evolve to the left while we are evolving to the right.
I always knew that the right and left hemispheres were different. They teach you that in every psychology class and in most of the my speech classes. However, in our speech classes we have a strong emphasis on the left hemisphere because it houses the language centers crucial for the actual production of speech (Wernicke and Broca's Areas). We get so caught up in the actual, sequential process of how speech is produced that we sometimes overlook how important our prior knowledge and emotions are when it comes to what we actually end up saying.
Pink states that the left hemisphere is sequential while the right hemisphere is simultaneous (p. 18). Therefore, the left hemisphere is used for things like reading, writing, and talking while the right hemisphere is used for things like interpreting facial expressions and reckognizing context and shaping how we say things. "The left hemisphere handles what is said; the right hemisphere focuses on how it's said-the nonverbal emotional cues delivered through gaze, facial expression, and intonation." So, without proper function of our right brain, we would be able to preform the task of speaking, however, there would be no augmentative elements to that speech. No intontation, no changing rates (prosody), no facial expressions or emotional reactions. The world would be very different without the right brain. But, without the left brain we wouldn't be able to talk at all. Both sides are crucial for adequate communication.
I can't help but draw a parallel here between this book and my speech classes again. I just find it fascinating. There is a great deal of emphasis on the left brain, however, during my fluency class (addresses theories for cause and possible therapy implementations for stuttering) we talked a great deal about the right brain. Many theories actually state that children stutter because of an over-activation of the right side of the brain and under-activation fo the left side of the brain. Therefore, when a child talks they experience delays in their speech (left side) and because of those delays their emotions heighten and interfere with further production until normal disfluencies in a child's speech develop over time into a disorder of stuttering. I think this is a perfect example of right and left brain function. Speech is considered to be housed in the left side of the brain and stuttering is considered a disorder of speech, however, this disorder is actually theorized to be caused by right brain activity. A disorder of the left side is caused by the emotions of the right side. Of course, no one knows the definite cause of stuttering and these are just theories, but how cool is that! Sorry if I have rambled, I'm sure not everyone is interested in speech disorders, but that theory is much more valid to me now.
Anyway, back to Pink. This is definately my favorite book so far. It applies to everyone and this complex topic is written in such simple terms. I also like the links he makes to society: Abundance, Asia, and Automation. "...the very triumph of L-Directed Thinking has lessened its significance (p. 33)." I absolutely love this ironic observation. The world is changing so fast and we need to change with it. We need to be more creative so we stand out in a crowd where everyone is the same and we need to use our right brain to do it. Our old sequential, book-learned skills are not enough to keep our jobs from traveling across seas to India and China. Computers will never be enough.
I was left with a lot of questions after reading Smart Mobs and throughout this course. We talk alot about dehumanizing and ask questions like, will computers take over? I think Pink is starting to answer those questions for me. I never really took into account, when asking these questions, the fact that we would continue to evolve. I also couldn't see where we could evolve to. However, we are taking what sets us apart from computers and technology, our right brain, and developing it, incorporating it into how we do business and how we communicate. Technology is continuing to evolve to the left while we are evolving to the right.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
An Interesting Current Event
As I was reading through the first three chapters of Pink's book, I saw a current event one night on the news a couple of weeks ago, and before I started reading I thought was a little strange. After I started reading, I found it to be a direct confirmation of Pink's ideas about where our lives are headed.
On the news a lawyer was taking drastic measures to put two parents accused of murdering their son in jail. She was using new strategies to get the jury's attention. She had a cake and sang happy birthday on the day of what would have been the young child's birthday in the courtroom. She also re-enacted what happened to the day the child was murdered using a child sized dummy and several props. She acted out the crimes the parents committed with great passion. I am not sure what landed this case on the nightly news, the actual thought of two parents murdering their son or the unorthodox way in which the lawyer was presenting her case. She took what is considered a left brain occupation and transformed it into a highly emotional, right-brain driven show.
I thought of this immediatly as I was reading through Pink's discussion of MBAs and MFAs. "...whats left for the letigious? High-concept work like that done by Animators at Law, a graphic design firm staffed by law graduates that prepares exhibits, videos, visual aids to help top trail attorneys persuade juries (p. 55)." It was really re-enforcing to find a connection to a current event. It drove home Pink's ideas that I find to be refreshing and reassuring (I would consider myself one of the right-brainers). I wonder if this lawyer is just a very creative individual who felt like taking her tactics to a new level or if she has read literature such as Pink's and taken the advice to heart.
No matter how she came up with her court-room strategy, she was right on target. She won her case, sending both parents to jail, getting justice for the young boy. I don't think that very many people really understand the change that is taking hold of our society. I admit that I hadn't really given it any thought until now. More than likely this is why the case recieved so much attention. They thought the lawyer's behavior was strange... she was controversial. Little does the general public know that we are going to be seeing more and more of these types of scenerios. It made her unique which is what more and more people will have to find a way of doing to make themselves valuable in their line of work.
On the news a lawyer was taking drastic measures to put two parents accused of murdering their son in jail. She was using new strategies to get the jury's attention. She had a cake and sang happy birthday on the day of what would have been the young child's birthday in the courtroom. She also re-enacted what happened to the day the child was murdered using a child sized dummy and several props. She acted out the crimes the parents committed with great passion. I am not sure what landed this case on the nightly news, the actual thought of two parents murdering their son or the unorthodox way in which the lawyer was presenting her case. She took what is considered a left brain occupation and transformed it into a highly emotional, right-brain driven show.
I thought of this immediatly as I was reading through Pink's discussion of MBAs and MFAs. "...whats left for the letigious? High-concept work like that done by Animators at Law, a graphic design firm staffed by law graduates that prepares exhibits, videos, visual aids to help top trail attorneys persuade juries (p. 55)." It was really re-enforcing to find a connection to a current event. It drove home Pink's ideas that I find to be refreshing and reassuring (I would consider myself one of the right-brainers). I wonder if this lawyer is just a very creative individual who felt like taking her tactics to a new level or if she has read literature such as Pink's and taken the advice to heart.
No matter how she came up with her court-room strategy, she was right on target. She won her case, sending both parents to jail, getting justice for the young boy. I don't think that very many people really understand the change that is taking hold of our society. I admit that I hadn't really given it any thought until now. More than likely this is why the case recieved so much attention. They thought the lawyer's behavior was strange... she was controversial. Little does the general public know that we are going to be seeing more and more of these types of scenerios. It made her unique which is what more and more people will have to find a way of doing to make themselves valuable in their line of work.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Short Video Proposal
I have been thinking about this all of break, and I have yet to come up with a good idea! I have a million ideas for my next NeoVox, but a video, I don't have a clue. I'm just going to throw something out there. I'm not sure if it's good or bad (probably bad) but hey, it's something.
What if your did some kind of video interviewing other students about what their view of the future would be. There are so many debates, one I just commented on, about whether we will become dehumanized and where all of this technology is going. Since we are the generation that will see a great deal of these new technological advances and some of our classmates may even play a role in creating them, why don't we find out what they see. We are the future, right?
What if your did some kind of video interviewing other students about what their view of the future would be. There are so many debates, one I just commented on, about whether we will become dehumanized and where all of this technology is going. Since we are the generation that will see a great deal of these new technological advances and some of our classmates may even play a role in creating them, why don't we find out what they see. We are the future, right?
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Finishing Snow Crash
Wow, I finally finished Snow Crash! I have to say that the end seems to be a completely different book from the beginning, a different writer. I thought the end was just very well done. He finally brought a sense of controlled chaos to the book. One that the reader could follow, understand and identify with. Towards the first half of the novel he was trying to hard to be inventive. He put too much effort into creating this world and not enough into expressing who the characters are and developing the action that takes place. Although, the more I think about this book and the great attention that Stephenson pays to detail, the more that I think that what we perceive as a weakness in writing was, actually, a strategy he used to represent the bigger picture he was bringing to our attention... the theme of the novel.
As we have discussed before, the constant description of the reality that Hiro lives in is distracting. He pays more attention to the setting rather than the characters. I think I recall one discussion where we hypothesized that he does this on purpose to give us this sense of chaos that the characters are feeling and experiencing. He puts is in the mindset that Hiro and Y.T. are in so we can understand the characters better. Maybe in their world (our future) they are neglected. Money, franchulates, propoganda take precedence of people. However, as the story unfolds until we reach the end, he allows the characters to unfold greatly. They take control of the their environment and we learn who they are as they engage themselves and take charge. I think we didn't know who they were because they didn't know who they were. Like us, they were lost in their reality, overwhelmed. Maybe Stephenson is using this as a warning. We must take control. We must conquer our surroundings as technology progresses and challenges our conventional ideas of government, social roles, right, wrong and even reality itself. Once again, he's making important statements about society and who we may become if we continue on this path. His novel is disguised in the characters and actions on the surface using aquired language, but like the deep structure or "linguistic infrastructure" Hiro describes, he makes much more profound statements that we may not even realize are there. Maybe I'm taking this all too far, but I just a have a feeling that he wasn't just writing a virtual reality novel for entertainment purposes only.
I really enjoyed the way he developed the characters such as Raven towards the end. He gave them a certain depth, such as the fact that Raven loved Y.T., that made you identify with them, make the story more believable. He brings them to life and he goes to extremes with this so the characters will be able to take charge over the environment. I also like the idea that these characters that are supposed to be the "bad guys" are softened, like Raven and the Mafia. It brings an unexpected edge to the story. I really enjoyed this last part of the novel, much more than the first.
Finally, I LOVED the way he tied up the lose ends connecting the mythology presented earlier in the story to present day and the spread of Snow Crash. He was bringing so many different elements into it in the beginning of the novel that I was very confused. I really couldn't put it all together by myself, but once Hiro explained it in the Metaverse starting in Chapter 56 it all made sense. I was in awe. It made perfect sense and was fascinating. Rife was right by trying to take over the world by using language. Communication is such a critical part of our lives and is becoming more easily accessible to everyday. We are in constant contact with eachother as we disucussed in Smart Mobs by Rheingold. By taking away your higher thinking abilities through a virus similar to what we see in our communication devices that we use to keep us constantly in contact everyday-all day, was very creative on Stephenson's part. To draw on the past and connect it to the future in such a realistic way was great.
Overall, it was a very good book. I give Stephenson a great deal of credit.
As we have discussed before, the constant description of the reality that Hiro lives in is distracting. He pays more attention to the setting rather than the characters. I think I recall one discussion where we hypothesized that he does this on purpose to give us this sense of chaos that the characters are feeling and experiencing. He puts is in the mindset that Hiro and Y.T. are in so we can understand the characters better. Maybe in their world (our future) they are neglected. Money, franchulates, propoganda take precedence of people. However, as the story unfolds until we reach the end, he allows the characters to unfold greatly. They take control of the their environment and we learn who they are as they engage themselves and take charge. I think we didn't know who they were because they didn't know who they were. Like us, they were lost in their reality, overwhelmed. Maybe Stephenson is using this as a warning. We must take control. We must conquer our surroundings as technology progresses and challenges our conventional ideas of government, social roles, right, wrong and even reality itself. Once again, he's making important statements about society and who we may become if we continue on this path. His novel is disguised in the characters and actions on the surface using aquired language, but like the deep structure or "linguistic infrastructure" Hiro describes, he makes much more profound statements that we may not even realize are there. Maybe I'm taking this all too far, but I just a have a feeling that he wasn't just writing a virtual reality novel for entertainment purposes only.
I really enjoyed the way he developed the characters such as Raven towards the end. He gave them a certain depth, such as the fact that Raven loved Y.T., that made you identify with them, make the story more believable. He brings them to life and he goes to extremes with this so the characters will be able to take charge over the environment. I also like the idea that these characters that are supposed to be the "bad guys" are softened, like Raven and the Mafia. It brings an unexpected edge to the story. I really enjoyed this last part of the novel, much more than the first.
Finally, I LOVED the way he tied up the lose ends connecting the mythology presented earlier in the story to present day and the spread of Snow Crash. He was bringing so many different elements into it in the beginning of the novel that I was very confused. I really couldn't put it all together by myself, but once Hiro explained it in the Metaverse starting in Chapter 56 it all made sense. I was in awe. It made perfect sense and was fascinating. Rife was right by trying to take over the world by using language. Communication is such a critical part of our lives and is becoming more easily accessible to everyday. We are in constant contact with eachother as we disucussed in Smart Mobs by Rheingold. By taking away your higher thinking abilities through a virus similar to what we see in our communication devices that we use to keep us constantly in contact everyday-all day, was very creative on Stephenson's part. To draw on the past and connect it to the future in such a realistic way was great.
Overall, it was a very good book. I give Stephenson a great deal of credit.
Friday, March 2, 2007
Working on my NeoVox
It has been over a year since I have taken a course where I have to do any writing, I've learned that it is not something that you can just jump back into. This is a process. Sometimes, a long, slow, and painful process. Once I submit something, I decide there was something I should have changed. It never ends. That's why I am loving Wiki! I really like the fact that it is always changing with our minds. Nothing is final and that's nice sometimes.
Anyway, back to the topic of this blog, I've been trying my best to hammer this NeoVox out. Going over the requirements again and again, trying to imagine my audience and use a voice that would speak to everyone who might read this online magazine. This is so much harder than writing for a professor! (I get where you're going with this Prof. Reid) So, just as I turned in my article for others to do a peer review, I got another idea that would either add greatly to my NeoVox or change it all together.
My mom actually steered me towards this idea one night on the phone. She is a school teacher, and she sees the impact that MySpace is having on her high-schoolers. She is very worried about what kids are putting on their MySpace's, what they are doing, and what they are being exposed to. She even gets on my case for having one at all. They have been holding parent meetings at the school to educate parents on MySpace and why kids shouldn't have. I believe one of the topics was something like "Online Bullying." The school has also punished students who posted pictures of themselves drinking on MySpace, expelling them from school and keeping them from participating in activities, such as sports teams. Is MySpace really that much of a danger?
While any place that we put our information online is dangerous, I think many parents are taking this to the extreme. If you know the correct way to operate your profile on MySpace, you are in little danger. It is something that parents know little about because it is geared towards our younger, net savvy generation, and therefore, they are wary of it. Without giving it a change they watch the meladramatic broadcasts on tv about how MySpace has ruined people's lives and assume that the same exact thing is going to happen to their children.
I think that I am going to incorporate an article I found that is on the internet and that I also saw on tv called, "Why parents should mind MySpace." It interviewed a mother who had found her 13-year old daughter's MySpace and was appauled. It exaggerated the dangers of MySpace while telling parents that they need to get involved. After seeing this any parent would demand their child get rid of their MySpace or let them see it and would make any kid roll their eyes.
"When “Dateline” surfed MySpace, we found scenes of binge drinking, apparent drug use, teens posing in underwear, and other members simulating sex, and in some cases even having it."
This is just one quote taken from the article. With material like this floating around, no wonder parents are over-reacting. MySpace can be dangerous, however, if you take the right precautions, it is "a place for friends." There are privacy settings that allow only your friends to view your profile. You do not have to provide any personal information such as you address or phone number, these devulged by choice and individuals should be encouraged to make the right choice. Also, if you are a college student who will be looking to apply for jobs in the future, it would be a good idea to limit what is on your profile and to limit who can view your profile so prospective employers won't make judgments about you based on your MySpace content. Also, everyone should know that need to show caution when choosing who to approve as your friend. Don't allow someone you don't or who may have offensive material, and most importantly, as with any online service, never meet with anyone you have met online face to face.
I think this could add to my NeoVox, although, I'm not sure how interesting college students would find parent's problems with MySpace. Maybe I should just add information to students about how Myspace could affect their ability to get jobs in the future. Maybe I will leave it as it is. I just don't know!
Anyway, back to the topic of this blog, I've been trying my best to hammer this NeoVox out. Going over the requirements again and again, trying to imagine my audience and use a voice that would speak to everyone who might read this online magazine. This is so much harder than writing for a professor! (I get where you're going with this Prof. Reid) So, just as I turned in my article for others to do a peer review, I got another idea that would either add greatly to my NeoVox or change it all together.
My mom actually steered me towards this idea one night on the phone. She is a school teacher, and she sees the impact that MySpace is having on her high-schoolers. She is very worried about what kids are putting on their MySpace's, what they are doing, and what they are being exposed to. She even gets on my case for having one at all. They have been holding parent meetings at the school to educate parents on MySpace and why kids shouldn't have. I believe one of the topics was something like "Online Bullying." The school has also punished students who posted pictures of themselves drinking on MySpace, expelling them from school and keeping them from participating in activities, such as sports teams. Is MySpace really that much of a danger?
While any place that we put our information online is dangerous, I think many parents are taking this to the extreme. If you know the correct way to operate your profile on MySpace, you are in little danger. It is something that parents know little about because it is geared towards our younger, net savvy generation, and therefore, they are wary of it. Without giving it a change they watch the meladramatic broadcasts on tv about how MySpace has ruined people's lives and assume that the same exact thing is going to happen to their children.
I think that I am going to incorporate an article I found that is on the internet and that I also saw on tv called, "Why parents should mind MySpace." It interviewed a mother who had found her 13-year old daughter's MySpace and was appauled. It exaggerated the dangers of MySpace while telling parents that they need to get involved. After seeing this any parent would demand their child get rid of their MySpace or let them see it and would make any kid roll their eyes.
"When “Dateline” surfed MySpace, we found scenes of binge drinking, apparent drug use, teens posing in underwear, and other members simulating sex, and in some cases even having it."
This is just one quote taken from the article. With material like this floating around, no wonder parents are over-reacting. MySpace can be dangerous, however, if you take the right precautions, it is "a place for friends." There are privacy settings that allow only your friends to view your profile. You do not have to provide any personal information such as you address or phone number, these devulged by choice and individuals should be encouraged to make the right choice. Also, if you are a college student who will be looking to apply for jobs in the future, it would be a good idea to limit what is on your profile and to limit who can view your profile so prospective employers won't make judgments about you based on your MySpace content. Also, everyone should know that need to show caution when choosing who to approve as your friend. Don't allow someone you don't or who may have offensive material, and most importantly, as with any online service, never meet with anyone you have met online face to face.
I think this could add to my NeoVox, although, I'm not sure how interesting college students would find parent's problems with MySpace. Maybe I should just add information to students about how Myspace could affect their ability to get jobs in the future. Maybe I will leave it as it is. I just don't know!
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Something Unexpected- Snow Crash 2/3
Sorry! This one is a little late. I got a little distracted with the NeoVox!
The middle portion of this book really surprised me. When the idea of the Babel and religion was introduced by Stephenson my first reaction was, how in the world does religion have anything to with technology? I did not think that he would form such a intricate connection that really does make sense.
The idea of the religion was really first introduced when they connected the spread of snow crash to L. Bob Rife's private church. Throughout this section he is slowely introducing new information that is helping Hiro to understand the connection between different religious groups of the times of Greek mythology and how they connect to the spread and symptoms of snow crash. I enjoyed the connection made to Babel, however, I'm starting to get a little lost. It is alot of information to sort out, once again, I think the way Stephenson writes allows us to feel the way as some of the characters in the book may feel. Rushed, overwhelmed, and bombarded with information constantly. He wants us to feel as if we are part of the book. He does a nice job with this.
I think an important connection is made when he links religion to viruses (technology) and drugs. " 'This Snow Crash thing- is it a virus, a drug, or a religion?' Juanita shrugs. "What's the difference?' (pg. 200) " After thinking about our current day views of religion, it seems that the church is still an important structure in many people's lives. While I feel people our age and younger are not losing faith in a God of some sort, they are losing faith in the Church. It seems to be more and more about money and control than it is about leadership and guidance. Stephenson obviously saw the way the Church was headed. I think as our society becomes more commercialized, many people are more aware of the power the Church has over people. Those who go to church do so regularly, without doubt or hesitation. They see the vulnerability that lies within these individuals. The lengths that their beliefs will force them to go for the Church, and I think that they are exploiting that. Whether or not this is happening today is completely debatable.
However, Stephenson makes his views very clear. In his novel he has tranformed the Church from a place where all people can come together and worship and be safe to a place that requires a credit card for a "donation" and contains pictures of Jesus and Elvis on the walls in which drug deals take place. This is far from the picturesque view of the Church many people still have in mind today. Is this what religion will come to? A place to take advantage of an individual's faith in order to make money and deal drugs? This scenerio he places before us is scary and, in many ways, real. The Church will soon merge with the higher powers on Earth- those who provide the public with an endless supply of goods and bombard with propoganda to be sure they will consume- to become no more than a money-machine. Is this in our future? I would hope not for the sake of those who go to church every Sunday that this won't happen, but once again, I think Stephenson had the right idea.
Snow crash now has been classified as a psychosomatic drug. "David had a snow crash last night, inside his head (pg. 199)." As the book continues, the connection between Summarian mythology and the spread of viruses seems to be metaphorically linked to the spread of snow crash. For example, Hiro compares the me, "the rules of society" (pg. 255) to an operating system in a computer. This is very interesting to me. The human race does operate much like a computer system and therefore, it makes sense that a virus would be able to be spread throughout both of these systems by relatively the same mechanism... an information break down. I'm very intrigued but still a little confused!
The middle portion of this book really surprised me. When the idea of the Babel and religion was introduced by Stephenson my first reaction was, how in the world does religion have anything to with technology? I did not think that he would form such a intricate connection that really does make sense.
The idea of the religion was really first introduced when they connected the spread of snow crash to L. Bob Rife's private church. Throughout this section he is slowely introducing new information that is helping Hiro to understand the connection between different religious groups of the times of Greek mythology and how they connect to the spread and symptoms of snow crash. I enjoyed the connection made to Babel, however, I'm starting to get a little lost. It is alot of information to sort out, once again, I think the way Stephenson writes allows us to feel the way as some of the characters in the book may feel. Rushed, overwhelmed, and bombarded with information constantly. He wants us to feel as if we are part of the book. He does a nice job with this.
I think an important connection is made when he links religion to viruses (technology) and drugs. " 'This Snow Crash thing- is it a virus, a drug, or a religion?' Juanita shrugs. "What's the difference?' (pg. 200) " After thinking about our current day views of religion, it seems that the church is still an important structure in many people's lives. While I feel people our age and younger are not losing faith in a God of some sort, they are losing faith in the Church. It seems to be more and more about money and control than it is about leadership and guidance. Stephenson obviously saw the way the Church was headed. I think as our society becomes more commercialized, many people are more aware of the power the Church has over people. Those who go to church do so regularly, without doubt or hesitation. They see the vulnerability that lies within these individuals. The lengths that their beliefs will force them to go for the Church, and I think that they are exploiting that. Whether or not this is happening today is completely debatable.
However, Stephenson makes his views very clear. In his novel he has tranformed the Church from a place where all people can come together and worship and be safe to a place that requires a credit card for a "donation" and contains pictures of Jesus and Elvis on the walls in which drug deals take place. This is far from the picturesque view of the Church many people still have in mind today. Is this what religion will come to? A place to take advantage of an individual's faith in order to make money and deal drugs? This scenerio he places before us is scary and, in many ways, real. The Church will soon merge with the higher powers on Earth- those who provide the public with an endless supply of goods and bombard with propoganda to be sure they will consume- to become no more than a money-machine. Is this in our future? I would hope not for the sake of those who go to church every Sunday that this won't happen, but once again, I think Stephenson had the right idea.
Snow crash now has been classified as a psychosomatic drug. "David had a snow crash last night, inside his head (pg. 199)." As the book continues, the connection between Summarian mythology and the spread of viruses seems to be metaphorically linked to the spread of snow crash. For example, Hiro compares the me, "the rules of society" (pg. 255) to an operating system in a computer. This is very interesting to me. The human race does operate much like a computer system and therefore, it makes sense that a virus would be able to be spread throughout both of these systems by relatively the same mechanism... an information break down. I'm very intrigued but still a little confused!
Monday, February 26, 2007
Will Youth Still Exist?
I had a quick moment, while reading, in which I realized just how young Y.T. is. She is only 15! When you are swept up in the story it is very easy to forget that she is just a child. Just like every other tiny detail in this book, Stephenson incorporated this age in a very subtle way. We forget how old she is so easily and then it hits, only for a moment, then we forget again. I think he is trying to make an important statement with this number. Y.T. is 15, has a very dangerous job as a Krourier, is working with the Mafia ( a very powerful and possibly criminal group of people), is working with Hiro Protagonist chasing after drugs that are damaging hackers, and has a boyfriend. Wow! At 15 all I wanted was to get my license! I know, how cliche of me to say that, but I think there is a serious motive behind that number.
Again, he may have been off the mark when it comes to particular details in this book that we may see in the future, however, he hit the nail right on the head as far as broader ideas that make sociological observations are concerned. Stephenson does nothing on accident in this novel. Y.T. is so young because Stephenson could already see the effects technology was having on the development of youth today. He suggests that in the future, children will no longer be children. No more sweetness and innocence. When I realized this I asked myself, is she too young to be doing the things she is doing? Yes! By even today's standards I think she is far to young to be involved in drugs and in partnership with several possibly dangerous men, working on the highways, but the fast pace of this book makes us forget about it while we're reading, just like the fast pace of society will cause us to forget about it in the future as we experience it. It is a sad thing to think about, but we can already see its effects today. I don't know how many times I have been at a family gather, for example, and heard my grandmother say something like, "Oh, kids are growing up so fast these days. I couldn't have my own car until I could buy one for myself!" Even I felt old when my 10-year old cousin was telling me about her Myspace! I couldn't help saying outloud, "you are too young to have one of those!"
However, no one can deny that with changes, such as these comes progress. It is also debatable whether or not children are growing up faster. My grandparents started having children when my grandmother was only 16. By the time she was 30 they had 9 kids! If that's not growing up fast, I don't know what is. We see today that when are having their first children into their 40's and women are waiting much longer to get married and start families. Maybe children are growing up just as fast, just in different ways. I think this book, like Rheingold's in a way, makes significant observations as the ways in which our society will change as a result of technology, not just how technology will advance.
Again, he may have been off the mark when it comes to particular details in this book that we may see in the future, however, he hit the nail right on the head as far as broader ideas that make sociological observations are concerned. Stephenson does nothing on accident in this novel. Y.T. is so young because Stephenson could already see the effects technology was having on the development of youth today. He suggests that in the future, children will no longer be children. No more sweetness and innocence. When I realized this I asked myself, is she too young to be doing the things she is doing? Yes! By even today's standards I think she is far to young to be involved in drugs and in partnership with several possibly dangerous men, working on the highways, but the fast pace of this book makes us forget about it while we're reading, just like the fast pace of society will cause us to forget about it in the future as we experience it. It is a sad thing to think about, but we can already see its effects today. I don't know how many times I have been at a family gather, for example, and heard my grandmother say something like, "Oh, kids are growing up so fast these days. I couldn't have my own car until I could buy one for myself!" Even I felt old when my 10-year old cousin was telling me about her Myspace! I couldn't help saying outloud, "you are too young to have one of those!"
However, no one can deny that with changes, such as these comes progress. It is also debatable whether or not children are growing up faster. My grandparents started having children when my grandmother was only 16. By the time she was 30 they had 9 kids! If that's not growing up fast, I don't know what is. We see today that when are having their first children into their 40's and women are waiting much longer to get married and start families. Maybe children are growing up just as fast, just in different ways. I think this book, like Rheingold's in a way, makes significant observations as the ways in which our society will change as a result of technology, not just how technology will advance.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Subtle Details (Snow Crash- 1/3)
I am not someone who is interested in technology and how it works. I use it to do what needs to get done, and I get out. I don't think about the how or the why. I do, like most people so, this novel has been a struggle for me so far... I am not going to lie.
After about the first one-third of it I have realized that more than anything, this novel is one that takes a lot of getting used to. You really have to open up and put yourself in this new world that Stephenson so creatively pieces together. When I first started reading it I sat on the outside thinking, "yeah ok." There are still a few things that really have me baffled, however, its the minute details that really catch my attention. I think the attention to detail is what makes this book such a good piece of fiction. I may not be a science fiction person, but I can appreciate good writing and hardwork which is obviously what Stephenson put into this novel.
Since it was written in 1992, no one could expect Stephenson to know exactly what the distant future would include. In alot of ways, he was very off. In alot of ways, he was very on. He realized just how fast technology moves. The reader can tell he was really drawing upon the changing environment around him as his primary resource. This book is very fast paced and since it is supposed to take place around 2010, it means that he thought technology was going to move at an incredible rate, which it does. I think he overshot his target slightly, but he had the right idea. With so many people using communication technologies, developing them, improving them, it is bound to move in a thousand different directions at the speed of light.
One thing I noticed that I really enjoyed, in reference to his writing, is the fast pace of this book really reflects that fast pace of technology. One chapter your in the Metaverse, the next you're surfing the streets with Y.T. The movement is flowing and continuous and fast much like the evolution of technology. It adds alot to the dynamic of the book.
I'm not sure that I like the reality that Hiro lives in. It seems to be a dark place ruled by propoganda which is what I think many of us our fear our lives will become. That fear is completely legitimate to me, it's something that I worry about when I think about the changing times ahead. It's so hard to believe that pizza delivery would be so important and there would hardly be any judicial system anymore. The people seem free to do as they please, sometimes that's not always the best thing. Sure, everyone wants freedom, but with freedom must come some rules. His reality seems very scattered and slightly pointless to me.
Ex: "Pizza delivery is a major industry. a managed industry. People wen tto CosaNostra Pizza University four years just to learn it." (Chapter 1, Page 3) I hope this is something we will never see.
An important point I think that Stephenson is making could seem unintentional, but it is very representative of his view of the future. I get the impression that he had the idea that while we would be moving forward technologically, we would be moving backwords as human-beings. One example of this is his constant reference to race. One would assume that after the battles that have been fought over equal-treatment of all individuals (ie The Bill of Rights, Civil Rights Movement) that in the years to come race, ethnicity, gender, etc... would be issues of the past. The whole idea is that color will no longer matter, right? According to Stephenson, wrong. I think he makes in interesting observation with this. He actually shows evidence of segregation in Hiro's reality. "A big ornate sign above the main gate: WHITE PEOPLE ONLY. NON-CAUCASIANS MUST BE PROCESSED." (Chapter 4, Page 32) This is something that one would expect to see if you traveled back to the days of Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks. It really sticks out in my mind because it really questions the idea that many people are so bent on defending... that technology will only make us more human and more able to communicate. Stephenson obviously thought it would "dehumanize" us. I know that we have had discussions in class regarding this term and its use and I really had, had a change of heart. Nevertheless, in this future it really does seem like these people have changed dramatically. If we are supposed to be moving toward a world free of prejudice, why does Stephenson think that we will still be harboring contempt for other races? Technology, he believed, will hold us back socially (as a society) while propelling us forward politically, economically, etc... It is really disturbing to read about the barcodes that everyone has on their chest and reading them allows people access to your entire life. We are not items on shelf at Walmart with UPC codes. We are people. I hope that the world never comes to that. Yet another example I found was when Hiro first came into contact with Raven outside the Metaverse. "These days most states are franchulates or Burbclaves, much too small to have anything like a jail, or even a judicial system. So when someone does something bad, they try to find quick and dirty punishments... a warning tattoo on a prominent body part. POOR IMPULSE CONTROL." Does he think that we are going to be so scattered, so dehumanized that we will result to a punishment seen in the days of Hitler? Labeling people with tattoos. It is extreme, but it makes a statement. I love the way in which he incorporates these subtle opinions in such a unique, creative, and literary way. It gives you so much to think about!
After about the first one-third of it I have realized that more than anything, this novel is one that takes a lot of getting used to. You really have to open up and put yourself in this new world that Stephenson so creatively pieces together. When I first started reading it I sat on the outside thinking, "yeah ok." There are still a few things that really have me baffled, however, its the minute details that really catch my attention. I think the attention to detail is what makes this book such a good piece of fiction. I may not be a science fiction person, but I can appreciate good writing and hardwork which is obviously what Stephenson put into this novel.
Since it was written in 1992, no one could expect Stephenson to know exactly what the distant future would include. In alot of ways, he was very off. In alot of ways, he was very on. He realized just how fast technology moves. The reader can tell he was really drawing upon the changing environment around him as his primary resource. This book is very fast paced and since it is supposed to take place around 2010, it means that he thought technology was going to move at an incredible rate, which it does. I think he overshot his target slightly, but he had the right idea. With so many people using communication technologies, developing them, improving them, it is bound to move in a thousand different directions at the speed of light.
One thing I noticed that I really enjoyed, in reference to his writing, is the fast pace of this book really reflects that fast pace of technology. One chapter your in the Metaverse, the next you're surfing the streets with Y.T. The movement is flowing and continuous and fast much like the evolution of technology. It adds alot to the dynamic of the book.
I'm not sure that I like the reality that Hiro lives in. It seems to be a dark place ruled by propoganda which is what I think many of us our fear our lives will become. That fear is completely legitimate to me, it's something that I worry about when I think about the changing times ahead. It's so hard to believe that pizza delivery would be so important and there would hardly be any judicial system anymore. The people seem free to do as they please, sometimes that's not always the best thing. Sure, everyone wants freedom, but with freedom must come some rules. His reality seems very scattered and slightly pointless to me.
Ex: "Pizza delivery is a major industry. a managed industry. People wen tto CosaNostra Pizza University four years just to learn it." (Chapter 1, Page 3) I hope this is something we will never see.
An important point I think that Stephenson is making could seem unintentional, but it is very representative of his view of the future. I get the impression that he had the idea that while we would be moving forward technologically, we would be moving backwords as human-beings. One example of this is his constant reference to race. One would assume that after the battles that have been fought over equal-treatment of all individuals (ie The Bill of Rights, Civil Rights Movement) that in the years to come race, ethnicity, gender, etc... would be issues of the past. The whole idea is that color will no longer matter, right? According to Stephenson, wrong. I think he makes in interesting observation with this. He actually shows evidence of segregation in Hiro's reality. "A big ornate sign above the main gate: WHITE PEOPLE ONLY. NON-CAUCASIANS MUST BE PROCESSED." (Chapter 4, Page 32) This is something that one would expect to see if you traveled back to the days of Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks. It really sticks out in my mind because it really questions the idea that many people are so bent on defending... that technology will only make us more human and more able to communicate. Stephenson obviously thought it would "dehumanize" us. I know that we have had discussions in class regarding this term and its use and I really had, had a change of heart. Nevertheless, in this future it really does seem like these people have changed dramatically. If we are supposed to be moving toward a world free of prejudice, why does Stephenson think that we will still be harboring contempt for other races? Technology, he believed, will hold us back socially (as a society) while propelling us forward politically, economically, etc... It is really disturbing to read about the barcodes that everyone has on their chest and reading them allows people access to your entire life. We are not items on shelf at Walmart with UPC codes. We are people. I hope that the world never comes to that. Yet another example I found was when Hiro first came into contact with Raven outside the Metaverse. "These days most states are franchulates or Burbclaves, much too small to have anything like a jail, or even a judicial system. So when someone does something bad, they try to find quick and dirty punishments... a warning tattoo on a prominent body part. POOR IMPULSE CONTROL." Does he think that we are going to be so scattered, so dehumanized that we will result to a punishment seen in the days of Hitler? Labeling people with tattoos. It is extreme, but it makes a statement. I love the way in which he incorporates these subtle opinions in such a unique, creative, and literary way. It gives you so much to think about!
Saturday, February 17, 2007
NeoVox Idea
The idea of the "Metaverse" in this novel has really caught my attention more than anything else. It has really made me think about how closely a representation the "Metaverse" is of our own reality.
That's why I think I would like to write my NeoVox about the internet and the different profile developing sites like Myspace and Facebook that create Group Forming Networks that Rheingold referred to in Smart Mobs. It is a subject that truly fascinates me, partly because I have a few of my own, and I know just how addicting they can be!
That's why I think I would like to write my NeoVox about the internet and the different profile developing sites like Myspace and Facebook that create Group Forming Networks that Rheingold referred to in Smart Mobs. It is a subject that truly fascinates me, partly because I have a few of my own, and I know just how addicting they can be!
First Impressions
I am not completely sure of how I feel about this book yet. I rarely read fiction in my everyday life, and I'm not a big science fiction fan. So, picking up a fictional science fiction book was not something I was completely looking forward to. I am about a third of the way through the novel and although I am not thoroughly enjoying the novel I must give Stephenson a great deal of credit. The world that he creates, which may not be far from our own in some ways, is very vivid. It is a very well crafted book. He is a gifted writer without question. He leaves nothing to the imagination so, I really feel like I am in the novel. Whether or not I want to be is a different question. I do feel as like my thoughts are going in a million different directions, so please bare with me as I try to sort them out...
Stephenson puts forth an idea of living in 2 worlds. Reality and a virtual reality called the "Metaverse." In this virtual reality Hiro no longer delivers pizzas. He lives a very different life, a complete escape from reality. It can be accessed from anywhere and in it, you can be anything you want to be as long as you have the right software. However, as I was contemplating whether or not this virtual reality was appealing to me, it occured to me that we are already, in a sense, living in 2 worlds.
Do you have Facebook or Myspace, maybe a profile on an online dating system, even a personal blog? While the idea behind these profile systems is to connect easily online lets face it, most of us don't tell the whole truth. Different rules apply here, just like the "Metaverse." We can be whoever we want to be. The shy guy can be outgoing and flirtatious. Someone completely insecure about their looks could be the next model for Victoria's Secret. Very few people will ever know the real you if they meet you online, and you never have to let them. Of course, there are many people who are completely honest, and I do apologize to anyone I may be offending. However, online the rules change. Unless you allow them, no one has access to who you really are. It is a whole new world. The way we present ourselves in this world is completely different as well. Isn't this true of Hiro's "Metaverse"? The back of the book reads "In reality, Hiro Protagonist delivers pizza for Uncle Enzo's CosaNostra Pizza Inc., but in the Metaverse he's a warrior prince." I think this is the most accurate observation Stephenson has made so far in this book. We are already living our lives through the internet. Shopping, managing bank accounts, keeping in close contact with friends and family, doing business, ording a pizza can even be done online on our Cortland campus. Many ideas in this book are far-fetched, and many of them are completely unimagineable in our near or distant future but, I don't think the idea of "Metaverse" is far off.
It's far too early in the novel to say whether I love it or hate it, but it has made me realize just how much I enjoyed Smart Mobs by Rheingold. I feel like that was a great introductory book to get our feet wet. It prepared me well for this novel, which uses a completely new and unique set of vocabulary. I can't imagine the time that went into creating these ideas. Developing these complex characters and the even more complex world they live in. I am enjoying how he has introduced a whole new set of vocabulary to the reader, and while they are terms that I've never seen, he uses them in a way so you have a good idea of what he is using them to represent. Once again, his writing is excellent. It is very well thought-out, and as someone who enjoys writing myself, I must respect that.
Stephenson puts forth an idea of living in 2 worlds. Reality and a virtual reality called the "Metaverse." In this virtual reality Hiro no longer delivers pizzas. He lives a very different life, a complete escape from reality. It can be accessed from anywhere and in it, you can be anything you want to be as long as you have the right software. However, as I was contemplating whether or not this virtual reality was appealing to me, it occured to me that we are already, in a sense, living in 2 worlds.
Do you have Facebook or Myspace, maybe a profile on an online dating system, even a personal blog? While the idea behind these profile systems is to connect easily online lets face it, most of us don't tell the whole truth. Different rules apply here, just like the "Metaverse." We can be whoever we want to be. The shy guy can be outgoing and flirtatious. Someone completely insecure about their looks could be the next model for Victoria's Secret. Very few people will ever know the real you if they meet you online, and you never have to let them. Of course, there are many people who are completely honest, and I do apologize to anyone I may be offending. However, online the rules change. Unless you allow them, no one has access to who you really are. It is a whole new world. The way we present ourselves in this world is completely different as well. Isn't this true of Hiro's "Metaverse"? The back of the book reads "In reality, Hiro Protagonist delivers pizza for Uncle Enzo's CosaNostra Pizza Inc., but in the Metaverse he's a warrior prince." I think this is the most accurate observation Stephenson has made so far in this book. We are already living our lives through the internet. Shopping, managing bank accounts, keeping in close contact with friends and family, doing business, ording a pizza can even be done online on our Cortland campus. Many ideas in this book are far-fetched, and many of them are completely unimagineable in our near or distant future but, I don't think the idea of "Metaverse" is far off.
It's far too early in the novel to say whether I love it or hate it, but it has made me realize just how much I enjoyed Smart Mobs by Rheingold. I feel like that was a great introductory book to get our feet wet. It prepared me well for this novel, which uses a completely new and unique set of vocabulary. I can't imagine the time that went into creating these ideas. Developing these complex characters and the even more complex world they live in. I am enjoying how he has introduced a whole new set of vocabulary to the reader, and while they are terms that I've never seen, he uses them in a way so you have a good idea of what he is using them to represent. Once again, his writing is excellent. It is very well thought-out, and as someone who enjoys writing myself, I must respect that.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Chapters 7-8
The final chapters in Smart Mobs made me re-examine what are society considers powerful or "in control." Children in our society are raised to believe that the government is not only the highest authority, but it is the most well organized and, as a result, powerful structure in the world. Of course at this time we are young and impressionable and are under heavy influence within the school systems to conform. It doesn't take long for us to learn that the government, like our parents, is an authority to be challenged. However, I still think that this notion of an all-powerful central, rule-based government stays with us. Some of us still believe, despite our own best judgement, that the government is something much bigger than us, and they will always have control.
It was amazing to me to read of the organization of the people within Smart Mobs in opposition to the government. They were successful. It occured to me that, we the people, are much bigger than the government. If we find ways in which to band together for a cause we believe strongly in, the government will have no choice but to listen. Working with eachother using these new forms of communication technology is a world-altering development. Not only are tehnologies changing the way in which we communicate on a day to day basis with eachother, they are changing the way we wage war. With these new developments, "democracy" will surely take on a whole new meaning; one much more reflective of its true idealic definition. Smart Mobs proves that strength comes in numbers, knowledge, and cooperation. "...the emergent capabilities of decentralized self-organization can be surprisingly intelligent (pg. 177)."
The comparison of these new forms of rebellion using communication technology to groups of animals, such as fish, that work together for protection was perfectly representative and pleasantly unexpected. I found it ironic that while discussing the developments in the latest technologies we have developmed, we were being compared to animals. We think of ourselves as the most intelligent specious on the earth, but maybe we are no more intelligent than other species using their innate knowledge and tools to survive in the world. These technologies are not talking away from our capabilities as humans beings, they are augmenting them.
The final chapter, however, was cautionary for the right reasons. "Every rose has its thorn." As cliche and over used as this analogy may be, it is the truth. If we are willing to embrace the positive attributes technology will bring to our lives, we must also be willing to defend ourselves against its possible negative effects. If we did not question, we would not see progress. If we did not examine technologies harmful effects, we could not take steps to avert them. Rheingold would not provide us with a book that takes us to so many different places, speaks with so many different people, and brings to light so many different viewpoints (the Amish are even quoted briefly) if he wanted us to believe, like many do, that only good can come of technological development. We most be open minded, in all aspects, in order to be sure we are making the best decisions for ourselves, our families, our communities, and our society. My favorite aspect of this book is this fact. He encourages us to understand technology rather than simply accept it. He provides us with a hearty knowledge base to cultivate our own opinions and make our own decisions. Ignorance is not bliss. This can be applied to both sides of the coin. No good will come of turning a blind-eye to technology, however, no good will come of accepting it with open arms. We must find a healthy middle ground, and I think Rheingold has done just that.
It was amazing to me to read of the organization of the people within Smart Mobs in opposition to the government. They were successful. It occured to me that, we the people, are much bigger than the government. If we find ways in which to band together for a cause we believe strongly in, the government will have no choice but to listen. Working with eachother using these new forms of communication technology is a world-altering development. Not only are tehnologies changing the way in which we communicate on a day to day basis with eachother, they are changing the way we wage war. With these new developments, "democracy" will surely take on a whole new meaning; one much more reflective of its true idealic definition. Smart Mobs proves that strength comes in numbers, knowledge, and cooperation. "...the emergent capabilities of decentralized self-organization can be surprisingly intelligent (pg. 177)."
The comparison of these new forms of rebellion using communication technology to groups of animals, such as fish, that work together for protection was perfectly representative and pleasantly unexpected. I found it ironic that while discussing the developments in the latest technologies we have developmed, we were being compared to animals. We think of ourselves as the most intelligent specious on the earth, but maybe we are no more intelligent than other species using their innate knowledge and tools to survive in the world. These technologies are not talking away from our capabilities as humans beings, they are augmenting them.
The final chapter, however, was cautionary for the right reasons. "Every rose has its thorn." As cliche and over used as this analogy may be, it is the truth. If we are willing to embrace the positive attributes technology will bring to our lives, we must also be willing to defend ourselves against its possible negative effects. If we did not question, we would not see progress. If we did not examine technologies harmful effects, we could not take steps to avert them. Rheingold would not provide us with a book that takes us to so many different places, speaks with so many different people, and brings to light so many different viewpoints (the Amish are even quoted briefly) if he wanted us to believe, like many do, that only good can come of technological development. We most be open minded, in all aspects, in order to be sure we are making the best decisions for ourselves, our families, our communities, and our society. My favorite aspect of this book is this fact. He encourages us to understand technology rather than simply accept it. He provides us with a hearty knowledge base to cultivate our own opinions and make our own decisions. Ignorance is not bliss. This can be applied to both sides of the coin. No good will come of turning a blind-eye to technology, however, no good will come of accepting it with open arms. We must find a healthy middle ground, and I think Rheingold has done just that.
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Politics and the Net?
I think more than anything I am learning about the significance of technology in our current society. When I am sitting on my computer talking on AIM or listening to iTunes or even on my cell phone trying to figure out where me and my friends are going for dinner, I never think about things like politics. I think most people don't. We use these technologies so much that we forget that we are using them, as Rheingold eluded to in the book, and we don't consider them as anything but the devices we use to write a paper or phone a friend. Because they are such a part of our everyday lives they are bound to make their way into other areas of life, like politics and culture.
I truly did not realize until now just how much of an impact technology is have on our culture. It is not just changing how we communicate and the speed at which we can accomplish certain tasks, it is changing the jobs we have, the requirments we have to meet, the way we give and recieve information, essentially, the way we live. This holds serious implications for the future. Our children will live completely different lives than us and we can't stop it. We can't shut it out and live in our own world. This world is too big to ignore. We have to, at the very least, make an attempt to understand the changes that are underway.
One change to society that I would have never given a second thought is the way we fight against the government. Netwars. After reading of the revolution in the Phillipines against President Estrada in 2001, I was astounded by the power of cellular phones. Sure everyone tells us we are always connected, we are the internet, we have access to anything anywhere, we can make anything happen... who would have thought war? It's a whole new concept which has the ability to make a revolution even more powerful. Everyone who believed in the cause could participate in these netwars, not just those who are passionate enough to stand on the battlefield.
We have the ability to do more as a people thanks to living a life in which we never lose contact with the world around us.
This also made me think of the ways in which people participate in different aspects of life. This was covered more in chapters 4-6 of the book, but I think it relates to society, these netwars, and our class in a significant way. Our ability to participate. I am one of the students who you would see raise her hand maybe 2 or 3 times per semester. Not because I am not familiar or comfortable talking about the material, instead, I feel self conscious and would rather not have everyone staring at me to make my voice heard. In this class we can be heard and not seen, just as in cyberspace. I think that has contributed a great deal to the success of the internet. Living in such a judgemental society, it's not out of line for someone to have a certain level of anxiety about speaking their mind or standing up for what you believe to be right. Cyberspace allows us to have influence without feeling judged. We can throw our thoughts to the masses and if they don't like what they read, too bad. Nothing lost and nothing gained. I think that's important to alot of people. Nothing is put on the line, therefore everything is put online.
I truly did not realize until now just how much of an impact technology is have on our culture. It is not just changing how we communicate and the speed at which we can accomplish certain tasks, it is changing the jobs we have, the requirments we have to meet, the way we give and recieve information, essentially, the way we live. This holds serious implications for the future. Our children will live completely different lives than us and we can't stop it. We can't shut it out and live in our own world. This world is too big to ignore. We have to, at the very least, make an attempt to understand the changes that are underway.
One change to society that I would have never given a second thought is the way we fight against the government. Netwars. After reading of the revolution in the Phillipines against President Estrada in 2001, I was astounded by the power of cellular phones. Sure everyone tells us we are always connected, we are the internet, we have access to anything anywhere, we can make anything happen... who would have thought war? It's a whole new concept which has the ability to make a revolution even more powerful. Everyone who believed in the cause could participate in these netwars, not just those who are passionate enough to stand on the battlefield.
We have the ability to do more as a people thanks to living a life in which we never lose contact with the world around us.
This also made me think of the ways in which people participate in different aspects of life. This was covered more in chapters 4-6 of the book, but I think it relates to society, these netwars, and our class in a significant way. Our ability to participate. I am one of the students who you would see raise her hand maybe 2 or 3 times per semester. Not because I am not familiar or comfortable talking about the material, instead, I feel self conscious and would rather not have everyone staring at me to make my voice heard. In this class we can be heard and not seen, just as in cyberspace. I think that has contributed a great deal to the success of the internet. Living in such a judgemental society, it's not out of line for someone to have a certain level of anxiety about speaking their mind or standing up for what you believe to be right. Cyberspace allows us to have influence without feeling judged. We can throw our thoughts to the masses and if they don't like what they read, too bad. Nothing lost and nothing gained. I think that's important to alot of people. Nothing is put on the line, therefore everything is put online.
Monday, February 5, 2007
Chapters 4-6
I was very intrigued by reading Rheingold's ideas that technology is "disappearing around us." I found this to be particularly interesting. Technology is all around us, and each year brings something new to the table to connect us in more efficient ways both with others and the world. Because our use of technology can be so mindless (and no, I am not referring to taking away our humanity) we forget we are even using it. We know that we need that new cell phone to keep in touch with our friends, family, and business associates, and we know that we want that new cell phone to store our favorite music and have the latest ringtones. What we don't think about is that when we buy that new technology we are responding and taking part in a whole other world. No one thinks about spectrums or the group forming networks (GFNs) we are creating. We are contributing to something greater than that cell phone or your friends inbox, but because that contribution is so constant throughout each day, we don't think twice about it. Rheingold stated, "The most profound are the technologies that disappear." I couldn't agree more. We are a critical part of the Creative Destruction disucessed in Chapter 6, and we don't even know it.
On the other hand, something that has yet to even enter into the greater population it disappear is the idea of virtual reality. Rheingold and the individuals he interviewed who have dedicated their careers to these new ideas described virtual reality as a way to extend the senses. I knew that VR was something people had many ideas and plans about, what I didn't know is that new technologies are already being made. They can be used (by a tiny group), nonetheless, they are being utilized and perfected to be mass produced one day. The descriptions are amazing. Being able to "point and click" anything means we would truly have the world at our fingertips. Smart Billboards seems like the perfect way for advertisers to truly reach their target audience, and Smart Rooms seems like the ideal creature comfort.
To play devil's advocate, my question would have to be, are we going to far with some technologies just because we can? Are we so carried away with the fact that we really can make any idea a reality that we are creating some technologies just to prove a point? Is the basis for innovation still a need or just a desire to say, "you said it couldn't be done... you were wrong."? Smart Money, putting microchips in money. What exact purpose would it serve to know who previously possessed that dollar bill you just handed to a cashier at the grocery store? It's incredible to see just what we can do, but sometimes I think you have to ask why?
Another example might be, why do we need all of these online recommendation sites and rating systems. When did we become so indecisive? Why do we need Amazon to tell us what book we should read based on our previous selections, and why do we need to develop such extensive rating systems when we never really know who we're talking to or doing business with on the internet to start with?
One important discussion of these rating systems addressed the issue of compulsive contributors. It made me wonder how much time we are actually spending finding the information we need on the internet, and how much time do we spend sorting and filtering that information? It seems to be a double edged sword. I know that I, personally, don't contribute as much to the internet and dont use many of these options because I dont have the energy to sort through all of the worthless information. With so many people on and contributing to the internet, how will one person make a difference? How will one person be heard when hundreds of thousands of blogs, podcasts, etc... are posted everyday?
Subgroups (Reed's Law) would come into play here. After some confusion and little extra research I understand what Reed is saying. I guess I am answering my own question here, but we are heard because of the small networks of individual connections that can be made. A small group of people growing into a larger audience. Slow evolution of who we communicate with, how we communicate with them, and the possible benefits that connection holds for each side of the connection. Still, very few are heard...
I guess my one question for Rheingold would have to be:
What can we do to make sure that we are making progress and not just noise?
On the other hand, something that has yet to even enter into the greater population it disappear is the idea of virtual reality. Rheingold and the individuals he interviewed who have dedicated their careers to these new ideas described virtual reality as a way to extend the senses. I knew that VR was something people had many ideas and plans about, what I didn't know is that new technologies are already being made. They can be used (by a tiny group), nonetheless, they are being utilized and perfected to be mass produced one day. The descriptions are amazing. Being able to "point and click" anything means we would truly have the world at our fingertips. Smart Billboards seems like the perfect way for advertisers to truly reach their target audience, and Smart Rooms seems like the ideal creature comfort.
To play devil's advocate, my question would have to be, are we going to far with some technologies just because we can? Are we so carried away with the fact that we really can make any idea a reality that we are creating some technologies just to prove a point? Is the basis for innovation still a need or just a desire to say, "you said it couldn't be done... you were wrong."? Smart Money, putting microchips in money. What exact purpose would it serve to know who previously possessed that dollar bill you just handed to a cashier at the grocery store? It's incredible to see just what we can do, but sometimes I think you have to ask why?
Another example might be, why do we need all of these online recommendation sites and rating systems. When did we become so indecisive? Why do we need Amazon to tell us what book we should read based on our previous selections, and why do we need to develop such extensive rating systems when we never really know who we're talking to or doing business with on the internet to start with?
One important discussion of these rating systems addressed the issue of compulsive contributors. It made me wonder how much time we are actually spending finding the information we need on the internet, and how much time do we spend sorting and filtering that information? It seems to be a double edged sword. I know that I, personally, don't contribute as much to the internet and dont use many of these options because I dont have the energy to sort through all of the worthless information. With so many people on and contributing to the internet, how will one person make a difference? How will one person be heard when hundreds of thousands of blogs, podcasts, etc... are posted everyday?
Subgroups (Reed's Law) would come into play here. After some confusion and little extra research I understand what Reed is saying. I guess I am answering my own question here, but we are heard because of the small networks of individual connections that can be made. A small group of people growing into a larger audience. Slow evolution of who we communicate with, how we communicate with them, and the possible benefits that connection holds for each side of the connection. Still, very few are heard...
I guess my one question for Rheingold would have to be:
What can we do to make sure that we are making progress and not just noise?
Thursday, February 1, 2007
I Have Alot to Learn
As I read there are times, I must admit, that I am completely lost. I did not realize until I started reading this book just how unaware I am of the technology around me. I am victim of the major companies and their propoganda. As I was reading chapters five and six I was in complete agreement with Rheingold and the individuals he interviewed such as Steve Mann. It was then that I realized I am one of the people mindlessly feeding the companies who are quietly taking advantage of the public's ignorance in an effort to pad their million dollar bank accounts.
Like many other Americans who carry around the incorrect notion that our country is the center of all development, a part of me really believed that the latest cellular phones in the new Verizon or Sprint commercials were the height of all technological development so far. Well, I was very wrong. I had no idea they were so far ahead of us in countries such as Japan, building entire wireless communities and creating clothing with computers in it! Who knew? Certainly not me.
I think a part of this is due to Rheingold's comment about computers being a world of their own. Learning about computers, for the most part, requires aquiring a whole new vocabulary that can only be used in that world, and if that's a world you don't visit very often, how likely are you to maintain your new knowledge? Where in the world did they come up with words like "blog" or "podcast"? It truly boggles my mind. While I am slowely sorting out the knowledge and learning my new language, I feel as though the more I read this book the more clueless I find out I am.
In addition, I think our ignorance is due to what I have previously mentioned. The companies trying to control our knowledge of technologies. Keeping us in the dark so we go along with whatever they put in front of us. Their businesses would be completely damaged if everyone started building their own wireless phones or making improvements and challenging their ideas of buying airtime and spending hundreds of dollars a month. They are taking advantage of the public and slowely attempting to distintigrate "the commons" due to their own self-interest. As Rheingold said, "few are controlling all," and I know I don't like the thought of that anymore.
Overall, I am enjoying the awareness this book is raising in my own mind and hope it will continue.
Like many other Americans who carry around the incorrect notion that our country is the center of all development, a part of me really believed that the latest cellular phones in the new Verizon or Sprint commercials were the height of all technological development so far. Well, I was very wrong. I had no idea they were so far ahead of us in countries such as Japan, building entire wireless communities and creating clothing with computers in it! Who knew? Certainly not me.
I think a part of this is due to Rheingold's comment about computers being a world of their own. Learning about computers, for the most part, requires aquiring a whole new vocabulary that can only be used in that world, and if that's a world you don't visit very often, how likely are you to maintain your new knowledge? Where in the world did they come up with words like "blog" or "podcast"? It truly boggles my mind. While I am slowely sorting out the knowledge and learning my new language, I feel as though the more I read this book the more clueless I find out I am.
In addition, I think our ignorance is due to what I have previously mentioned. The companies trying to control our knowledge of technologies. Keeping us in the dark so we go along with whatever they put in front of us. Their businesses would be completely damaged if everyone started building their own wireless phones or making improvements and challenging their ideas of buying airtime and spending hundreds of dollars a month. They are taking advantage of the public and slowely attempting to distintigrate "the commons" due to their own self-interest. As Rheingold said, "few are controlling all," and I know I don't like the thought of that anymore.
Overall, I am enjoying the awareness this book is raising in my own mind and hope it will continue.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Smart Mobs 1-3
Surprised.
I must say that is what I feel at the moment as I look back and reflect on the chapters I have just read from Smart Mobs by Rheingold. Pleasantly surprised as a matter of fact. I must confess, when we first got started I thought to myself, "How in the world are these books so long? It is only about communication technology. How is this going to be interesting?" I am pleased to report that I was completely wrong about this book. I am amazed at the depth Rheingold incorporates into his work, so it is no longer just about the internet or cell phones, it is about true human contact in all aspects of life and the part that technology plays.
Chapter one is the chapter I felt I could most relate to. One important observation, to me, Rheingold made was that we live in 3 places simultaneously: the physical world, the artificial but concrete world (propoganda for example) and this new world of texting tribes or "channels." Personally, it made me wonder about my own texting habits and, as a result, examine them more closely and on a larger scale. As technology becomes more prevelent in our society I worry that a serious dependency will form. I know that I am dependent on my cell phone. I text constantly no matter where I am. Work, walking to class, in class, in bed, while doing my homework. Many of these situations I know I should not be on my cell phone, but it is such a frusterated feeling to no longer be connected everyone who is important to me. One question I brought up and feel very strongly about is, "what will this dependency mean for all forms of communication." Rheingold described us as living a "continuously shared life." I love that phrase. It makes me feel comfortable knowing that if I need someone, they are a few keypad strokes away. In that sense cell phones and the internet are wonderful, however, what is this doing to our everyday communication with the physical world? If cell phones have in fact become a "remote control for our life" what will our lives become? A life of sitting behind a computer. Will college become obsolete because through classes such as this we never have to leave our living room to earn a degree? What will happen to hands-on experience? How can who we are be shaped by what happens to and around us if all that is happening around is a flashing screen? Maybe I am becoming a too critical, but considering the pace at which technology is already evolving, I think that people need to be asking questions such as these to make sure we do not lose control, and I think these are the types of dialogues Rheingold wanted to inspire with this book. He wants us to learn and relate and examine and predict. If he just wanted us to believe technology is the greatest thing in the world that we could not live without he would not provide us with so many resources and views and such a rich historical perspective.
Chapter two is the section that really sparked my interest. When I first began chapter two I had to wonder where he was going with his talk of pastures and "commons." It did not take long for me to realize that he was connecting development and technology to more than a cell phone. He was connecting it to the way in which we communicate on a broader spectrum. I had no idea the internet was created not by one company or another but by the population as a whole. This technology has truly involved in the most unique and personalized way, through eachother. Learning of the new ways companies are trying to control the world's own individual technology progress and use was scary. "Ruin is the destination towards which all men rush... each persuing his own best interest." I think this is when his discussion of a collective action dilema became so important. What is good for these companies and CEO's is turning us into robots. Instead of people developing our own ideas of the next technological advancement we sit and watch for the next Verizon add to tell us which phone to buy or which new service is offered. We have become passive. What is good a small group of a few billionaires is bad for us! Due to competition, cooperation and the rate of development has actually slowed.
Community. A word that seems so simple to define but has transformed into something much more complex and debatable. The idea that a community can consist of a group of people, each from a different side of the globe is still a community as long as they provide support and foster socialization and share information. In chapter three when Rheingold discussed the idea of the internet being own by "everyone and no one," a real view of this community was opened. If we use the internet as a mode of communication, in an abstract way, we own a piece of this world-wide community. We share this space when we log on. We are a part of something bigger.
While the discussions of file sharing in chapter three held little interest to me, it is mind boggling to read of the possibilities for the future. The internet is forming its own world, and it's not just about communication anymore. It's about enriching our lives through connections such as file sharing. It is about using computations and analysis and file converting to put anything and everything at our fingertips, to do work and create possibilities that would have otherwise taken us years. While it stills scares me to think that computers can now predict what we will like to read or what files may interest us, it is an amazing resource that has truly been proven to me to have no limit to its possibilties.
The reason I have connected so well to this author, I believe, is because he makes observations that not only include technology but span all aspects of the "human phenomena." I think any sociologist would find this book to be fascinating. In a few short chapters he has made my thinking take a serious turn. I am eager to see what the rest of the book as in store for me.
I must say that is what I feel at the moment as I look back and reflect on the chapters I have just read from Smart Mobs by Rheingold. Pleasantly surprised as a matter of fact. I must confess, when we first got started I thought to myself, "How in the world are these books so long? It is only about communication technology. How is this going to be interesting?" I am pleased to report that I was completely wrong about this book. I am amazed at the depth Rheingold incorporates into his work, so it is no longer just about the internet or cell phones, it is about true human contact in all aspects of life and the part that technology plays.
Chapter one is the chapter I felt I could most relate to. One important observation, to me, Rheingold made was that we live in 3 places simultaneously: the physical world, the artificial but concrete world (propoganda for example) and this new world of texting tribes or "channels." Personally, it made me wonder about my own texting habits and, as a result, examine them more closely and on a larger scale. As technology becomes more prevelent in our society I worry that a serious dependency will form. I know that I am dependent on my cell phone. I text constantly no matter where I am. Work, walking to class, in class, in bed, while doing my homework. Many of these situations I know I should not be on my cell phone, but it is such a frusterated feeling to no longer be connected everyone who is important to me. One question I brought up and feel very strongly about is, "what will this dependency mean for all forms of communication." Rheingold described us as living a "continuously shared life." I love that phrase. It makes me feel comfortable knowing that if I need someone, they are a few keypad strokes away. In that sense cell phones and the internet are wonderful, however, what is this doing to our everyday communication with the physical world? If cell phones have in fact become a "remote control for our life" what will our lives become? A life of sitting behind a computer. Will college become obsolete because through classes such as this we never have to leave our living room to earn a degree? What will happen to hands-on experience? How can who we are be shaped by what happens to and around us if all that is happening around is a flashing screen? Maybe I am becoming a too critical, but considering the pace at which technology is already evolving, I think that people need to be asking questions such as these to make sure we do not lose control, and I think these are the types of dialogues Rheingold wanted to inspire with this book. He wants us to learn and relate and examine and predict. If he just wanted us to believe technology is the greatest thing in the world that we could not live without he would not provide us with so many resources and views and such a rich historical perspective.
Chapter two is the section that really sparked my interest. When I first began chapter two I had to wonder where he was going with his talk of pastures and "commons." It did not take long for me to realize that he was connecting development and technology to more than a cell phone. He was connecting it to the way in which we communicate on a broader spectrum. I had no idea the internet was created not by one company or another but by the population as a whole. This technology has truly involved in the most unique and personalized way, through eachother. Learning of the new ways companies are trying to control the world's own individual technology progress and use was scary. "Ruin is the destination towards which all men rush... each persuing his own best interest." I think this is when his discussion of a collective action dilema became so important. What is good for these companies and CEO's is turning us into robots. Instead of people developing our own ideas of the next technological advancement we sit and watch for the next Verizon add to tell us which phone to buy or which new service is offered. We have become passive. What is good a small group of a few billionaires is bad for us! Due to competition, cooperation and the rate of development has actually slowed.
Community. A word that seems so simple to define but has transformed into something much more complex and debatable. The idea that a community can consist of a group of people, each from a different side of the globe is still a community as long as they provide support and foster socialization and share information. In chapter three when Rheingold discussed the idea of the internet being own by "everyone and no one," a real view of this community was opened. If we use the internet as a mode of communication, in an abstract way, we own a piece of this world-wide community. We share this space when we log on. We are a part of something bigger.
While the discussions of file sharing in chapter three held little interest to me, it is mind boggling to read of the possibilities for the future. The internet is forming its own world, and it's not just about communication anymore. It's about enriching our lives through connections such as file sharing. It is about using computations and analysis and file converting to put anything and everything at our fingertips, to do work and create possibilities that would have otherwise taken us years. While it stills scares me to think that computers can now predict what we will like to read or what files may interest us, it is an amazing resource that has truly been proven to me to have no limit to its possibilties.
The reason I have connected so well to this author, I believe, is because he makes observations that not only include technology but span all aspects of the "human phenomena." I think any sociologist would find this book to be fascinating. In a few short chapters he has made my thinking take a serious turn. I am eager to see what the rest of the book as in store for me.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)