Piracy has had a big effect on the new media online. So many people are downloading songs online for free and they have no idea as to where the songs are coming from, who they are coming from, and the dangers that they could possibly have on our computers and the viruses it could possibly have. Many people, especially the generation that has grown up with the internet and never heard of dial up or bulletin boards, get the idea in their heads that downloading software; music or movies off the internet is one of its purposes. They basically subscribe to the notion that if it is available online, they have every right own it, or if they right click and save, it must be free of charge right? Well for most things it is, of course, but the majority of content found on the internet, whether it is pictures, music, movies, etc is copyrighted, therefore that notion does not really apply in this situation.
Downloading costs record companies a lot of money each year but the question is what should we do about it and can we stop it? Mason says, "if either decide to compete with pirates by moving into the new market space, they can also cut into the market share of the competitor." (236) Apple created iTunes in a way to compete with piracy and move that into the new market space. It is now one of the most popular music/movies/games downloading sites on the World Wide Web.
To be completely honest, I download music online for free and I watch movies and TV online all the time. Every night after class and I am done my homework, I sit in my room and decide to watch a couple of episodes of a funny TV show or a movie. It's free, I do not have to go to the video store to watch it and...did I mention it's free? I mean...of course piracy has its advantages. We can get any kind of music or movies that we want online whenever, wherever we want for no amount of money. Zilch! Zippo! However, we are still taking media forms that do not belong to us and people are not even aware of the fact that we are stealing it. Because it is out there for the whole world to see and use for their own personal use, we take advantage of that and do not think anything of it until our computer crashes down because of a virus the media form we took. Like I said, we never know where or who the information we are downloading is coming from. All we want is the music we listen to and a good movie to entertain us and apparently, that seems to be all that matters nowadays. Personal use and entertainment...
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Social Networking...Is It Really That Safe?
One of the articles that I found really interesting and I could definitely relate to was Anders Slbrechtslund's article, "Online Social Networking as Participatory Surveillance." He argues that social networking is anchored in surveillance practices. The majority of us have Facebook, some have blogs, Youtube, etc, and what we post online seems to be interesting to all of us and tend to see nothing wrong with it. We have developed the idea that people "creep" everybody else and Anders discusses how it has its benefits.
The word surveillance is etymologically associated with the French word surveiller, which translates simply as to watch over. The verb suggests the visual practice of a person looking carefully at someone or something watching from above. The term "watching over" has become a metaphor for all other monitoring activities. The general perception of surveillance is that it occurs from the top down. This means that the people at the top is the person in power and watching the people at the bottom that have no control as to what those higher of them can see or do with their information. "Surveillance can be seen as a "flat" relationship or even in favor of the person under surveillance, either negatively as actively resisting the gaze or positively as exhibitionistic empowerment." People can see what we post online, as well as us seeing what they post. It is a win-win situation but at the same time...we are not sure as to what those people could do with our information and that is what scares not only me but the rest of society.
Sharing information and photos definitely has its perks, but at the same time it can be extremely dangerous. Sometimes we do not have the idea in our head as to if what we post online is acceptable or not. We tend to post random stuff that has no effect on anybody and really is pointless, without even realizing if it is even safe. We need to make sure that before we post anything, we will not regret it a few days, week, month or even a year later. We need to make sure that what we search online is safe and credible and will not destroy our "secret online" identity.
The word surveillance is etymologically associated with the French word surveiller, which translates simply as to watch over. The verb suggests the visual practice of a person looking carefully at someone or something watching from above. The term "watching over" has become a metaphor for all other monitoring activities. The general perception of surveillance is that it occurs from the top down. This means that the people at the top is the person in power and watching the people at the bottom that have no control as to what those higher of them can see or do with their information. "Surveillance can be seen as a "flat" relationship or even in favor of the person under surveillance, either negatively as actively resisting the gaze or positively as exhibitionistic empowerment." People can see what we post online, as well as us seeing what they post. It is a win-win situation but at the same time...we are not sure as to what those people could do with our information and that is what scares not only me but the rest of society.
Sharing information and photos definitely has its perks, but at the same time it can be extremely dangerous. Sometimes we do not have the idea in our head as to if what we post online is acceptable or not. We tend to post random stuff that has no effect on anybody and really is pointless, without even realizing if it is even safe. We need to make sure that before we post anything, we will not regret it a few days, week, month or even a year later. We need to make sure that what we search online is safe and credible and will not destroy our "secret online" identity.
Google Steals Information and Eats Itself
We create a lot of money for Google by serving them text advertisements on a network of hidden websites. We buy Google via their own advertisement. Google eats itself, but in the end, "we own it!"
The Google database has tonnes of incredible information that assists us in anything we do. It is constituted by the most visited pages of the net.We have this thought in our mind that accessing Google is Free and Easy so LET'S DO IT! Why not? It's free and who does not like free stuff?!
The question is...what is the price we have to pay? Unfortunately, there is a price that we are paying. Instead of taking pocket change from us, they are using us as a human resource which provides them with information, clicks, personal data, etc. Forget the concept of FREE. FREE just ends up being another concept of control and we want to find the controllers of this system. We can not find them easily because we do not have access to them and without access it is pretty much invisible.
Google tends to steal information very easily. One easy way of stealing information is the street view on Google Maps. All you do is type in the address and click street view to see the house. I have ironically seen one of my friends on street view and it really scares me as to if I am really on this so called "street view." I searched up my house once and I saw all the cows on my farm, my dogs and my dad's new car at the time. It is scary to think that the world can see where I live and what my house even looks like. Even though this is just one example as to how we are losing our privacy online, this just enforces that point 100x more.
The Google database has tonnes of incredible information that assists us in anything we do. It is constituted by the most visited pages of the net.We have this thought in our mind that accessing Google is Free and Easy so LET'S DO IT! Why not? It's free and who does not like free stuff?!
The question is...what is the price we have to pay? Unfortunately, there is a price that we are paying. Instead of taking pocket change from us, they are using us as a human resource which provides them with information, clicks, personal data, etc. Forget the concept of FREE. FREE just ends up being another concept of control and we want to find the controllers of this system. We can not find them easily because we do not have access to them and without access it is pretty much invisible.
Google tends to steal information very easily. One easy way of stealing information is the street view on Google Maps. All you do is type in the address and click street view to see the house. I have ironically seen one of my friends on street view and it really scares me as to if I am really on this so called "street view." I searched up my house once and I saw all the cows on my farm, my dogs and my dad's new car at the time. It is scary to think that the world can see where I live and what my house even looks like. Even though this is just one example as to how we are losing our privacy online, this just enforces that point 100x more.
Search Engine Meets Web 2.0
Web search engines have emerged into vital tools for our successful navigation of the growing online information circle. Google says, "the goal is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful" and to create the "perfect search engine" that provides only intuitive, personalized, and relevant results. In the meantime, Web 2.0 has blossomed that is largely based on the faith in power of the networked masses to capture, process, and mashup someone's personal information in order to make them more useful, social and meaningful. Michael Zimmer states that the combining of Google's large amount of information-seeking products with Web 2.0 infrastructures is called "Search 2.0-which intends to capture the best of both technical systems for the touted benefit of users. I think it's the best of both worlds don't you think??
With the information that Web 2.0 provides, search engines can better predict the world wide web's users needs and wants, and also send out more meaningful results.
In 2004, Tim O'Reilly and Dale Dougherty of O'Reilly Media went out to describe the common features of various Web companies that survived the "dot-com burst" of the late 1990's. For the companies that survived, they were arguing that they all had certain things in common: they were all collaborative, interactive, dynamic, user-centered, network based, and data rich. The term they used to describe this emerging trend was "Web 2.0." Popular sites such as Flickr, Facebook and Myspace are all part of the new second-generation Internet phenomenon, featuring user-generated content, opportunities to collaborate with photos and friends, and modify or share content.
Web 2.0 has sparked a revolution in the way people use the internet. The users of the world have shifted from 1-way data to 2-way community collaboration and interactivity. However, with the doors of web-bound word processing and Wikipedia opened, people have to wonder, what is going to happen to these search engines? Yeah the algorithims of yesterday hold value, but if information is changing all the time, I do not see what the big deal is with changing the way we look at it. Search today is undoubtedly much better than it was in the 90's. But internet search still has lots of room for improvement and waiting to see what will happen in the future is exciting!
With the information that Web 2.0 provides, search engines can better predict the world wide web's users needs and wants, and also send out more meaningful results.
In 2004, Tim O'Reilly and Dale Dougherty of O'Reilly Media went out to describe the common features of various Web companies that survived the "dot-com burst" of the late 1990's. For the companies that survived, they were arguing that they all had certain things in common: they were all collaborative, interactive, dynamic, user-centered, network based, and data rich. The term they used to describe this emerging trend was "Web 2.0." Popular sites such as Flickr, Facebook and Myspace are all part of the new second-generation Internet phenomenon, featuring user-generated content, opportunities to collaborate with photos and friends, and modify or share content.
Web 2.0 has sparked a revolution in the way people use the internet. The users of the world have shifted from 1-way data to 2-way community collaboration and interactivity. However, with the doors of web-bound word processing and Wikipedia opened, people have to wonder, what is going to happen to these search engines? Yeah the algorithims of yesterday hold value, but if information is changing all the time, I do not see what the big deal is with changing the way we look at it. Search today is undoubtedly much better than it was in the 90's. But internet search still has lots of room for improvement and waiting to see what will happen in the future is exciting!
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Loser Generated Content
In the article "Loser Generated Content: From Participation to Exploitation," Soren Mork Peterson discusses the different ways as to how the large corporations take advantage of the user-generated content to earn lots of money. The majority of people see Web 2.0 as a freedom of expression and to post anything that we please online for the world to see, but in reality, Web 2.0 is a place for free labour, losers and exploitation. These words are part of what happens online, and for the sake of history, always have happened. It has become a regular thing on the Web and the amount of privacy on it will probably never get any better.
One of the most interesting and productive aspects of Web 2.0, and also one of the problematic ones is said to be the relational character of these technologies. Learning to think rationally is the first step to build a more rational world. We need to view the world as relations instead of objects and subjects. We need to make sure that when we are looking at how Web 2.0 creates significance and value. This is important because it explains why specific type of software and practices related to it can be exploitative yet create pleasure for its users at the same time.
The social network website of Facebook is a perfect example. We are entertained by it and it is one of the most used social networking sites of today. Facebook has become a sort of drug to society. We use it for interacting with friends from school or work, playing games, uploading pictures and letting people what you are up to, and especially used for finding old friends. It has been so successful that director David Fincher decided to create a film about it. In it's opening weekend, it made $22,445,653. It was one of the most successful films of 2010.
Facebook may have its perks with communicating, but it definitely has its disadvantages with the amount of exploitation. So many people around the world can hack your account, take your pictures, and do many other illegal things to your account. Everybody can see your profile even if you think you set your profile to private. Social networking sites use a typical infrastructure of hosting all the content produced by their users. Whether it is sharing music, pictures, or different types of content, these types of sites have some commonalities when offering different platforms for users to share content. Along with the content you are uploading and comments post on other friend's profiles, they allow the opportunity to create your own personal profile. Added to this you get your friends and contact list. Unfortunately, the only way to keep your identity is to constantly update your information, and be an active member of the website's community by commenting on friend's profiles and communicating with them. People may end up creating a strong bond with the site and the community that you are part of which makes these websites so successful.
We have been participating in Web 2.0 for years and it has really become an addiction. It has taken advantage of us and is definitely exploiting us 100% more than we ever expected or wanted to.
One of the most interesting and productive aspects of Web 2.0, and also one of the problematic ones is said to be the relational character of these technologies. Learning to think rationally is the first step to build a more rational world. We need to view the world as relations instead of objects and subjects. We need to make sure that when we are looking at how Web 2.0 creates significance and value. This is important because it explains why specific type of software and practices related to it can be exploitative yet create pleasure for its users at the same time.
The social network website of Facebook is a perfect example. We are entertained by it and it is one of the most used social networking sites of today. Facebook has become a sort of drug to society. We use it for interacting with friends from school or work, playing games, uploading pictures and letting people what you are up to, and especially used for finding old friends. It has been so successful that director David Fincher decided to create a film about it. In it's opening weekend, it made $22,445,653. It was one of the most successful films of 2010.
Facebook may have its perks with communicating, but it definitely has its disadvantages with the amount of exploitation. So many people around the world can hack your account, take your pictures, and do many other illegal things to your account. Everybody can see your profile even if you think you set your profile to private. Social networking sites use a typical infrastructure of hosting all the content produced by their users. Whether it is sharing music, pictures, or different types of content, these types of sites have some commonalities when offering different platforms for users to share content. Along with the content you are uploading and comments post on other friend's profiles, they allow the opportunity to create your own personal profile. Added to this you get your friends and contact list. Unfortunately, the only way to keep your identity is to constantly update your information, and be an active member of the website's community by commenting on friend's profiles and communicating with them. People may end up creating a strong bond with the site and the community that you are part of which makes these websites so successful.
We have been participating in Web 2.0 for years and it has really become an addiction. It has taken advantage of us and is definitely exploiting us 100% more than we ever expected or wanted to.
We Are What Is Making Social Networks What They Are Today
In the article Market Ideology and the Myths of Web 2.0, Trevor Scholz talks specifically about how the corporate market took over the web and how they have used socially collaborative networks to earn massive amounts of money.
What I found quite interesting is that Scholz talks about how Web 2.0 is not at all new. The internet and those ideologies have been around since the beginning and they are the same ones that apparently are held by Web 2.0; which Trevor Scholz refers to as "new newness." The World Wide Web took over the United States in the early 1900s but Wikis and user-submitted content has been around since 1973, when ARPANET's email program was the most popular feature. What is similar to that is blogs (started in 1994), social networking (Classmates.com was founded already in 1995 which was soon followed by SixDegrees,com), RSS feeds (which allows users to subscribe to a dynamic web site such as a blog, started in 1999), and CSS(creates a consistent approach to providing style information for web documents that started in 1998).
After all of these features were created for the World Wide Web, this where you can see where the corporatization of the web can be seen. The Web makes people easier to use. By "surfing" it, people serve their virtual hosts and they are always happy about it. We are constantly on the World Wide Web and we do not realize how much money corporations are making because of our personal use. We are using the World Wide Web for absolutely everything now. We are using it for banking, social networking, blogging, shopping online, work and education. It is taking over our life and apparently the takeover of the web by business interests is also apparent credible when looking at public discourse.
The most obvious authors that are writing about the Social Web, tend to be lawyers, legal scholars at high end universities, business strategists, and corporate social media consultants. These are the articles that University Students and other people go to when they need legit information that will not be incorrect.
Scholz states, "the users/producers on the Social Web are the base to the super structure of virtual real estate owners." The users of Web 2.0 technology are all contributing to the big corporations who own networks and databases that we use in our everyday lives. We are the little stepping stones that assist on making Web 2.0 so successful and without the social web as an unmarketed project, we probably would not be where we are today.
What I found quite interesting is that Scholz talks about how Web 2.0 is not at all new. The internet and those ideologies have been around since the beginning and they are the same ones that apparently are held by Web 2.0; which Trevor Scholz refers to as "new newness." The World Wide Web took over the United States in the early 1900s but Wikis and user-submitted content has been around since 1973, when ARPANET's email program was the most popular feature. What is similar to that is blogs (started in 1994), social networking (Classmates.com was founded already in 1995 which was soon followed by SixDegrees,com), RSS feeds (which allows users to subscribe to a dynamic web site such as a blog, started in 1999), and CSS(creates a consistent approach to providing style information for web documents that started in 1998).
After all of these features were created for the World Wide Web, this where you can see where the corporatization of the web can be seen. The Web makes people easier to use. By "surfing" it, people serve their virtual hosts and they are always happy about it. We are constantly on the World Wide Web and we do not realize how much money corporations are making because of our personal use. We are using the World Wide Web for absolutely everything now. We are using it for banking, social networking, blogging, shopping online, work and education. It is taking over our life and apparently the takeover of the web by business interests is also apparent credible when looking at public discourse.
The most obvious authors that are writing about the Social Web, tend to be lawyers, legal scholars at high end universities, business strategists, and corporate social media consultants. These are the articles that University Students and other people go to when they need legit information that will not be incorrect.
Scholz states, "the users/producers on the Social Web are the base to the super structure of virtual real estate owners." The users of Web 2.0 technology are all contributing to the big corporations who own networks and databases that we use in our everyday lives. We are the little stepping stones that assist on making Web 2.0 so successful and without the social web as an unmarketed project, we probably would not be where we are today.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Is Google Making Us Stupid?
Google. The website we all depend on for information. Whether it comes to essays, pictures, or even personal information. It is always there for us when we need it. It is an easy and fast way to gather the information that we need instead of spending hours in a library flipping through books of over 1500 pages of information that isnt required. It may be an easier way for us to find things but is it making us stupid and less intelligent?
The basic form of the internet developed in the year 1969 and Google wasn't created until the 1990s. So we had the internet for over 20 years without Google. What did people do on the internet back then? Did they blog? Did they post pictures on unknown websites? Who knows? All I know is, ever since Google was distributed on the internet so people all over the globe could access it, it has made us even lazier than we were years ago.
I'm going to be brutally honest. When I am doing an assignment and I want quick, updated info, I probably go straight to google to gather the information I need in a flash. It is a very quick and easy way to help you. And I personally think that Google is making us stupid. The library is not used half as much as it used to and we just get lazy to the point where we don't want to spend hours researching. When it comes to Google, it is just clicks away from finishing that 20 page essay you need for that media class. It really has taken control of our life. . As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
The worst part is, being on the internet is generally very distracting. We go on Google to research a topic, end up on facebook, decide to listen to music while doing your homework, and just end up completely losing focus. Some people have to fight to focus and finish their assignment. I wish I could say that we could get rid of this addiction of losing focus on the world wide web but is just isn't that easy.
When I was younger, I was not introduced to much technology. I was always outside riding my bike, playing hopscotch, going to the park with my family and just enjoying being a kid. I had a tv but it only had around 6 channels so I rarely watched tv. I started playing piano and then that became a big part of my life. Now that there is satellite tv, blackberry's and i-Phones, and the world wide web, it really seems like it has taken over me. It is like a drug I can not quit. I am 100% addicted to it. I am constantly on my blackberry and constantly on facebook. I have completely lost touch with the outside world. They already portray the outside world online so what's the point right?
Google has made people lazier and lazier over the years. We are so dependant on the information that Google provides, we don't take the time to actually learn anything. We end up copying and pasting information to finish that last sentence to tie together that last paragraph in the tough essay you procrastinated to finish.
We really do not learn as much as we used to and I wish I could say that technology is going to change and we will be smarter, but it is just getting worse and worse and Web 2.0 is going to develop into something huge. We never know what the future holds with all this technology that is developing. All I am hoping is that I don't get lazy to the point where I am sitting on my butt the entire day doing nothing. I want to be able to do something and enjoy life. Google has to get out of our lives. Otherwise, we will not learn anything and there is just really no point in learning anything new.
All I can say is good luck to the future generation and I hope that we can still live our lives without the media taking over and posessing us.
The basic form of the internet developed in the year 1969 and Google wasn't created until the 1990s. So we had the internet for over 20 years without Google. What did people do on the internet back then? Did they blog? Did they post pictures on unknown websites? Who knows? All I know is, ever since Google was distributed on the internet so people all over the globe could access it, it has made us even lazier than we were years ago.
I'm going to be brutally honest. When I am doing an assignment and I want quick, updated info, I probably go straight to google to gather the information I need in a flash. It is a very quick and easy way to help you. And I personally think that Google is making us stupid. The library is not used half as much as it used to and we just get lazy to the point where we don't want to spend hours researching. When it comes to Google, it is just clicks away from finishing that 20 page essay you need for that media class. It really has taken control of our life. . As the media theorist Marshall McLuhan pointed out in the 1960s, media are not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought, but they also shape the process of thought. And what the Net seems to be doing is chipping away my capacity for concentration and contemplation.
The worst part is, being on the internet is generally very distracting. We go on Google to research a topic, end up on facebook, decide to listen to music while doing your homework, and just end up completely losing focus. Some people have to fight to focus and finish their assignment. I wish I could say that we could get rid of this addiction of losing focus on the world wide web but is just isn't that easy.
When I was younger, I was not introduced to much technology. I was always outside riding my bike, playing hopscotch, going to the park with my family and just enjoying being a kid. I had a tv but it only had around 6 channels so I rarely watched tv. I started playing piano and then that became a big part of my life. Now that there is satellite tv, blackberry's and i-Phones, and the world wide web, it really seems like it has taken over me. It is like a drug I can not quit. I am 100% addicted to it. I am constantly on my blackberry and constantly on facebook. I have completely lost touch with the outside world. They already portray the outside world online so what's the point right?
Google has made people lazier and lazier over the years. We are so dependant on the information that Google provides, we don't take the time to actually learn anything. We end up copying and pasting information to finish that last sentence to tie together that last paragraph in the tough essay you procrastinated to finish.
We really do not learn as much as we used to and I wish I could say that technology is going to change and we will be smarter, but it is just getting worse and worse and Web 2.0 is going to develop into something huge. We never know what the future holds with all this technology that is developing. All I am hoping is that I don't get lazy to the point where I am sitting on my butt the entire day doing nothing. I want to be able to do something and enjoy life. Google has to get out of our lives. Otherwise, we will not learn anything and there is just really no point in learning anything new.
All I can say is good luck to the future generation and I hope that we can still live our lives without the media taking over and posessing us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)