Info Tech & Social Life

Implants as a Threat for Business

2007-05-04T08:33:00.000-06:00

After we started reading the Chorost book, I didn't get a chance to share with everyone that I worked for a company that makes medical devices to help treat epilepsy and depression. Although I worked in the Information Technology department, I learned about the device mostly from the websites that I maintained for the company. Certain company meetings gave us an opportunity to meet and hear from the patients themselves who have been implanted by our device. And it is amazing to see how happy they are. They talk about how they couldn't live their lives because the medication didn't work anymore or never did at all. Sometimes it really makes you wonder if the doctors out there really care for the patients or if it's more for that little bonus they get for prescribing the medicine. The device that we provide is meant for patients who have tried three or more medications and have not been successful. I don't really think that the pharmaceuticals companies should feel threatened by this method of treatment, but they do. And it's really sad that the patients have to suffer because of it.

Complex Networked Architectures

2007-05-04T05:17:00.000-06:00

What about the people who don’t like software, hardware or technology in general? For sure they aren’t one of the user profiles in the accessibility and usability discussion. But they will be indirectly affected no doubt. I guess they just get weeded out? survival of the fittest ...

Taking up from Jared's post on Simple Complexity...A complex networked architecture designed to save time will not cover all aspects of Everyware. Think about Modernity and industrialization. All the sudden we had the power in these nations to create mass suburban housing developments; build huge urban institutions from reinforced concrete, steel and bricks; and ultimately what happened? At least in urban environments, the structures and architectures we built are largely uninhabitable; often doing more harm than good. Now zoning laws transform habitable areas into uninhabitable areas, this is why I go downtown for my volunteer work. Surrounded by buildings which work great during the daytime, but are completely vacant at night; leaving behind those who panhandle for change in the daytime. And rightly so, we do need change, they do need change, and they go to the source of their oppression and ask for it; downtown. Theirs’ is a direct tax, operating outside the law, purely by the sympathy of human nature; while the corporate method is indirect and operates by the laws of oppression and taxation.

I see downtown as the equivalent to the harbors of Boston in the 18th. The taxes stem from those buildings/harbors. They lobby in congress, get some zoning laws and property taxes changed so they can indirectly boot the people living in the places they need to build on; for those areas are prospected for their ease of access, low cost, and time saving location.

And we're on route right now to do the same thing modernity did with its industry and factories. Its good that we have people like Greenfield calling attention to these contemporary issues, getting the word out and asking us to discuss, but the focus on convenience and time-saving, at the moment may sound wonderful, considering how valuable time is to us, but time is very much money, and not everyone has equal access to that, but everyone does have equal access to time, so lets not screw this up like much of Ford-ism did for Modernity. That complex networked architecture is no different from the one we're building today; luckily, for now at least we still have the opportunity to influence that outcome…

some European nations are doing some really cool stuff with sustainable, organic, & interactive architectures, I think these guys are moving in the right direction; how bout yall? do you think this is a very likely route our current economy would take-up?

Random Ramblings ~ Rebuilt

2007-05-03T17:10:00.000-06:00

Chorost’s inspirational account in Rebuilt was indeed a great read. It seems like every time you read parts of this book, there’s something new to reflect upon.

Every Chapter title is a memoir in itself:

1. Broken
2. Surgery
3. Between two worlds
4. Activation
5. Forget about reality
6. The Computer Programs me
7. Upgrading
8. The Logic I loved and Hated
9. A Kinship with the machines
10. A Kinship with the Humans
11. The Technologies of Human Potential
12. Mike 2.0

By glancing through the titles, one can recap the entire experience. I could not have hoped for a better ending than Chapters 11 and 12. Mike 2.0 was truly heartfilling. My views on Cyborgs and Biotechnology have changed after reading this book. I have always been skeptical of the interference of advanced technology with the human body, on the premise that the human body was not made to function like this. That when artificial things in the body go wrong, they can really go wrong. But, after an introspective account such as Rebuilt, one can really experience within close quarters, the difference it makes when a man is able to go against the forces of nature, battling a disease that he was born with (Rubella) and overcoming the problem that impaired him from birth. For no apparent fault of his own. But once you marry technology (cochlear implant) and the human body with harmony and care, great things can happen!

I maintain my cautious views on the matter, but can now say with confidence that if this interference (technology and the body) can continue to change lives, and inspire others with similar problems..show them the light, and the courage to pursue this light…then it is definitely a boon. And no critic can take this away from them. My views on the matter have gone through a revelation, but one that I can confidently say, has made me see, experience and feel, the other side.

Biotechnology

2007-05-01T16:18:00.000-06:00

After reading this book, I am extremely fascinated with biotechnology and the means that it takes to replace human organs with plastics, metals and circuits. The human organs are extremely intricate in design and seem almost impossible to design from scratch. Even the artificial heart can only be used for a maximum of a few years before the patient needs a real heart. The artificial eye transplant does not give even close to the natural eyesight. What impressed me the most was how fairly significant the cochlear implant emulates natural hearing. Although I am assuming some depth in hearing has to be lost and can sound scratchy at times. The music plug in play seemed to be very progressive. Its hard still to this day use technology to replace vital organs such as the kidneys, heart, and etc. A dialysis machine can keep a patient on a machine for so long before the patient would require a real kidney donor. Replacing the eyesight is another tough challenge, current technology allows for extremely pixilated/grainy pictures of your surroundings. Just think if it’s really possible to replace the human brain with plastics and circuits. To me biotechnology is so important but not looked at the correct way. We don’t need wires, and plastics in our bodies, we need to cultivate actual organs from other cells such as stem cells in order for technology in biological sciences prosper.

Rebuilt Second Life

2007-04-30T14:08:00.000-06:00

I read the last part of Rebuilt all at the same time, so I admit I can't exactly differentiate the second part of the reading from the first. So instead, I'm going to comment on parts that I thought taught me something or that stuck in my mind. In the book it talks about deaf people not being exactly "deaf". That the ear makes up sounds that aren't there that the person hears, maybe due to the absence of sound. This i never knew and am extremely interested in the fact that it does happen.

I mean if I had one line from a poem was repeating in my head over and over again for more than 30 minutes(like it did with the author of the book), I most likely would go crazy. Yet, I guess the body adjusts and most just learn to tune it out, like we do a clicking clock, only hearing it when we really pay attention or when it becomes all of a sudden quiet.

On Wednesday, we also tried logging on to Second Life and playing it. though it took forever to log on, and when it did there were major glitches in the system. It was good to see how social systems are constantly being upgraded, changed and made better, like everything that we deal with in life now. Even when there was a major glitch in the system and i couldn't modify my character's appearance, nor see my character, I was helped by another newbie who had the same problem. We talked to each other until i was unexpectedly logged off the system, and amazingly only took 3 minutes to log back on again. And just like technology today, sometimes you just need to restart the system to make it start working again, as we could see since this is Windows solution to almost all problems imaginable (otherwise known as The Blue Screen of Doom/Death).

Second Life

Rebuilt

2007-04-30T13:09:00.000-06:00

What a lovely book. I liked it just as much the second time around as I did the first. He takes a subject that not many people understand unless they are directly involved with the implant, and makes it easy to understand and so personal- he writes as he would speak, directly to the reader from his heart. I felt like I could really relate to his struggles, and his problems in life. I also enjoyed hearing about the behind the scenes part of the implant industry. It is the part that never gets mentioned. Nobody ever hears about the testing, and the people that built the implants by hand, and the people who wrote the software. Nobody knows about the trial and error in reproducing sound, in looking for newer and better ways to do the same thing. Nobody knows about the mistakes, like the processors that leaked, or the processor that didn’t work right, or the positioner, which gave some users meningitis. All these things fade into the background of the novelty of the invention itself: a device implanted into the brain that functionally reproduces the ability to hear for people that cannot. I just think that even with all of its problems, it is so amazing how far this technology has come, and how far it will eventually go.

Brain Interpretation

2007-04-30T12:43:00.000-06:00

I find it amazing in how far technology has moved along, and how quickly. From the reading of the past, in the class, we started off with ones and zeros and the telegraph. Now it just blows my mind trying to comprehend how these doctors and medical technological technicians have made devices to interpret hearing with the brain. I mean it takes very very serious knowledge to be able to create a device to give a deaf man his hearing back. I cant begin to understand the complications it would take to create such a device. I mean this is a really life changing invention. Sure the interenet and everything else has made life easier but, when you think about how a deaf person becomes totally depressed and feels so lonely with no hearing, it really brings this invention a level up on others. Its not only helping make life easier, but also tolerable and its bringing happiness into many peoples lives who thought it was impossible to get hearing back.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/860000/images/_864815_cochlear_implant_inf300.gif

It blows my mind that this is acctually a real thing. Now a days we also have the lasik eye surgery to where they make someone who has bad eyes sight, much renewed. My parents and grand parents have had it.

http://www.eyeclinicpc.com/lasik/lasik%20steps1.jpg

Now someone with bad eye sight and bad hearing can be renewed. This is such an amazing feat in the medical technological field. What will they come up with next? What kind of medical technologies do you think will be here in the near future? Do you think that the prices for these operations will get cheaper?

From the book rebuilt, all in all, I learned that we need to be appreciative for our blessings and just everyday things we take for granted. We should love every day and realize we are lucky because we can hear, see, think, and learn so easily in such a great enviroment!

Simply Complex

2007-04-30T11:26:00.000-06:00

Ubiquitous systems must not introduce new complications into ordinary operations like the exaggerated door fee example. If ubiquitous systems help save time they should be used. Otherwise, I would agree that there is no need to place them in a situation that would take less time and energy without it. I also understand the need for the system to be at the choice of the user and not at the choice of the system. The system is in place to help us in our daily lives not the other way around so it should be greater than or equal to the efficiency of present tasks. We should not have to spend needless time using the system if it is not doing us a service. I recently read the "the laws of simplicity" by John Maeda and it discusses as greenfield has, the complexity of and within simplicity. Maeda discusses how devices such as the IPOD have succeeded in appeal because they follow the law of complexity within simplicity. Meaning, the device is simply a wheel that can function through a complex system of tasks to acheive the system goal. The look is simple the technology is innovative and simply, complex. This can definitely relate to the ubiquitous system. The system must be extremely efficient and user friendly in its simplicity, but in order to achieve this there will need to be an extensive organization of complex networked architecture for the system to function as it has been imagined, to serve the people.

2007-04-30T10:50:00.000-06:00

Being able to turn Everyware off is a very real challenge that is going to be hard to figure out. At one point the ubiquitous systems will be so integrated, that human error could cause grave trouble. The most real example that I can cite of this is automated highways, similar to Minority report. The cars are communicating with each other, not the drivers, so what a driver may choose to do while controlling his car may be very different for what the other cars around him thought was going to happen. This is just one example of how turning off the ubiquitous system could cause grave danger to everyone else that is continuing to use it. Another more recent/funny example is the new Visa commercials where everyone is paying with a check card, and the cafe is operating at near Dr. Seuss level. Next, one person comes up with cash and throws the entire thing out of whack. While this is not an example of ubiquitous systems having too much information...ect, it is an example of the stresses that people will put on efficency the more ingrained this quick technology becomes. It is like at the grocery store when someone writes a check. No one talks bad to the person, but everyone wishes they would get with the times.

High Complexity in the Service of Simplicity

2007-04-30T10:12:00.000-06:00

I love the idea of all things controllable by one interface. But Greenfield's description of the High Complexity in the Service of Simplicity touches on a topic that I've thought of many time in the advent of technology. We obviously want technology to make our lives easier. I'd love to sift off mundane tasks to my R2 unit and focus on pressing matters. But the automated devices that make life simple are complex themselves.

Take my R2 unit for example (no i don't really have one though it'd be freaking awesome). Artificial Intelligence is built upon automations of automations. Programming of the most complexity. Time and research has been spent on this field for ages with significant, yet limited, results. But the capabilities of these robots are amazing. Just passing by the Robotics Lab in Taylor Hall, we can see little puppies playing soccer. Not cloning or scientific experiments, just soccer. The students at this university have achieved a great feat though. If these puppies can play soccer, then tackling dirt and trash in the house will definitely be an option in the near future. Yet these programmers have coded their butts off just to reach that milestone. High complexity that no one could understand, few have and put it inside mechanical dogs. It's purpose...to play soccer, next: sweep and mop floors. Technology will do everything for us to make our lives simpler, but we must simply make technology able to do everything.

the on/off switch

2007-04-29T22:18:00.000-06:00

"Thesis 76: Everyware must be conservative of time. Thesis 77: Everyware must be deniable".

I've flip-flopped back and forth all semester long, one day condemning everyware, the next praising it. Finally I realize my capricious fence jumping was symptomatic of my need to be able to turn everyware off. For me control must ultimately lie in my hands, and as innovative and slick evryware seems it can one day be I was still uncomfortable with the loss of human control. I never thought about being able to turn it off. I always saw the possibilities of everyware as a double edged and therefore a little scary--- HAL 9000 scary, 1984 scary. Now that I realize the painfully simple solution of the on/off switch, well hell I'm not so apprehensive. The day my front door threatens to sue me is the day I get evicted from my apartment so being able to turn aspects of everyware off is definitely reassuring. Now that I'm writing this I'm beginning to think that one of the most important things which will have to be available in everywarfe is the off button. As the systems we create continue to expand in influence and complexity we lose a bit of our individuality. By individuality I mean our ability to shape our surrounding through purposive action. Everyware streamlines our lives but we lose the choice of purposive action. The loss might be nominal, even trivial its still a loss of control. So three cheers for the off button, it rocks and thank goodness for it! Everyware, in all its efficient glory must remain dependpent on us, not the other way around. Systems fail, stuff breaks and people make mistakes and in my experience, turning stuff off is a good way to fix it (sometimes hitting it with a shoe works...sometimes). So as we near the end of the semester I can say I've learned a lot about IT&S, I bore my buds at happy hour recounting the telegraph etc, but I'm rally glad to learn about he off button. I'm a simple guy, technologically provincial, I get by ok but also get lost a lot. So once again the whole off button thing, hell yeah it rocks.

More surprises?!?

2007-04-24T20:51:00.000-06:00

I can truthfully say, that I never even considered that this was possible. When volunteering at The Arch, I was trying to explain it to one of the men that are helped there, and couldn’t even form the correct words to explain what this man is going through. He wrote a whole book about it, and yet I can’t sum up what it was and how it works? That’s when I fully realized how deeply engrained my disbelief was, how fast I processed the information and how quickly it drained out the other ear while I was reading it. It’s as if we are brought up to expect that anything is possible, yet we are psychologically inclined to avoid what seems new, foreign and life changing.
When reading Rebuilt I automatically realized the potential that it had for “listening” to music. Imagine where we are all wirelessly connected to our music and phone players, through our head. I know in the book his had a wire, but I think he talked about an easier one to wear while he tumbled under the covers. I’m not sure if this had a wire or not, but with all the Bluetooth and wireless technology around, I’m sure its not too far in the future if it is not already here. But just imagine that. Wouldn’t it be awesome? I’ve mentioned in class before about the soundless sound system that uses high and low pitches to create music and sound that can be heard by one or many people. Yet that doesn’t come close to what this could do for the music industry. The way he talks about how he hears the music sounds like its not too distorted from normal…but then again, it may just be the quality that turns people away.
Another question that entered my mind while reading. Would it be possible to someone connect these as a communication device? Earlier on I talked about a phone, yet now I’m meaning more, is someone able to someone get into that system and make him hear what they want to? It’s a scary thought, and I hope that it wouldn’t be possible. I mean, if its just a hard drive in which you could encode programs, whose to say you can’t write a program for receiving someone else’s signal. Either way, I love the guy’s humor, reading in public is hard to do with this book only because my random snorts of laughter are pretty embarrassing in a quiet setting.

Digital Ears

2007-04-23T14:28:00.001-06:00

Whenever I get a new cell phone, Ipod, or any piece of technology, it takes a bit to learn to navigate the menu systems and fine tune all the settings. Now imagine if this technology was instead one’s self AND it was sending messages to ones brain to stimulate sound waves. This would be the motherload of technology curves.

Micheal must have been so confused learning to cope with his new found hearing. From calibrating the maximum settings to manually adjusting volume on his wrist, I am sure it was a strange experience. If you forget to change your ring tone volume on your cell its really no big deal, you can call people back, but if you forget to turn on your hearing… well you are def.

“The toilet flushing: an explosion” (54)

Not only do you have to go through the hard ache of adjusting volumes, it seems like your brain has to become familiar with this electronic hearing. I guess in a lot of ways it makes sense, the technology is not 100% the same as hearing, I am sure that is an incredible feat. So Micheal also has to fine tune his own mind to the new workings of his digital ears.

Cochlear Implant

2007-04-23T13:47:00.000-06:00

I can understand the anxiety and frustration Michael felt adapting to his cochlear implant. The whole reality of a tiny microchip replacing my hearing with its own interpretations of audio signals through 1s and 0s can be a bit unsettling. Not only that but a microchip designed by programmers who have their own ideas of what hearing is to sound like can lead to doubts. None the less I would have gone through with the implant just as he did. To live in a world without being able to hear would be unimaginable. Not to be able to talk to your family and friends, you would really be living in a world not many other live in or understand. Then there is the whole process of getting accustomed to your new implant which reminds me of an assignment I did in another class where we had to navigate a computer only using the keyboard. I know this is not even near the same level as trying to reclaim your hearing but it sure frustrated the heck out of me and I couldn’t imagine how Michael who has no other choice might have felt. To add to any more problems, there is that optional upgrade which is so tempting because of that longing to hear as normal as possible, which if one does decide to upgrade leads to the whole process of getting accustomed to the new sounds once again right when your comfortable where your at.

SAS v. CIS

2007-04-23T10:28:00.000-06:00

While comparing the two different settings of the cochlear implant, the Author is trying to decide between SAS and CIS hearing. He likens it to handing someone a guitar, and two theory books, and telling them to decide which theory to follow to learn how to play. This is a pretty shocking decision for me. As he said, it would be much better if they just gave you one and let you decide which to use. You could then adapt to the "best" possible software and be on your right track to hearing. The way he describes the sounds the two aids make is quite interesting, and from his description I have a hard time deciding which sounds more enjoyable. Listening to how they work, the SAS seems like it would be more realistic, as it is an analog signal where the entire cochlea is stimulated, as opposed to the CIS which is digital. The SAS seems like it would offer more in terms of sound, but then your body would have to interpret it.

The fact that our Author is a computer programmer makes this book way more interesting as well. He looks at it from the prospective of a computer programmer, and that makes the book come alive. Without his critical thinking do you think the book would have happened? I do not think he would have seen all of the angles of the surgery for himself if his career path had been different.

Do no harm

2007-04-23T10:16:00.000-06:00

See I just see a problem with this concept. All these people making all the new technologies will be thinking money. All they think and everyone thinks in the world is money. If companies had a new product that might cause a little bit of harm to the people but make them loads and loads of money, guess what, we are all going to get a little harm. When people invent new things I dont think they really do much to cause harm. I see it as the consumers misuse the products alot of the time and in essence can really cause some harm. I think back and remember about a scientist who created some kind of bomb and it ended up causing a whole lot of trouble. The telegraph was not made to harm but as we can see people still did things on it that were not right to other people. Im sure there was lots of illegal exchanges going on. In all this I wouldnt really say its the inventors fault, its more of the consumer misuse. Lets just hope these greedy companies dont put something out on accident that can easily be abused to cause harm the average man.

Digitalized and Dehumanized.

2007-04-23T08:41:00.001-06:00

I find the whole idea of having a processor inside of me and being able to plug in media devices such as cell phones and cd players as pretty amazing, and a part of the inevitable future. What are they trying to do with every new computer system? Make it smarter, make it faster, have more memory...basically make it human without human errors.

It kinda made me think of "The Terminator 2: Judgment Day". In this one ol' Arny comes back as the good guy...and is basically the perfect human. There is a point in the movie where...Sarah Connor...don't know her real name, points it out. The terminator would never get mad and hit him, never get drunk and hit her, never sleep all day and want to watch football all night...a machine will do what it is told and programmed to do without human error.

So I am not surprised that the angle of incorporating machine like benefits into a human is being looked at. It's just a matter of how far. Will it go so far that instead of our cars communicating with each other, we are telling the car behind us we are gonna change lanes via a blue-tooth chip in our head and the other drivers head? Will we one day not even have to go anywhere to have our life? Like the man who lived through the lamdamoo...will the world one day become a digital life? Instead of going to work, I'll just communicate through my computer and do the work there. It all sounds pretty far fetched to me, but in 1000 years, where will life be? If there are people living there life through digital worlds now...what about then.

Not quite there yet...maybe never?

2007-04-23T07:28:00.000-06:00

Throughout the book Everyware we've been introduced to many interesting theses regarding the possibility of its further integratrion into our daily life experiences. Thus far, I'm confident enough to speculate we know this generally: high technology will continue to matter, but how much ,is yet, if ever to be determined.

Thesis 70 proposed that to"act in good faith, it's simply not specific enough to constitute practically useful guidance" (p. 227). Generally, relying on individuals to act in good faith is not a particulary effective or effiecient. Simple enough to understand but societies are diverese and it will be difficult to syncronize a general inter-societal guidance program (not mention intra-societal programs) and there will be a definite need to legislate some form of control. Given the nature of legislation this will require an increase in bureaucracy to implement the guiding legislation. I think such a guidance program would be inherently better than relying on individuals to act in good faith but would still be naturally prone to ineffiency and stagnation. So what possible solution can we propose to better protect any individual affected by everyware? Is there an absolute definitive best answer, no probably not.

Thesis 71 and the "smart" problem. I'm fairly confident we'll be hard pressed to develop tehcnology that does "smart" well. The human ability to react to interactions with other human beings is a very organic thing. Its a very human thing to react, and tools don't do "human" well. I don't think its possible for tools, and therefore everyware to do "human". I see Pinochio never becoming a real boy, but being a wodden puppet with no strings is still pretty cool.

Automated? No thanks.

2007-04-22T22:17:00.000-06:00

I agree with Greenfield’s statement that we have yet to create anything that is “smart.” We have been able to simulate this smartness based on data collected to guess what we may be interested in. But how accurate is this method? I do not ever recall ordering something from Amazon, and looked at the “You might be interested in these products…” section and actually bought what they suggested. Although, I would have to say that it was a good attempt in trying to figure me out.

It is true that the devices, such as the iPod, are not “smart” in updating its own firmware, but after working for so many years with the computer, I am not so sure I would even want my iPod or even any other device I may own to do that. I can’t be sure that the upgrade would be able to work as well as what I currently have setup. It’s a nightmare to try to remove an upgrade from something in hopes to restore it back to a good, stable working state.

I still believe that computers are here to enhance our lives, not take over it. You need to make sure that there is human interaction in between otherwise, it could be totally unpredictable. Who knows what may be being automatically installed into your machine or device until it is too late.

Half Human or Half Cyborg?

2007-04-22T21:29:00.000-06:00

Reading about Chorost's life of a cyborg intrigued me so much i had to do further research on Cochlear implants and other bionic advancements. I remember along time ago implants were becoming available for the blind to see in grainy black and white images by implanting devices in their heads hooks up to a chip. This was similar to Chorost's auditory replacement. Stevie Wonder was considering getting this surgery done however backed out last second after he thought about how having vision would dramatically alter his life maybe even negatively. There is actually a large debate among the deaf community about weather this technology should be available because of the unique gifts that the deaf posses will be lost as they progress into becoming more “normal”. This was one of the reasons Stevie did not go through with the procedure.

What I was impressed by the most in Chorost’s story was his ability to plug in devices to his processor and listen to audio files and other audio streams. Sound is sensed by our own ears as just fluctuations of waves in frequencies we can pick up. The cochlear implant works in the same way by picking up these distinct waves and sending them to the brain to translate. The significance of how we are embedding technology in our selves is to show the progression of how we are turning complex human processing into digital form. Eventually someday it would be interesting to see processors capable of competing with the human brain in developing adapting patterns to emotions and behaviors.

2007-04-20T22:15:00.000-06:00

I read Rebuilt before the semester started, but I am reading it again to keep the events fresh in mind, and I have to say, I'm enjoying it as much this time as I did the first time I read it. It is so interesting to learn Mike's thoughts and feelings as he goes through this process, and about the process itself. I really liked reading about how he hears the sound in his head. It sounds so strange to me. I also liked how all the gadgetry worked, such as plugging the cd player into his processor so that it goes directly into his head. He says "I'm hearing music that never actually exists as sound". I think that's absolutely awesome!! What if we could develop something like that for hearing people, so that no one could bother others with their loud music again? No one would ever know what you were listening to. I wonder whether or not he could still hear things around him. It would be really neat if he could have music playing in his head and still hear the people around him.
Another example of the gadgets was the cell phone he plugged directly into his processor. It would be like hearing people talking in your head. I bet that would feel really strange the first time. I also had no idea that there were cell phones designed to work with those implants. I think its really cool and obviously very useful for the people that have the implant.

Cyber Rape & Stolen Identity

2007-04-18T13:26:00.001-06:00

The Mr. Bingle incident seems similar to getting your identity stolen, which he did in terms of the MOO. Stolen identity and Mr.Bingle both are a pain to deal with, because they claim to be you and they have enough documentation to prove it (which in most cases is not a lot). They reap the benefits of being you by taking out credit cards and buying things, like Mr.Bingle using people to launch attacks on each other. Then finally, once you have been ravaged you have the task of putting the pieces back together, and convincing others that it was not really you at all who committed the acts.

Like in our world, I am sure it’s hard to tell and deal with identity in a MOO. So much time and emotion is invested the fact that someone could easily destroy it is a scary idea. Perhaps all social system struggles with identity issues, and how one should properly identify themselves using cards and logins. Because it seems like the story of “Cyber Rape” shares many similar ideas as real life identity theft.

I raped World of Warcraft

2007-04-17T00:07:00.000-06:00

Jumping into the world MUD, it was a unique experience when I was in the LambdaMoo house. When playing in this virtual reality, I began to think how liable we are for our actions inside this world. Just because we are behind a computer screen does that really make it ok to be someone you are not? The virtual world reminded me of the game called the SIMS where you can create people and towns. You are in total control of everything that’s happening including traffic flow, natural disasters, and even love making. The game allows you to play God and be in charge of every occurrence. In Julian Dibbell’s article we examine cyberspace rape and analyze how responsible someone should be in cyberspace. This reminded me of how I usually pretend to be someone else when I am online. I usually pretend I am some gangster type person and try to have a lot of fun. When communicating in the virtual world like this, no one should take words seriously. Unless the content comes from accredited agencies such as cnn.com, a lot of things on the internet are actually just scams and erroneous information. The only way we can merger reality with the virtual world is through trust and honesty.

Cyber Rape

2007-04-16T22:22:00.000-06:00

The Dibbell article posed some interesting questions. The main one being "where does the line between virtual and actual reality blur?" The victim could have very well been so offended that it was considered rape...or the victim could have just ignored the harassing statements and blocked them. But in the MOO world where text is held accounted for with so much regard, it was impossible to squash the attacks for what they were. Instead the victim's good name was sullied by the attacker and misrepresentation of the name with the voodoo doll was seen as an unforgivable act. The feelings must be based on a certain violation level by that account. We want a good name and rapport in real life as well as any virtual life we may partake in. If insert pain, hurt feelings and ill-intentions towards any of our other identities, then we feel violated.

Then, I start to wonder what programming measures are taken to prevent such incidents. Eliminating all bad things in a simulated environment isn't impossible but takes a lot of coding. But doesn't simulating an environment force you to mimic everything...even bad things. So the real question is posed on which direction the developers will take in creating these constructs. In a virtual world where crimes like rape are A) Possible or B) Not Possible make for two completely different experiences.

Cyberspace Rape

2007-04-16T14:26:00.000-06:00

Thinking about it, I find Cyberspace Rape as curiously intriguing as Dibbell did. Just to figure out its psychological effects on a person so immersed into this social interaction that it would move them to tears and feelings of violation. I found this reading to be a little fantastical and one-sided at times, but interesting in its account of what most people do not even take a second glance at.
When I first started reading it I held a bit of disbelief and wonder at 1) that we were reading it and 2) that people were so affected by this persons behavior. I guess I would consider myself to be a techno libertarian, as Dibbell calls it, I believe that there are assholes everywhere and you just have to deal or do something about them. Most likely this person would never have done anything like this in person, so why was talk even considered about messing with his Real Life or RL as they like to call it.

Virtual Reality

2007-04-16T13:43:00.000-06:00

I don’t understand why people like Mr. Bungle have to disrupt gaming and virtual environments such as these. I think the reaction of the fellow gamers was typical and probably long over due. There are always going to be people like Mr. Bungle and there isn’t really a way to get rid of them. Even if there is some kind of punishment or repercussions for these individuals, the damage is already done and the individual like Mr. Bungle can just reinvent himself to cause further mayhem or make more victims. Although what he did was very serious I just can’t help but be amused in the way he was handled. I mean fist they had a virtual debate inside the MUD where he plopped in and was confronted. His sentence was to be “toaded” which had to be handled by wizards. I remember there was RPG game on a game console where a member of some kind of clan died in RL. The clan held a ceremony for him where there was this big line where they paid their respects at a river. Well there was this rival clan who crashed the ceremony and killed all the others paying there respect. It caused a whole bunch of fuss. But I can’t help but think it was bound to happen and I found it interesting.

RL Just another WIndow

2007-04-16T13:02:00.000-06:00

I really enjoyed Turkle's reading over MUDs and computer consciousness. She weaved very entertaining interviews in with her analysis of the online communities and the virtual identities they contain. I have not been involved in many virtual online spaces other than trying second life or Lambdamoo in class. They do not strike my interest. I guess I do not have a need at this time to express myself through an online identity, like the guy who uses MUDs to have online sexual affairs or the women who takes on a man's role to become apart of the dialogue between men. But maybe I'll find an interest in another aspect of having a online identity as time goes on.

I loved how Turkle takes input from children for her research. The quotes she gets from those kids are extremely clear and poignant. These kids she speaks to see life within "the lifeless," computers, robots and describe our similarities and differences within such inanimate objects like I had not critically thought about before this reading. The pinochio quote was fantastic. Talking about how Pinnochio was always alive as a doll and as a boy. This kid used the story to illuminate the soul or life within inanimate objects specifically computers in this discussion. The consciousness of computers and robotics can be understood through this quote. Is consciousness a human/animal monopoly? I think not and although we are quite a ways from conscious building on the level of human understanding we are well on our way to understanding the mobility of life through technology.

MOOUD VS. MMORPG

2007-04-16T11:23:00.000-06:00

First I would just like to say that I was a nerd for a good 2 years of my life. By nerd I mean played online computer games at least 8 hours a day. Yes that was alot and yes I wouldnt have changed it for the world. When I was on the MOO during class I thought it was pretty weak in comparison. Not to be crude but theres just no way that a text adventure could ever beat a high intense graphic adventure. Then I started thinking about how much an MMORPG costs. And for those of you who dont know its Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. It costs 50 for the game. Then probably like 10 every month that you play. Something along those lines. The MOO is free and you can basically go exploring in text based rooms and chat with people in text. Maybe its just me but if I had the chance to choose which to do I would go with the MMORPG. I mean the lands that you go and do adventures on are graphically beautiful. The people you see are all detailed by themselves so you have no 2 same charecters. Then I think how the MMORPG was like another life and it took up way too much of my real life. So I will just stick with the MOO when I want an online adventure haha.

Bring On The Bar-Codes!

2007-04-16T10:41:00.000-06:00

Every time I read another thesis from Everyware I always get that “why didn’t I think of that” feeling. I can already see how beneficial a ubiquitous future can be for larger purposes that Greenfield mentioned earlier in the book like having your home sense where you are and being able to service you through spoken command, but I tend to forget how useful this technology can be for smaller things.

I never looked at bar codes as a way to link information together other than the price of a product which gets pulled from some database that links to a specific code. Half a year ago I was a little amazed when I saw that they sell a portable bar code scanner which you can use to scan all of your house hold items so that you can keep records of your belongings, or use it to scan items and look them up on your computer. But its really amazing when you don’t need to carry around a bar code scanner or even a computer anymore because you can just take a picture of these 2D bar codes with your camera phone and it will immediately bring up more information of the product.

I thought this was a little funny about the avocado with a 2D bar-coding, “An avocado, on its own, is just a piece of fleshy green fruit—but an avocado whose skin has been laser-etched with a machine-readable 2D code can tell you how and under what circumstances it was grown, when it was picked, how it was shipped, who sold it to you, and when it’ll need to be used by (or thrown out).” All of this information about a single avocado just from one 2D bar code….Three Cheers For Sweet Ubiquitous Technology!

A Rape in Cyberspace

2007-04-16T08:53:00.000-06:00

I kind wish we would have read this before our baptism by fire into LambdaMoo. I think it would have helped me develop a more concrete context from which to understand the whole MOO phenomena. Now after rading the article, I think I can appreciate it a little more. People really get into this stuff---it means something to them. Though in reality the occurrences of the MOO may be nothing more than the scroll of individual fantasy across a monitor, the interactions of of those individual fantasies seem to have very real consequences. In the case of this article, a few people felt so abused by Mr. Bungle it resulted in his eventual VR banishment. Death by toading, as humorous as it sounds and seems to be to me, is apparently its serious business. Mr. Bungle might have been a fantasy, but "he" was some one's fantasy; the object of some one's creative will. The product of some one's mind Mr. Bungle was effectively squashed, erased, expelled from existence...dead. Big deal right, he just reincarnated himself into a new character and re-assumed his place in VR of LambdaMOO. So, for me at least, the whole point of this and any other analogous example, is that symbolism means something. Take the assault and following execution to be prime examples of this consequentialism. It matters because symbolism, as its discussed here, exists in the realm between VR and RL. This gray area intrudes upon both the VR and RL linking them and seperating them in the same instance ("conflation of speech and act in a computer mediated world").

All in all, the melodrama of Mr. Bungles leads me to believe that as revolting symbolic speech can be, we can't forget its ephemeral quality. On the same note, we also must be attentive of how close VR and RL get and insure that gray area remains an uneasy barrier between the two worlds. When VR and RL collide individuals often find themselves in big trouble.

Virtual Rape...

2007-04-16T08:35:00.000-06:00

I found this article very interesting...and almost like a story. When I found out they actually killed Mr. Bungle I caught myself feeling like a character just died in a book I was reading. I understand the complexity of feeling within a virtual world for people who encapsulate themselves daily in something like MOO, but seriously? That's like me, being someone who plays Counter Strike, asking for the account of a fellow player being deleted because on his mic he screamed and cursed at me.

It's almost like the characters in MOO forget it is a virtual world, and they place their real life emotions inside of it. Personally, if I had been a "victim", of course I would have been confused as I did not emote such an action, and of course I would be frustrated or angered, and maybe think this person shouldn't have an account. But as to take it so far as this event? Maybe I am more tolerant to such acts as a younger individual who has grown up around virtual realities. I used to play an MMORPG and I my character was me, my actions and opinions. But there were the characters who were "evil" they were criminals and murderers...they were outcasts not allowed in cities because they stole from people and killed them, and their names were written in red so people would know who they were. I didn't question that persons RL intentions or ask why he would dare do such a thing in a virtual life. It's just a character. Sometimes in Counter Strike I get bored and decide to kill everyone on my team...does that make me a murderer or a bad person or should I be toaded?

Maybe someone will get offended for my lack of compassion in this blog for the victims of Mr. Bungle, and maybe I am being heartless for my lack of sympathy for virtual humiliation. I guess I've just never felt so emotionally attached. I know I would feel embarrassed...but would do no more than justify my innocence and probably virtually threaten and argue my enemy as so many do online, which I find arguments over the internet hilarious. "I'll kick your ass". "No I'll kick your ass." "Oh Yeah?" So funny to me when people do that online. I think this article is a good example of how people can become obsessed with the internet. Drawing the line between what is real and what isn't is become less and less clear. Do we punish this person in RL because of his virtual data? I think it is ludicrous...but that's just me.

How Much Can You Handle?

2007-04-15T21:57:00.000-06:00

It was interesting to read the article by Julian Dibbell about the LambdaMOO situation with Mr. Bungel/Dr. Jest and how people reacted to this virtual reality. In this case, it was a bit of an extreme and a little disturbing to read, but opened my eyes to how people can engulf themselves into a scenario that may not be physically real. Because the occurrence happened online, it still affected the users mentally in such a way that they had to do something about it. I can’t even imagine if I would have been able to handle that situation very well, just because I don’t understand why a person really has to do anything so terrible in the first place.

But to take this reading and apply to it to something outside of the MOO, such as video games that takes place in a virtual world, there is a different expectation involved in response to the “actions” made in each session. Killing a person, you would think, would be equivalent to the rape involved in the MOO, but why doesn’t anyone from the game protest like they did in there? Somehow we can separate this in our minds, but does that mean we don’t see killing a person really that big of a deal?

I suppose it just shows you how sensitive we are to particular actions, whether it be in VR or RL. We just need to remember that just because we are hidden behind these anonymous identities on the computer every time we get online, doesn’t mean that there isn’t someone out there who will test the waters to see how they can “abuse” people for whatever the reason may be for them to do it.

Octopus

2007-04-13T13:07:00.000-06:00

When I first read the Everyware chapter about the Octopus system in Hong Kong, I thought they meant a system that had an RFID tag imbedded in someone’s arm, because they said something about a “jaunty wave of your wrist”, I think it was. It took me awhile to figure out they meant a card. I guess it looks like a credit card? To me it sounds like a credit card, with the same functions- able to pay at all different places like the store or pool. I guess we don’t have card readers by the pool or on the bus, though. Plus here we still have to run the card number, which takes time. This sounds more like a UT id, where you just slide (scan) it and go. I just don’t think it sounds that much different from what we already have. I like the idea of the tag in a cell phone-that is new and different. I think that would be a great thing to have here in the states-a tiny credit card in your cell phone that you just use like a paypass.

On a related note, the eres articles were interesting too. I have to admit, I never really thought much about online rape, but I suppose it could be a big deal if it happened to you. I do agree that it is a crime against the mind more so than the body, and I think if you let yourself get into the idea of the virtual world, then it becomes real to you…or real enough that it affects your mind. It makes me wonder how real it was to Mr. Bungle, the character who wrote the program that raped and violated the other characters. I wonder if it actually meant something to him or if he simply thought of it as a game.

lambdaMOO

2007-04-11T21:05:00.000-06:00

I read the article assigned in class regarding MOOs...still, I was completely lost the whole time in class today. Things went way too fast for me, I spent most of my time in the MOO scrolling up to read stuff. It was pretty frustrating.

Redemption: Being totally frustrated with the experience thus far I decided to just "explore". I started in the kitchen, wound up in the woods, walked around for a bit and found an old creepy barn. Curious I decided to check out the barn and went in to explore. Talk about creepy, I felt like I was in The Blaire Witch Project. I was walking around and made my way outside into the garden behind the barn. As soon as I was outside the door I just walked though eerily creaked shut. Creepy!

Freaked out I teleported to the pool. The pool was described as murky...hmmm....maybe I should jump in and take a swim? So I did and low and behold I find an underwater cave...interesting...and creepier still. The cave lead to another underwater pool, filled with more creepy stuff. For example: trolls suspiciously eyeing my every move. Oh look another cave and more trolls , and oh yeah a vampire bat DWTF!?! A vampire bat?

Then the class was over and it was time to go. I liked the MOO. Specifically I enjoyed my time exploring. It was like reading a comic book, a choose your own adventure comic book. All in all a very unique and interesting experience, one I'll have to try my hand at again.

I just wanted to make a second general post

2007-04-11T08:27:00.000-06:00

It seems that a lot of the posts this week are considering the lack of interest from our generation in this "everyware" technology...

I think that this is where it starts though. We all see this advancement in technology as unnecessary, as did generations before us about the technology we have everywhere today. Years ago people were fine with horses. Years ago people were fine with candles. They didn't dream of the need to connect instantaneously to anyone across the world, or to be able to send packages to China over night.

I think to achieve this ubiquitous "Everyware" our generation is curious about it will take time because it's not magically "poof" then it is here. We want that universal remote, or that intercom system, or this or that...and then in 20 years our kids will want this and that...and eventually it will lead to this "future" we see in movies. It's so weird to think about this technology just being everywhere because for us it is unnecessary. I don't care about a building that automatically adjusts to my preferences...but someday people will.

No one generation dreams of this sudden dramatic change we imagine is possible. It's about taking baby steps towards that future. Which is what leads to these advancements...we dream them up as crazy, then suddenly 30 years later...there they are.

Is Everyware even wanted by people?

2007-04-09T14:18:00.000-06:00

In class we always talk about ubiquitous computing as the foreseeable future, I think that is a pretty solid statement to support, but is the ‘Everyware’ in Greenfield’s book going to be that ubiquitous computing? I think not.
We have the processing power and the storage capabilities to deploy ubiquitous computing, yet it is still very far away from us. This does not make sense.. logically if we have the means to create this technology, it should be rolling off the shelves.

Looking to current next generation technology, such as high definition television & movies, gives a good example of how societies pick up new technologies. I know in my family many people still have CRT fat televisions, simply because they do not see the value in spending 3k on a new LCD or plasma TV. This amazing cost (to some) is just for a TV, ubiquitous computing would require EVERYTHING we had to be replaced eventually. I do not see many people being able to afford this future of technology, nor would they want to spend their money on special tile floors that will change the temperature, when they themselves have no issue walking to the thermostat.

Obviously some things will be implemented from this fictitious Everyware, such as super smart remotes that can control… everything (I hope) but vehicles, houses, offices, schools being completely entangled in a mess of computing seems like a distant hope.

Obstacles & non-obstacles

2007-04-09T13:20:00.000-06:00

After reading through everyware 58-60 I get a sense of the obstacles and non-obstacles being addressed by ubiquity supporters. The value of the system is analyzed and seen as somewhat cliche futuristic goals mixed with the unpredictable desires of society. It seems that society wants simplicity of ubiquitous functions, the complexity hidden within simplicity of the system allowing society to spend "less time fumbling with change." It seems that society is not demanding ubiquitous computing directly but rather through demand of new technology productions which integrate into the ubiquitous system.
It seems that the current value of the system is determining its time of implementation rather than any computing obstacle. It is fascinating to read how we are in a technological state of possibility where such ubiquitous world is clearly possible and economically feasible. The processing power is efficient and will continue to increase beyond the limits of Moore's law leaving no processing obstacle foreseeable. And for storage capacity, it seems to be heading down a similar path where no certain obstacle hinters on the system. To be able to capture an entire life of experience within a grain of sand is somewhat fathomable in today's technologically advancing pace. I do not feel technology will create any obstacle for society's implementation of ubiquitous computing. I agree with Greenfield that the only obstacle facing the ubiquitous system's integration is society's lack of acceptance and demand for such a system.

Story Board

2007-04-09T12:48:00.001-06:00

I just wanted to post on how much I enjoyed making the story board. I feel like it really brought out my creative side. I got to draw about 10 pictures and then kind of hypothesis about what was going to go on in the video. This video project hopefully will help everyone learn a little more about the wonderful time we live in. 5 Years ago we would not have been able to have the tools and resources to be able to edit and tape so easily and transfer with such high quality and ease. It is amazing to ponder upon our day in age. I like to practice gratitude in my everyday living. We must be thankful people to make us realize how blessed we are. So if you read this take a step back from the screen and think of things you have in your life and how you are thankful for certain things. It helps me maybe it will you!

Holiday Homework

2007-04-09T12:09:00.000-06:00

It's so easy to forget how weekends and family can make concentration and focus so difficult to try and muster up for things that need to get done, especially school work. Then not only is it a weekend, but Easter weekend...and not only is there school work to be done, but end of the semester review papers and storyboards. So, I just wanted this blogs subject to be about the problems that some may have gone through this past weekend, with organizing the group together or organizing different ideas together.

I have to say that i've never done a real video project and not only do i find this a new experience for me, but a really fun and creative way to express an idea or point. One of the things I've learned is that storyboarding is essential, like a roughdraft is to a good paper. And it seems the more you have your ideas together in a storyboard, the more organized and less stressed we're all going to be when we're filming and editing.

Another thing that I've learned is that dealing with others in a creative environment I at first thought was going to be a lot more difficult, yet it hasn't been too bad, and having more creative thoughts really enhances everything in the end. Last but not least, i've l earned powerpoint is a really good demonstrative tool when words do not get the idea across.

Ubiquitous? No thanks, just the basic package...

2007-04-09T12:02:00.000-06:00

I love how Greenfield tries to sell the idea of a ubiquitous system as something of an upgrade to what you can "already" get. We are far away enough from the ideal Jetsons ubiquitous systems to not have a choice. If Everyware is going to serve, it will do so regardless of what the population says or wants. Here he makes it sound like more of a burden than something that can "simply show us a parking space." I'll say that by 2020, something of the sort will be mainstream in society and we'll have never seen a chance to "buy the basic package".

Concerning processor speeds, multi-core processors have hit the market and blown what we thought was powerful out of the water. I remember surfing the net on a 533 Mhz Pentium III and thinking, "Wow, this is FAST!" That was 1999. This being less than ten years ago, it's easy to see that computer progression utilized technological advancements to increase overall production and decrease size. The multi-core processor has just been a manifestation of a processor of processors in the most recursive thing I've ever seen. Working at Best Buy last summer, I used such explanations as, "it's like opening up a second register at lunch hour." Throw in some key words like delegate and people think they understand what's going on when all they really need to know is that it's faster. I just can't wait until my cell phone boasts a "Tera-core" processor.

Circuits

2007-04-09T11:03:00.001-06:00

Thesis 58

In this chapter, Greenfield proposes that ones technological wants are not that easy to figure out. If you think about it, people want what they can’t have, therefore bringing the next generation into the future will not seem as demanding as once thought. Scores of people will complain about privacy and security issues as well.

Thesis 59

Greenfield states in this chapter how the required computational power is already available. Processors are fast enough and doubling every year while hard drives are shrinking physically/growing capacity wise. This got me thinking about the technology in a PS3, the system apparently has 9 different chips that work together to render the next generation graphics. Other companies actually use the PS3 for other uses such as medical breakthroughs. 60 PS3’s have been hooked up and manipulated to provide the most computational power available including supercomputers. The technique is being used to find cures for such diseases as Alzheimer’s and HIV.

Thesis 60

What I liked about this chapter was how he stated that a person’s life from a newborn to the age of 70 can be recorded within 20 terabytes. This includes recording all 5 senses and emotions. If you take this into consideration about the 24 month doubling period of storage capacity, all that information should fit into a grain of sand. This is real interesting as nano-technology will soon take off into un-before-seen advancement.

Too Much is Not Enough (Security)

2007-04-09T10:15:00.000-06:00

The usages of Everyware, while far reaching, are going to be more than your everyday person really wants from technology.
As shown in 59 and 60, the increase in technology according to Moore's Law is going to lead to technology that we think is still good today, being worth as much as a light switch in about ten years. The implications of this as stated are that we will be able to install processors and memory storage all over the house at what seems like a very reasonable rate. This is a wet dream for all of those scientists out there scheming and racking their brains trying to decide how to make Everyware applicable to the everyday person. What said scientist may not be thinking however, is that many people just do not care. As stated in thesis 58, what people want Everyware for is things like combining all the remotes into the house into one. A few other examples off of the top of my head might be an intercom system throughout the house that is integrated with the computer, or one switch that allows you to power down all the lights in your house with one push of a button. I, for one, am just fine to use a key to open my house door. I know that their is no way to electronically hack my lock, and if my key were stolen, I would know about it. This is a simple yet important mental comfort that locks by electronic recognition may not be able to provide.
After reading 57 it has really made me question how much of this new technology I really need/want.

Thesis 58

2007-04-09T08:16:00.000-06:00

I like that Greenfield brings this point into conversation. There are aspects of new technology I see a demand for. Video game and entertainment advancement, which Greenfield acknowledges, but there isn't a sense of desire for this state of "everyware." I find that most people think it's just amazing what is possible. I find it exciting to think about, what technology is capable of accomplishing. Your living room greeting you, dimming the lights, starting your favorite tv show, adjusting the temperature, and preparing every other aspect you have planned for the night, all by face recognition upon entering the room. That is all very neat. But I'm not so anxious that I can't wait for it to come out. I don't sit here and wish and day dream that one day I won't even have to use a remote to control my tv, or a thermostat for my air. When I think about the future I never think about the aspect of purchasing all of these things. Like in movies, my vision of the future is just with everyone already having these technologies. Like in "Minority Report".

I wonder at times if the whole idea of "Everyware" is just a scheme to sale more product to the public. A "hyping" technique for the future. People exclaiming this is possible, and this will do this, and this car will fly, and blah blah blah. The excitement and hype has built to the point that I think people find it an inevitable change. Not so much that we can't wait to have these things available or that we can't wait to go out and buy them, but that we can't wait to see if what we think the future will be like is what it turns out to be. At least that is how it is for me. I could care less about the automaticity of my room, I'm just amazed at what we can do, but I don't want to buy something like that...unless I'm just so rich I have more money than I know what do with.

finally someone says it: Theses 58-60

2007-04-09T07:19:00.000-06:00

Thesis 58: "Of course, what real people need or want in any given situation is far from obvious" (Gene Becker, Thesis 58). This is my major hang-up with all of this talk of evreyware and ubicomp, sure its nice to discuss all the possibilities of ubicomp but for the most part (at least currently) it seems academic. Me personally, I'm pretty content with the way things are right now. Most would call me provincial but I really have little, if any desire to live in a "Minority Report" or "I Robot" world. I don't mind manually adjusting the thermostat in my apartment or flicking a switch to turn on the lights. On the other hand, I hate going to the bank and don't know what I'd do without my debit card or direct deposit. Sure I'd get by but I'd rather keep my debit card. So for me personally, it boils down to comfort and familiarity. You throw things I'm not familiar or comfortable with at me and I tend to refuse them. The email list and LR are two good examples. Everyware might be progressively becoming more and more a reality but I think it still depends upon people accepting it to fully realize.

Thesis 60: Storing the whole life experience of an individual in a device the size of a mobile phone, or a grain of sand...well that's pretty cool. Who would want to do such a thing? Well, that I'm not so sure about. I for one really have no desire for my own personal little black box (maybe a temporary one for vacations, bachelor parties, lectures etc.), my own personal memory has served me well so far. I can see something like personal black boxes being used in various industries to track individual productivity or record expeditions etc. But I get the point of the example: storage capacity will some day allow it. Is there a limit to storage capacity? Could we map our known galaxy and store it on an iPod or cd? This is the sort of thing that think could be useful applications of the increase in storage capacity, recording natural phenomena and modeling etc.

Is it that time already?

2007-04-08T20:08:00.000-06:00

Technology has gotten to a point where it is being developed faster than we can utilize it and also costing more to do so. I remember that there was a time where you could purchase a computer and be pretty much set at least for a couple years before you absolutely had to upgrade. And when you upgraded, most of the parts were still useable. Now, I can barely keep up with what is out there since the processors are becoming more complicated. They are requiring specific types of RAM that match the processor to get the best performance. With the latest processor that I purchased (Intel Core Duo), I had to purchase a new type of video card since they had changed to the PCI-Express card slot. But by the time, my computer was up and running, I was already behind.

Either way, did I REALLY have to spend all that money to build a brand new computer? Not really. But what usually sparks the upgrade (other than just wanting something new because it’s new) are the components, like software (games, applications, video cards, etc). In my case, it was the graphic programs. I wanted to be more efficient in my work so I could get other things done while my system was processing my image. I know that I would have dealt with the speed that it was processing, but since the processors were coming out so fast, I was feeling left in the dust. And I think that everyone would be happier with their purchases if technology would ease in the new stuff instead of constantly shoving it down our throats. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing, technology is happening at a more rapid pace than what we are used to.

books on CD

2007-04-07T23:02:00.000-06:00

I'm taking Children's Lit this semester and I've made a bad habit out of not reading the four children's book assigned for each exam. But I've found a solution and it resides in the realm of Ubicomp. Thankfully for me, in this day and age I can always turn to books on CD and listen thoughtfully as someone else artfully reads the books to me. I can listen in my car or at home on my computer before I go to bed etc. So, I'd like to take a moment and thank the prevalence of Ubicomp in my world for allowing me to sit back, relax and close my eyes and listen to the digitally transposed text of books which I should have read three weeks ago. Thanks Ubicomp.

2 eggs and an airconditioner

2007-04-06T08:13:00.000-06:00

I never considered the fact that there really isn't a need for everyware. It makes sense, though. You never hear people say, "gosh I wish this room would have cooked me breakfast and cooled down two degrees when I walked in". I think in this case, the need will come with having the devices. Once society moves to a new level of comfort and convenience, we never look back. It is unthinkable to move toward the LESS convenient (gasp). The real need according to Greenfield involves simple day to day conveniences like finding parking or consolidating the remotes. Personally, I think these small things will eventually lead right into the everyware vision, because whether we need it as a whole, we do need (or think we need) the individual parts. I read just this morning in the Daily Texan that Texas wants to begin using the fingerprint as a voluntary identification system. Instead of ID you would just have your fingerprint scanned to buy tobacco, alcohol, lottery tickets, and R-rated movie tickets. I believe that this is one of those small components that will eventually lead to the everyware system. We just want more and more convenience, and with more small systems, it will be only logical to combine them to save space and time, thus creating an everyware type environment. My only complaint at the moment is that I still believe that we don't really need that much convenience. I mean, how hard is it to look for a parking place and dig for change in your pocket? But I'm only trying to postpone the inevitable. We as a society will always be looking for the easy way out. That's how it's always been, and I figure that's how it always will be.

The 'Relationship' in the Language of New Media

2007-04-04T16:15:00.000-06:00

It was interesting getting Manovich’s rather scientific perspective on analyzing media. It’s worth noticing how despite the ‘different’ principles of analyzing new media and distinguishing it from old media, all the stated principles converge on a number of issues. It's bringing out this relationship by means of connecting the dots and forming a cyclical pattern that seems to repeat itself over and over again.

There exists a great synergy in the way principles of technology work.

Numeric Representation of media in forms of digital codes is connected heavily with the principles that follow. An essential part of this Numeric Representation is the ability to manipulate itself based on a defined ground or premise. (For the mathematically inclined, an algorithmic function is a procedure of sorts that will terminate itself after converting from the initial state to a defined end state.) What’s important here is that there needs to be a defined ground to assess change. All these set grounds for the second principle of Modularity. The single modular identity concept comes from the earlier principle where we have mathematically defined a new form of media. Each different module is a function of developing an algorithmic manipulation system, whereby maintaining the integral identity of the media object yet branching out into a different rendition of its earlier form.

Case in Point:
Windows 95 --> Windows 98 --> Windows 2000--> Windows ME--> Windows XP--> Windows Vista

All the different ‘versions’ of the operating system had undergone modifications in its operation yet maintaining a steady increase in the number of applications contained in the respective version of the unilateral operating systems. The base, conceptually however remained the same. These ‘manipulations’ in function were caused by numeric manipulation (code shifts, changes in pixels, development of voxels, characters, scripts etc).

Similarly, ‘Automation’ was a function of Principle 1 and Principle 2, aka Numeric Representation and Modularity. After establishing some basic relationship, we can see how then the ‘Variability’ principle and the eventual ‘Transcoding’ principle follow suit.

It will indeed be interesting getting perspectives on this relationship process between the five mentioned principles.

Art in Technology

2007-04-02T14:26:00.000-06:00

I admit that I didn't like this reading too much, too mind numbing. But I have to say that it did make me remember and think about my modern art class. I mean, what is all creation if it is not some form of art? And, what is technology and new medias if not new creations and inventions? New frontiers are constantly being explored in art and technology, computers, performance art, brain scanners, and even Duchamp's toilet art submission. It's funny how everything seems so connected once you take a step back to look at it.
Especially with the talk of how all this new technology is fundamentally based off all the old ones. It’s like the background of a mural, you first have to invent/paint the foundation and you build off there. From there we just keep on combining what we already have, keep on layering, and each time we get new images and new technology. I believe the basics will always be the same, no matter how complicated the instruments get. I mean, all we’re trying to do is accomplish new ways of communication and entertainment. This could all be done, though it takes longer, much more simply. But we want it fast, easy and affordable, and we’re always moving, changing, destroying, and creating…I could expect no more than constant change, it is who we are…always trying to make life “easier”.

Ubiquitous Already?

2007-04-02T14:21:00.000-06:00

Reading Everware is not really getting redundant as much as I'd like to think so. The readings touch the same topics but the ways to look at them differ. Fifty-two suggests that ubiquitous computing is already embedded in society. I honestly do not find this hard to believe. From the smart cams at Vegas that search databases to identify cheats to the Exxon Speedpass that pretty much brings up your info on the spot are as commonplace as ever now. My fears escalate when I remember that these devices and technologies are indeed hooked up to the network. By the network I do mean the vast web of cyberspace ready to gobble up and permanently seal your involvement in certain activities as soon as you hit enter or send (possibly before). So are they really spying on us? Not really I think. My day to day dealings are too unimportant in the scope of things. Fifty-four however states that Everyware will fully mature in about ten years. But I’d like to think of it as a child. True, while the danger is small while the evil is young but to me, maturation is simply a time to collect and gather all necessary information.

Surveillance

2007-04-02T11:36:00.000-06:00

This past saturday i worked at the sts civic forum titled "Surveillance and you." The forum discussed surveillance in the present state of our digital world. I worked along with other participants to provide a sense of being watched throughout the event. The coordinators scripted a play of surveillance where the guests became the participants of the revealing experiment which became the forum. The experiment went as follows; Participants walked in and were greeted by a table for registration. The participants were then asked to give the registrar their thumb for fingerprinting. If the participant willingly gave their fingerprint they were given 5 aninimity dollars which they could later use to buy items towards concealing their identity during the forum from cameras that were taping the entire forum. If they would then provide another finger for identity then they would recieve another 5 aninimity dollars towards hiding their identity. If the participants were unwilling to provide their finger they were given a red ticket to go in with and were unable to recieve any aninimity dollars. The reactions from the participants unwilling to provide their fingerprinting was very interesting to experience. At first I thought the older participants would be the skeptical ones but it was random who would participate and who would refuse. I was shocked at first when I was told of the fingerprint scanners being used. Even though we are surveilled each day by many hidden "Cameras" of surveillance I felt my personal information being violated through the scanner. The experiment helped me to better understand surveillance and the actions being taken to have and protect our information. The topic of surveillance is ever present with the identity 2.0 increasing as the internet continues to develop. At this pace the internet will pose many security problems if they are not addressed soon.

New Media: AI and Virtual Reality

2007-04-02T11:22:00.000-06:00

After reading The Language of New Media, I want to explore more about AI (artificial intelligence) and virtual reality on which Manovich touched on briefly. I think the computer is the ultimate form of presenting, distributing, and storing media. Anything after will be a play off the computer but that does not mean everything after will not be creative or innovative. I can picture some kind of connection from your computer to your brain where you can visit a website as if you were there in person. Say you are looking for a car and you visit a dealership website. As soon as you are connected you start looking for a car and select one you would like to see. An AI car representative gives you a tour and responds to your eye movement or placement in or around the car while giving descriptions at each of these points.
Imagine the possibilities of search a virtual reality in regards to education. A child could get connected and play in a “hands on” simulated environment that could truly aid in then learning process. Or imagine going back to 1963 and be there at Lincoln Memorial to hear Martin Luther King Jr. “I Have Dream” speech. The advantages of new forms of media are endless but we must not count out the disadvantages. We need to also imagine that terrorist who wants to learn how to develop a dirty bomb. All that person has to do is get connected and instead of following instructions or instruction videos that terrorist can follow an AI instructor where they can interact and ask questions.

2007-04-02T10:47:00.000-06:00

In Lev Manovich selection, The Language of New Media, Manovich goes through the time continuum in describing how media has evolved. He examines and ponders what the characteristics of new media are and where we can find them. An important characteristic of new media is they are created from scratch on computers or converted to a digital product from an analog source. New media should also contain modularity and automation meaning layered information and automatic action/Artificial life components. To me, new media is anything that is innovative and makes its predecessors nearly obsolete.

Like how a modem works, new media is described to take in part in maintaining the digital age. Technology has to convert analog signals into digital signals which then can be decoded back into almost the same original product. Modems use sounds over a telephone wire to transfer packets and decode them on the other end. Analog to digital converting turns reality into ones and zeroes.

An interesting fact that I never knew was about IBM and how it was initially created. It was a product from a merger of three Tabulating companies. IBM is one of the most world renowned companies and a pioneer in information technology.

Thesis 52

2007-04-02T10:31:00.001-06:00

The subtle integration of Everyware into our day to day lives is something mind boggling to contemplate. On one hand, it is easy to see how information processing technology keeps getting smaller and faster, but it is also quite difficult to imagine information processing that is not centered around a personal computer. Today, most everything that is considered personal technology ends up getting plugged into a computer for one reason or another, and that is a trend that seems to make a lot of good sense. Why not allow your PC to be the hub for almost all of the technology you use? You get the songs from your Ipod off of Itunes, and upload them and listen all day. The same goes with digital cameras but in a reverse fashion. Doing it any other way does not make sense, especially since you will most likely just be E-mailing your captured images to your relatives anyways.
The way the author talks about a shift away from personal computers to Everyware, but still leaves a place for PC's in the world is good for his theory, because I do not think people will be ready to give up the ease and familiarity of a personal computer for sensing microchips that allow them to do whatever it is that needs to be done. The way they talked about smart houses that would sense and adjust is cool, but I bet many people would be just as supportive if not more supportive of a program on the PC that allowed they to control all of the settings and logistics of the house. Basically, I do not think that Everyware will ever be able to fully replace the PC for day to day tasks.

Time and space

2007-04-02T10:23:00.000-06:00

While reading the article about new media I begun to put together a time line in my head. This time line is a crazy one because at the start of the timeline is a train. The train is traveling very very slowly but as it travels it begins to double in speed. Within a hundred years which is where we are today the train is going very very fast. This train represents technology and the timeline represents, well, time in which we are living. This train will not be stopped because there will be no one to stop a train this fast. It will keep getting faster and faster. The train also represents the way in which technology is growing at such a rapid pace. Its amazing how every foot further the train travels it doubles in speed. It is very coinciding with how technology today is acctually going. It keeps getting faster and everything keeps getting smaller. I am scared to see what our world will be like after another hundred years of the train effect. I am thinking it will be a very relaxing way of life. Becuase after all one of the main things technology does for us is make life easier and relaxing.

Manovich

2007-04-02T09:13:00.000-06:00

The Manovich essay really showed me how the development of technologies fueled the creation of further technologies. A kind of perpetual force of motion evolves essentially beginning to maintain itself on its own. One thing leads to another, so forth on so on, in a never ending progression. When I think about IT this way it tends to start making more sense to me. Technology in general seems to follow this progression. Some key points from the reading I found especially relevant: The specialization of technologies. By this I mean both the customization and standardization of technologies and the infrastructure which props up around it. For example, the Industrial Reveloution and all of the changes it entailed, social, economic, legislative, bureaucratic, represents a prime example of how one technological shift can in turn cause shifts across a varied range of others. The evolution of IT helped subsume these advances into the status quo. Some other interesting points which came about because of this specialization: "fractal structure of new media" = modularity. So digitization has lead us to new media and the quicker dissemenation of info. The advent of AI really intriguied me because I never thought of AI as a tool of info retrieval, easing the overload of info for the user to interface with.

New Media

2007-04-02T08:32:00.000-06:00

When reading "The Language of New Media" I found the talk of what "new media" actually is very interesting. How words on a computer are, but words on a piece of paper are not. I didn't really understand his point as to why this shouldn't justify this media as being new media just because they can both equally have effect on society.

Manovich's first principle of "new media" really made me think about digital technology. The numerical representation of a picture. I already knew that everything in a computer is in binary code, but I don't really picture the design of something like that in text, or especially in a picture. When Manovich talked about how new media is subject to algorithmic manipulation, or that "media becomes programmable." Like the formulas required to change the sharpness of a picture. Although I agree that both new and old media have the power to effect equally. What makes computer's new media is this programmability. Which allows this "Modularity" of movies or clips. The program Photo Shop has to be mentioned when talking about these principles. I watched a clip the other day on you tube of speed drawing on with photo shop. There is no doubt in my mind that we are well on the way to replacing hand drawings with digital drawing. The detail was amazing. This is a new media...not because it's new information but because of the medium, the method. The digitalization. The modularity & automation.

I just liked this article because it makes me think about the actual process involved in creating something like this text for this blog input. It's easy to take it for granted and think that displaying this text was a simple process. But the algorithms are crazy. I can't even imagine creating programs with capabilities of iMovie, or iTunes, or Photo Shop.

Everyware Here Already?

2007-04-02T01:07:00.000-06:00

Our world today already has the components to make everyware a reality which is also why we have devices that uses the intelligent user interface described by Everyware. But I think it is safe to agree with Gene Becker from HP Laboratories’ when he states that this idea is a “hundred-year problem” because although we will have a whole bunch of devices using RFID tags and ID sensors in numerous locations, there will always be room for a topic like that to grow, always be places to stick sensors. Just like technology today, we can set goals to having a “final” technology in our grasp, but it could be considered an never-ending problem because there will always be new technology to be thought of or discovered and invented. As thesis 53 stated, we do have the components that make our lifestyles capable of such “Everyware” devices but as more and more devices are used, more and more will be thought up and will need higher end components. This is similar to how programs that are running on today’s computers would have never been able to run on computers 10 years ago and 10 years from now, the computers will have us questioning on how we ever got by in life using the intelligent machines we are using now. As time goes by and technology grows, it doesn’t just “fill” up a room until we reach the maximum of growth, it’s more of a world in itself expanding everyday a little more and has no boundaries on how large it can reach.

How Do They Do It?!?

2007-04-01T20:49:00.000-06:00

It is amazing how far we have advanced since the 1830s. What makes it even more amazing is what made these inventors even think to start trying to figure out how to make life easier with these crazy inventions? Adobe Photoshop is a tool that is critical to my job function. Without it, I would not be able to product the graphics needed for projects. But as I sit there and use the program, it baffles my mind at the team of software writers at Adobe for creating such a powerful application. And not only does the application remain the top software in its category, the computers that are being developed use Photoshop as a benchmark for their processors, as well as high end graphically intense PC games. I mean, how do they even start to create anything like that? Not being a strong programmer, I just couldn’t even see where to begin. But ask me to create a graphic, you've got it! Much kudos to programmers and developers!

And then the idea of customizing lifestyles is happening everyday all around us with all the new technologies that supposedly are able to predict and read what we want to see and feel. The excerpt brings up web pages often about this because it seems to be the easiest method for customization. Websites can be programmed to leave cookies in the user’s computer in hopes to be able to retrieve the information later to display certain ads that the user had once expressed interest in previously. Working with HTML, I have built a website at my company that tracks the user’s data in a cookie that then we use to display themes and settings that they had chosen before. Even looking at how all the main search engines allow you to customize your main page to include the types of news and information that you are most interested in.

We are quickly moving into a time where we almost expect everything to be handed to us on a platter whether it is information on a website or the preferred temperature in a room that we spend most of our time in. Not trying to say that we are getting lazy, but our expectations of technology have gotten a lot higher and it is our human nature to try to push it to its limits.

Some interesting articles re: IT and, of course, society.

2007-03-29T13:45:00.000-06:00

The two links below deal with IT and its impact on society.

The first deals with the use of virtual reality in the treatment of soldiers suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. Interesting to see how IT coalesces with society, in this case through queuing the the stress which causes the debilitating fear in veterans through the manipulation of VR instead of hypnosis or other means. VR puts the patient back in the violent stressful scenario but allows the experience to be associated with a safe environment. I can imagine the spread of this technique beyond PTSD into the treatment of phobias etc. Neat.

The second recounts the dispute between a law professor and the NFL and, by proxy, Youtube over the posting by the professor of a NFL game. I found it interesting because we can see how IT continues to reshape our society, in this case our legal system and the rights, vis-a-vis, of individuals and corporations.

Using virtual reality in treating post traumatic stress disorder in veterans of the war in Iraq: http://www.defense-update.com/products/v/VR-PTSD.htm

Law professor puts the NFL/youtube in their place: http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070320-nfl-fumbles-dmca-takedown-battle-could-face-sanctions.html

Bits and pieces

2007-03-28T22:13:00.000-06:00

I really like the way all the technologies seem to connect to one another. Throughout the semester, we keep seeing the same things over and over in different readings. Here, they talk about early film and photographs. I also think its hilarious that they tried to use 35mm movie film for computers. None of the rest of the article was of particular interest to me, except the idea of the virtual environments where the user interacts with animated characters and the interface with the “human” computer. I think that it’s absolutely awesome that a computer exists that can guess our mood and react accordingly. I never considered the intelligence behind the computer player on games either. I mean, those have been around for awhile, right? It’s hard to believe we have had the technology to do something like that and not taken it any further. I know there were strong limitations to what the computer could (and can) do, but they still should have tried. I also never knew that the ads and banners and such on a website changed according to each viewer. I always thought they were random. Am I reading that wrong? Because it kind of freaks me out that I’m being tracked for my advertisement preferences. I must have read that wrong…I’m writing this late at night. Someone help me out. And anyway, if they are tracking my preferences, why do I keep getting male enhancement ads? Lol…

Whose fault is it then?

2007-03-26T14:28:00.000-06:00

I agree with Thesis 46 in the fact that error is commonly pushed off on someone other than the user of technology. It's easy to blame the complicated boxes in front of you and one-sided shouting matches usually ensue. But fast forward to a time when all of our "ubiquitous computing" is done with simply "real life" interaction. Though some of these technologies already exist like supermarket doors opening while people walk up to it. When is the last time someone blamed the machine for screwing up something as simple as walking. Though I do wonder what the day will be like when such inputs do exist. The blame should be shifted towards people for messing up mundane tasks but I still think we will revel in our intelligence at complicated systems that pick up commands and compute by simple human nature. If I rub my hungry stomach, the kitchen bot should make me a sandwich. Although, shift or no shift of blame, I still think the "inhuman" machines will take responsibility for mishaps though not of their own account.

2007-03-26T14:14:00.000-06:00

I never really got into comics as a child but during high school I was able to make a couple of those flip through books with a simple animation. I also made simple animations using Adobe Photoshop which helped me better relate to the reading. The way I would make my animations longer in Photoshop was either by making slight adjustments of the content of each frame or by tweening in between frames which meant that there would be more time to get from one frame to the next. I never really thought about how the shape of the frame could make it seem longer or shorter.
Throughout school I always thought PowerPoint was the “way to go” probably because it was instilled in us through teachers. I guess because it was so simple and easy to use and as mentioned in the reading it made us get to some kind of point in some kind of organized manner. But when making a PowerPoint to be presented in front of an audience the content wasn’t suppose be read word for word but rather a guideline to make sure you did not forget something or veer off track. After reading Tufte’s text I realized how there is this limit that we can cut out before the point we are trying to get across is no longer true or just doesn’t make sense. I also realized because of the NASA PowerPoint presentations that I need to make sure I bullet or emphasize the important points as not to be misleading or detract from information that may be more relevant.

Pinning Down Power Point?

2007-03-26T14:09:00.000-06:00

Tufte raises some eyebrows with his views and stand on power point and it being used as a leading medium of instruction. Some views he presented were the stagnant nature of presentation, and its inability to captivate the viewer. It’s very important to understand what Power Point wishes to accomplish and what it doesn’t include in its spectrum.

PowerPoint was never designed to be an audio/visual delight with intensive graphics and eye-catching presentation. Its very purpose was to objectively list data with some pictorial presence mainly used as a static presentation and not an mpeg file. To add some color, think of a projector (the machines used to put up information by means of a transparent sheet reflecting information with the help of a light bulb) that we all have seen in some class that is not only hard to read but is in fact, so dry that we might never really have even looked at it with much interest. Now compare this to the Power Point presentations that do lack some modern graphic marvels, but display and present the information in a much better format and style.

So, while looking at any form/medium of presentation/technology, we must first think about what the objective of this medium is. Yes, the objective in many cases is fluid and does evolve over time but the concrete purpose does not. Would we rather the Professors just scribble some bullet points on the whiteboard and spend all our time trying to decipher the text, and infinitely worse, copy it word for word. I think having an electronic medium makes for better learning as it easier to distribute and follows a proper layout and system.

It is up to the author of presentations to be as creative as possible in his or her efforts to catch the eye of the audience. I’m not Power Point’s most loyal fan, but since my exposure with finance has been heavy, I have lived and breathed MS Excel and PP during my stints and assure you that is perhaps the most effective tool when some but not all information needs to be communicated. The purpose of this tool was never to be content heavy, but outline heavy. Perhaps, that is what our PP editors and neglecting.

Just a thought!

Power Pointless

2007-03-26T12:23:00.000-06:00

"Why are we having this" class? (Tufte 31)

I have thought this many times in classes that have used powerpoint to present the course notes through a listing of bullet points accompanied by further repetition from the presenter. The format not only leads to a completely boring presentation but also and uninformative one-sided discussion that often is straight our of class text. Tufte definitely addresses the pointlessness of PP use in presenting any sort of educational information.

At first, I felt Tufte was being a little harsh to the powerpoint system seeing that I have used it in class presentations. Yet after thinking back on those presentations I had to provide extensive explanation for the lack of visual and contextual commentary PP lends. I agree with Tufte that PP should be banned from being used as a primary tool for education, especially in the case of NASA, having sadly played a harmful role in the Columbia incident. Yet PP may still have merit when being used to present a series of pictures for a story board. Last semester I used PP to present a comic like series of images and it worked well for that sort of format.

In my class this morning I was unable to grasp the context of the topic being discussed through a bulleted list of vagueness. I am definitely going to present this article to some of my professors who rely on PP presentations and feel that by posting these vague bulleted discussions online that they will somehow clear the confusion over the topic.

Repersentation of Time in Comics

2007-03-26T12:00:00.000-06:00

The representation of time in comics is a topic that I have never pondered in the slightest. I really enjoyed how the article was written overall, and specifically how the author used the medium of a comic strip to most effectively demonstrate the techniques used. The most interesting thing to me was the fact that motion no one even attempted to portray motion in a graphic medium until the 1800’s. I have never really been that into comics as I am sure you can see, but I have read a few here and there. The importance of the techniques pioneered by the artists of Japan is not fully appreciated by many. The ways serious animation is done in America today would be way different if they had not worked so hard to figure out how to display motion.
While I liked the article, the way the artist portrayed the use of word bubbles as overcomplicated and hard to understand. Anyone worth two cents can figure out what comes after what in a comic, as it is common sense. The author dwelled on this point too much. Also, the author showed all the different kinds of borders, but did not discuss any of the implied meanings behind any of them. I was left feeling a little confused over this, and wish he had made a point to clarify this.

Communication & Power Point

2007-03-26T11:50:00.000-06:00

Edward R. Tufte’s 31 page Power Point bashing pamphlet was very insightful to the ways of flawed communication and poorly designed presentations. Power Point presentations are usually boring and pointless, but with that said, why not give tips on how to make them interesting and
meaningful? Looking at the demographic of people who actively use Power Point is also another clue to why the presentation might be lacking. Just think of all the millions of Windows PCs out there, and then the amount that have Office, that’s a pretty high number. I don’t see him arguing on why not to use Internet Explorer, why is that?, oh yes it’s a lost cause because a majority of people do not even realize what “software” really is. “I can uninstall Windows? But I don’t see it in the Add/Remove Programs!”

In general I would like to believe that The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint is more concerned with a lack of efficient communication happening in corporations and businesses:

“Any organization which designs a system… will inevitably produce a design whose structure is a copy of the organization’s communication structure” (Melvin E. Conway 7)

Effective communication should not be put into a Content Wizard (especially if Microsoft designed it, although Office is their only one product worth owning) and Power Point is often used as the weapon of choice for slaughtering a presentation. Tufte emphasizes on real substances, with words, and paragraphs, although I am unfamiliar with this technique, I hope soon to be able to communicate efficiently with it.

Tufte has a large hate especially for Nasa and its affiliates use of PP, although I would hope no major decision was ever made solely off of power point, especially if its Nasa. Reading geeky reports is suppose to be their bread and butter. From my experiences with the tech industry, unless you are into cutting edge design trends (Apple, Xbox team, Sony) more than likely you will give a poorly designed, data filled presentation, which in my mind is not so bad.

Comic Strips

2007-03-26T11:03:00.000-06:00

In McCloud’s document, he describes another form of communication through time frames in comics. In a world where perception of time is hard to judge, comic book authors manipulate several characteristics of the strip to accentuate several aspects of time. Some tools authors use is stretching out the boxes in horizontal length, this works by forcing the eye to spend more time on that particular frame which in turn stretches out the time. Other clever tools that writers use is the shape of the box, certain shapes evoke a particular response from the readers such as exclamation or tension for non standard frames. Splitting a large frame into several smaller frames allows the reader to understand the events in the order that it happens. For instance when a large frame is introduced, we are unaware if the events are sequential or instantaneous. A large strip can contain a lot material in the sense of activities going on. By breaking the frames up , the reader would be able to follow the path of words sequentially. This is much different than most standard media content such as the television where time is measured the same as it is in reality. There is no rule on comic book frame calibration for time; therefore writers have such articulate ways to help demonstrate time.

PowerPoint Woes

2007-03-26T08:29:00.000-06:00

I doubt many of us in this class are going to completely disagree with Tufte's views on PP. We all despise the endless amounts of slides when we're in a lecture. I've always found a presentation without PowerPoint much more...enthralling if that is at all possible.

But his attacks are more at how PP allows people to give a bad presentation. That if used by the medial presenter it becomes the cliche PP presentation of blandness and generalizations. I really liked his analysis of the NASA slide. This just really illustrated what I have always thought about PP. The "very big bullet". The misleading title. The limited amount of information. It really shows how within the confines of PP a presentation becomes faulty. Users feel like they have an outline to follow. Each slide must have a point, as illustrated by each title, and then broken down into bullets of information. With the limited space, users feel obligated to squeeze in as much as possible, which leads to "phrase fragments". Instead of standing in front of the class and speaking continuously and elaborately, people spell it out slowly as to prove each significant point; Bullet by bullet to prove that they have come to some kind of decision. Like in the NASA presentation. Instead of just speaking about the incident and analysis, the presenters crammed information into slides and generalized a conclusion without much elaboration. When giving a presentation one should never be reading something, unless it's a verbatim quoting. With the way people tend to use PP, what they could do is just stand at the front of the class not talking, just clicking a mouse, and have the audience copy the slides.

But this isn't because that's all the can be done with PP. Personally I don't mind using PP when giving a speech or presentation, but I don't use it much. If used correctly, it should be like the slides aren't really even there. The presenter should be informed and knowledgeable enough to speak without them. The only reason I seem to use PP is because I'm required to do so according to class. The slides become a visual organization of information for the audience. Not a guideline of your presentation. The presentation comes from your head, and shouldn't be a bulleted speech. Even putting general ideas, reading them one by one, and elaborating is a PP presentation fault...it's boring. Sometimes, I put information on the slides that I don't say or talk about, just a way to get out more information than I have time to say. I think powerpoint presentations tend to make the presenter focus on reading an abbreviated, animated, illustrated essay instead of just talking about what they know.

comics and powerpoint

2007-03-26T06:29:00.000-06:00

I've collected comics since I was ten years old. My mom used them as bribes to get me reading. It worked, every weekend she'd have to drive me to the comic shop as long as my grades remained good. I've never given much thought to the substance of comics before I read the article in eResv. Sure I payed attention to the characters, the plot etc. but never to the framework of the comic. The reading brought this framework to my attention and elucidated the high level of reasoning involved in reading comics. The reader must orient him/herself within the flow of the frames, interpret and place accompanying text in order to progress though the story. Comics are cool and I'm going to have to drag out my collection and get reacquainted with some old friends.
PowerPoint on the other hand, well it just plain sucks. I've always thought this, Tufte just validated the opinion I formed through sitting through PP lecture after PP lecture. Sure PP is great when it comes to cramming for an exam, PP make great flashcards and really help if the exam is multiple choice. I agree with Tufte, PP lacks motive flow, its static and limiting, boring and incomplete. The whole NASA PP failure really drives this home. I still think PP make good flashcards, but that's probably it.Therefore, comics rock and PP is lame. Comics involve the reader in the progression of the action, the reader navigates and sets the pace. PP presentations force feed generalized points.

*.ppt

2007-03-25T22:17:00.000-06:00

After reading Tufte’s essay on how bad PowerPoint is as a tool for communication, I am glad to see that I am not the only one. Being in a corporate environment for several years, I have seen plenty of PowerPoint presentations pass me by – ranging from presentations about how the company is doing as a whole for the whole fiscal year to a way to communicate a local fundraiser that is going on next week.

From a technical standpoint in the IT department, PowerPoint presentations are killer on the exchange server. A simple message that could be written in an email (or even a Word document) about a bake sale happening next week taking up maybe 5kb of server space could balloon into 14MB because of some unnecessary slide transitions and music. I’d be more frustrated because I didn’t get the gist of the entire message within seconds because I had to wait for the song to load.

Then if I look at it from a graphical standpoint, I can understand why PowerPoint is the tool for presenting data. One reason is because it is available. Corporations will always purchase the whole Office suite so if you have an option to be “creative,” why not? Clipart-away! PowerPoint tends to be an outlet for getting out of the norm of a routine. This I can’t really fault the application, but the content needs to be meaningful, not filled with cheesy images.

I have been in many meetings, where I have walked out and don’t remember a single thing from the presentation other than maybe the comic strip placed at the beginning to give us a chuckle before the meeting started. I have stacks and stacks of presentations that were printed out as a “reference,” but I can’t quite recalling needing to ever do them. Go figure.

Like Tufte said about lousy presentations, it is “the fault of inept PP users, not the fault of PP” and I totally believe that.

Comic Stripper

2007-03-25T21:45:00.000-06:00

Most of the time for me learning is quite boring and I forget things very easily. I loved how McCloud did his work to help people see how these comics work. I really understood the messages he was trying to get across. Maybe its just me that learns better this way, I dont know. It just stuck into my mind much better than looking at some boring article. I felt like the learning comics he did where for people more to read and understand. Most other articles make me just want to drift to sleep. It was also very interesting to me how the time works in comics. Before reading his explanation of how the time works in just one single frame, I already had in my mind a knowing that each bubble was a different amount of time. One thing I began pondering was about the chinese who read from right to left. If I would have done that then the whole thing would have been very backword. I began chuckling at the was the different countries would do their comics very different from the US.

Powerpoint's Dreadful Record

2007-03-25T21:14:00.000-06:00

PowerPoint is the cause of how many deaths, lost jobs, and business downfalls?!? <-- *insert scoff there* I understand that PowerPoint is not the best presentation tool for anything that you aren’t going to keep funny, short, and sweet. Yet, I think that Professor Tufte was a bit over the top and opinionated I did like Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg PowerPoint which I thought was hilarious. He also had a good point for people who rely on PowerPoint for important matters such as dealing with life and death and/or teaching situations. The last time I used PowerPoint it was for a high school environmental science presentation, because that is where they encourage you to use it, high school. I know anyone who has dealt with inept PowerPoint users knows what I’m talking about or for anyone who has ever taken a class where the professor decides to teach each an hour and a half class with 250 slides stock full of information that 1 you can’t differentiate what is really important and what is just good to know and 2 numbs your brain until all the coffee in the world couldn’t help you using the wall as a giant hard pillow. Yet, I have to admit that I am pro PowerPoint. No matter how many people misuse the little bullets for main points instead of small details (scientists) or read off every darn word as it shows up (teachers and students), it is my savior since I am one of those 10% who cannot speak in public without turning beat red with voice and hands shaking uncontrollably. To my backup when my mind has decided to turn into a big pile of frightened jello, PowerPoint, I don’t care how hopeless and pfluff filled you are and though I will probably never use you again, I salute you.

time frames and film

2007-03-24T19:15:00.000-06:00

The eres article “time frames” was a nice change from the normal readings we do for this class. For me, it was much easier to read and understand the reading in the form of a comic strip. I think it made me slow down and actually process the information instead of just skimming over it and not remembering it. I liked the discussion about time and motion in the panels. I think that even though we see the images as a still moment in time, we fill in the gaps (the motion) with our imaginations. It is pretty much like the way film works, on a much slower scale. In film, there are tons of still images flashed by so fast that your brain sees only motion because it can’t process all the pictures. The cartoon panels are comparable. Although they aren’t moving, they still seem to signal motion from one panel to the next because time is passing, so our brains still fill in the motion that should be there. I mean, we don’t actually SEE the movement like with movies, but we know that it is supposed to happen and it goes through our minds while we look from panel to panel.

Also on a random note, I thought the power point pamphlet was great. I never realized just how little information was conveyed by those things. I have had so many professors and teachers over the years that have used them, and I’ve written more than my share, too. It just interested me to see it in a new light, from a different point of view. I never really thought about the bad side of the program, so it was good to take a look at it.

Social implications of Everyware Ch 40,41,42

2007-03-19T12:34:00.000-06:00

These three chapters discuss the various foreseeable and unforeseeable social implications in ubiquitous technology.

Fears of seamless steady and customizable information flow and control is discussed in the first chapter. Where will the physical customizable controls be in an "imperceptible system?" This question poses an interesting dilema of "seamlessness." Yet the question is not whether we should be able to have complete control over the system rather what form will the control take and will it be restricted or segregated within society.

The emergent implication of the system and what it will be used for and how it will be utilized is an extremely important and unpredictable question discussed in the next chapter. Most future applications for this system of everyware are unforeseeable and for this reason there is a sense of social danger with its integration. Society must not see the technology as a separate entity from our culture or ourselves because everyware and the emeregent technology is a cyborg anthropological system that is embodied within each individual who is culturally encountered by it. Because everyware has social awareness ingrained in its creation, society must be safe with its integration.

The way in which the logistics of the system are decided are as important as the system itself and it's potential use in society. This is most evidently described through Lawrence Lessig's discussion of the webs architectural implications and freedoms of design. He speaks of the way in which the design of the "end to end" web architecture lead way for many social interactive technologies unforeseeable but only possible by way of the logistical setup of the system. He also speaks about a social consciousness of design as to be aware of future unpleasant applications used by the system. Overall their are many social fears in the only partially foreseeable future of the everyware system.

341234 meet 234123

2007-03-19T10:53:00.001-06:00

In Thesis 40-42, Greenfield continues to give us a glimpse of how technology will be incorporated into our ambient surroundings. In Thesis 40, we get a look how some biotechnology would allow a typical person to monitor their diet and exercise. Technology would be embedded in our refrigerator, microwave, and even inside ourselves. This would allow the mainstream public to become healthier in general and reduce the increasing obesity problem. The technology would serve as a purpose to control our eating behaviors into one that is most beneficial to us.
Other points that Greenfield makes is that in order for technologies like these to prosper, they must first be affordable and widely used/accepted. Without these attributes, the technology would end up failing due to a lack of support. Remember, technology is made by companies, and it is their job to suck in as much revenue as possible.
In Thesis 42, I was interested in the RIFD tags that would be implemented in us. Cars would also carry the tags and would help identify the people in a crash or possible identity seekers for cops. Although all this might sound as though it is creating a Utopian society, Greenfield clearly points out how this can lead to discrimination. The tags would not just reveal our names, but also our sex, ethnicity, and other personal information. If such RIFD reading technology was implemented into architecture, conflicts may occur. People could get racially discriminated against and not allowed to enter the certain building/room because either the RIFD reader has a bug in the system, or the creator has a personal bias against certain people. In any regards, we must be careful with such advancements in how we use it.

mirror, mirror on the refrigerator

2007-03-12T00:52:00.000-06:00

After reading the everyware theses for this week, I can’t lie, I’m a little worried. I hope I never see the day when my refrigerator has talked to my bathroom scale and tells me I’m getting fat and need to run more and eat better. I mean, how guilty will that make people feel? I know it would be useful in a health sense, but I can’t see very many people buying into that kind of ubiquitous computing. It just makes you feel bad. It’s like the gym coach, physician, and mother all in one, stuck to your refrigerator door and your bathroom mirror, and what’s more, it nags and nags, but it never goes away. Sounds like everyone’s worst nightmare right? And besides, what does the magic mirror tell the clinically obese every morning? I bet its not “Try adding leafy greens to today’s meals”, if you know what I mean. I just think that particular idea would be really demoralizing, and I don’t think it would change the fact that America is overweight. If we want to change that, we’re going to have to make the scale talk to the floor and tell it to go into treadmill mode once in awhile.

On a separate and unrelated note, I never considered the fact that the social security number is a national identity number. I know, it’s fairly obvious, but who really thinks about that? I just wonder how it came into existence in the first place-a national identity number sounds entirely too close to the rfid tag identification systems, and I think the evidence speaks for itself that that hasn’t been a very popular idea. I can’t imagine how the American public would let itself be identified individually at all times. If that isn’t an invasion of privacy I don’t know what is. I guess that it’s just evidence that there might be a future of continual identification by rfid tags at all times after all. Kind of scary, isn’t it?

The Nanotechnology Talk

2007-03-09T03:27:00.000-06:00

I attended the recent talk on Nanotechnology given by visiting scholar Andrew Jamison on Tuesday. I enjoyed listening to his views and thought of sharing some here. Dr. Jamison started the talk with a brief, but what I thought to be very informative, historical account of technology. Remember, this talk focuses more on the cultural implications of technology rather than the future of it. He presents his views in a very interesting fashion. He describes these different accounts by calling them ‘Long waves of Technological change’. I know many readers will probably not take the time to go into great detail about this. Hence, I’m providing a brief synopsis of the talk.

There are 4 main phases in which these long waves of technological change took place.

1. 1800-1850 (Machanization)
-Romanticism/cooperation phase
-Samuel Morse and the telegraph (Romantic writer & inventor)

2. 1850-1900 (Capitalism)
-Socialism/ Popoulism phase
-Age of Capital

3. 1900-1950 (Imperialism)
-Age of Empire
-Electricity, automobiles, chemicals, airplanes (invention)
-Players: Wright Brothers, Henry Ford, Edison (Phonograph)
-This phase also gave birth to a new sentiment: "Lets bring the life back in technology"
-Lewis Mumford, said "The whole industrial world -and instrumentalism is highest conscious expression"

4. 1950-2000 (Technoscience)
-The new Industrial state
-Atomic/Nuclear power
-Rise of transnational technology corporations (IBM)
-Japan's contribution to technology making it efficient and profitable due to cultural reasons

Think of this:

-Transistors in 1950's --> led to consumer electronics --> led to Personal Computers

-Rachel Carson
Environmental Technology -->Biologist turned technologist -->led to hybrid energy

My take: The talk was indeed more historic than I had imagined. But it did give an insight into 'Hubris' and 'Hybrid' etc. The above mentioned patterns, in my mind show how increase in technology over time leads to progressive development, meaning it increases the rate of change. There's a lot more that happened in the later 'waves' than the one's that precede it. We are in, what is popularly called, the 'Age of Information'. And in this age, 'Converging Technologies' seem to be ruling the roost. Think of 'info-,bio-,cogno-,nano- technology. All culminating towards Information Technology or IT. IT is a term that is thrown around very often these days, but rarely is it properly understood.

Thoughts on the Television..Then and Now

2007-03-09T03:11:00.000-06:00

The ‘Communications in History’ reading made me think about how technology transitions! The television has probably impacted our society the most out of all the other forms of media that have come up over time (I don’t consider the Internet to be a form of media, but a culmination of all). I would like to think about this in two ways. One, the transition process, and the other being the implications it has today.

So, the television went through a series of revelations. Not just in the equipment and devices space, but its impact on the society as a whole. Initially, it was set up as a source of providing information and essential broadcasting. In the post WWII era, the television enjoyed major popularity and it was only time before it became an essential part of our society. The primary purpose of television was widely understood to provide news reporting to inform people about what was going on. This did not eat into the Print Media’s share, but incorporated it in its scope. Historically, many speeches that were given, were being aired on TV (MLK, Jr. etc) to address a larger population. This was in addition to the speeches being published in the daily newspapers etc. There seemed to be an interesting role play between print media and television. News readers were regarded as gurus in the fields of reporting and the content was treated as final authority(then). Movies like, ‘Good Night and Good Luck!’ give us an insight into what the so called ‘battles’ were like between News & media journalists (Edward Murrow) and politicians (Joe McCarthy). This was also a result of the TV along with the Radio being the only electronic source of information present. Access to information, was limited. The avenues were scarce. The sources were restricted.

Now, think of today’s day and age. Would Edward Murrow enjoy the same amount of popularity on CNN in 2007? Lou Dobbs certainly doesn’t. The television has transitioned our society. And this impact, transcends politics. I mean I too enjoy reading about the history of the television, but I’m more interested in knowing what the implications are. And, the implications today are vast. The TV plays a heavy role in people deciding their political preference. Democrats and Republicans use the TV as their primary tool. War on Iraq seems even worse when Anderson Cooper goes to Iraq and shows us real footage of our war heroes and what they’re going through. Obama seems more appealing when we watch his rallies in southern Illinois on TV and hear the loud cheers he gets. The Presidential Debate, perhaps the most important debate in the deciding who will lead the most powerful nation in the world are showcased to the entire world LIVE on TV!

So, is the TV a mere source of information now? I think it’s become a major part of our culture, society and life. And it’s worth everyone’s while to sit back and think about this entire transition to better understand how technology has pierced every form of though and information.

“Everyware (finally) insinuates itself into transactions never before subject to technical intervention.”

2007-03-09T01:50:00.000-06:00

So, I finally found very interesting evidence in thesis 34 touching on a few key, and largely unexplored facets of the effects of modern technology and its ‘intervention’.

Case in point: Greenfield talk’s about the Brazilian company IHOUSE selling a unique product, which they call the Smart Hydro ‘intelligent bathtub’. I’m sure many of you who read this piece were not too perturbed about this insight and the description. Perhaps, quite a few of you actually thought; “My ‘cool’ personalized, digitalized, computerized and all in all, heavily technologized bathtub”. I’m personally a little cautious of this level of intervention. The question of ‘where to draw the line’ remains largely unanswered. In my opinion, everything that increases the efficiency of our actions is good. And technology seems to be our best friend in this endeavor. But what if this efficiency comes at a risk. Risk of dependency, or still worse, risk of health hazards. Having a technologized bath, for example seems strange. Not just because of its present far fetched feeling (I say this knowing that it will be in some Bond movie soon, and Bill Gates probably owns one already), but I cant seem to come to terms with the feeling of technology affecting our lives in such a way, that we are so dependent on it, that even the slightest absence of it will make us uncomfortable.

Will there be electronic tents and camps when school children go for trekking and camping trips? What about the lessons learnt from adventure and survival.

Adventure of getting lost in the jungles. Wait, is that even possible anymore?! What about GPS! It is hard to get lost with a device telling you exactly where you are and where you need to go.

Final Words: The purpose of my disconnected take on the matter was to bring out the two contrary positions. One, where I seem to oppose technology intervening with the simple bathing process. As Greenspan puts it rather well;

“But you already knew how to draw a bath, didn’t you? And you’ve somehow survived this far in life without the help of automated cells from the bathroom infrastructure…bathroom preference settings is probably not on the list of things you most want to do with your time(!)”

And the other, where technology seems to be a boon. Even though GPS might take away from us some sense of adventure, it does do a lot more. I’m sure most would agree that they’d rather have GPS than not. Better navigation, more accessibility and most of all, easier access to information, even on the move does seem like a step forward.

Technology is indeed changing our lives. How much we will allow it to change it, is still largely undecided.

retroactive royalties

2007-03-07T07:50:00.000-06:00

Ok, on my commute to work this morning I tuned into NPR to listen in for a bit and caught "The Market Report" on "Morning Edition". There was a report regarding streaming radio on the internet and the royalties paid by web sites to record labels. The royalties have steadily increased over the years and have even been enacted retroactively in some cases. This doesn't really cut into the profits of AOL, Yahoo etc.---they're rich--- but small sites, small business if you will is effectively cut out of market due to these practices. Where have we seen this before? The telegraph, Film, Radio network, Television networks, it seems that all of these industries have "suffered" similiary. What I think we can expect from the royalties issue is a consolidation of the market share of streaming radio.

You will find it Everyware!!!

2007-03-06T18:53:00.000-06:00

Thesis 34 touched on smart-ware which we'd all like to have today. I still like to think back at what it was like before we had certain technologies. People wanted their houses to be cooler in the summer and warmer in the winter. We have achieved that with air conditioners, so what's next? Now I'd like the house to sense what room I'm in and set the temperature automatically to my preferences. The integration will be seamless, much like the a/c, but we haven't reached that level. Our grandparents and even parents were amazed by inventions like the refrigerator and air conditioners but now they are common place. I won't lease another apartment for the summer until I know the A/C works properly. We just haven't reached the age of smart-wares that the book is talking about. Thesis 35 touches the personal data issue that's been an ongoing problem. No one would track your body's data before because they couldn't. Now that they can, security and privacy issues arise again. Integration into society will help these devices survive. Before it was theoretically impossible to track someone's whereabouts, but with cell phones so common place right now, anyone's a potential target. (if that technology exists, which I'm sure it does) The only problem is that few people stop to think of new and fascinating technologies as a threat. The general population's wants and desires will determine the success or failure of this integration.

Television Transforms the News

2007-03-06T03:56:00.000-06:00

Television transformed the news in a way that is hard to understand. Reading this article I realized that I hadn't even thought about how the news cast that I watch came to be. From "talking heads" to HDTV graphics it has been quite a journey.
With the rise of TV it seems odd to me that many of the things that seem common place to us now a days had not even been thought up yet. For example, on site reporting. They used to just use footage and then have the in-studio reporter talk over it. Another thing that seemed interesting is the way that the TV news had to decide which subjects to cover and how to cover them. They straddle the line between the tabloids and the more intense print based platform.
How famous must the newsmen have been back then? Imagine if there were only three channels, and content on TV had not been expanded like it has been today. The newsman would have been the most popular man in town.
The story about how President Johnson had three TV's to watch everything that was on the media. Our president today seems to take pride on the fact that he does not care about how the media perceives him whatsoever. President Johnson called the media when they made him look bad. I don't think that there is enough hours in the day for George W. Bush to do that.

When FYI becomes TMI

2007-03-05T21:28:00.000-06:00

Information overload. How much is too much, and what's the point of making something we really don't need nor want to know what it tells us? Will we get a choice if it is engrained into everything we do? I don't want my shower to ready itself nor tell me when it's ready, it is a luxury that i neither need or want. But if what we think will come...comes, what choice will we have but to accept the whole and not the parts?

Some things just can't be. Costs of making cannot exceed necessity/want of people. I believe that it is now that we decide the parts, and that as time passes it will be increasingly difficult to decide what information you want to get about your surroundings. With new mind boggling inventions being brought to the public's attention monthly it is now that we decide if we want it or not.

Just like the telegraph, much of the technology that we have today could have been just a passing fad that fades away. Without a couple crucial elements and discoveries ous whole way of living could be dramatically changed. Some would say that if one person didn't figure it out another would have later, but would they have really? I guess you just never know. It's like wondering what it would be like if Germany won the war, an infinite of possibilities and ways it could have been.

News and Journalists

2007-03-05T14:10:00.000-06:00

In Communication in History, it points out “the extent in which television news had come to fascinate, if not obsess, the nation.” I am not sure what type of news fascinated the people back in the early years of television but I am sure it was news about politics, wars, sports, and not so much of the “bull” we are fascinated with today. I hate to be inconsiderate but I don’t think Anna Nicole Smith is all that news worthy. I mean sure she was an extravagant TV personality that captured her audiences attention with her odd performances but there are far more worthy things that should be at the fore front of today’s news. I think there is way to much of this type of news flooding the TV.
The journalist first starting out discovering and presenting the news probably had no idea how much their work would impact society. Journalist now days are visiting dangerous countries to investigate atrocities to humanity, shed light on the progress of wars, and various other things. But above all journalists are risking their lives in order to bring this news to the public. And I believe there efforts are not in vain as we use the information they have provided and either make the proper changes ourselves or call upon legislature or other government officials to make the changes.

TV WARZ

2007-03-05T13:07:00.000-06:00

The television industry has such a dominant and lucrative market present day; it’s hard to imagine it any other way. But when television first appeared, the first few years it struggled, having to compete with the all too popular radio. I thought it was interesting how many were skeptical of TV's possible profits, saying it would take about 10 years until TV would become commercially successful. This skepticism could be related to the internet now, and how many doubt how some sites (besides the big names of course) will earn money. As long as people want a technology, that technology can make money.

VHF vs. UHF - the ultimate battle of first generation television technology, sort of. Even though the “FCC [knew] that VHF television standards were inadequate” they still let it happen, because of pressures from NBC/RCA. This is the classic example of obviously flawed technologies creeping up on consumers, and the FCC not doing anything to stop them. When companies argue about standards for new technologies, with only their corporation in mind, they in-the-end are the victims. America does not want to decide when it’s right to invest in a technology, they simply want to buy it and hope it works forever. Blu Ray vs. HD-DVD seems to be in the same boat currently, both are only doing so-so in sales.

Language of the Medium

2007-03-05T12:33:00.000-06:00

I agree with Carpenter's analysis of new media not making old media obsolete but rather creatively revitalizing it in new ways previously unimagined. It seems and understandably so skepticism comes with each new media. Skepticism seems to stem from the idea that new media "challenges" old media when I also feel that is never the case. With the advent of each new medium society is given greater tools to work with in conveying the language present within that medium used to provide the message. With the creation of new mediums old mediums are not trashed but incorporated allow for a variety of forms for a message to be taken place.

"A medium is not simply an envelope that carries any letter; it is itself a major part of the message" (Carpenter 257). With a view point from a diversity of mediums the message becomes more varied and in a sense less bias to one form. Carpenter studies the use of a variety of mediums to project one message, through a TV, print, and radio lecture. This lecture seems to have varied results each time it is used in the experiment. I think this just shows how many intricacies goes into utilization of a medium to display a single message. The message not just a product of the medium used but of the environment and culture.

Processors

2007-03-05T12:08:00.000-06:00

When the class first started and we were reading about how people were all scared about new technologies I laughed. I mean I though to myself, How could someone be scared of something without a mind of its own. Now I am reading about all these processors being intertwined with everything I use in almost every day of my life. This is scary to think because in a sense these processors kinda have a mind of their own. It scares me to think of what they will soon be like and how easy it will be to incorporate into robotics. These processors are becoming much smaller and much faster and much more "smart". It is because of this that I am scared. People will be able to use these for anything and that scares me. In the next 100-1000 years could we be looking at an age of robotics and processors everywhere, well I hope that people soon become less selfish and more looking into the good of humanity, or we should all be very very afraid.

Bring on the Television

2007-03-05T12:01:00.000-06:00

It was intriguing to read that when the television first began, there were so many technicalities. I can remember on one of my grandparents old televisions, that they might still have, there was a knob to switch between VHF or UHF and I never knew what that meant until I read about the start of television. But I guess not too much has changed because even today we still have the FCC regulating what can and can’t be viewed on television. However I think we all agree that with every year passing, a line gets pushed, then crossed, and then accepted. I mean I know that there are like billions of lines that have been pushed and crossed just with the cartoon show South Park.

Lots of things change with time of course, like how back in the 1940’s some commentators stated that the expected viewing periods are about an hour or two a day. And today there are millions of people that practically watch television all day long. Another thing was that when they first came out, the television was usually used only by the upper-class status public, but of course that changed within the first 10 years of the start of the televison. The prediction that was made that television were going to only be used by the upper class was made invalid a year later because the middle class public began to also purchase television sets, which brought on these remarks an editor in Business Week “TV is becoming the poor man’s theater” and “Television is the poor man’s latest and most prized luxury.” It’s a little funny how technology theories seem to repeat themselves, like the television and the computer: which were expected to be only used by the rich, but now almost everyone owns one, upper, middle and lower class people.

death of tv rabbit ears

2007-03-05T09:24:00.000-06:00

I heard an interesting thing on my commute to work this morning, by 2009 the old TV antennas our parents grew up with will cease to work. TV manufacturers will stop making TVs that use this analog technology and start making TVs exclusively digital. Now this is no big deal to me, and probably no big deal most people in general, but it represents the end of an anolog tech in TVs. I thought this seemed worth mentioning in given the context of class.

Now, in the light of the essay about the beginnings of TV I think the above side note is even more pertinent. I found it interesting to note how the developmnet of the TV industry as we know it, was sevely affected by the involvement of the Federal government i.e. the FCC. The proscription of UHF in favor of VHF, which limited the amount of competition avaliable for the burgeoning industry essentially formed the TV world we know so well today. Things like the infamous "blue book" and censorship all sprung from the VHF restrictions.

I also found it interesting reading the recounts of early TV criticism. The fact that many thought TV would steal women at home away from their chores, and junior away from the baseball diamond, and dad away from his study doesn't seem far fetched today. I find myself immersed in crappy programs all the time, wondering why the hell I'm watching American Idol or Cops, when I should be studying for this class. Programs like Jerry Springer and The Biggest Loser also fall under the list of programs that these early TV critics prognosticated as being mind numbing and productivity killing.

Censorship of TV programs was an essetial factor in the rise of TV and I think this was a good thing. Why? Well if anyone has ever watched cable access any time after 12am we all know how inane and vapid the programming can be. Thank goodness for this little gem restricting our freedom of speech, or else we'd be subject not only to the jabbering of corporations hungry for our money but also the rants of anyone with enough cash to get a a licesnse.

Privacy Invasion

2007-03-05T09:13:00.000-06:00

In Thesis 35 Greenfield touches on the aspect of invasion of privacy with networking. He talks about sites such as Friendster or Orkut. The first obvious thing I think about in comparison is Facebook, and the not so popular upgraded version a few months ago. I really didn't care. But the new facebook informed all of your friends essentially what you did, when you did it, and everything else in facebook. To the majority of students on facebook this was a huge invasion of privacy. I did find it odd or somewhat disturbing after a while. For example, now whenever my ex-girlfriend posts new pictures of her and her new boyfriend kissing or going to Mt. Bonnell...I am immediately informed and see the gory details.

Social networking sites aren't all that Greenfield touches on. I particularly like the part about information receiving a sort of "immortality" once it reaches the grid. Sometimes we need to forget things or not know about something, but now once it hits the network it will always be there. Greenfield says "One trouble with this is that we've historically built our notions of reputation such that they rely on exformation - on certain kinds of information leaving the world..." Although facebook administrators enabled privacy settings, a lot of people still aren't satisfied. And what of things were no privacy settings can be enabled? We're getting so fixated on acquiring more information in more ways and more rapidly that I think we sometimes reach the point when it's too much. But that's what technology is doing...bringing more information that will be immortalized.

How may I serve you… the news, that is…

2007-03-05T08:40:00.000-06:00

News is offered in so many different ways nowadays – hardcopy (newspaper/magazine), electronic (internet), audibly (radio) and visually (television) – that the media does not give much room to not know what is going on in the world today. Of course, all sources, that are not opinion-based, are regulated to make sure that they are valid and not causing the world to break out in a riot. It is always interesting to see how much things have changed in the past and you sit and think, “Wow, knowing what I know now, could I really survive a time when there was no television or the internet?” I think I could.

Although television is probably the most appealing of all the mediums, I find it to be the most distracting. They touch briefly on actual news and then focus on other “news” to stir up chaos like “How milk is really not good for the body. Tune in and find out.” Maybe there isn’t enough news out there to be covered? I am not sure. With the newspaper and the internet, you have more control on what you want to find out about. You can skim through and browse sections to get the stories that you have more interest in and it is uninterrupted (unless someone stops to talk to you or your bus arrives). I can’t say that I don’t “watch” the news because I can usually YouTube or find a video clip online of the particular news story that I was reading about.

Whichever route you take to find out the latest news, we have so many options of being informed by what is going on in the world.

Television, the most powerful dictator ever

2007-03-05T00:31:00.000-06:00

Edmund Carpenter’s article “The New Language” stimulated me the most in conjuring commentary. On page 257 he states that “We don’t watch TV; it watches us”. This reference made me think about TiVo and how suspicions were being raised about how TiVo monitors its clients. Apparently TiVo automatically adapts to users choices of shows and automatically records data, the data is then analyzed and then returns other shows that you might like that are similar. This stirred a huge privacy debate weather TiVo had the right to monitor recorded content. But it is this technology that Carpenter was foreshadowing; the TV will adjust to our viewing preferences and not the other way around.

In Williams Boddy’s selection “Television Begins” concentrated on the early entrepreneurships of the few successful television companies. The selection also centered around how the television impacted the family life. Women were out of the kitchens, children were inside instead of outdoors playing and fathers were leisurely relaxing all day without opening the briefcase. This scenario continues to show relevance today, as Americans are statistically eating more and exercising less. The media through television contains the power to change the American way of life. Much of what people do are dictated through media and has a direct influence on society. When McDonalds introduces a new product, millions of people will go try it, not knowing that it contains high levels of fat and cholesterol, the only image being portrayed is that, the food will bring happiness. Like Carpenter states in his article, the television is the most powerful media of the time.

2007-03-04T17:31:00.000-06:00

I for one, was shocked when I read the statistic that close to 60% of the televisions sold when they were first introduced were purchased on credit. That may not seem so drastic in this day when credit lines and accounts are readily available to everyone over the age of 16, but in the '60s that represented an overwhelming majority. I was mostly taken aback for two reasons. First being that, I find it difficult to imagine the ready acceptance for a technology that was not entirely proven. Upon first release, it seems that televisions for the most part were big, expensive, had horrible picture quality and almost no network/channels to work with. Yet droves of people clamored to have one. Radio and Print media would still be the king of news and entertainment venues for several years to come, however a large number of people went beyond their average means of living just to purchase a television set. People that couldn't very well afford a set, did everything in their power to make sure they had one set up in their homes before too long. It's hard to believe that the average person buying a television at that point would have done it for sheer potential of what they believed the sets could accomplish. Rather, it seems more like the creation of television contained the perfect mix of future wonder and current practicality. As far as media was concerned, television had all the makings of radio but with the added incentive of picture broadcast.
The release of televisions to the general public also seems to be the last truly large scale release of a "must-have" product. As mentioned before, over 60% of the televisions bought were done through credit and loans. Ever since then, there hasn't been a technological release that has matched the enthusiasm that customers showed then. The next remotely similar launch would more than likely have been of the personal computer. While innovating the way information is broadcast and opening a door of potential applications to the user, computers were far too complicated to be inhaled by the masses directly after it's release. Eventually more savvy users would begin to purchase the machines, however in terms of technical revolution and ease of use, the television set remains King.

Then and Now

2007-03-03T19:03:00.000-06:00

I think my favorite part of the reading was comparing television then to television now. I absolutely loved the quote about television content: "This means that vulgarity, profanity, the sacrilegious in every form, and immorality of every kind will have no place in television. All programs must be in good taste, unprejudiced, and impartial."
When I read this, I burst out laughing. I mean, I don't think any programs exist today that DON'T have any of those things. An example of this is the show "I Love Lucy" I thought it was mind-blowing that the show wasn't allowed to have Lucy and Ricky sleeping in the same bed, even though they are married. It really shows the change in morals, and what is considered acceptable in this day and age.
Back then, there was "simply no place for the florid gesture, the overprojection of emotion, the exaggeration of voice or grimace or movement..." I wonder how long it took them to change that idea. :) Now, there is high definition to capture every florid gesture in detail. In fact, that's what we love about television.
I thought it was interesting that there were only three major networks originally too. I wonder how many there are now. I would assume many more than that. And that makes me wonder what the future holds. If I am so amazed at how far television has progressed (or digressed, depending on how you look at it), I wonder how my great grandchildren will be entertained. Or with the way technology is progressing, maybe just my children. There might be something coming along better than tv very soon.

Random thoughts...

2007-03-01T01:43:00.000-06:00

Well after completeing the hw .doc on the Fischer chaps I was having tons of thoughts and needed to write some down, dont read if you dont want but I need to get some postings in fa'sho.

The networked computer yields an unprecedented level of analysis of the social climate and the power of technology. For the first time, we actually have a ton of people giving first-hand accounts of there everyday lives; a critical development for the analysis of technology and society. So with the computer, we are able to quantify everything, and with the networked computer, we are able to quantify personalities, day-by-day lifestyles, and a plethora of other valuable information for sociologist, historians, and the populous alike. The problems of analysis then become extracting purposeful meaning from the mass quantities of information we are aggregating. Where do you look? How do you look? Why is the data collected? Who is collecting it? Is this a reliable source?

Now we must use the technology, in order to examine it and determine what people are doing with it; a profound cycle of people using technology, to see how other people are using technology. What does this mean for media studies? Will we have a bunch of new material to draw theory and practice from? Undoubtedly, but the real meaning I take from this, is that we have finally achieved a goal which we may or may not have consciously realized. That goal is the unity theory and practice. From the Renaissance, this distinction was made, and even back to Aristotle, theory and practice are separate. The two are complete opposites. Yet if we really think about it, has not all innovation come out of a unity of theory and practice? Inventors, Scientists, Alchemists, Engineers, all innovate side-by-side, and others come along, witnessing these discoveries occur side-by-side and cannot help but connect them to their own theories and practice. This in itself is a heuristic model, you have an idea, and in order for that idea to be valuable, it must be possible and must actually happen, and therefore you must practice through trial and error to learn something new, and certainly amend the original idea or theory in response to the practice. These things, although completely separate, are connected in the presence of human life. We have known this all along, but have been in opposition. Why? Maybe because so much good, along with so much bad has come from this resistance--WE’VE GOTTEN THIS FAR HAVENT WE?

Technology and Modern Life

2007-02-26T15:27:00.000-06:00

The fears of technology that people had at the turn of the century seem to parallel the fears we have now of everyware consuming our lives. Its interesting to think though, about what they feared then and how it seems like such an innocent technology now.

Telephones – “some objected that it encouraged too much familiarity and incivility and that it undermined neighborhood solidarity”

Our society now is all about connections, and with the internet I am unsure if we will ever have “too much familiarity” with anything, especially each other. But during the 1920s when this claim was made, their society was completely different than ours is now, I am sure the idea that you could talk to someone whenever you wanted, several hundred miles away would be very scary thing, next to your farm house being abducted by a flying saucer of course.

“College administrators in the 1920s argued that automobiles distracted students from their studies and led many to drop out”

Perhaps more people are dropping out help their families, or some other noble cause that requires them to flee from school. If cars are suppose to help people go places, and people are leaving college (granted dropping out is not good) then I would think cars are serving their purpose of transporting.

While reading Technology and Modern Life it seems like new technologies and society are playing a never-ending game of cat and house. If its not telephone that are causing moral breakdown, it’s the radio, if its not the radio than it has to be videogames, or cell phones, or computers, the internet, basically every major technology has “been then and caused that”. But they are all just technologies, and we, the users of technologies should be the ones taking the blame.

“The telephone cannot think or talk for you, but it carries your thought where you will. It’s yours to use...” This quote can serve any technology, and as I type on a computer, it is I thinking, not the keyboard, mouse, or monitor.

Everyware where you really need it

2007-02-26T15:14:00.000-06:00

Reading through Everyware always makes me think of something new, never too repetative. While reading about how everyware may be used in helping people be less overloaded by information, it came to me how easy it would really make certain parts of my life. Everyday life is all and well with everyware, but what about where we really need it? Like in places of emergency, where speed and accuracy is extremely important when concerning information. I work at a hospital and when doctors need to get test results for bodily fluids stat, it is rather hard to do, especially during peak time when everyone is trying to get there patients test results. this is not even considering all the time it takes to sludge through mislabeled specimens, and other other such problems. If RFID tags were implanted in the labels as they printed out, I can see much of the laboratory work being done in half the time, leaving techs with more time to spot and fix mistakes.

Technology and ‘Ancient’ Modern Life!

2007-02-26T15:09:00.000-06:00

I found the reading in America Calling to be quite interesting. I think it’s a perfect example of the evolution of man through its different stages. Evolution is not just restricted to Anthropological observation but more so by the change in man’s society and human environment. The initial pages talks about the ever-so famous Debate about whether Technology and Modern Inventions have decreased the qualitative aspect of living our life by making humans rely more on convenience which makes them less pro-active. In 2007, this does seem like a needless topic of conversation as technology has penetrated all of our lives in, as some would say, irreparable ways. I also notice similar sentiment in some of the earlier posts. But try and think back. Way back. When having a telephone was considered a novelty. When the decision every month was not whether to renew the Time Warner Cable Internet and Digital Phone Services, but rather if there could exist a way to communicate faster than sending messages through telegraph and the odd voice call. In man’s history, if there has been any one avenue where he has seen the most change, it is undoubtedly Technology. And the aspect of Technology that has impacted man the most is Communication.

I was particularly interested in AT&T’s 1916 Public Announcement where they say that, the subscriber is the dominant factor. “His ever growing requirements inspire invention”. Worth noticing that every successful invention has had one thing in common. It all starts with one simple idea that would impact the lives of many (lets not think of the modern semi-conductor or Biological cloning technologies!). This simple an idea then leads to a chain reaction if successful. And the more people it applies to or targets, the more successful the invention. AT&T got it right with the Telephone. And boy, did they get something right. They did not perceive (then) that it would lead to many new technologies (dialing up to a local server and having a secured connection!). But they kept the golden principle in mind; ‘Subscriber is king’. It was only time before they hit the right chord, and the ‘bells’ starting ringing!

Everyware...Helping or Hurting Society?

2007-02-26T14:46:00.000-06:00

In Thesis 28, Greenfield discusses the computer’s importance in our society. It holds our gateway into the digital realm and enables us to do pretty much whatever we can accomplish with a “magical box”. This reminds me of my first thoughts of the “magical box” we first opened up at my home. Complete with music burning, DVD and photo editing software, that box quickly became the central tool in my life. I call it a tool because essentially, that’s what it is. It allowed me to create, explore and connect to the world. I quickly saw the progression of our society as dependant on such elaborate and complex devices. That point quickly reminds me of a movie I recently saw. The movie Babel is an intertwined mix of storylines that all deal with communication and locations. Whilst, a deaf, mute girl in Japan uses her video-cell phone to “talk” idly chit-chats to a friend in her luxurious Tokyo-skyline loft, a little boy and his brother in Morocco run across a desert to deliver an important message to their father in a stone hut. Two societies, in the same world at the same time using different means of communication and technology to do the same thing. In the same movie, the main character, in need of an ambulance for his wounded wife, is stranded in a small village in the same Moroccan desert with only one telephone to call for help. I have no doubt that seeing this movie made aware of not only customs and traditions of different countries in this world not being on the same page, but also the differences in technology make for vastly different ways of life. I’m not saying that countries with computers are the only ones to prosper, but the welcoming of technology has enabled many societies to come together and grow into this “dawning age of ubiquitous computing”.