Rebuilt Second Life

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

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

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

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.

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

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

"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?!?

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

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

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

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

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.

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?

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.

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?

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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!

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

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...

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?

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

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

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

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?

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

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

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

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...

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

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)

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

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

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?

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

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

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

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

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?

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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?

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?!?

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.