Honesty is Key: A Prelude to Self-Assessment

As I start to finish up my questions for the final exam, I couldn't help but think for the future about what exactly I am going to write within my self-assessment. For me, this class has been a journey: a journey that has had its highs and its lows. At first I didn't have much expectations in this class, but in terms of the amount of new ideas that I have acquired, those expectations were exceeded. I will admit, however, that throughout this course I was highly intimidated my most of my peers, but neglected to let my doubts and fears lead me to give up and drop the class, like most have already done. I decided to challenge myself, and strive to achieve my goals and aspirations in the most effective way that I can. That is why I am still here.

Digital Networks had allowed me to view technology in a entirely different perspective. I have always been surrounded by technology growing up, and I still effectively utilize technology to this day. Now, I have become aware of how Google has really influenced my discovery of information online, and how I have constantly been distracted by technologies. I have learned that the media is highly influential, especially in today's society, and how the interactivity through social networks has both negatives and positives. Through my analysis of media I have become more open-minded about numerous ideas, and though it may seem peculiar or strange, I often link some technological ideas to Music, which is obviously one of my motivating forces in my life.

I felt the need to express some of my self-assessment with no intentions to seem vulnerable or weak, but in fact strong and determined to succeed in this course. Like we discussed in class from Carr's observations, these days there is not much compassion for others in the world, and I feel that this is true, simply because we are mainly concerned with ourselves, and often neglect the feelings or views of others. People have a tendency to not become fully engaged in knowledge and have trouble remembering certain ideas, thoughts and values. Sometimes it's good to sit back and dwell on our interactions with others without being distracted.

The Shallows

Just from reading and processing the first few pages of The Shallows brought me back to the days of my later childhood when I was at the point of graduating elementary school and transitioning to junior high school. Since my mother was a teacher, she always gave me books to read just so I would not end up immersing my mind into technology. She always hoped that I would have continued my engaged reading for enjoyment, especially through high school and college. Well Mom, I'm sorry to have disappointed you, but the idea of deep thought in reading is just not viable anymore. What I have derived from the few chapters so far of "The Shallows" is that we are using the internet in replacement of physical sources of information, such as books and periodicals, and have, as a result, lost the deep thought that was needed in order to fully comprehend and process information.

As a songwriter, I often find myself nowadays depending on technology (laptop, iPod, Android notepad) to jot down my melodic ideas. Even some popular artists have also used this technique, and as our society is continuously moving forward and accelerating, people need sources of information as quickly and as efficiently as possible without truly embracing the true meaning of the information. There was a quote on page 19, said by Koselitz, where he states, "My thoughts in music and language often depend on the quality of pen and paper."By all means, I love to write creatively, and I honestly feel that once I started using technology to formulate my song ideas, instead of cross-outs and sloppy pen marks, my finished products became structured lines of text that were in a different, unusual form. Somehow I miss the days of writing in my songwriter's journal, and still wonder to this day if it was really the transition from the quality of pen and paper to a virtual notepad that changed my songwriting style; not to mention, I found myself memorizing my songs more as I physically wrote it as opposed to writing it on the virtual notepad...

Here is what someone working in the music biz practically told me,

“It seems the higher I climb the ladder, the more I realize they use less and less vision, and want practically a finished product presented to them…”

I feel that this is relevant to Carr's view of the internet and how it has transformed our thinking habits because he states that we are often distracted by different technologies, and we often need a generalized view or basic summarization of the information that we need without really having to think much about the other pieces of information that is being left out. How we access and interpret information today is similar to how an A&R (Artist and Repertoire) Executive briefly skims through demos, only listening to 10-15 seconds of a song in order to determine if it is actually a hit or not. In other words, we only choose the main view of our information, but like a song, we tend to use the summarized version of what we need and neglect the actual meaning of our content that requires deep intuitive thought.

That’s what also happens once students make the transition to college. We multi-task, and therefore the tiny space we have to process information is lost. Once we are faced with deep thought, we become overwhelmed by the thought of processing more information than expected.

Reflections on Thursday's Class

From reading Bifo's views about autonomy within today's society and how technology diminishes the emotional effect of communication, there were many interesting ideas from Thursday that I jotted down and decided to put my own reflection on from chapters 4-8. Though the first few Bifo chapters seemed quite historically overwhelming, I felt more at ease with the later chapters, maybe since I can personally relate to many of the ideas that were expressed.

First off, In chapter 4, what I found very interesting was how Bifo claims the cellphone is seen as the assembly line of labor. This really struck me because I agree that in this age we have become fully dependent on smartphones, where even if we take a day off (or few days off) from work, we can still find an effective approach of completing tasks through technology without even being present at work. One example that comes to mind involved my absence from class for a couple days, where I had no access to any type of technology whatsoever because my phone had been damaged. I had felt out of touch with the world, and even at one point lost an aspect of time due to my dependence on technology. About two days later, once I received a new phone, it felt as if my world had spun on its axis yet again; everything had fallen back into place though in the meantime I developed my own sense of time cognitively... In short, what I derived mainly from this chapter was that technology is an extension of our availability, and that we rely on technology to provide flexibility within our lives.

Next, in Chapter 5, I couldn't help not taking one side from another when discussing the issue of how technology critically affects cognitive function, but I will say that comprehending and applying literacy to technology does result in the loss of the emotional connection that, for example, one would obtain from being taught by their parents or elders. I will also add that there is also an emotional disconnection between images that we share on Facebook and the images and memories that have been stored in our thoughts. For instance, when someone looks through another user's images, they are viewing the image from an outsider's point of view, and may not recognize the significant memory that was shared during the moment that the photo was taken. Also, another element that adds to the emotional disconnect through imagery is the limited amount of time that is spent looking through one's album which also contributes to the emotional disconnection. Moreover, the more information (or images) that we look through, the more dissonance of information arises which results in the increasing lack of attention that we pay to the overload of information.

What I also found interesting about Chapter 6 is that although through the idea repression, thoughts and emotions become internalized and build up over time, hyper-expressivity is what Bifo views as the main cause of disorders. It is as if the more freedom or autonomy people have to express themselves, the more prone people are to have several psycho-pathological disorders, since it is not solely based on an individual level, but on a mass level. However, was Bifo stating that art shouldn't be therapeutic due to the revolts of different people's opinions?

The Essentials of Marketing

What I derived from both the Movements.org was that the group was motivated to engage the youth through new media technologies such as Facebook, Twitter and Myspace. I felt that this was a good approach to target youth for social justice, and that in today's society, utilizing these networks to reach out to the youth was a very effective technique. As for the combination of different top named companies at the summit, such as Pepsi, Youtube, and Google, at first I viewed the adjoining of these companies to have a positive effect on the community, showing that they can help out for a cause. However, it never slipped my mind that these companies would use their marketing strategies in order to benefit their own companies, which can be viewed as a good and bad thing. These companies are using the youth since we are the largest demographic for marketing and Public Relations, and they know how to catch our attention by finding new strategies to sell projects. 

If the money that companies make is going towards a beneficial cause, then it it should be fine. However, it is certain that their goals are not solely based on spreading awareness, yet hopefully these companies are using this movement to help society, not just as marketing gimmicks in order to obtain revenue for their companies. One idea that I agree with that was mentioned in class on Tuesday is the reality that there are needs in our society and corporations are filling those gaps and fulfilling these needs. 

I do believe that what drives most successful companies are their business strategies which are key components of good marketing. What bothers me, however, is how these websites may not actually be driven by young people, but mainly the marketers who are just engaging in these websites in order to advertise their products, so it is slightly biased. I also found it interesting that people’s own revolt for social change or awareness is repackaged, remodeled, and sold pack to an entrepreneurial elite. This idea actually reminds me of the music industry, specifically, where record companies collaborate with organizations in order to support a cause. One example I can think of are Live8, a movement in 2006 whose mission was to "make poverty history" in Africa by holding a variety of concerts. With this approach however, there is still poverty in Africa that has not been fully eradicated, and the record companies (and some artists) still made a profit from this movement. The big-name companies who were involved in this movement were AOL, BBC, and Nokia, who most likely benefited from this event and used their clever marketing tactics. Nevertheless, Live8 also claimed that, "The beneficiary of excess revenue after the costs of the concerts were donated to the Band Aid Charitable Trust." Therefore, the reality that companies fill the gaps in our societies towards our needs is still relevant today. Even through campaigns such as the Peace Iced Tea,  consumers are still being manipulated  into buying the Arizona products. Thus the Arizona company obtains revenue while advocating a cause. But like I said, it's all in the marketing strategy. You gotta do whatcha gotta do...

Today's Presentation - Debate on Open Source

I appreciate everyone's participation during today's debate. As we deliberated on each of the groups that were for or against open source, we found that there had been some very interesting points about open source.

The For Group: It was great how you all explained that open source provides the internet with open forum for "revolutionized" information, easy access to that information, and how there is a network harmony that is associated with open source. Also, I enjoyed the peer-to-peer interaction advantage of open source. As mentioned by Tuomi, open source "recruits developers from all over", thus bringing an array of ideas in order to improve software.

What I derived from Raymond's article was that the cathedral ideology involves carefully structured software, where the bazaar ideology contains:

1)      Different agendas and approaches
2)    Allows users to communicate efficiently with developers. Also, open sources are more effective in producing better, less time-consuming results.

3)      Linux world is more free and open to searches that are available.

I can also agree with Raymond's views that though there may be a community of geeks that may develop software that is challenging for some users to utilize, there are many users that can be hackers, effective hackers who can shorten the debugging time for applications. Raymond also states, "Given a bit of encouragement, your users will diagnose problems, suggest fixes, and help improve the code far more quickly than you could unaided. I also commend the For group for using the iPad example, where the iPad develops new improvements of established software, and that the Bazaar ideology engages thousands of developers who swallow bugs and help applications to work better.

Along with Raymond, Koch, who is also for open source, views it from a research perspective. Koch claims that open source allows researchers to "have complete data sets and provides much historical information through large quantities of projects." I also agree with Koch because through the public availability of information through open source, any group can "come back" and reproduce the study, which reminds me of many psychology studies that have been conducted that replicate older studies. Therefore, like psychological studies, open source reproduces information that can also be improved, and has a great impact on validity and results. 

As for the Against group, I also sided with some of the statements claimed about open source, such as how wikipedia is not respected in the academic community. Lanier talks about this idea through his analysis of wikipedia, where there are anonymous authors and editors who produce all different types of information, and that our intellect and productivity is flawed and decreased as a result. I personally would argue that though closed sources are more valid, they are less accessible for some users; not everyone has a Mac, or even access to GarageBand. More notably, the Audacity program (open-source) is just as useful as GarageBand, and can be used for everyone.

Overall, I felt like everyone did a fabulous job in presenting their arguments. After today's class, even as an advocate for open source information, I could admit that Wikipedia has its flaws with editing information. I have, along with many others, come across situations where even celebrity information (i.e. birthdates, place of birth) has not been validated (they show different birthdates of Mariah Carey, yet the same month and day). Nonetheless, open source software is still an outlet that is used to provide necessary information, even if there may be some negative effects to it. 

Today's Class Discussion: Chapters 6 & 7

At first, when I entered the classroom, I was completely lost in translation about what was about to occur during the next hour and 20 minutes. After I got settled, my mind finally began to marinate the numerous discussions about Chapter 6 and 7. For me personally, I can usually multitask, but when it comes down to listening to and understanding everyone's views about Andrejevic's points in the chapters, I realized I had to listen and comprehend first, then write a blog. Honestly, I felt that some views did go around and were not consistent until about 10 minutes later. Nonetheless, I thank everyone for sharing their views and ideas to help me write this blog. What i basically derived from both the discussion and the readings about iWar and iPolitics were that:

The efforts of war are turning into profits. Also, Andrejevic states,"...Anxiety is especially productive, and risk can be leveraged for profit" (p. 184) I agree with these statements because the more that we become anxious about what is to occur, be it terrorism or any attack, the more that we are vulnerable to the government investing in weaponry in order to incite fear.

Some of the other ideas that were discussed were that the government tricks us into giving up our privacy, and that in order to be prepared, we are giving up every ounce of our privacy. Another idea that was brought up was the idea of a feedback loop of fear, where the government manipulate us into thinking that in order to not be afraid, we must be prepared. However, this motive of preparation is provoked through heightened fear. Also, because we are afraid of what can potentially happen, they can make us feel as if letting go of our privacy can contribute to preparation.

Another idea that was discussed was that technology is being used by politicians to gain voters. Also, if politicians have access to target companies and distribute personal messages, they can influence voters into thinking the politicians are sympathetic towards their issues and control. Also, it was also mentioned that social networks such as Facebook are being transferred into our physical lives, where people are buying into gated communities, yet people have limited control of what is being discussed or determined by the higher officials of those social communities.

Lastly, what was also brought up was that we do not recognize what the real source of terrorism is, and even if we attack a targeted terrorist, there is distributed network of terrorists. In addition, the internet could make us more engaged in democracy, but in reality there is still a higher force of political authority that places limits on what we can access and determine, yet the government can access all aspects of our privacy.

iSpy: Our Privacy's in Jeopardy

We have 4 lives: Our public life, private life, secret life, and digital life.


Andejevic states that "Contextual advertising" (pg. 1)  is seen as google using users' locations to give time and location for specific ads to pop-up, whether it be through our browsers, smartphones, or applications through Facebook and Google. There were many instances where I  have encountered contextual advertising. One particular experience involved listening to the online unlimited radio station which we all know as Pandora. While tapping into my musical space, one specific ad struck me as annoying yet fascinating. It was a St. John's University advertisement about enrollment. What really puzzled me about this ad was how Pandora was able to use my location to advertise local restaurants and schools that are popular in NYC, seeing that St. John's is in Queens, and I reside in Brooklyn. My point, which Mark Androvick touches bases on, is that different internet services, most notably Google, are taking advantage and control of internet users' location in order to provide ads. In the case that Androvik discusses involving users receiving free wi-fi in San Francisco, my case is similar in that in return for providing free musical enjoyment, Pandora is utilizing my input of information on my account including my location in order to provide local advertisements. I would not be surprised if in a couple of years, or even months I should say, instead of us Pandora-lovers having the freedom to develop our own stations based on our personal music interests, we might instead be faced with completely automated playlists (which has already been generated with several company promotions such as Macy's and Facebook) or even have out personalized playlists be exploited through third-party servers without us even knowing.


I agree with Andrejevic when he states that digital enclosure involves a creation of an interactive realm, where every action and transaction develops information about itself within a physical space. The internet provides digital enclosure where the more we post on social networks, the more we and other services are able to locate our information. Thus our private information is not really private, but there should be a limit as to what personal information can be accessed through different anonymous services, although there is not a physical, contractual agreement between the user and the service provider stating and confirming that they cannot access our private information. In addition, although shopping services claim our transaction information would not be used for third party purposes we really cannot take the risk of jeopardizing our privacy...

Blog Theory: The Last 2 Chapters

Seeing that I am currently in the process of writing out answers for the midterm, I decided to spend the last 2 chapters writing out some points that I took from the reading, and placing it into this post. Here it goes:

1)      Blogging is a practice that includes multiple forms of media integration, and provides a space where people can express themselves. It’s whatever.

2)      Blogs are not as personalized as much as you may think. Yes it allows for unique expression, but there are still limitations. 

3)      Whatever is such an interesting word. The term “Whatever “ suggests apathy, lack of interest, and/or the disposing of someone else’s thoughts or feelings., and much more.  Whatever is unsettling, and for blogging, it’s communication without any communicative effort. As Professor Dean mentioned in this chapter, “whatever”  takes no side, and “neither rejects nor accepts.” When I think of the word, “whatever”, not only do I think of today’s society and my generation, I also think of pop culture entirely. Honestly speaking, for instance,  when I think of most of today’s pop music and how it is received,  I think about how the messages that some music puts out is not based on the true content or meaning, but perhaps intent to make you dance or flaunt your lavish spending,  but not to make you feel.

4)      When it comes to blogging, people can blog “whatever” their heart desires, but the response of content goes unresolved through “whatever.”

5)      The supplying of blog services such as layouts and other features, makes blogs virtually indistinguishable from one another. I agree because although we have the option of personalizing our own blog, there is still a standardized structured that is followed with blogs, as well as other media networks (facebook, twitter.)

6)      We can almost control what we put out, but not how many people receive or react to what we put out. It’s whatever.

7)      There are two types of fantasy –

a)      Exposure without exposure – telling your info to the world without having an exploitation of your information, leaving room for easy monitoring,

b)      The f.a.m.e.  – (fantasy allowing mutual exposure), where people share their life with friends, and also add friends just to gain popularity (say, 1000+ friends). I’ve actually become a victim of this F.A.M.E. fantasy. However, you have no full control of what you are putting out because the info you put out to you network also feeds into advertisements and third parties.

8)      What I derived from Chapter 4 was that users gain a sense of attachment through these affective networks. When the blogging system was down due to a virus, I could not help but think about the idea of blog anxiety, where at that moment  I realized my excessive enjoyment for writing blogs as soon as the system went down, hoping to seek fulfillment in writing yet another blog. 

Blog Theory: My Understandings

I know I've been on hiatus for quite a while, but I have been quietly intaking all of these thoughts and ideas, trying to fully understand it, and also develop my own argument. Bare with me. From what I learned about Chapters 1 & 2, there were numerous points that were discussed that I want to briefly ensure I am on the right page with. First off, I want to begin with:

Social Acceleration/Mediation

Current media trends are constantly accelerating as we know it. Because we are constantly bombarded with new technological ideas each day, what I grasp is that we just go along with the new technological innovations without really appreciating it for what it is. We can utilize technology,  yet we cannot think about how it is developed due to social accelerations and we cannot think about the other prior innovations we had. This also relates to the idea of mediation. Through the outlet of mediation (i.e. facebook, twitter, etc.) we have displaced our prior functions, and implemented our activities through these mediations.

** On the bottom of page 2 (the portion that talks about multiple-recombinant ideas), I grasped that these different ideas that circulate throughout the media may lead us to think that they are all equally valid, but they are distracting us from society, and prohibiting us to think. If all ideas were equally valid, wouldn't that would that lead to the  stability of symbolic efficiency, seeing that all thoughts would be similar? Also, there was an interesting point about e-books, articles, and blog posts being convenient ways to store and share ideas. At first I thought that these media outlets would stimulate thought, but perhaps these outlets are instead stimulating interest in and curiosity about the subject. 

Communication Capitalism

My understanding of communication capitalism is that it is the idea of capturing users though several contemporary communications of enjoyment. By people putting out several forms of communications, thought processes are lost. I feel that because of all these plural ideas, we become lost in the variations of ideas, and allow these new technologies to think for us and also to provide the necessary resources for us such as keeping in touch with friends, etc. 

Symbolic Efficiency 

From what we discussed in class about this idea, I think symbolic efficiency is practically a source of ambiguity, where there are different types of symbols, and different ways to interpret these symbols. I also saw the decline of symbolic efficiency as an imbalance of interpretation, where things we symbolize become lost or misinterpreted by new ideas that form. 

**One thing I am still unsure of: How is communicative capitalism reliant on the suspension of narratives, patterns, identities and norms (pg. 31)

Terranova VS. Anderson

For some reason,  I was in a quandary state in trying to figure out if I sided more with Terranova's view or Anderson's view. At first, I was completely lost with Terranova's view until after today's class when I understood that "free labour" consists of providing labor or input that is not being compensated for, and also has an impact on the capitalist economy, where others make a profit from that input.

What I did confidently grasp from Terranova's standpoint, however, was how the digital economy is divided into older and newer media, where there is a significant difference between work structure in internet and TV. I agree with how TV labor has a more structured, dire force, whereas in the digital network, everyone basically does segments of everything. What I am still unsure of is this collective knowledge, where there is a general standard of intellect that everyone is aware of, but how does this aspect become a part of the capitalist economy? 

While reading Anderson's article, the main thoughts that went through my mind involved the role of several free file-sharing sites such as Limewire (although it may be shut down.) I feel the user always had the option to purchase Limewire Pro, but never did because we did not want to have to purchase a premium version of a file sharing program that would eventually give us viruses or slow down our computer. Maybe Anderson's saying everything should be free, but I feel that it is unfair how the individuals who have the higher positions claim to make the most profit, while everyone else suffers. Maybe I just had a hard time understanding this chapter overall, but please try to help me clarify these views if I seem entirely off track. 

Network Culture - Chapter 2

Now that I have gained Terranova's perspective about how information stands out from noise and how its importance lies within the multiple channels that it passes through rather than what is entered in the channel, this chapter was a bit more coherent; It presented many views involving issues of internet duration, and how there is this idea of a "grid" that is "modified and differentiated" through several domains becasue it is more dynamic. I agree with what Terranova states about how the network is becoming less of a specific system because of the various, multidimensional formations, and through these different media networks connecting from a point-to-point basis, there is arguably a lost sense of individuality.

When Terranova talks about Lovink's idea of a "spaceless, virtual time standard", I automatically think not only about the time zones, but also about the communication networks such as Skype. I believe global communication has taken on a much wider approach due to technologies such as Skype and Oovoo. What also comes to mind is that the internet can be a representative medium that is relative to the process of globalization, simply because without these technologies that are utilized, there would not be the constant expansion and transcending of global communication.

I finally grasped the idea of a global culture being split between the homogeneous, meaning the global, and the heterogeneous, which is known as the local sphere. I really like the idea that was expressed about "mutant cultural forms", which reminded me of the famous "American Idol" being the pseudo-individuation of "The X-Factor" or vice-versa, along with "Britain's Got Talent" and "America's Got Talent." I also feel that limiting the distant locations would pose a threat to global acceleration and transformation in the culture, seeing that we are not able to move forward if our linkage is limited. 

Overall, I feel that this global internet culture had allowed communication to be consistent through the essence of time, which is not completely removed, but has become more abstract through the development of web networks that provide face-to-face contact with the other user. 

 

Tizianna Terranova - Network Culture

I don't know if it's just me, but I think this author has the most awesome name ever (sounds like a follow up to a Maserati)! While attempting to analyze this chapter, I was hoping to grasp the most vital points that Terranova was explaining, and what I grasped was that she demonstrates two insights that describe our contemporary culture of network communications, and how it is influenced and distracted by "white noise" rather than information. I also agree that this idea of noise is overshadowing information that is being sent through different channels, and that the noise is prohibiting or delaying the sending of messages.

I liked the statement Terranova stated about how contemporary culture is like a kaleidoscope where each segment is this culture presents differences within the culture that has its own specific reflection. I also found interesting how there are different types of information, specifically two types of information that are known as material, and immaterial, which I am inferencing is more abstract than material information.

The last point that I was able to comprehend was that information is content of our communication. To me, that means without information, we are unable to communicate; information affects the ways in which we send, receive, and process messages to each other, and noise becomes a concern for allowing us to communicate through networks.

Digital Networks: Response to Comments

Sorry I haven't gotten to respond to comments on my blog, but I have tried my best in answering questions in a clear, coherent manner. Here it goes:

“Lanier (137) "Numerical popularity doesn't correlate with intensity of connection in the cloud." How do you respond?”

I am honestly going to try my best to fixate my mind into the days of Lanier, and attempt to analyze this quote.

I feel that Lanier is implying that the number of people that has viewed your content network does not amount to how strong your connection is with the people in that network. That is a really strong quote because many people think just because you have, for example, 100, 000 of views on youtube, that you have a strong connection with ALL 100,000 of those viewers/subscribers.  When Lanier discusses “lack of expression” when anonymous people make mash-ups of recorded music, I concur with his point that the original artist’s music becomes a “statistical distribution” when blended with other presentations, but just as long as the original artist’s work is shown and promoted first, shouldn’t that be enough? Besides, he should also consider that there are still 3^rd party copyright infringements that still lie within these networks. Lanier may have to consider that there is actually expression still involved in the artist’s original recorded music, but I feel this is where “power laws” steps in, creating the whole ranking process.

“how do you think Lanier would respond to your point that musicians have no choice but to submit to lock-in?”

He would probably say something in the lines of lock-in is allowing our creativity to diminish in this industry, and that we need to be able to break out of this “lock-in” system of technology that has bounded us, making us incapable of thinking for ourselves and doing what we love without technology.

“your points on human identity in the first paragraph are interesting. they seem to me to expose a potential problem in Lanier's thinking, namely, too strong an opposition between what is human and what is technological. If our technologies are extensions of and supplements to who we are, then can we really think of who we are without them?”

I believe that we as people can ponder once in a while about not having our technologies present in our lives to truly recognize what we are grateful for having, but by doing so, we can bring ourselves back to the times, when, technology was not as prevalent in our lives as it is today. For instance, a few days ago, my friend had written a card for her boyfriend, and had trouble writing the mailing information (i.e. return address, stamp, etc. ) She asked for my assistance while stating, “Writing an e-mail is not this difficult, why is doing this so difficult?” I responded, “Well, when the soldiers during the wars had to write letters to their loved ones, did they feel it was so difficult?” I feel that although technologies are extensions of ourselves and our interests (iPod Touch for me ^_^), we should not neglect all that we have learned  and accomplished without the usage of technology.

"Is a commercial internet in everyone's interest? Or, is it user interest and satisfaction that drives the technologies?"

 I believe that it is in the interest and demands of users and consumers that drives these technologies, If technologies weren’t made to accommodate people’s interest, why buy them? If some of these technologies did not have a purpose and were just useless, who would consider them?

"lyndastarr do you want computers to "shop for us" in the future?

If you are implying computers giving us options about what to purchase, along with special online deals that spark our interests and guilty shopping pleasures, then yes. If you are suggesting humans having no input whatsoever in what they purchase along with the limitations that follow, then no.

"I like the way your personalized the post with an anecdote; what's your take as an artist on file sharing, RIAA, lawsuits, and things of that nature? I recently read a critique of commercial filmmaking by Francis Ford Coppola of all people and am always interested on where people stand on these issues."

I think file sharing along with leaking are HARMFUL  detriments  to artistry and craft, and it has contributed to the diminishing advancement of record companies and artist’s careers. I view file-sharing as The Grinch Who Stole Royalties. However, some budding and established artists still have hope with the likes of RealPlayer, Yahoo, and the top-dog of legal music downloading, iTunes.

As for the RIAA, I understand that utilizing copyrighted content is wrong and all, but sending individual letters like this:

 

Are just pushing it.

Here’s their Goal:

Our goal with all these anti-piracy efforts is to protect the ability of the recording industry to invest in new bands and new music and, in the digital space, to give legal online services a chance to flourish.

I feel legal online services as I aforementioned have already flourished. There’s still people out there who don’t know what torrents are (which I consider the Grim Reaper of entertainment in its entirety but I am still a guilty victim of it) But speaking as an unsigned artist, I can say that file sharing has allowed many underground artists who are not signed to a label to have their music heard, even if it’s just through Mediafire , Frostwire, or other file-sharing sites. Speaking as an established artist possibly in the future, it has hurt many careers, but has allowed the development of free mixtapes to arise that the labels don’t necessarily release (and most of those that are put out actually sound better than the actual albums). Even Drake has been lenient with his music being leaked. 

Power Laws, Weblogs, and Inequality

Ahh, how it feels great to actually comprehend and have information actually proccessed in my brain from a short, concise reading with clarity. I have really come to an understanding while reading these numerous articles that technology does in fact influence who we are and who we have become as people. Blogging has become something almost renowned in our society, especially in entertainment and pop culture. Had it not been for blogs, many celebrity socialites may not have gained as much internet exposure as they have. Also, many celeb gossipers may would not even have jobs had it not been for blogging.

I agree with the quote regarding diversity and freedom creating inequality, and I also admit it is true that there is a positive correlation with increasing diversity and inequality. I just feel that it is not fair that through this ranking process, power laws are being enforced, yet there are millions of bloggers out there who do not get ranked. Nevertheless, I constantly remind myself that society is basically a popularity contest in most aspects, so even if some bloggers possess quality over quantity in their content, what is most valued is how many people are linked to certain blogs due to popularity, or even through methods or marketing. After all, we still have this idea of "open culture" that remains in technology, so of course there's going to be a trafficking of views, ideas, and blog posts.

I also agree that as time and technology progress, it will become much more difficult to even have blogs seen as the blogging population grows, and it may cause some bloggers, who strive to have their opinions heard and viewed, to lose hope. It is all about preference, and preference allows the top blogs to be ranked, and the rest of the anonymous blogs can just add to the traffic.

Some questions that often cross my mind are, "If there were a fee for blogging, how drastic would the threshold be affected?"

The Last of Lanier: Parts 4/5

What I have grasped from the last 2 parts of "You Are Not A Gadget" are views that have been so paradoxical that my brain has gone into a "Lanier Overload" about 5 times. The main views that Lanier discusses towards the end of the book are the different types of "flavors" that contribute to the idea of computationalism, which in my mind represents the culture of how computers have evolved to the point of analyzing and interpreting human behavior. There are even some examples of meta-commentary that I have noticed while reading when Lanier states that he is contradicting himself, and is playing different roles at the same time while trying to explicate a point.

While attempting to decompose each of these "flavors" of computationalism, I found that in the first flavor, most or all of the qualities that may be found in humans might willingly be prevalent in computers, and possibly one day, computers will be able to assess our behavior, leading to the next "flavor". As Lanier further discusses the thought of a computer having a specific design comparable to a human, I also find it interesting that software that contains a "strange loop" is identifiable with human consciousness. I agree with this statement because there is a point in human cognition where there is a labyrinth of thoughts that emerge in our minds, and some thoughts that reoccur might as well have been repressed.  I also feel that the awareness of consciousness lies in the individual, and depends on how that individual thinks and speaks. I did not quite fully understand the last flavor that included an info structure appearing to be human actually being human. If it is mostly a subconscious idea (which I think it is), then maybe the info structure that is actually present could possibly be a human, since human created it. You tell me.

The fact that Lanier often contradicted himself while trying to explain his views made the reading more difficult and perplexed to comprehend. For instance, while discussing the second flavor, Lanier claims it is not "helpful", but "fascinating and clever". If it's "fascinating and clever", how come it cannot be helpful? What is the missing factor that the second flavor is missing? Is it the many circular references that he makes? Or is it the idea of self-representation that is not being followed through?

Lastly, in the third flavor, Lanier argues that people can make themselves believe in all of these fictional beings, but there is a breaking point that allows us to change ourselves through allowing these fictional ideas to be part of our reality and in our daily regime. I can agree with this idea to the extent of these fictional ideas being dull. For instance, I am unsure if this example fully represents my point, but I feel that for me it is the most relevant. When I play the game It Girl online, the game gives me this idea of a "strange loop" that consists of different levels that invoke my interest in shopping. I can concur with Lanier that these fictional ideas have slightly changed ourselves in many ways, but it surely does not make us dull - We don't necessarily have to completely change ourselves. As I discussed in my previous blog, this idea of a dual-standard identity is reinforced, where our human identity is integrated into our virtual identity. But is Lanier implying that our virtual identity is livelier than our human identity? That may be the case for some, but not for all. It may be more accessible to to purchase apparel or find a mate through this and other similar games in the virtual world, but maybe one is trying to experience other things. Or, maybe the person who is playing the game is actually a small town girl living in a lonely world, but we don't stop believing.

You Are Not A Gadget: A Musical/Monetary Continuation

The expansion of wealth through technology has really shaped the way big businesses can sell their products and expand their companies. From what I gained from Parts 2/3 of You Are Not A Gadget, Lanier takes a highly intriguing approach how money in today's society is critically affecting artists, musicians and journalists, implying that since money is mostly going to advertising, where is the future for all of these starving workers? He also states that our culture will entirely be "nothing but advertising", yet I see it differently. Without advertising, through a musician's viewpoint, artists who are signed to labels may not have as much success in promoting their albums/tours/appearances without the means of Facebook/Google/Myspace Ads, along with television ads and radio ads that are in heavy rotation (see: Diddy). The entertainment market is highly based on advertisement, and as a result of it, an abundance of new products have become available. I also see advertising as a positive structure, seeing the amount of job opportunities it has produced through many companies over the years. I often think about what would happen had there not been any advertising departments in radio stations, film, and music companies?

So, yes, advertising has played a major role in our "open culture", aiding established artists, and hungry, unsigned artists alike. Through sites including Reverb Nation, artists and producers are able to have the option to promote for free, or, through paid services (amazon, iTunes, etc.)  To comment on Lanier's bullet point regarding the "aggregator", this idea of aggregating music for hundreds and thousands to hear online has become a phenomenon. Even for some artists, just to have the ability to have their voice heard through their music on the net, instead of waiting around to get signed at a gas station or local club, is phenomenal.

There is also another thought-provoking statement that Lanier makes, claiming that things that are "non-digital related" will not work for artists, musicians, and filmmakers due to "digital idealism". I highly disagree with this statement because there are plenty of artists and musicians who sell merchandise outside of the digital and still make a profit, primarily through t-shirts, buttons, posters, scrapbooks, and even special-edition bracelets and other apparel. It may not be as effective as say, deluxe album releases though iTunes/Amazon, or bonus DVD's, but hey, this method still works to this day.

Another thought-provoking statement Lanier makes is if a new army of artists who sell their own CD's are starting to appear. I say ABSOLUTELY. How? One Word: Mixtapes. Mixtapes, mainly prevalent in the Hip-Hop & R&B community, has allowed a plethora of underground singers, rappers, DJ's and producers to express their creativity through their content, but it has already expanded throughout the pop culture.

Lanier also expresses his concern about the idea of the "hive mind", where this "hive ideology" continuously robs musicians and other creative people of the ability to "influence context within which their expressions are perceived." While interpreting this "hive mind" idea, I realized that through these several musical networks, we as artists, musicians and other creative people, are in many ways our own communities where we share our creative ideas and circumstances through our musical content, and also find ways to promote it and advertise it to the world, solely for exposure, but later for monetary purposes; we learn and grow through the process of hearing new content. Even through YouTube, we are sharing our resources and knowledge globally, but is that really a bad thing?

You Are Not A Gadget: A Musical Perspective

After reading Part 1 of "You Are Not a Gadget", it really had me thinking about how much the internet has really changed our identities. We live in a world where our identity has become a dual-standard, meaning that we not only have a "human" identity, but also a "virtual" identity. Our "human" identity defines who we are as people and how we interact with one another in our daily lives, and our "virtual" identity involves how we communicate with one another via social networks and through other forms of media.


Lanier discusses this idea of changing technology that changes people when he states, "Our identities can be shifted by quirks or gadgets." I feel that instead of our identities being "shifted", our human identity has been integrated into our "virtual" identity, instead of being replaced.  In addition, these technologies, including mobile phones and gadgets, have made us become even more dependent on them as they change, so I agree with Lanier when he states that altering something on the web changes an individual's behavioral patterns.   


Another idea that I found interesting about Part 1 was this process of MIDI. Of course, with me being a Music major and all, it was a must to have reflected my ideas about this development. I agree with Lanier about MIDI being a breakthrough in musical expression, and that the musical note had transformed from a "bottomless idea" to a "mandatory structure". However, to answer his question about digital artists accepting this finite idea of a MIDI note, I don't believe digital artists really have a choice to not give in to"lock-in". In today's society, the main way to for an artist to actually progress in this industry is to submit to this idea of "lock-in", due to digital purchasing of music, along with the development of new musical software programs that are designed to work with MIDI. 


Lanier's other question that I would like to take a stab at is when he asks how can a musician appreciate the "broader, less-defined" concept of a note that came before MIDI, although we use MIDI in our everyday lives and interactions. I feel that a true musician should appreciate all types of musical concepts, but never forget where the idea of MIDI came from: the original notes and scales from a piano. And yes, MIDI has allowed musicians without any prior engineering or production training to create their own music, but at the same time, we cannot simply neglect what has set the standard for developing music. Similarly, we cannot neglect our "human" identity, and trade it in for our "virtual" identity. 
 

Past/Future History of the Internet: A Reflection on the readings

Around 1:20 AM Wednesday morning, I searched on my iPod Touch for new application updates, and I stumbled across an app entitled, "ProStudio." The description on the iTunes website stated that it was a "Must have Music Industry App On the Go", and I immediately took advantage of this opportunity. I then found an app called "VoiceJam" and was in awe of the many vocal features it obtained, allowing the buyer to loop multiple voice recordings and create a simple masterpiece within minutes. I had never previously seen any product such as this that really compelled my interest, but an instant, I purchased it and fell in LOVE. This new app discovery is just one of the many examples of how internet has transcended in our society. Throughout reading the article, Past/Future History of the Internet, I completely agree that "internet involves many aspects including technological, organizational and community."

Over the past 10 years, the internet has become a hot commodity where products are accessible to fit almost every individual's lifestyle, ranging from games, movies and other sources of entertainment that "implement internet technology." The expansion of private network services has also allowed the development of competitive commerce. What really engaged me about this particular article was the quote by Nicholas Phibbs, stating how computers will "shop for us" in the future. This idea of internet technology has developed into a phenomenon, specifically allowing for artists and musicians like myself to not only transport our talents through audio and video streams, but for us to actually record songs and demos through purchased on-the-go applications.

Along with conveniently purchasing portable studio sessions, what sparked my interest in this article was the availability of "pervasive networking and communications" in portable form. Through the "VoiceJam" App, users can also enter a host of online contests and share their live performance tracks through websites such as SoundCloud, expanding the idea of peer-to-peer networking. In a sense, this social networking is its own form of a virtual community where artists from across the globe can share their works.

Throughout our society, we are without a doubt moving towards "increasing the use of online tools to accomplish electronic commerce, information acquisition, and community operations." These latest developments are becoming more sophisticated as more updates are released with new and improved features that allow us to express ourselves as well as communicate with our peers more efficiently. And yes, the internet will continue to change and accommodate more characteristics and requirements.

Here's the Link: http://soundcloud.com/user9690423/2011-01-28-05-19-15-0000-1/s-4q008

1st Day of Class - Digital Networking

Hello Class,

This is Youdlyn. Many of you may also know me as Lynda Starr, the WHWS Host on 105.7fm, and that is perfectly fine, just as long as you know who I am. I just added this class today, and I must say, I think this is going to be a very interesting class. I gained much knowledge about the history of the internet just by sitting back and viewing the fabulous presentations. I would like to first off discuss my comments about Group 1's project. The design of the powerpoint was very simple, yet legible to read and comprehend. All the information was structured in a very coherent and concise matter. It was very fascinating to hear how the usage of early computers was mainly for data communication. The sequence of events was properly organized in a timely fashion, constructively explaining the transition of internet and new media. My only concern was the font. I felt for the titles for each slide, there could have been a more diverse font that was used instead of Arial. Besides that, the presentation was spectacular. Next, Group 2's presentation was fantastic. I absolutely enjoyed the video graphics displaying the progression of YouTube, as well as how the future of internet involves the evolution of touch-screen products. This presentation kept me anticipating for more information, yet I was a bit distracted by the moving images while trying to process some of the vocal information that was provided.

I liked how Group 3's presentation involved the slideshow on a cool network called Dipity. That really intrigued me. I also enjoyed this group's perspective on file sharing, pirating, and the several lawsuits that occurred between record companies and various file-sharing users. However, I felt a little more work could have been done in terms of configuring the images. Lastly, I enjoyed how Group 4's presentation displayed a more broader aspect of how the internet developed, touching bases on numerous topics including the father of the computer, Mr. Babbage, and the influence of Microsoft and Apple on today's society.

Overall, all of the presentations I observed in class today was very informative. I am glad that I got the chance to learn the emergence and development of various social networks including Myspace, Twitter, and Facebook, not to mention Friendster which I had not heard of prior to enrolling in this course. I hope to  develop more knowledge about digital networking as the course progresses, and I am eager to learn how I can apply this information to many issues in today's society.