Monday, May 9, 2011
Reflection
It has been a pleasure to be in Digital Networks this semester! I appreciate the knowledge i've gained from Professor Dean and peers in the class. I hope everyone has a safe and enjoyable summer!
Self-Assessment!
I want to start this self-assessment by thinking about what goes through my head in preparation for an assignment like this. This self-assessment allows me to reflect on my effort over the course of this semester. As the saying goes, “A for effort”, I honestly feel like that applies when thinking about the structure of Digital Networks this semester. I have viewed this class as an experiment over the last couple months. Merriam Webster’s definitions of experiment are “a tentative procedure or policy” and “an operation or procedure carried out under controlled conditions in order to discover an unknown effect or law, to test or establish a hypothesis, or to illustrate a known law” These definitions mean to me that the results of an experiment are unknown, but that’s why you experiment, to see what works and what doesn’t. At the beginning of this class, there were twice as many people in the class as there were at the end, but I think this answered some questions about this endurance race already. First, those who weren’t in it for the long haul jumped shipped before the experiment really started. To me, it’s like reading the terms of a binding contract, and not committing to something they’re not ready to get themselves in to. If I am the professor, this tells me that the ones who were not committed to trying something new chose they’re fate and that those who decided to stay were not necessarily going to reach the end, but were at least had the courage to try.
My thoughts on going into this semester of Digital Networks was probably different than most. Taking a quick trip in the past, this was my second go around with an experimental class. In fall of 2008, I took Politics and the Internet which was similar to the current class. Personally, there are several factors as to why my effort has increased since the first time around. First of all was my maturity level. When I say maturity level I mean the fact that I procrastinated a great deal that semester and this was a larger factor as to why I couldn’t handle a loose class structure such as that. My mindset was that I had all day to do it; I could do blog posts and other assignments right before they were due. This was a deadly mixture, and it did nothing but lead to my eventual doom in the class. Fast forward three years later, I saw taking this class again as a blessing and an opportunity masters the experiment. Going back to my rant about effort, I feel like a class such as this, effort is a big thing because I feel it speaks volumes to how hard a student works in an unfamiliar class setting.
On the subject of effort, I feel like I exerted all of my energy towards getting into the class during the first week. This situation is relevant to my success in Digital Networks because it is a testament to my maturation process in being prepared for this class and excelling as a college student. During the first week of the spring 2011 semester I wanted to get into a Cultures of Advertising class that I needed to finish for my Major. Due to circumstances beyond my control, I had to be put on the waiting list, but I was eventually promised a spot, and it was pressing that I get in because this is the industry I want to be involved in for a career. I believe it was divine intervention or some kind of sign, but three years after I crashed and burn in this class, I was searching classes and saw that it was open. Though I was promised a spot in the advertising class by the end of the first week, without hesitation, I added Digital Networks as a class. My reasoning behind this was that I felt I needed to start something I did not finish. The opportunity arose and I accepted it with enthusiasm. I knew this was a privilege and I was going to have a positive outcome this time.
So, failed experiment, smailed experiment, second opportunities don’t come around frequently and I feel I had no choice to but to take advantage and succeed. With this said, I want to start assessing myself with what I think is one of the most important parts of a classes success, participation. I felt from the start, it was quite clear as to how I could earn points for participation, I could give my thoughts in class, and I could also use my as a way to express myself and encourage others to keep a steady flow of conversation going. To be more specific, blogs were my voice in class; they allow me to contribute my thoughts on lectures, my feelings about other class matters, and to comment on my peer’s contributions to the blog spot. One of the most interesting days for blogging day was Thursday March 24, 2011. Little did I know, the professor would not be present and we as student needed to conduct class in its usual manner which involved discussion. When I entered class, and realized there was no professor, I thought how students would respond. Would some students leave knowing she was not there? Would some students grab the reigns of class, and conduct class in its usual manner? Would students think it was some trick, or test to see how we would react? Surprisingly it was a little of each. The test for myself was not worry about what others were doing, just be concerned with how I handled the situation, and how I contributed to class that day. During this class I was giving my reactions to reading Mark Andrejevic’s iSpy, chapters 6 and 7. What I got out of chapters 6 and 7 of Ispy is that the government is trying to look more into our private lives in order to persuade our beliefs as a consumer. One example of this is when President Bush was in office, the government was encouraging civilians to buy war products as a way to support the war. I think the government is trying to have a say in what we buy in order to control us. We think we are in control because we are the ones who buy and do things based on our own beliefs, but these beliefs are actually influenced by others. Chapter 7 talks more about the internet and surveillance. I think government monitoring or any kind of monitoring is a way of getting control. My problem is, it has not been made that big of a deal. I will never forget the scene in the movie Men In Black where the guy is spying on a past love through video surveillance on a computer. Thinking about it now, that is quite disturbing, because our government does have that kind of technology and we would be naive to think that they wouldn't use it on their own people. Here, I felt like I intertwined my understanding of the chapters with personal perspective. On this particular day, the absence of my professor was a litmus test to see how committed to the class. I actually thought my professor was spying on the class somehow, and was taking note of how each student reacted to her not being there.
My feelings towards blogging are strong because it makes since to use all resources that you have access to succeed. The class is called Digital Networks, and I feel that the bulk of my work should be done online. I believe in quality over quantity. I feel that for my blog grade, my effort on and understanding of the readings/discussion should be rated as opposed to the amount of posts I did. I feel my best blogs were the ones where I connected what I read to my generation. The first of these was Tenzina Terranova’s book Network Culture. Chapter 2 of Terranova's book has been quite interesting for several readings and in my opinion has been easier to sift through than chapter 1. The first thing is when the author talks about establishing a connection, getting from point A to point B in cyberspace. Going off of my previous post, I don't think it is this easy. When we talked about noise, it makes the process of one connection difficult. IF eight people are standing in a room and they are talking about different things, but at the same noise level, how is it possible for someone to fully comprehend an individual’s conversations. Relating this back to the internet, it is impossible. There is always more than one possibility when it comes to getting information, and hearing opinions and ideas. When I read the first few pages of this article, I thought of the telephone game I used to play as a kid where I had a cup with a piece of string tied to it, and on the other end a friend had a cup with the end of the string tied to it, point A to point B.
Terranova's interpretation of the internet as a "hyper network" got me thinking...something that is constantly accelerating can attain this acceleration by the amount of traffic in this universal address space we call the internet. Let's look at the net like real estate. The infrastructure provides acres of land to a limitless amount of people, and they never run out. That to me is amazing. A space that will never run out of room, and will never turn away another member. It's like a hyper club, a nonexclusive collection of hopefuls looking to spread ideas, and manipulate it to a certain extent.
Lastly, the real time of the internet allows people to connect on the same time, though they are separated by time zones in real life. Fifteen years ago, virtual reality was something used to describe a world that a human being could not live in, but in reality, the virtual aspect of the internet has been embedded into the DNA of society so deep that it is hard to establish what is "real" or "fake". If you’re talking with someone it's real, so I guess virtual reality is reality in this present time.
The title of Terranova’s book Network Culture was the most important book to me because it relates to my generation. The title is symbolic because it describes the interconnectedness of my tech savvy generation. There is always a need to be connected, a need to be seen, heard, and talked about. I would call our class a network, an experimental network. I am making a conscious effort to make sure I am connected. The only full proof way to do this is contribute; this is why I feel blogs are the crown jewel of this course. I compare blog posts to free throws in basketball. The one thing you can always control in the class is the amount you participate. Though everyone may not be contributing in order for things to circulate, at least my voice is in the clutter. A blog I posted a tow months ago talked about my feelings on keywords such as network that draws people in. During discussion of the so called grass roots organization called movements.org, I felt their play on words, persuaded the youth demographic they were targeting to feel they were making a difference, but their pitch was coincidentally cross promoted with products and brands that my age group is interested in. My blog said: After thumbing through the Movements.org site, I began to think what exactly they are trying to do. Identify, Connect, Support. It seems to me that people are being swayed by networks these days, which I think is a clever idea. When you hear the word network, most people think that there are thousands, maybe millions of people connected. Maybe or maybe not in the case of movements.org, but I think people are being swayed by key words without fully looking into what the organization or company is about. Let's think about the keywords on Facebook: Connect, Share, Life, this is a more realistic network because you are connecting with people that you actually know. My question is: if something sounds right, are people more likely to join an organization because they are throwing products at them that are associated with their demographic, or is it because they have read into what they are about and want to get on board?
The second reason why blogs were an important communication tool for me is because I was able to have my professor comment on my posts. This provides me with incite, and a quick critique of my post. I feel this helped my comfort level with the class knowing the professor was available in some form or fashion 24/7. One interesting comment she left was on April 11, 2011, when she stated “Bifo’s point regarding psychopharmaceuticals is that capitalism today relies on brains and so brains have to be functionalized for capitalism”. This comment spoke to me because it was centered on my feelings of how the internet is making us network drones. Thinking about my comment and Mark Andrejevic’s iSpy, I feel that companies are trying to control our brains and be a machine for capitalism. I am always thinking that, wow, look at this limitless internet we as users are able to use, but at what cost? Several topics discussed over the semester have caused me to come up with some overall points. The first is that I feel the material that the authors I have discussed are foreshadowing an internet dominated future. I think of Mark Andrejevic’s two visions as a fork in the middle of the road. If you go left, interactivity will disempower citizens politically, if you go right, you will feel active and involved. What he is saying here is that there is no going straight, moving forward our only choices are one, the other, or both.
What I believe they are foreshadowing is a world that is overly dependent upon the internet, but users can’t wean themselves off of it because it is their life support. Some key words that I feel are relevant here are, network drones, cross-promotion, dependency, demographic, control. These are all relevant because they are what the marketing machine known as the internet uses to keep a constant flow of consumers interested, engaged, and locked in.
I believe my largest contribution to the class was my group presentation on Wikileaks. I felt a good part of my effort for this class came from putting together and presenting on this topic. I felt my presentation was most meaningful, because unlike the presentations before ours, it contained material that had not been discussed over the course of the semester. Wikileaks, which is a non-for-profit media outlet that provides users with breaking news and information, I felt was the most presentation for my group and I to get the class interested. As I said, other presentations that contained information about Google, Twitter and Open Sources were easier conversation starters because we had already discussed them as a class, and this was only continuing this conversation. I felt our game plan for having a successful presentation was our research. Compiling sufficient information so that we could meet the time requirements, keep the class interested, and relate to the class. During our group meeting, I suggested to my presentations partners that we should have a debate as the engaging activity component. These questions were meant to be debated and are one’s that people would have several opinions on. Some of these were” Is WikiLeaks ethical or not?-Should the people releasing the information to WikiLeaks be seen as criminals?-How credible do you feel the information released on WikiLeaks really is? I felt this was largest contribution to the class because I was introducing something new.
The most tedious work I did in Digital Networks was the way I went about writing the papers. I had a methodical way as to how I approached each paper. First, I will make an outline, so I will have the scaffold to my paper. This outline is important for me because it gives me guidance and allows me to have enough talking points to write a sufficient paper. Next, what I will do is find the passages and quotes that I need in order to thoroughly answer the question. These two steps are my prep work for writing the actual paper and allow me to write with hitting speed bumps. Usually at this point I am able to write the paper with minor distractions. I feel my only problems with writing papers is that I sometimes give too much of my opinion and I believe that takes away from the sources I am using to help me answer the question. Though the papers I have done so far, have received grades of B’s and C’s I feel my effort on both of these were deserving of an A. The way I prepped for the papers ensured that I had a good foundation and a full proof way to not only answer the question in depth, but to also include some of what I think, especially if I’m writing had been discussed in previous class sessions.
At the beginning of this class I was frustrated. I didn’t have a strategy as to how I was going to succeed in the class. The approach I took was week by week. During the second week, when I enrolled in the class I was a bit frightened as to why so many people would drop the class after one or two sessions. Were they scared? Were they scared of the freedom? Were they afraid of blogging? Since I questioned the actions of others, I asked myself the same three questions: Was I scared? No, I don’t dear anything except God and know if there was anything to fear, it would be letting myself down. Was I scared of the freedom? No, I felt that at this point in college, if I was not mature about my studies, I would never be. Was I afraid of blogging? No, I like exercising one of my rights of the constitution, freedom of speech. One saying that has always passed through my brain waves is “A closed mouth doesn’t get fed”. If you don’t contribute, there is no reason for wasting your time, and a seat that could be occupied by someone hungrier. Giving my opinion and ideas on things is how one learns. Merriam-Webster defines learning as the act or experience of one that learns; knowledge or skill acquired by instruction or study, and modification of a behavioral tendency by experience (as exposure to conditioning). My point is though everyone learns differently, experiencing learning as a class is more beneficial because you gain more insight and some of your thoughts and ideas are molded around other’s unique takes on subject matter.
I feel each way of learning in the pyramid above describes how I contributed to class.
Lecture- I feel like my WikiLeaks group presentation allowed me to spread my knowledge of something new to others. It proved to be effective by the heated debates between students on the topic of raw news vs. biased, mainstream news
Audio Visual- This kind of learning took place during clips we watched as a class such as the Movements.org pitch, and the video about why Google is keeping our personal information. My contributions were wondering why Google need our information when they are a search engine, what are there purposes for storing this sensitive information.
Discussion Group- My contributions for this were helping my team argue that open source is a good thing. My contributing points were that we need sites such as Wikipedia because they encourage peer to peer learning and allow others to continually contribute to the constant flow of information on the site.
Teaching Others- I felt I taught others through opinions and experiences I used to make my points on the blog spot. On April 5, 2011, I used my experiences with using the internet to make my about perpetual gratification. I said “Touching more on the freeness of Google and the internet, I feel like there are less safe guards now then there were ten years ago. Take for instance the comment about porn on the YouTube page, that person is kind of right when it comes to material on the internet that young teenagers and under should not be seeing. Whether this is porn, vulgar blogs or what have you, I think our ability to file share has made anything and everything free on the internet. It's more than just instant gratification, its perpetual gratification.
Reading- They say knowledge is power, well so is peer to peer learning. Honestly, I read about half of the readings thoroughly over the course of the semester. There were some that I did not read such as the first assigned passages from Nicholas Carr’s The Shallows, but hearing about the text from a peer motivated and encouraged me to read it afterword. This is why I think peer to peer learning is important.
Demonstration- I demonstrated my understanding of the readings and class discussion by my effort put into my papers, and take home exams. Though I did not get the grade I felt I deserved, I don’t believe it can be argues that I didn’t have enough content. For instance, with paper #2 I used several quotes from Mark Andrejevic’s iSpy to answer the question I picked.
Practice by Doing- I feel this was the risk I took taking Digital Networks. I am not sure of the outcome of this class, especially knowing my previous demise, I didn’t know what to expect. I did instead of didn’t. Practice is using past shortcomings and achievements to improve, so I won’t make those same mistakes again. Life is a learning experience, and so is college.
Given the evidence I have above, I feel like I deserve an A for my effort. Merriam Webster defines the word effort as the total work done to achieve a particular end. If I didn’t believe I deserved it, there is no point in arguing for. People don’t go to trial if they don’t think they’re going to win, you play a sport to lose, you play it to win. Sure, there were times during this semester where I felt like I wouldn’t reach the end. I felt a bit discouraged after I received a C on my first paper, but I kept trekking. What actually gave me motivation was those who jumped shipped before we got to the destination. I felt that if they had given up, I need to proceed because I wasn’t going to let this class defeat me; it’s not its purpose. With a class such as Digital Network, there are expected to be some bumps along the way, but if you stick it out, and reach the end, and you feel you’ve given a quality effort, I think that is admirable. Honestly, I am somewhat glad I failed round one of this class, because I wouldn’t have gotten another change to succeed. In life there are few second chances, and I am glad I had the opportunity to take advantage of this one.
My thoughts on going into this semester of Digital Networks was probably different than most. Taking a quick trip in the past, this was my second go around with an experimental class. In fall of 2008, I took Politics and the Internet which was similar to the current class. Personally, there are several factors as to why my effort has increased since the first time around. First of all was my maturity level. When I say maturity level I mean the fact that I procrastinated a great deal that semester and this was a larger factor as to why I couldn’t handle a loose class structure such as that. My mindset was that I had all day to do it; I could do blog posts and other assignments right before they were due. This was a deadly mixture, and it did nothing but lead to my eventual doom in the class. Fast forward three years later, I saw taking this class again as a blessing and an opportunity masters the experiment. Going back to my rant about effort, I feel like a class such as this, effort is a big thing because I feel it speaks volumes to how hard a student works in an unfamiliar class setting.
On the subject of effort, I feel like I exerted all of my energy towards getting into the class during the first week. This situation is relevant to my success in Digital Networks because it is a testament to my maturation process in being prepared for this class and excelling as a college student. During the first week of the spring 2011 semester I wanted to get into a Cultures of Advertising class that I needed to finish for my Major. Due to circumstances beyond my control, I had to be put on the waiting list, but I was eventually promised a spot, and it was pressing that I get in because this is the industry I want to be involved in for a career. I believe it was divine intervention or some kind of sign, but three years after I crashed and burn in this class, I was searching classes and saw that it was open. Though I was promised a spot in the advertising class by the end of the first week, without hesitation, I added Digital Networks as a class. My reasoning behind this was that I felt I needed to start something I did not finish. The opportunity arose and I accepted it with enthusiasm. I knew this was a privilege and I was going to have a positive outcome this time.
So, failed experiment, smailed experiment, second opportunities don’t come around frequently and I feel I had no choice to but to take advantage and succeed. With this said, I want to start assessing myself with what I think is one of the most important parts of a classes success, participation. I felt from the start, it was quite clear as to how I could earn points for participation, I could give my thoughts in class, and I could also use my as a way to express myself and encourage others to keep a steady flow of conversation going. To be more specific, blogs were my voice in class; they allow me to contribute my thoughts on lectures, my feelings about other class matters, and to comment on my peer’s contributions to the blog spot. One of the most interesting days for blogging day was Thursday March 24, 2011. Little did I know, the professor would not be present and we as student needed to conduct class in its usual manner which involved discussion. When I entered class, and realized there was no professor, I thought how students would respond. Would some students leave knowing she was not there? Would some students grab the reigns of class, and conduct class in its usual manner? Would students think it was some trick, or test to see how we would react? Surprisingly it was a little of each. The test for myself was not worry about what others were doing, just be concerned with how I handled the situation, and how I contributed to class that day. During this class I was giving my reactions to reading Mark Andrejevic’s iSpy, chapters 6 and 7. What I got out of chapters 6 and 7 of Ispy is that the government is trying to look more into our private lives in order to persuade our beliefs as a consumer. One example of this is when President Bush was in office, the government was encouraging civilians to buy war products as a way to support the war. I think the government is trying to have a say in what we buy in order to control us. We think we are in control because we are the ones who buy and do things based on our own beliefs, but these beliefs are actually influenced by others. Chapter 7 talks more about the internet and surveillance. I think government monitoring or any kind of monitoring is a way of getting control. My problem is, it has not been made that big of a deal. I will never forget the scene in the movie Men In Black where the guy is spying on a past love through video surveillance on a computer. Thinking about it now, that is quite disturbing, because our government does have that kind of technology and we would be naive to think that they wouldn't use it on their own people. Here, I felt like I intertwined my understanding of the chapters with personal perspective. On this particular day, the absence of my professor was a litmus test to see how committed to the class. I actually thought my professor was spying on the class somehow, and was taking note of how each student reacted to her not being there.
My feelings towards blogging are strong because it makes since to use all resources that you have access to succeed. The class is called Digital Networks, and I feel that the bulk of my work should be done online. I believe in quality over quantity. I feel that for my blog grade, my effort on and understanding of the readings/discussion should be rated as opposed to the amount of posts I did. I feel my best blogs were the ones where I connected what I read to my generation. The first of these was Tenzina Terranova’s book Network Culture. Chapter 2 of Terranova's book has been quite interesting for several readings and in my opinion has been easier to sift through than chapter 1. The first thing is when the author talks about establishing a connection, getting from point A to point B in cyberspace. Going off of my previous post, I don't think it is this easy. When we talked about noise, it makes the process of one connection difficult. IF eight people are standing in a room and they are talking about different things, but at the same noise level, how is it possible for someone to fully comprehend an individual’s conversations. Relating this back to the internet, it is impossible. There is always more than one possibility when it comes to getting information, and hearing opinions and ideas. When I read the first few pages of this article, I thought of the telephone game I used to play as a kid where I had a cup with a piece of string tied to it, and on the other end a friend had a cup with the end of the string tied to it, point A to point B.
Terranova's interpretation of the internet as a "hyper network" got me thinking...something that is constantly accelerating can attain this acceleration by the amount of traffic in this universal address space we call the internet. Let's look at the net like real estate. The infrastructure provides acres of land to a limitless amount of people, and they never run out. That to me is amazing. A space that will never run out of room, and will never turn away another member. It's like a hyper club, a nonexclusive collection of hopefuls looking to spread ideas, and manipulate it to a certain extent.
Lastly, the real time of the internet allows people to connect on the same time, though they are separated by time zones in real life. Fifteen years ago, virtual reality was something used to describe a world that a human being could not live in, but in reality, the virtual aspect of the internet has been embedded into the DNA of society so deep that it is hard to establish what is "real" or "fake". If you’re talking with someone it's real, so I guess virtual reality is reality in this present time.
The title of Terranova’s book Network Culture was the most important book to me because it relates to my generation. The title is symbolic because it describes the interconnectedness of my tech savvy generation. There is always a need to be connected, a need to be seen, heard, and talked about. I would call our class a network, an experimental network. I am making a conscious effort to make sure I am connected. The only full proof way to do this is contribute; this is why I feel blogs are the crown jewel of this course. I compare blog posts to free throws in basketball. The one thing you can always control in the class is the amount you participate. Though everyone may not be contributing in order for things to circulate, at least my voice is in the clutter. A blog I posted a tow months ago talked about my feelings on keywords such as network that draws people in. During discussion of the so called grass roots organization called movements.org, I felt their play on words, persuaded the youth demographic they were targeting to feel they were making a difference, but their pitch was coincidentally cross promoted with products and brands that my age group is interested in. My blog said: After thumbing through the Movements.org site, I began to think what exactly they are trying to do. Identify, Connect, Support. It seems to me that people are being swayed by networks these days, which I think is a clever idea. When you hear the word network, most people think that there are thousands, maybe millions of people connected. Maybe or maybe not in the case of movements.org, but I think people are being swayed by key words without fully looking into what the organization or company is about. Let's think about the keywords on Facebook: Connect, Share, Life, this is a more realistic network because you are connecting with people that you actually know. My question is: if something sounds right, are people more likely to join an organization because they are throwing products at them that are associated with their demographic, or is it because they have read into what they are about and want to get on board?
The second reason why blogs were an important communication tool for me is because I was able to have my professor comment on my posts. This provides me with incite, and a quick critique of my post. I feel this helped my comfort level with the class knowing the professor was available in some form or fashion 24/7. One interesting comment she left was on April 11, 2011, when she stated “Bifo’s point regarding psychopharmaceuticals is that capitalism today relies on brains and so brains have to be functionalized for capitalism”. This comment spoke to me because it was centered on my feelings of how the internet is making us network drones. Thinking about my comment and Mark Andrejevic’s iSpy, I feel that companies are trying to control our brains and be a machine for capitalism. I am always thinking that, wow, look at this limitless internet we as users are able to use, but at what cost? Several topics discussed over the semester have caused me to come up with some overall points. The first is that I feel the material that the authors I have discussed are foreshadowing an internet dominated future. I think of Mark Andrejevic’s two visions as a fork in the middle of the road. If you go left, interactivity will disempower citizens politically, if you go right, you will feel active and involved. What he is saying here is that there is no going straight, moving forward our only choices are one, the other, or both.
What I believe they are foreshadowing is a world that is overly dependent upon the internet, but users can’t wean themselves off of it because it is their life support. Some key words that I feel are relevant here are, network drones, cross-promotion, dependency, demographic, control. These are all relevant because they are what the marketing machine known as the internet uses to keep a constant flow of consumers interested, engaged, and locked in.
I believe my largest contribution to the class was my group presentation on Wikileaks. I felt a good part of my effort for this class came from putting together and presenting on this topic. I felt my presentation was most meaningful, because unlike the presentations before ours, it contained material that had not been discussed over the course of the semester. Wikileaks, which is a non-for-profit media outlet that provides users with breaking news and information, I felt was the most presentation for my group and I to get the class interested. As I said, other presentations that contained information about Google, Twitter and Open Sources were easier conversation starters because we had already discussed them as a class, and this was only continuing this conversation. I felt our game plan for having a successful presentation was our research. Compiling sufficient information so that we could meet the time requirements, keep the class interested, and relate to the class. During our group meeting, I suggested to my presentations partners that we should have a debate as the engaging activity component. These questions were meant to be debated and are one’s that people would have several opinions on. Some of these were” Is WikiLeaks ethical or not?-Should the people releasing the information to WikiLeaks be seen as criminals?-How credible do you feel the information released on WikiLeaks really is? I felt this was largest contribution to the class because I was introducing something new.
The most tedious work I did in Digital Networks was the way I went about writing the papers. I had a methodical way as to how I approached each paper. First, I will make an outline, so I will have the scaffold to my paper. This outline is important for me because it gives me guidance and allows me to have enough talking points to write a sufficient paper. Next, what I will do is find the passages and quotes that I need in order to thoroughly answer the question. These two steps are my prep work for writing the actual paper and allow me to write with hitting speed bumps. Usually at this point I am able to write the paper with minor distractions. I feel my only problems with writing papers is that I sometimes give too much of my opinion and I believe that takes away from the sources I am using to help me answer the question. Though the papers I have done so far, have received grades of B’s and C’s I feel my effort on both of these were deserving of an A. The way I prepped for the papers ensured that I had a good foundation and a full proof way to not only answer the question in depth, but to also include some of what I think, especially if I’m writing had been discussed in previous class sessions.
At the beginning of this class I was frustrated. I didn’t have a strategy as to how I was going to succeed in the class. The approach I took was week by week. During the second week, when I enrolled in the class I was a bit frightened as to why so many people would drop the class after one or two sessions. Were they scared? Were they scared of the freedom? Were they afraid of blogging? Since I questioned the actions of others, I asked myself the same three questions: Was I scared? No, I don’t dear anything except God and know if there was anything to fear, it would be letting myself down. Was I scared of the freedom? No, I felt that at this point in college, if I was not mature about my studies, I would never be. Was I afraid of blogging? No, I like exercising one of my rights of the constitution, freedom of speech. One saying that has always passed through my brain waves is “A closed mouth doesn’t get fed”. If you don’t contribute, there is no reason for wasting your time, and a seat that could be occupied by someone hungrier. Giving my opinion and ideas on things is how one learns. Merriam-Webster defines learning as the act or experience of one that learns; knowledge or skill acquired by instruction or study, and modification of a behavioral tendency by experience (as exposure to conditioning). My point is though everyone learns differently, experiencing learning as a class is more beneficial because you gain more insight and some of your thoughts and ideas are molded around other’s unique takes on subject matter.
I feel each way of learning in the pyramid above describes how I contributed to class.
Lecture- I feel like my WikiLeaks group presentation allowed me to spread my knowledge of something new to others. It proved to be effective by the heated debates between students on the topic of raw news vs. biased, mainstream news
Audio Visual- This kind of learning took place during clips we watched as a class such as the Movements.org pitch, and the video about why Google is keeping our personal information. My contributions were wondering why Google need our information when they are a search engine, what are there purposes for storing this sensitive information.
Discussion Group- My contributions for this were helping my team argue that open source is a good thing. My contributing points were that we need sites such as Wikipedia because they encourage peer to peer learning and allow others to continually contribute to the constant flow of information on the site.
Teaching Others- I felt I taught others through opinions and experiences I used to make my points on the blog spot. On April 5, 2011, I used my experiences with using the internet to make my about perpetual gratification. I said “Touching more on the freeness of Google and the internet, I feel like there are less safe guards now then there were ten years ago. Take for instance the comment about porn on the YouTube page, that person is kind of right when it comes to material on the internet that young teenagers and under should not be seeing. Whether this is porn, vulgar blogs or what have you, I think our ability to file share has made anything and everything free on the internet. It's more than just instant gratification, its perpetual gratification.
Reading- They say knowledge is power, well so is peer to peer learning. Honestly, I read about half of the readings thoroughly over the course of the semester. There were some that I did not read such as the first assigned passages from Nicholas Carr’s The Shallows, but hearing about the text from a peer motivated and encouraged me to read it afterword. This is why I think peer to peer learning is important.
Demonstration- I demonstrated my understanding of the readings and class discussion by my effort put into my papers, and take home exams. Though I did not get the grade I felt I deserved, I don’t believe it can be argues that I didn’t have enough content. For instance, with paper #2 I used several quotes from Mark Andrejevic’s iSpy to answer the question I picked.
Practice by Doing- I feel this was the risk I took taking Digital Networks. I am not sure of the outcome of this class, especially knowing my previous demise, I didn’t know what to expect. I did instead of didn’t. Practice is using past shortcomings and achievements to improve, so I won’t make those same mistakes again. Life is a learning experience, and so is college.
Given the evidence I have above, I feel like I deserve an A for my effort. Merriam Webster defines the word effort as the total work done to achieve a particular end. If I didn’t believe I deserved it, there is no point in arguing for. People don’t go to trial if they don’t think they’re going to win, you play a sport to lose, you play it to win. Sure, there were times during this semester where I felt like I wouldn’t reach the end. I felt a bit discouraged after I received a C on my first paper, but I kept trekking. What actually gave me motivation was those who jumped shipped before we got to the destination. I felt that if they had given up, I need to proceed because I wasn’t going to let this class defeat me; it’s not its purpose. With a class such as Digital Network, there are expected to be some bumps along the way, but if you stick it out, and reach the end, and you feel you’ve given a quality effort, I think that is admirable. Honestly, I am somewhat glad I failed round one of this class, because I wouldn’t have gotten another change to succeed. In life there are few second chances, and I am glad I had the opportunity to take advantage of this one.
Final Exam!
I used every resource I could when taking on this final exam. I went to brainstorming session with the class in the library last week, I looked at my blogs, I used information from my second papers, my Wikileaks power point, and relevant texts that assisted me in answering the questions. Below, my answers, and the answers discussed with others were a mix of exchanges of thoughts and feelings on texts that helped us in answering each question. I tackled this exam over the course of three days.
1. Eric Raymond contrasts the cathedral and the bazaar. What point is he trying to make with this contrast? Is his argument consistent with his title? Why or why not?
Eric Raymond contrasts and discusses the software builders in The Cathedral and The Bazaar. He makes it clear that open-source engineering is better than enclosed development. Some points he is trying to make are in open-source development are a genuine interest in the project that the developers are working on. Enclosed development is different, in this situation; developers are assigned to specific duties. In open source movements, projects are seldom started unless they have the means to accomplish it. Eric Raymond argues for open-software, he argues that “the best hacks come from harnessing the power of the entire community”. This arguments and ones I previously states are for open-source software.
I do not believe that Eric Raymond’s argument is consistent with his title because the title implies that he is considering the positives and negative of each style. I believe this means he will give equal time to analyze, compare, and contrast both. In reality, he does not do what I think, he actually just discusses open-source development and fails to discuss the pros of enclosed development.
2. My Definition
Siva Vaidhyanathan argues that Google has capitalized on public failure. What does he mean when says this? How is this argument connected to the question of regulation?
In the Googlization of Everything by Siva Vaidhyanathan, she argues how Google has capitalized on public figure. This means that design flaws in public services and regulation have allowed Google have a stranglehold over the internet. Google has grown tremendously over the past decade, and their power and authority have come from them controlling the accessibility of information. The failure of the government to control or regulate the internet has helped Google become one of the biggest powers in cyberspace.
According to Siva markets fail when they cannot organize to supply an essential public good. At which point, public intervention becomes justified.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
As stated in The Googlization of Everything, there are many different facets to the company “Google”. For some of these aspects, regulation is a tangible and almost acceptable concept. For example, the issue of YouTube and the hosting of copyrighted content. Viacom has been adamant about YouTube (owned by Google) taking down videos that contain copywrited content. Governments in more authoritarian countries have regulated other facets of Google, like the very search function. However, in the United States, Google has gone largely without regulation. In fact, Google seems to have a working relationship with the government. President Obama has voiced his cooperation with the company, hosting his videos first on YouTube.
The collaboration of the government and Google almost makes one think that Google should be regarded as its own type of agency. It would seem that Google is the regulatory authority on the internet; after all, it does decide which content is viewed via the search function. Google even holds sway with service providers. When the net neutrality debate was going on, it could be argued that Google was the driving force behind proponents of net neutrality. Google defended the traditional model of the internet against companies that wanted to implement “pay for your bandwidth” policies. In both of these cases, it could be argued that Google is a powerful regulatory agency of the internet.
(The Googlization of Everything, Siva Vaidhyanathan)
3. What drives social media? The best answers will think in terms of both the users and the features of social media. They will also refer to the "The Viral Me."
My Answer
Social media is driven by several factors. Entrepreneurs and companies create the platforms that users are able to connect. Some of these include Twitter, Facebook, and MySpace. These platforms allow people to share thoughts (Twitter), purchases (Swipley), pictures (Facebook), and locations (Foursquare) with friends and strangers all day long. Users are attracted and connected to these platforms because it involves flooding the social market with information users want out there about them. The article “Viral” discusses different ways to look at users by them getting lured by their desires to show off, be heard, reaffirm themselves, and be included.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answers
Social media allows users to immerse themselves into their social life at all times. There is not a single moment when solitary internet browsers can be disconnected from the outside world. This is appealing to some people. Social media is often tailored to the exact desires and interests of the users. In networks such as Facebook, only relevant ads are shown, only your friends are publicized on your news feed, and only people who you know can write on your wall. Therefore social media allows users to focus on the things that they deem important, and not “noise” from the outside world.
(The Viral Me, Devin Friedman. Blog Theory, J. Dean, p. 113-119)
4. In what ways does an eighties "hacker culture" shape Wikileaks? How does this differentiate Wikileaks from more traditional journalism? What are the benefits of these differences? What are the drawbacks?
The eightes “hacker culture” has shaped Wikileaks because it has been influential in the continued existence of the site. The “hacker culture” has always rebelled against “the man” by using technology in order to better the lives of citizens. Both use secrecy to their advantage by using what available to them, but not revealing their sources of how exactly they did it.
I think an eighties hacker culture shapes Wikileaks, because it influences the way they go about getting and revealing their information. On the Wikileaks site, they say they are dedicated to bring important news and information to the public. They also say “we publish material of ethical, political and historical significance while keeping the identity of our sources anonymous, thus providing a universal way for the revealing of suppressed and censored injustices. This quote is one of the ways Wikileaks differentiates them from traditional journalism, they reveal their sources, and as a citizen this makes me think of wikileaks as suspect because of their failure to do this.
The benefits of Wikileaks are: revealing their sources would compromise the security of their organization and sources. Their privacy allows them to publish stories that often disclose top-secret information that we would otherwise not be privy to. The benefits of Wikileaks are unbiased information to the public, and releasing stories that otherwise might be held from the citizenry. According to my presentation on Wikileaks a couple weeks ago, the negative aspects of Wikileaks is that it often discloses government secrets that should not be disclosed to the general public, it serves as a threat to democracy, and creates international conflicts. For instance, there could possibly be military information released that could put our troops in danger, or at least cause concern to the government for releasing this kind of information.
(Wikileaks website research/Wikileaks powerpoint)
5. What does Mark Andrejevic mean by "digital enclosure"?
According to Mark Andrejevic, he believes the internet provides the paradigimatic example of a virtual digital enclosure, one in which every virtual “move” has the potential to leave a digital trace or record of itself. Andrejevic states “Digital enclosure is meant to envoke the land enclosure movement associated with the transition from feudalism to capitalism, the process whereby overtime communal land was subjected to private control, allowing private landowners to set the conditions for its use. Overtime, the enclosure movement leads to the formation of distinct classes; those who own the means of production and those who must sell their labor for access to those means, whether arable lands or factories”
My own understanding of a digital enclosure is the internet’s cove where a user cannot move through this space without leaving a digital footprint.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
Mark Andrejevic’s “digital enclosure” is the surrender of our privacy in exchange for the use of a service. The people who own the infrastructure for the use of technology can set the terms of usage.
(iSpy, Mark Andrejevic)
6. Does interactivity entail democratization? Use Mark Andrejevic to answer this question. What are the repercussions of your answer for analyzing movements.org?
I don’t believe interactivity entails democratization because unlike real life, in the cyber society, users don’t necessarily have say over anything. Users have free access to move as they please, but in terms of control I believe it is limited. In Mark Andrejevic’s ispy, he says that decentralized totalitarianism is used as an extension of the version of interactivity offered by the commercial sector, in other words, I believe he means allowing people to believe they have the power will keep them interested. Andrejevic says that this version of interactivity will amount to actively sustaining the scene of one’s own passive submission. I see interactivity as a game of tug-o-war, and companies and others who persuade users to continually use their services are winning. I believe users are motivated by the illusion that they are in control, but in reality, this acceptance of control validates a company’s perpetual exploitation of them.
Mark Andrejevic states “Interactivity invites participants to embrace the very goals that are exempted from deliberation as their own” (Andrejevic 44).Analyzing Movements.org, they want to make social and are appealing to the youth demographic, but I am skeptical of their reasons behind getting the youth involved. From looking at their website, I am not exactly sure whether they are solely out to get my age range involved, or to reel us in with products we consume. Andrejevic states “Interactivity invites participants to embrace the very goals that are exempted from deliberation as their own (Andrejevic 45). They make their statements inclusive by using the word “we”, but the youths who buy into this are really being sold products that are cross promoted with their company. With this said, I feel that interactivity is not democratic, nor do I feel it is equal.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
Andrejevic’s argument applies very well to the organization “Movements”.Movements.org relies on the façade that the use of interactive networks can produce positive change in the tangible world. Through the harnessing of Facebook and other social media, users can make a change with minimal effort.
(iSpy, Mark Andrejevic)
7. What is the connection between technology and refusal of work according to Franco Berardi?
Franco Berardi sees a relationship between the idea “refusal of work” and the rise and surge of technology. This idea of “refusal of work” comes from a mindset in the 1970’s that you did not feel like working that day, you had the option to do just that. Laborers were able to have a schedule with specific, set hours because of the regulation of the industry and the surplus of jobs that weren’t dependent on technology. This mindset crumbled due to the deregulation of the industry and the rise of technology. Instead of having specific responsibilities, employees were required to be available to their employers all of the time.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
Berardi calls these types of jobs “cognitive labor”. These jobs did not required that the laborer be available and working at all hours of the day. With the rise of new technologies, like cell phones and smart phones that allow emails to be read on your mobile device, employers have even more control over employees.Now, laborers are paid for the timely and punctual delivery of assigned tasks, not the labor that occurs between the hours of 9AM to 5PM. The refusal of work, combined with the rise in technologies has resulted in the virtual enslavement of the educated working professional.
(Precarious Rhapsody, p. 72-82)
8. According to Franco Berardi, why do problems like panic disorder, ADHD, and depression increase under semio-capitalism?
My Answer
According to Franco Berardi, these problems increase under semio-capitalism for two reasons. First, the rates of Attention Deficit Hyper Disorders have increased because of the amount of information that is available to people today. The rise of the internet has made information easily accessible and it has somewhat resulted in an overload of noise. The problem is out minds process information quickly, but the speed and quantity of what we comprehend causes us to lose some of the meaning of the information, and our comprehension decreases.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
Panic orders and depression are caused by a different phenomenon. As mentioned earlier in his book, Berardi believes that the average non-physical laborer is now tethered to their job via communicative devices and in increase in the entrepreneurial ethos. With both unemployment and the cost of living rising, employers have the upper hand over their employees. Workers are held to a higher standard than is physically or mentally capable for some, and as a result an increase in the rates of panic disorders and depression. To the average worker, it is better to be medicated and work at a super-human level than to fall behind the competition because of “mental deficiencies”.
(Precarious Rhapsody p.99-102, 109-120)
9. According to Nicholas Carr, what does the internet do to our brains? How does he use the idea of brain plasticity in his argument? Is it persuasive? Why or why not?
My Answer/Blog
According to Nicholas Carr, internet use is having a measurable effect on the human mind. Studies have shown that the brain adapts to outside stimuli, rerouting the neural connections where they are best used. This change of neurological behavior is the foundational belief behind the theory of “brain plasticity”. This is the thought that the human brain is malleable, and can change according to the material.
I think it was interesting how he feels that the mighty power that is the internet is making us dumb. This is interesting to me because the world wide web is perceived as a place of knowing and knowledge. His feelings lead me back to a discussion that we had in class three weeks ago, when we talked about the speed of things does not allow our brains to process anything deeply. This said, it makes me agree with what Carr is saying because knowing that information, pictures, what have you, are there, why internalize it?, or better yet, why take the time to thoroughly process it when it will always be on the internet where we can always access it.
Thinking about the reasons behind this, it's almost like the internet is becoming our second brain. I believe our reasons for liking instant gratification stem from the fact unlike our own brains, the internet won't forget anything. It can store infinite information and can access anything and everything at first thought, and the click of a mouse.
(Nicholas Carr, The Shallows)
Discussion/Brainstorming
Carr’s assertion is that due to the massive deluge of information on the internet, the human brain is changing in a way that could be considered detrimental. To Carr, the plethora of visual, aural and intellectual stimuli on the internet is causing the human mind to think faster. However, we are not thinking about the information as much. In exchange for our enhanced speed, we are losing out on the ability to comprehend and remember information. Instead of contemplating and thinking about specific ideas or concepts for an extended period of time, we “juggle” them, not thinking about them for that long. To Carr, the implications of this development are vast. Memory has been affected. When the collective human history is concentrated in one location, there isn’t really a reason to retain it.
10. Why is it in Google's interest to get us to click on more and more links? What are the repercussions of this for Google? What are the repercussions for people? Does it make sense to use the notion of efficiency to think about thinking? Why or why not?
Google does benefit from users clicking on more and more links because users look to gain traffic through promoting their products and their brands through Google.
Discussion/Brainstorming
Google’s efficiency has resulted in far more relevant advertisements. As previously mentioned, only strong ads get placed on the main search page of Google. As a result, the most convincing ads are placed where the most people can see them. Google’s advertising strategy ensures that the public only views the strongest and most convincing ads.
It makes sense to use the notion of “efficiency” when discussing the human thought process.
Nicholas Carr argues that the human brain is transforming to process data faster (albeit with less delicacy). Studies have shown that the human brain acts differently when an individual uses the internet. This evidences the notion of human efficiency of though. Our brains have the capability to ensure that we process things as fast as possible, indicating efficiency of thought. If humans could not adapt to be efficient in their environment, it would surely mean the end of the race. However, humans have thrived on earth, indicating that efficiency is a core concept of the human mind.
(The Shallows, Nicholas Carr. P.155-157, 221, discussion)
Twenty point question. Be sure to engage and cite material from the course in your answer. You may use texts assigned during the first half of the course (chapter two of Terranova may be important here).
Students had the option of changing the way their work in the course would be assessed. You could change the requirements as well as the way these requirements would be weighted. Why didn't you do this? In answering the question, consider what you personally did or did not do as well as what your fellow students did or did not do (I'm asking you here whether you think your own reasons/motivations were the same or different from those that you attribute to others). The best answers will thematize the effect of the media terrain. For example, digital networks are supposed to facilitate communication; they are supposed to enable people to connect with one another easily; is this the same as enabling/inciting people to come together to evaluate problems, formulate options, and make decisions? Might the same technologies that reduce friction also displace action?
I honestly don’t understand why we had the power to change and did exercise this right. Personally, any changes I though t needed to be made I voiced them as comment on other people’s blogs in order perpetuate conversation. I can recall three weeks ago, this topic came up, and I gave suggestions on a peer’s page suggesting that the reflection should be 10 to 15 pages and other comments pertaining to end of the year work. I feel like the lack of people showing enthusiasm with adding to the blog conversation is a major reason why no one felt the need to make changes. I feel like my comments towards it were caught up in a non-circulating blogosphere where people either didn’t feel the need to comment, or didn’t feel like blogging for reasons beyond me.
As far as the classroom, I feel like things were not discussed because people felt they had to express themselves in the blogs instead of in house. I think it would have been beneficial if we had taken one class day to have a discussion on how we want to go about this, a student only meeting where everyone would get an opportunity to voice their opinions and feeling towards how class should be structured from that day on. Though my generation is computer saavy, I feel like some students were more enthusiastic than others about blogging. I think the first grading period, when you posted the graph on our blogs was a telling sign about the difference of blogging and posting in general among students in the classroom.
Those students who dropped the class during the first week, I believe, were the ones who had true problems with the structure of the class. From the readings over the semester, I think Franco Berardi and sections of Blog Theory relate most to this situation. First, our discussion on the fast movements of images and information on the internet makes it difficult for us to focus, and thoroughly internalize something. I feel with all of the other blogging we were doing that was not relevant to discussing the syllabus, let alone other platforms on the internet that take our time away from the blogging platform, how could we devote time to fully voice our opinions on syllabus structure. With this said, I feel like this should have been taken care of in class. It would have taken 30 to 40 minutes for everyone to get together and figure out what, why, and how they want it to be. Then, the student or students supervising this meeting would then present this to you as a proposal, and if accepted, this is what we would have done, all hands on deck.
I do believe that the same technologies that reduce friction also displace actions. It’s interesting how after we realized we could change something, people were more concerned, but yet few people followed through and put their voices on the blogs. Lastly, I believe that though the platforms were available, there were various reasons as to why people did not choose to you. I feel some people felt, since they talked in class, there was no reason to blog, and if there was no reason to blog, if they had feeling towards the syllabus structure or other things in class, they wanted to discuss them in class. I was the opposite, my voice was on the blog, occasionally in class, but I felt my thoughts and ideas could flow more online. Unfortunately, the conversation thread was not perpetual as it should have been because of the nature of the class.
1. Eric Raymond contrasts the cathedral and the bazaar. What point is he trying to make with this contrast? Is his argument consistent with his title? Why or why not?
Eric Raymond contrasts and discusses the software builders in The Cathedral and The Bazaar. He makes it clear that open-source engineering is better than enclosed development. Some points he is trying to make are in open-source development are a genuine interest in the project that the developers are working on. Enclosed development is different, in this situation; developers are assigned to specific duties. In open source movements, projects are seldom started unless they have the means to accomplish it. Eric Raymond argues for open-software, he argues that “the best hacks come from harnessing the power of the entire community”. This arguments and ones I previously states are for open-source software.
I do not believe that Eric Raymond’s argument is consistent with his title because the title implies that he is considering the positives and negative of each style. I believe this means he will give equal time to analyze, compare, and contrast both. In reality, he does not do what I think, he actually just discusses open-source development and fails to discuss the pros of enclosed development.
2. My Definition
Siva Vaidhyanathan argues that Google has capitalized on public failure. What does he mean when says this? How is this argument connected to the question of regulation?
In the Googlization of Everything by Siva Vaidhyanathan, she argues how Google has capitalized on public figure. This means that design flaws in public services and regulation have allowed Google have a stranglehold over the internet. Google has grown tremendously over the past decade, and their power and authority have come from them controlling the accessibility of information. The failure of the government to control or regulate the internet has helped Google become one of the biggest powers in cyberspace.
According to Siva markets fail when they cannot organize to supply an essential public good. At which point, public intervention becomes justified.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
As stated in The Googlization of Everything, there are many different facets to the company “Google”. For some of these aspects, regulation is a tangible and almost acceptable concept. For example, the issue of YouTube and the hosting of copyrighted content. Viacom has been adamant about YouTube (owned by Google) taking down videos that contain copywrited content. Governments in more authoritarian countries have regulated other facets of Google, like the very search function. However, in the United States, Google has gone largely without regulation. In fact, Google seems to have a working relationship with the government. President Obama has voiced his cooperation with the company, hosting his videos first on YouTube.
The collaboration of the government and Google almost makes one think that Google should be regarded as its own type of agency. It would seem that Google is the regulatory authority on the internet; after all, it does decide which content is viewed via the search function. Google even holds sway with service providers. When the net neutrality debate was going on, it could be argued that Google was the driving force behind proponents of net neutrality. Google defended the traditional model of the internet against companies that wanted to implement “pay for your bandwidth” policies. In both of these cases, it could be argued that Google is a powerful regulatory agency of the internet.
(The Googlization of Everything, Siva Vaidhyanathan)
3. What drives social media? The best answers will think in terms of both the users and the features of social media. They will also refer to the "The Viral Me."
My Answer
Social media is driven by several factors. Entrepreneurs and companies create the platforms that users are able to connect. Some of these include Twitter, Facebook, and MySpace. These platforms allow people to share thoughts (Twitter), purchases (Swipley), pictures (Facebook), and locations (Foursquare) with friends and strangers all day long. Users are attracted and connected to these platforms because it involves flooding the social market with information users want out there about them. The article “Viral” discusses different ways to look at users by them getting lured by their desires to show off, be heard, reaffirm themselves, and be included.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answers
Social media allows users to immerse themselves into their social life at all times. There is not a single moment when solitary internet browsers can be disconnected from the outside world. This is appealing to some people. Social media is often tailored to the exact desires and interests of the users. In networks such as Facebook, only relevant ads are shown, only your friends are publicized on your news feed, and only people who you know can write on your wall. Therefore social media allows users to focus on the things that they deem important, and not “noise” from the outside world.
(The Viral Me, Devin Friedman. Blog Theory, J. Dean, p. 113-119)
4. In what ways does an eighties "hacker culture" shape Wikileaks? How does this differentiate Wikileaks from more traditional journalism? What are the benefits of these differences? What are the drawbacks?
The eightes “hacker culture” has shaped Wikileaks because it has been influential in the continued existence of the site. The “hacker culture” has always rebelled against “the man” by using technology in order to better the lives of citizens. Both use secrecy to their advantage by using what available to them, but not revealing their sources of how exactly they did it.
I think an eighties hacker culture shapes Wikileaks, because it influences the way they go about getting and revealing their information. On the Wikileaks site, they say they are dedicated to bring important news and information to the public. They also say “we publish material of ethical, political and historical significance while keeping the identity of our sources anonymous, thus providing a universal way for the revealing of suppressed and censored injustices. This quote is one of the ways Wikileaks differentiates them from traditional journalism, they reveal their sources, and as a citizen this makes me think of wikileaks as suspect because of their failure to do this.
The benefits of Wikileaks are: revealing their sources would compromise the security of their organization and sources. Their privacy allows them to publish stories that often disclose top-secret information that we would otherwise not be privy to. The benefits of Wikileaks are unbiased information to the public, and releasing stories that otherwise might be held from the citizenry. According to my presentation on Wikileaks a couple weeks ago, the negative aspects of Wikileaks is that it often discloses government secrets that should not be disclosed to the general public, it serves as a threat to democracy, and creates international conflicts. For instance, there could possibly be military information released that could put our troops in danger, or at least cause concern to the government for releasing this kind of information.
(Wikileaks website research/Wikileaks powerpoint)
5. What does Mark Andrejevic mean by "digital enclosure"?
According to Mark Andrejevic, he believes the internet provides the paradigimatic example of a virtual digital enclosure, one in which every virtual “move” has the potential to leave a digital trace or record of itself. Andrejevic states “Digital enclosure is meant to envoke the land enclosure movement associated with the transition from feudalism to capitalism, the process whereby overtime communal land was subjected to private control, allowing private landowners to set the conditions for its use. Overtime, the enclosure movement leads to the formation of distinct classes; those who own the means of production and those who must sell their labor for access to those means, whether arable lands or factories”
My own understanding of a digital enclosure is the internet’s cove where a user cannot move through this space without leaving a digital footprint.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
Mark Andrejevic’s “digital enclosure” is the surrender of our privacy in exchange for the use of a service. The people who own the infrastructure for the use of technology can set the terms of usage.
(iSpy, Mark Andrejevic)
6. Does interactivity entail democratization? Use Mark Andrejevic to answer this question. What are the repercussions of your answer for analyzing movements.org?
I don’t believe interactivity entails democratization because unlike real life, in the cyber society, users don’t necessarily have say over anything. Users have free access to move as they please, but in terms of control I believe it is limited. In Mark Andrejevic’s ispy, he says that decentralized totalitarianism is used as an extension of the version of interactivity offered by the commercial sector, in other words, I believe he means allowing people to believe they have the power will keep them interested. Andrejevic says that this version of interactivity will amount to actively sustaining the scene of one’s own passive submission. I see interactivity as a game of tug-o-war, and companies and others who persuade users to continually use their services are winning. I believe users are motivated by the illusion that they are in control, but in reality, this acceptance of control validates a company’s perpetual exploitation of them.
Mark Andrejevic states “Interactivity invites participants to embrace the very goals that are exempted from deliberation as their own” (Andrejevic 44).Analyzing Movements.org, they want to make social and are appealing to the youth demographic, but I am skeptical of their reasons behind getting the youth involved. From looking at their website, I am not exactly sure whether they are solely out to get my age range involved, or to reel us in with products we consume. Andrejevic states “Interactivity invites participants to embrace the very goals that are exempted from deliberation as their own (Andrejevic 45). They make their statements inclusive by using the word “we”, but the youths who buy into this are really being sold products that are cross promoted with their company. With this said, I feel that interactivity is not democratic, nor do I feel it is equal.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
Andrejevic’s argument applies very well to the organization “Movements”.Movements.org relies on the façade that the use of interactive networks can produce positive change in the tangible world. Through the harnessing of Facebook and other social media, users can make a change with minimal effort.
(iSpy, Mark Andrejevic)
7. What is the connection between technology and refusal of work according to Franco Berardi?
Franco Berardi sees a relationship between the idea “refusal of work” and the rise and surge of technology. This idea of “refusal of work” comes from a mindset in the 1970’s that you did not feel like working that day, you had the option to do just that. Laborers were able to have a schedule with specific, set hours because of the regulation of the industry and the surplus of jobs that weren’t dependent on technology. This mindset crumbled due to the deregulation of the industry and the rise of technology. Instead of having specific responsibilities, employees were required to be available to their employers all of the time.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
Berardi calls these types of jobs “cognitive labor”. These jobs did not required that the laborer be available and working at all hours of the day. With the rise of new technologies, like cell phones and smart phones that allow emails to be read on your mobile device, employers have even more control over employees.Now, laborers are paid for the timely and punctual delivery of assigned tasks, not the labor that occurs between the hours of 9AM to 5PM. The refusal of work, combined with the rise in technologies has resulted in the virtual enslavement of the educated working professional.
(Precarious Rhapsody, p. 72-82)
8. According to Franco Berardi, why do problems like panic disorder, ADHD, and depression increase under semio-capitalism?
My Answer
According to Franco Berardi, these problems increase under semio-capitalism for two reasons. First, the rates of Attention Deficit Hyper Disorders have increased because of the amount of information that is available to people today. The rise of the internet has made information easily accessible and it has somewhat resulted in an overload of noise. The problem is out minds process information quickly, but the speed and quantity of what we comprehend causes us to lose some of the meaning of the information, and our comprehension decreases.
Brainstormed/Discussion Answer
Panic orders and depression are caused by a different phenomenon. As mentioned earlier in his book, Berardi believes that the average non-physical laborer is now tethered to their job via communicative devices and in increase in the entrepreneurial ethos. With both unemployment and the cost of living rising, employers have the upper hand over their employees. Workers are held to a higher standard than is physically or mentally capable for some, and as a result an increase in the rates of panic disorders and depression. To the average worker, it is better to be medicated and work at a super-human level than to fall behind the competition because of “mental deficiencies”.
(Precarious Rhapsody p.99-102, 109-120)
9. According to Nicholas Carr, what does the internet do to our brains? How does he use the idea of brain plasticity in his argument? Is it persuasive? Why or why not?
My Answer/Blog
According to Nicholas Carr, internet use is having a measurable effect on the human mind. Studies have shown that the brain adapts to outside stimuli, rerouting the neural connections where they are best used. This change of neurological behavior is the foundational belief behind the theory of “brain plasticity”. This is the thought that the human brain is malleable, and can change according to the material.
I think it was interesting how he feels that the mighty power that is the internet is making us dumb. This is interesting to me because the world wide web is perceived as a place of knowing and knowledge. His feelings lead me back to a discussion that we had in class three weeks ago, when we talked about the speed of things does not allow our brains to process anything deeply. This said, it makes me agree with what Carr is saying because knowing that information, pictures, what have you, are there, why internalize it?, or better yet, why take the time to thoroughly process it when it will always be on the internet where we can always access it.
Thinking about the reasons behind this, it's almost like the internet is becoming our second brain. I believe our reasons for liking instant gratification stem from the fact unlike our own brains, the internet won't forget anything. It can store infinite information and can access anything and everything at first thought, and the click of a mouse.
(Nicholas Carr, The Shallows)
Discussion/Brainstorming
Carr’s assertion is that due to the massive deluge of information on the internet, the human brain is changing in a way that could be considered detrimental. To Carr, the plethora of visual, aural and intellectual stimuli on the internet is causing the human mind to think faster. However, we are not thinking about the information as much. In exchange for our enhanced speed, we are losing out on the ability to comprehend and remember information. Instead of contemplating and thinking about specific ideas or concepts for an extended period of time, we “juggle” them, not thinking about them for that long. To Carr, the implications of this development are vast. Memory has been affected. When the collective human history is concentrated in one location, there isn’t really a reason to retain it.
10. Why is it in Google's interest to get us to click on more and more links? What are the repercussions of this for Google? What are the repercussions for people? Does it make sense to use the notion of efficiency to think about thinking? Why or why not?
Google does benefit from users clicking on more and more links because users look to gain traffic through promoting their products and their brands through Google.
Discussion/Brainstorming
Google’s efficiency has resulted in far more relevant advertisements. As previously mentioned, only strong ads get placed on the main search page of Google. As a result, the most convincing ads are placed where the most people can see them. Google’s advertising strategy ensures that the public only views the strongest and most convincing ads.
It makes sense to use the notion of “efficiency” when discussing the human thought process.
Nicholas Carr argues that the human brain is transforming to process data faster (albeit with less delicacy). Studies have shown that the human brain acts differently when an individual uses the internet. This evidences the notion of human efficiency of though. Our brains have the capability to ensure that we process things as fast as possible, indicating efficiency of thought. If humans could not adapt to be efficient in their environment, it would surely mean the end of the race. However, humans have thrived on earth, indicating that efficiency is a core concept of the human mind.
(The Shallows, Nicholas Carr. P.155-157, 221, discussion)
Twenty point question. Be sure to engage and cite material from the course in your answer. You may use texts assigned during the first half of the course (chapter two of Terranova may be important here).
Students had the option of changing the way their work in the course would be assessed. You could change the requirements as well as the way these requirements would be weighted. Why didn't you do this? In answering the question, consider what you personally did or did not do as well as what your fellow students did or did not do (I'm asking you here whether you think your own reasons/motivations were the same or different from those that you attribute to others). The best answers will thematize the effect of the media terrain. For example, digital networks are supposed to facilitate communication; they are supposed to enable people to connect with one another easily; is this the same as enabling/inciting people to come together to evaluate problems, formulate options, and make decisions? Might the same technologies that reduce friction also displace action?
I honestly don’t understand why we had the power to change and did exercise this right. Personally, any changes I though t needed to be made I voiced them as comment on other people’s blogs in order perpetuate conversation. I can recall three weeks ago, this topic came up, and I gave suggestions on a peer’s page suggesting that the reflection should be 10 to 15 pages and other comments pertaining to end of the year work. I feel like the lack of people showing enthusiasm with adding to the blog conversation is a major reason why no one felt the need to make changes. I feel like my comments towards it were caught up in a non-circulating blogosphere where people either didn’t feel the need to comment, or didn’t feel like blogging for reasons beyond me.
As far as the classroom, I feel like things were not discussed because people felt they had to express themselves in the blogs instead of in house. I think it would have been beneficial if we had taken one class day to have a discussion on how we want to go about this, a student only meeting where everyone would get an opportunity to voice their opinions and feeling towards how class should be structured from that day on. Though my generation is computer saavy, I feel like some students were more enthusiastic than others about blogging. I think the first grading period, when you posted the graph on our blogs was a telling sign about the difference of blogging and posting in general among students in the classroom.
Those students who dropped the class during the first week, I believe, were the ones who had true problems with the structure of the class. From the readings over the semester, I think Franco Berardi and sections of Blog Theory relate most to this situation. First, our discussion on the fast movements of images and information on the internet makes it difficult for us to focus, and thoroughly internalize something. I feel with all of the other blogging we were doing that was not relevant to discussing the syllabus, let alone other platforms on the internet that take our time away from the blogging platform, how could we devote time to fully voice our opinions on syllabus structure. With this said, I feel like this should have been taken care of in class. It would have taken 30 to 40 minutes for everyone to get together and figure out what, why, and how they want it to be. Then, the student or students supervising this meeting would then present this to you as a proposal, and if accepted, this is what we would have done, all hands on deck.
I do believe that the same technologies that reduce friction also displace actions. It’s interesting how after we realized we could change something, people were more concerned, but yet few people followed through and put their voices on the blogs. Lastly, I believe that though the platforms were available, there were various reasons as to why people did not choose to you. I feel some people felt, since they talked in class, there was no reason to blog, and if there was no reason to blog, if they had feeling towards the syllabus structure or other things in class, they wanted to discuss them in class. I was the opposite, my voice was on the blog, occasionally in class, but I felt my thoughts and ideas could flow more online. Unfortunately, the conversation thread was not perpetual as it should have been because of the nature of the class.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Thoughts on Readings/Class Thoughts 5/3/11
Answering the question: Are people becoming less emotionally reachable? I believe so because of the amount of distractions that are on the internet. For instance, these days I think it would be easier to read a physical paper than a digital paper because of the amount of distractions that are on a page. As opposed to advertisements on the side, there are links intertwined with the words of the story that make it difficult to get through a whole article successfully. In this generation, we hear and see so many things that it is hard to process them and react to them emotionally. Just like the ticker at the bottom of a news broadcast or a sportscenter episode, information goes by in a flash and allow us to jump from story to story. The pace of our brain jumping from one thing to another discourages us from processing one thing thoroughly.
On the subject of the killing of Bin Laden, I feel that the day he masterminded the terrorist attacks on America and any other plots, he lost his rights as a human. How do you kill thousands of people, let alone one, and consider yourself a human being? In the same breath, I feel that we shouldn't celebrate the death of him, but be pleased that justice was served for the victims, though all of those people should be living and breathing today. Also, Bin Laden was not the only terrorist mastermind, and unfortunately wont be the last.
Professor Dean's statement that we don't need memory because everything is online runs parallel with my thoughts in my previous post about the internet being our second brain.
On the subject of the killing of Bin Laden, I feel that the day he masterminded the terrorist attacks on America and any other plots, he lost his rights as a human. How do you kill thousands of people, let alone one, and consider yourself a human being? In the same breath, I feel that we shouldn't celebrate the death of him, but be pleased that justice was served for the victims, though all of those people should be living and breathing today. Also, Bin Laden was not the only terrorist mastermind, and unfortunately wont be the last.
Professor Dean's statement that we don't need memory because everything is online runs parallel with my thoughts in my previous post about the internet being our second brain.
Thoughts on Readings from Last Week
I never had a chance to blog last week on the first part of Nicholas Carr's The Shadows, so here it is. I think it was interesting how he feels that the mighty power that is the internet is making us dumb. This is interesting to me because the world wide web is perceived as a place of knowing and knowledge. His feelings lead me back to a discussion that we had in class three weeks ago, when we talked about the speed of things does not allow our brains to process anything deeply. This said, it makes me agree with what Carr is saying because knowing that information, pictures, what have you, are there, why internalize it?, or better yet, why take the time to thoroughly process it when it will always be on the internet where we can always access it.
Thinking about the reasons behind this, it's almost like the internet is becoming our second brain. I believe our reasons for liking instant gratification stem from the fact unlike our own brains, the internet won't forget anything. It can store infinite information and can access anything and everything at first thought, and the click of a mouse. That's crazy.
Thinking about the reasons behind this, it's almost like the internet is becoming our second brain. I believe our reasons for liking instant gratification stem from the fact unlike our own brains, the internet won't forget anything. It can store infinite information and can access anything and everything at first thought, and the click of a mouse. That's crazy.
Saturday, April 16, 2011
Thoughts on Class 4/14/11
I thought it was interesting how Bifo talked about people’s differences through generation. I believe for each generation there are different ways of learning, different technologies, and some sort of societal advancement. For instance, at the turn of the century technology was not that heavily depended on like it is 11 years later. I believe technology and advancement allow things such as cell phones become a part of our DNA. This makes me recall the time in class when some people said they couldn’t imagine ever being without their cell phones, on the other hand, some people says it made them feel at peace because they weren’t always worrying whether someone had texted or called them.
Reactions to in-class reading:
What is the meaning of autonomy today?
I agree that time has been fragmented and made flexible in a fractal recombinant way. The cellular phone has become an extension of work and other life demands. Instead of working a 9 to 5 day and coming home to detach from business, the phone serves as a way of accessing a person for matters that need to be taken care of at that moment, this keeps a person constantly attached to business and leaving little time for things outside of the work bubble.
Frail psycho-sphere
Continuing my thoughts from Thursday’s class, I feel we sift through so much technology that there isn’t adequate time to process each individual piece of it. For instance, some people have thousands of Facebook pictures’, knowing that they are there is reassuring enough, leaving it not necessary to go through each one. A personal example I would use would be my Itunes Library. I have 6, 000 songs in my library, but I don’t need to listen to each one to know that, knowing that they are there and that I can access them at any time is reassuring.
Reactions to in-class reading:
What is the meaning of autonomy today?
I agree that time has been fragmented and made flexible in a fractal recombinant way. The cellular phone has become an extension of work and other life demands. Instead of working a 9 to 5 day and coming home to detach from business, the phone serves as a way of accessing a person for matters that need to be taken care of at that moment, this keeps a person constantly attached to business and leaving little time for things outside of the work bubble.
Frail psycho-sphere
Continuing my thoughts from Thursday’s class, I feel we sift through so much technology that there isn’t adequate time to process each individual piece of it. For instance, some people have thousands of Facebook pictures’, knowing that they are there is reassuring enough, leaving it not necessary to go through each one. A personal example I would use would be my Itunes Library. I have 6, 000 songs in my library, but I don’t need to listen to each one to know that, knowing that they are there and that I can access them at any time is reassuring.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Thoughts on Class 4/12/11
Adding to the debate in class, I think Facebook and Twitter both have certain issues. I think Facebook is a genius way to stay connected with old friends and connect with new ones. I also think that those who are consumed in this Facebook world have tunnel vision when it comes to being aware of other political and world events. Some people get their news traditionally from papers and others access it online. There are also those who are only aware of whats happening on their Facebook minifeeds. These are a collection of opinions, based on other people views, that the person viewing them can draw from to form a solid political view. I said that to say it is good to ration Facebook time, though, speaking for myself, can be hard to disconnect from a virtual realm that circulates so much information.
Twitter on the other hand I think is worse, in terms of circulating news information. As I said when we split into groups, I think followers of celebrities on Twitter are drawn to their title, their brand; not necessarily why they're famous but the fact that they are. Also, I think these followers get affiliated with any brands or products that the star they are following is cross promoted with. Trust me, I can't possibly understand why any teen girl would idolize her, let alone buy her book. On the other hand, its the same effect reality television is having on my generation.
Twitter on the other hand I think is worse, in terms of circulating news information. As I said when we split into groups, I think followers of celebrities on Twitter are drawn to their title, their brand; not necessarily why they're famous but the fact that they are. Also, I think these followers get affiliated with any brands or products that the star they are following is cross promoted with. Trust me, I can't possibly understand why any teen girl would idolize her, let alone buy her book. On the other hand, its the same effect reality television is having on my generation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)