Villanueva writes ....it brought back so many memories of Mom's push for assimilation at the loneliness of the "other" in a foreign place, of California, of how we are not meant to be alone, and the lengths we will go to not to be alone (pg. 39). Villanueva uses the term assimilation in a way which I believe Wikipedia defines best: the social process of absorbing one cultural group into harmony with another and by cultural assimilation as a political response to the demographic fact of multi-ethnicity which encourages absorption of the minority into the dominant culture. It is opposed to affirmative philosophy like multiculturalism, for example, which recognizes and seeks to maintain differences. It is going to be extremely interesting to see how many sites, communities, software, and games use the term in the same way and how they do it. It should be an eye opening experience where i probably would of never thought to do before this assignment. If and when I participate in these genres, I have never thought deeply about the way it is/was constructed and meant to be viewed.
According to Villanueva, biculturalism is:
a. cultures that swing both ways
b. an equal ease with two cultures
c. the tensions within, which are caused by being unable to deny the old or the
new
d. none of the above
T/F: Villanueva in Spin in English attempts to convert a GED into a diploma (and is denied) sees the school library's extension that looks like the one he designed.
Villanueva, Victor. "Spic in English", American Academic of Color. Urban, Il: NCTE. 34-50.
Friday, November 5, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Menu-Driven Indeed
I feel the "Race: The Power of Illusion" website is dead on with a "menu-driven" concept of race. Nakamura states it is certainly plausible to read websites that create race-regulating hierarchical menu's as lineal descendants of the dominant racial mythology that has enforced such taxonimical sleighs of band as the famed "one-drop" rule for determining the race of interracial peoples of partially African descent (Menu-Driven Identities: Making race happen online, 119). The website has that feel exactly. You start off by having quite a few choices on how to enter the site. This then gives you more choices for specifics on race. It basically allows you to go on a journey about racism throughout the times and explains how the way it was has paved the road to how it is, and will continue for how its going to be. Within these categories you are given more options and more menus to chose from. The website entails most of the key characteristics of a menu-driven website. The website isn't asking your race specifically, it is simply offering tidbits of information in regards to race and how it pertains to you. It however encompasses the "clickable" menus, the "drop downs" of categories that seem in order, like a timeline. Even though it is dead on, I don't believe it goes beyond.
Nakamura, Lisa. Cybertypes: Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet. New York. Routledge, 2002. Print.
Nakamura, Lisa. Cybertypes: Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet. New York. Routledge, 2002. Print.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Cybertyping and Identity tourism
Cybertyping is basically stereotyping but in cyberspace. So, we can take the definition of stereotype, which is simply a negative view of a person/individual or group who share certain characteristics or qualities. They are more or less assumptions based on other assumptions that in turn, create and take on a vicious cycle of negativity. Nakamura describes that cybertypes are the images that arise when the fears, anxieties, and desires of privileged Western users are scripted into a textural/graphical environment that is in constant flux and revision (Cybertypes: Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet, 2002).
Identity tourism is using another identity when on the web. This can be a different gender or race, other than your own. People do this when either playing video games, or on the Internet itself, generally speaking. This is looked at as "touring" other identities based on general stereotypes we might encounter daily based on our race or gender. If done the right way and consciously, identity tourism can help debunk these stereotypes and could potentially expand the boundaries of online community. Identity tourism allows us the freedom to play out of character, it suggests mobility within space for the purposes of curiosity, pleasure, or experience.
Their is plenty of cybertyping occurring in Streetfighter 2. Obviously they fighters to choose from are based of their country, so in fact they would create a character to symbolize the typical stereotype. The character from India's name is Dhalsim who wears skulls around his neck, can shoot fire, and expand his limbs, which emulates the characteristics we believe to be true of their culture and their beliefs. As well as the big dude from the USSR, and the black dude from USA with his boxing gloves and funky hairdo. The creators obviously make them to be the most stereotypical that viewers/gamers can relate to. The types of identity tourism that occur is simply the way you play the character. Depending on which character you choose, the way you fight and what buttons or moves you use is dependent on that.
Nakamura, Lisa. Cybertypes: Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet. New York Routledge, 2002. Print.
Nakamura, Lisa (2007). Race In/For Cyberspace. In D. Bell and B. M. Kennedy (Ed.), The Cybercultures Reader (2nd Ed.). London and New York: Routeledge. Print.
Identity tourism is using another identity when on the web. This can be a different gender or race, other than your own. People do this when either playing video games, or on the Internet itself, generally speaking. This is looked at as "touring" other identities based on general stereotypes we might encounter daily based on our race or gender. If done the right way and consciously, identity tourism can help debunk these stereotypes and could potentially expand the boundaries of online community. Identity tourism allows us the freedom to play out of character, it suggests mobility within space for the purposes of curiosity, pleasure, or experience.
Their is plenty of cybertyping occurring in Streetfighter 2. Obviously they fighters to choose from are based of their country, so in fact they would create a character to symbolize the typical stereotype. The character from India's name is Dhalsim who wears skulls around his neck, can shoot fire, and expand his limbs, which emulates the characteristics we believe to be true of their culture and their beliefs. As well as the big dude from the USSR, and the black dude from USA with his boxing gloves and funky hairdo. The creators obviously make them to be the most stereotypical that viewers/gamers can relate to. The types of identity tourism that occur is simply the way you play the character. Depending on which character you choose, the way you fight and what buttons or moves you use is dependent on that.
Nakamura, Lisa. Cybertypes: Race, Ethnicity, and Identity on the Internet. New York Routledge, 2002. Print.
Nakamura, Lisa (2007). Race In/For Cyberspace. In D. Bell and B. M. Kennedy (Ed.), The Cybercultures Reader (2nd Ed.). London and New York: Routeledge. Print.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Princess Frankenstein Monster?
In Super Mario Bros. 2, it is hard to be compelling in stating there are obvious gender stereotypes that Princess, Mario, Luigi, and Toad reflect and complicate. However, there are a couple, if not a few. In the beginning of the game, you have to choose which player to start with. I always chose the Princess to play with. Is it because I relate to her because she is in fact female? Nah, I picked her because when making her jump, or run + jump, she could actually float, which is extremely beneficial in the game.
An obvious stereotype is how women are looked at to be these helpless beings, waiting to be rescued by her prince charming, or knight in shining armor, as she plays the victim. So the “strong” man goes through all sorts of hurdles and battles to rescue her.
Personally, I don’t believe this game offers multiple “gender-subject configurations”, but for the sake of argument, I guess I will pick a couple. Princess could fall under the “Lara as Female Frankenstein Monster”, although her pink dress and crown might detract from that, she is still a hard core fighting machine. But she is definitely not some mutant offspring, nor a vicious, combative force. So more realistically, she ensues the “Lara as a Positive Role Model” because she is the only female character or avatar amongst the male avatars. “Violent, sexy, and capable women like Lara Croft might be better role models for girls than the few games that have been targeted specifically at girls, such as Ms. Pacman, Barbie Fashion Designer and the nonviolent, social games produced by Purple Moon” (Schleiner, 224). This actually leads back to the stereotype of women. Maybe we would like to see Barbie kick some ass while designing fashion and still make it back home in time to cook supper.
Schleiner, Anne-Marie. "Does Lara Croft Wear Fake Polygons? Gender and Gender-Role Subversion in Computer Adventure Games." MIT Press. 34.3 (2001): 221-226. Print.
An obvious stereotype is how women are looked at to be these helpless beings, waiting to be rescued by her prince charming, or knight in shining armor, as she plays the victim. So the “strong” man goes through all sorts of hurdles and battles to rescue her.
Personally, I don’t believe this game offers multiple “gender-subject configurations”, but for the sake of argument, I guess I will pick a couple. Princess could fall under the “Lara as Female Frankenstein Monster”, although her pink dress and crown might detract from that, she is still a hard core fighting machine. But she is definitely not some mutant offspring, nor a vicious, combative force. So more realistically, she ensues the “Lara as a Positive Role Model” because she is the only female character or avatar amongst the male avatars. “Violent, sexy, and capable women like Lara Croft might be better role models for girls than the few games that have been targeted specifically at girls, such as Ms. Pacman, Barbie Fashion Designer and the nonviolent, social games produced by Purple Moon” (Schleiner, 224). This actually leads back to the stereotype of women. Maybe we would like to see Barbie kick some ass while designing fashion and still make it back home in time to cook supper.
Schleiner, Anne-Marie. "Does Lara Croft Wear Fake Polygons? Gender and Gender-Role Subversion in Computer Adventure Games." MIT Press. 34.3 (2001): 221-226. Print.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Know your role....or not....
Avatar dichotomizes sex and dichotomizes gender from one world, which is real life, and from Pandora, the virtual.
In the real world, it showcases the men as the prominent sex. This is mainly because the majority of them are soldiers. They throw their machismo around, they show they are in charge, with a take no prisoner attitude. It’s all about fighting, shooting, blowing things up, keeping their eye on the prize, and more or less, conquering. The role Sigourney Weaver plays in the real world is a scientist whose role is of less importance to that of her male superior, even though without her they would not be able to access or habitat Pandora, but is still a tough, semi-crude lady.
In the virtual, or Pandora, the woman actually hold all the great roles within their culture/people. The woman role varies from one being a shaman of her clan, one being the daughter of the shaman, as well as the God they pray to, is a she (Wilson). Even Sigourney’s role in Pandora turns more motherly and nurturing.
Wilson, Tracy V. "Is James Cameron's 'Avatar' sexist?." HowStuffWorks. HowStuffWorks, Inc., 12/17/2009Web. 1 Oct 2010..
Avatar reflects Stone’s idea about cyborg envy because of the longing of the male for the female (Stone, 450). In Avatar Jake in the virtual world of Pandora falls in love. He attaches himself to a female who saves his life and she shows him the ways of the Navvi. What isn’t desirable about being a cyborg? It is a way to be able to use it as a means to escape your everyday existence. It’s a way to detach you from you, who everybody always sees you at, or knows you by. Stone states that penetrating the screen involves a state change from the physical, biological space of the embodied viewer to the symbolic, metaphorical ‘consensual hallucination’ of cyberspace; a space that is a locus of intense desire for refigured embodiment. In Avatar, Jake is able to free himself of his disability and is able to walk and run in the virtual. He became an extension of his real self, but in a way, euphorically became better. In order to enter cyberspace is to physically put on cyberspace (Stone, 450). Jake had to physically become one with the Avatar, he had to relearn how to use the body, how to learn the language, the ways of the people, how to physically interact with his surroundings.
Stone, Allucquere Rosanne. "Will The Real Body Please Stand UP?." The Cybercultures reader. Ed. David Bell and Barbara M. Kennedy. New York: Routledge, 2000. Print.
In the real world, it showcases the men as the prominent sex. This is mainly because the majority of them are soldiers. They throw their machismo around, they show they are in charge, with a take no prisoner attitude. It’s all about fighting, shooting, blowing things up, keeping their eye on the prize, and more or less, conquering. The role Sigourney Weaver plays in the real world is a scientist whose role is of less importance to that of her male superior, even though without her they would not be able to access or habitat Pandora, but is still a tough, semi-crude lady.
In the virtual, or Pandora, the woman actually hold all the great roles within their culture/people. The woman role varies from one being a shaman of her clan, one being the daughter of the shaman, as well as the God they pray to, is a she (Wilson). Even Sigourney’s role in Pandora turns more motherly and nurturing.
Wilson, Tracy V. "Is James Cameron's 'Avatar' sexist?." HowStuffWorks. HowStuffWorks, Inc., 12/17/2009Web. 1 Oct 2010.
Avatar reflects Stone’s idea about cyborg envy because of the longing of the male for the female (Stone, 450). In Avatar Jake in the virtual world of Pandora falls in love. He attaches himself to a female who saves his life and she shows him the ways of the Navvi. What isn’t desirable about being a cyborg? It is a way to be able to use it as a means to escape your everyday existence. It’s a way to detach you from you, who everybody always sees you at, or knows you by. Stone states that penetrating the screen involves a state change from the physical, biological space of the embodied viewer to the symbolic, metaphorical ‘consensual hallucination’ of cyberspace; a space that is a locus of intense desire for refigured embodiment. In Avatar, Jake is able to free himself of his disability and is able to walk and run in the virtual. He became an extension of his real self, but in a way, euphorically became better. In order to enter cyberspace is to physically put on cyberspace (Stone, 450). Jake had to physically become one with the Avatar, he had to relearn how to use the body, how to learn the language, the ways of the people, how to physically interact with his surroundings.
Stone, Allucquere Rosanne. "Will The Real Body Please Stand UP?." The Cybercultures reader. Ed. David Bell and Barbara M. Kennedy. New York: Routledge, 2000. Print.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Humanizing Computers
I checked out the new Apple + Intel commercial and definitely agree with Lupton about how we humanize computers. In this advertisement there is a group of individuals in white body suits, like scientists, to take out the Intel chip that is inside a personal computer (PC) and put it inside a MAC computer. The advertisements’ commentary states that the Intel has been living a dull life, trapped within a PC, and finally gets to be where it should be, doing what it is capable of doing, more or less. The commentary/commercial ends with: “Imagine the possibilities”, after a successful procedure of “setting the Intel free” ("Apple + Intel commercial").
I interpreted the commercial to basically be performing a transplant. This is how we have humanized the computer. The scientists are basically representative of doctor’s extracting a perfectly good organ out of a bad or unhealthy body, showing that if in the right body, the performance capabilities are endless.
Computers, as represented in advertising, are prone to many of the life experiences that humans experience (Lupton, 426). Lupton goes on to write about other advertisements that depict computers being humanized. One advertisement where a computer was delivered by a medical practitioner because the catch line was that: “NCE can deliver color notebooks now”. Another showing a computer flat lining like it’s had heart failure (Lupton, 426-427).
We do grow to build a relationship with our computers, whether it’s a love/hate, hate to love, or love to hate relationship, it is a relationship nonetheless. The advertisements try to reach us on that level of knowing that we become attached to them. I myself have to admit that I would love to perform a “transplant” to my computer. I would be simply amazed if I could take the Intel out of my PC and transplant it into a MAC. I am also amazed at surgeon for all the same reasons, except that they do it to actual humans. These observations are useful for understanding the blurriness and importance of the computer/user relationship. The relationship is symbiotic: users invest certain aspects of themselves and their cultures when…..viewed as contributing to individual images and experiences of their selves and their bodies (Lupton, 427).
There is nothing that is most significant that I have learned so far in class because I feel everything that has been read or discussed thus far is all significant and is all profoundly related in my understanding of technology as a whole. What I will state though, is how interested I am in the whole embodiment/disembodiment aspect of technology. I understand an am beyond aware of where technology is headed, and how fast it is advancing. It is also very understandable how we, myself included, can have or will become so engulfed in it. It is easy to see how we can get so involved digitally, yet zoned out in real life. You will be able to immerse yourself in simulated environments instead of just looking at them through a small rectangular window become an inhabitant, a participant, not merely a spectator (Robins, 228).
What am I going to take with me outside of class into RL is that, even as an aspiring graphic designer, who is merely more than willing to dive head first into technology and all that goes with it, there are still many who are scared of it. Those who believe there needs to be a separation between both worlds, that the line separating the two should not be completely blurred.
Bell, David, and Barbara M. Kennedy. eds. The Cybercultures Reader. 2nd Ed.
London: Routledge. 422-432. Print.
"Apple + Intel commercial." MY KEWEGO. Web. 22 Sep 2010.
.
I interpreted the commercial to basically be performing a transplant. This is how we have humanized the computer. The scientists are basically representative of doctor’s extracting a perfectly good organ out of a bad or unhealthy body, showing that if in the right body, the performance capabilities are endless.
Computers, as represented in advertising, are prone to many of the life experiences that humans experience (Lupton, 426). Lupton goes on to write about other advertisements that depict computers being humanized. One advertisement where a computer was delivered by a medical practitioner because the catch line was that: “NCE can deliver color notebooks now”. Another showing a computer flat lining like it’s had heart failure (Lupton, 426-427).
We do grow to build a relationship with our computers, whether it’s a love/hate, hate to love, or love to hate relationship, it is a relationship nonetheless. The advertisements try to reach us on that level of knowing that we become attached to them. I myself have to admit that I would love to perform a “transplant” to my computer. I would be simply amazed if I could take the Intel out of my PC and transplant it into a MAC. I am also amazed at surgeon for all the same reasons, except that they do it to actual humans. These observations are useful for understanding the blurriness and importance of the computer/user relationship. The relationship is symbiotic: users invest certain aspects of themselves and their cultures when…..viewed as contributing to individual images and experiences of their selves and their bodies (Lupton, 427).
There is nothing that is most significant that I have learned so far in class because I feel everything that has been read or discussed thus far is all significant and is all profoundly related in my understanding of technology as a whole. What I will state though, is how interested I am in the whole embodiment/disembodiment aspect of technology. I understand an am beyond aware of where technology is headed, and how fast it is advancing. It is also very understandable how we, myself included, can have or will become so engulfed in it. It is easy to see how we can get so involved digitally, yet zoned out in real life. You will be able to immerse yourself in simulated environments instead of just looking at them through a small rectangular window become an inhabitant, a participant, not merely a spectator (Robins, 228).
What am I going to take with me outside of class into RL is that, even as an aspiring graphic designer, who is merely more than willing to dive head first into technology and all that goes with it, there are still many who are scared of it. Those who believe there needs to be a separation between both worlds, that the line separating the two should not be completely blurred.
Bell, David, and Barbara M. Kennedy. eds. The Cybercultures Reader. 2nd Ed.
London: Routledge. 422-432. Print.
"Apple + Intel commercial." MY KEWEGO. Web. 22 Sep 2010.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Peg-Community or not?
I definitely agree with Bauman's dismissal of many contemporary forms of something-like-community as "peg communities"-as coat pegs on which we choose to temporarily hang parts of our identities (Bell, 255).
As social networking plays an important and prominent role in my life. I still don't give my full "self" or identity on it, I only give a part of who I am. Little snipets and tidbits of my life, or of my identity. Mostly on facebook my statuses are about school, work, and every now and again my home life. But these are only part of my identity at that particular moment of my life when I update. That is not who I am at every second, every moment of my being. Only those who know me in real life know my true identity, but even in that sense, it's not my full identity, just what they are allowed to know or see about me. But my social/virtual communities are an extension of who I am, nonetheless.
For some people, yes, virtual communities are "peg communities" that are "bonds without consequence" like Bauman describes (Bell, 258), but not for all. Bell writes, based off Giddens, that it might be possible to rewrite peg communities as pure communities as collectives entered into with eyes-wide-open, not stumbled into blinded by tradition and obligation (258).
In the end I agree with Bell, "who are we to say that what someone names a community isn't what we think w a community should look like?" (Bell, 261). Even if we don't give our full identity, we are still engaging in one, which makes us a part of it regardless. There are no rules that say how much of one's identity must be given for the community to remain true, or exist.
Bell, David, and Barbara M. Kennedy. eds. The Cybercultures Reader. 2nd Ed. London:
Routledge. 254-264. Print.
Design21: Social Design Network
http://jump.dexigner.com/directory/9389
deviantArt
http://jump.dexigner.com/directory/7266
Cataci
http://jump.dexigner.com/directory/13251
These are all design communities. I picked these sites because I am a designer and it is a nice way for other designers to come together and play off eachother's creativity and knowledge, as well as give/offer great resources for creativity and/or career advancement. These different communities offer different things for different designers that could, and are greatly beneficial, but all have design in mind as the common thread.
As social networking plays an important and prominent role in my life. I still don't give my full "self" or identity on it, I only give a part of who I am. Little snipets and tidbits of my life, or of my identity. Mostly on facebook my statuses are about school, work, and every now and again my home life. But these are only part of my identity at that particular moment of my life when I update. That is not who I am at every second, every moment of my being. Only those who know me in real life know my true identity, but even in that sense, it's not my full identity, just what they are allowed to know or see about me. But my social/virtual communities are an extension of who I am, nonetheless.
For some people, yes, virtual communities are "peg communities" that are "bonds without consequence" like Bauman describes (Bell, 258), but not for all. Bell writes, based off Giddens, that it might be possible to rewrite peg communities as pure communities as collectives entered into with eyes-wide-open, not stumbled into blinded by tradition and obligation (258).
In the end I agree with Bell, "who are we to say that what someone names a community isn't what we think w a community should look like?" (Bell, 261). Even if we don't give our full identity, we are still engaging in one, which makes us a part of it regardless. There are no rules that say how much of one's identity must be given for the community to remain true, or exist.
Bell, David, and Barbara M. Kennedy. eds. The Cybercultures Reader. 2nd Ed. London:
Routledge. 254-264. Print.
Design21: Social Design Network
http://jump.dexigner.com/directory/9389
deviantArt
http://jump.dexigner.com/directory/7266
Cataci
http://jump.dexigner.com/directory/13251
These are all design communities. I picked these sites because I am a designer and it is a nice way for other designers to come together and play off eachother's creativity and knowledge, as well as give/offer great resources for creativity and/or career advancement. These different communities offer different things for different designers that could, and are greatly beneficial, but all have design in mind as the common thread.
Yahoo! The Old...The Ugly...and The New....
I agree with Brunett and Marshall that one critical point about Web sites is that Web pages and Web sites change regularly (90). A lot of what we see on the Web is grouped amongst categories of interest and then divided up into subgroups within themselves. This is true not only in the search engine but within the website itself. When you click on a specific link in a website, it is going to connect you to other related resources or information based off the initial link you selected. The key distinction is that the web is much more continuous than discontinuous from different domains of activity (91).
When searching for information on Websites, most people not only look for ease of access, flow of information, and options, we expect it. As a commercial entity, Yahoo! has been successful at providing an easily usable site that can be personalized (91).
The old Yahoo homepage is somewhat overloaded with texts or links. It lacks images and aesthetics that keep the Web page warm and inviting. It is extremely text heavy that can be overpowering and can give too many options/links to choose from. Burnett and Marshall are accurate when describing how the links, even in older versions, with use of graphic user interface (GUI) and the icons clicked on can help lead or guide you to other interlinked information (82). This is prominent in the old homepage of Yahoo. All it is consisted of is links that lead to more links that are all interlinked.
Obviously with the advances in web design, and the knowledge of what makes a great website is ever changing. This is prominent with most or all companies and/or information sites. They all, at one point or another, give themselves a "face lift". You have to pay attention to the changing times and what is in more demand. Not that people are lazy, or don't want to read, but the simple fact that a "picture is worth a thousand words" makes sense. Not only to see and read a headline, but to have an image to go with it makes it much more real and interesting, as well as inviting.
The new Yahoo homepage is more personalizable, more sociable. If we are spending a lot of time on a specific page, the option of being able to personalize it and have specific links, information easily accessible and readily available the minute we get on the page, is time saving, extremely beneficial, and wanted. It's nice to be able to create or guide the web page to be geared towards things I am most interested in. We are wanting and looking for quick search engines, time saving pages, the idea of personalization is greatly warranted. The new page is obviously more appealing, on many different levels, but in essence still holds a lot of great concepts from the previous. It does so, but is visually stimulating, which goes a long way.
"Web Theory": Burnett, Robert; Marshall, P. David. "Web Theory: An Introduction".
2003. Routledge.
When searching for information on Websites, most people not only look for ease of access, flow of information, and options, we expect it. As a commercial entity, Yahoo! has been successful at providing an easily usable site that can be personalized (91).
The old Yahoo homepage is somewhat overloaded with texts or links. It lacks images and aesthetics that keep the Web page warm and inviting. It is extremely text heavy that can be overpowering and can give too many options/links to choose from. Burnett and Marshall are accurate when describing how the links, even in older versions, with use of graphic user interface (GUI) and the icons clicked on can help lead or guide you to other interlinked information (82). This is prominent in the old homepage of Yahoo. All it is consisted of is links that lead to more links that are all interlinked.
Obviously with the advances in web design, and the knowledge of what makes a great website is ever changing. This is prominent with most or all companies and/or information sites. They all, at one point or another, give themselves a "face lift". You have to pay attention to the changing times and what is in more demand. Not that people are lazy, or don't want to read, but the simple fact that a "picture is worth a thousand words" makes sense. Not only to see and read a headline, but to have an image to go with it makes it much more real and interesting, as well as inviting.
The new Yahoo homepage is more personalizable, more sociable. If we are spending a lot of time on a specific page, the option of being able to personalize it and have specific links, information easily accessible and readily available the minute we get on the page, is time saving, extremely beneficial, and wanted. It's nice to be able to create or guide the web page to be geared towards things I am most interested in. We are wanting and looking for quick search engines, time saving pages, the idea of personalization is greatly warranted. The new page is obviously more appealing, on many different levels, but in essence still holds a lot of great concepts from the previous. It does so, but is visually stimulating, which goes a long way.
"Web Theory": Burnett, Robert; Marshall, P. David. "Web Theory: An Introduction".
2003. Routledge.
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Have you been Digitally Divided....
The digital divide can and will be looked at from many different angles/perspectives.
Mark Warschauer states that projects around the world focus too much on the access of hardware and software, and little on human knowledge of that hardware and software (4).
Access to ICT (information and communication technology) is embedded in a complex array of factors encompassing physical, digital, human, and social resources and relationships. Content and language, literacy and education, and community and institutional structures must all be taken into account if meaningful access to new technologies is to be provided (Mark Warschauer 4).
The digital divide is about access to hardware, software, technology, even the internet connection itself, as well as the literacy needed for and to use the hardware, software and technology. It is a seperation in groups, communities, and people which includes having and incorporating techno literacy and cultural literacy. What good is having a computer if we have no idea how to use it?
The digital divide is not limited to the poor, the uneducated, or to those in third world locations, but is cross globally and reaches across every nook and cranny all over the world. Every one and one point in our lives will experience at least one if not more aspects of the digital divide.
Mark Warschauer provides great examples to show that access plays a vital role, but the only role in the digital divide. In one example, there was an experiment in New Delhi that provided an outdoor, five station computer kiosk, to one of it's poorest slums. No instruction was provided, there were no teachers to help or anyone to explain how to use everything. Kids had to figure out how to navigate through the kiosk. The kids learned how to navigate simple things such as: copying and pasting, changing the "wallpaper", also, how to launch and use Microsoft Word and Paint. The kiosk ended up being minimally effective due to the lack of educational programs provided, as well as lack of content provided in their spoken language. The kids mostly spent their time drawing and playing video games (2).
From the rich to the poor, the young to the old, the technologically savvy to those barely being introduced to it, the digital divide is prominent, and the awareness and attempt to close the gap is starting, but definitely has a long way to go. We must acknowledge the fact that every person starts from a different playing field and must be provided the much needed tools to succeed in this technologically changing and advancing world.
The metaphors used between Windows and Macintosh operating systems was somewhat confusing, and a little difficult for my to grasp and fully understand. I am not sure if it is accurate in that it represents modern capitalism, or that those of us who aren't prominently white middle to upper middle class users see it that way. To say that the icons of the manilla folders support that is a bit extreme and far fetched. They are recognized for what they are, literally. More and more people are familiarizing themselves with software, if that is in fact what they need, whether it be in an office setting, or at home for personal use. It is all dependent upon your level of education, what you actually do for a living, and your interest in the software itself. I was confused after reading this and am not sure what other metaphors can be used to better represent the underlying message of this entry. It isn't about the privelage of accessing the information, it is really about the reasons behind accessing it. What is our use and purpose for it. I wouldn't use Photoshop to merely re-crop an image, and I definitely wouldn't purchase it if that was the only use I would get out of it. However, in the same aspect as the earlier stated metaphor, you could say only designers would access the Adobe programs, due to the fact they are geared towards designers because only a designer would understand the icons of paintbrushes, cropping tools, etc. Like I said, I honestly didn't understand the metaphor so I do not have a solid answer for this.
Selfe and Selfe. Politics of the Interface. 1994. 485-88.
Warschauer, Mark. (2002). Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide. First Monday, 7(7), Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index/php/fm/article/viewArticle/967/888
Mark Warschauer states that projects around the world focus too much on the access of hardware and software, and little on human knowledge of that hardware and software (4).
Access to ICT (information and communication technology) is embedded in a complex array of factors encompassing physical, digital, human, and social resources and relationships. Content and language, literacy and education, and community and institutional structures must all be taken into account if meaningful access to new technologies is to be provided (Mark Warschauer 4).
The digital divide is about access to hardware, software, technology, even the internet connection itself, as well as the literacy needed for and to use the hardware, software and technology. It is a seperation in groups, communities, and people which includes having and incorporating techno literacy and cultural literacy. What good is having a computer if we have no idea how to use it?
The digital divide is not limited to the poor, the uneducated, or to those in third world locations, but is cross globally and reaches across every nook and cranny all over the world. Every one and one point in our lives will experience at least one if not more aspects of the digital divide.
Mark Warschauer provides great examples to show that access plays a vital role, but the only role in the digital divide. In one example, there was an experiment in New Delhi that provided an outdoor, five station computer kiosk, to one of it's poorest slums. No instruction was provided, there were no teachers to help or anyone to explain how to use everything. Kids had to figure out how to navigate through the kiosk. The kids learned how to navigate simple things such as: copying and pasting, changing the "wallpaper", also, how to launch and use Microsoft Word and Paint. The kiosk ended up being minimally effective due to the lack of educational programs provided, as well as lack of content provided in their spoken language. The kids mostly spent their time drawing and playing video games (2).
From the rich to the poor, the young to the old, the technologically savvy to those barely being introduced to it, the digital divide is prominent, and the awareness and attempt to close the gap is starting, but definitely has a long way to go. We must acknowledge the fact that every person starts from a different playing field and must be provided the much needed tools to succeed in this technologically changing and advancing world.
The metaphors used between Windows and Macintosh operating systems was somewhat confusing, and a little difficult for my to grasp and fully understand. I am not sure if it is accurate in that it represents modern capitalism, or that those of us who aren't prominently white middle to upper middle class users see it that way. To say that the icons of the manilla folders support that is a bit extreme and far fetched. They are recognized for what they are, literally. More and more people are familiarizing themselves with software, if that is in fact what they need, whether it be in an office setting, or at home for personal use. It is all dependent upon your level of education, what you actually do for a living, and your interest in the software itself. I was confused after reading this and am not sure what other metaphors can be used to better represent the underlying message of this entry. It isn't about the privelage of accessing the information, it is really about the reasons behind accessing it. What is our use and purpose for it. I wouldn't use Photoshop to merely re-crop an image, and I definitely wouldn't purchase it if that was the only use I would get out of it. However, in the same aspect as the earlier stated metaphor, you could say only designers would access the Adobe programs, due to the fact they are geared towards designers because only a designer would understand the icons of paintbrushes, cropping tools, etc. Like I said, I honestly didn't understand the metaphor so I do not have a solid answer for this.
Selfe and Selfe. Politics of the Interface. 1994. 485-88.
Warschauer, Mark. (2002). Reconceptualizing the Digital Divide. First Monday, 7(7), Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index/php/fm/article/viewArticle/967/888
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Rhetoric
Foss, Foss, and Trap describe rhetoric as being the term that captures all of these processes: how we perceive what we know what we experience, and how we act are the results of our own symbol use and that of those around us (1). Their definition also includes the use of symbols by humans and how humans construct the world they live in by symbolic choices and through representation. The key components of the definition of rhetoric are: humans, symbols, and communicate (Foss, Foss, and Trapp 1).
To me, Foss et. Al’s definition of rhetoric describes how humans communicate and interact with one another through the use of symbols. As humans, we see everything and every object as a representation of something meaningful in our lives. The way we see these things, these moments or things in our lives to be symbolic. Whether it is through, or for religious purposes, or to symbolize love, hate, feelings/emotions, or to even represent ownership, there is always a symbol, it is just human nature.
Rhetoric is extremely profound in digital cultures and in my everyday life. It is significant when I am online participating in my social networking, as well as when I am texting on my smartphone. I am constantly using symbols or abbreviations to communicate to my peers what I am doing, and/or how I am feeling; whether it is the abbreviation of LOL, FML, or by using and emoticon to show that I am happy, or smiling, sad, sticking my tongue out, etc. Social networking allows us to use rhetoric as well. Facebook for example, allows users access to applications where people can send “hearts” to one another that represent friendship, love, happiness, and things of that nature. So what are they? Symbols of course. It goes back to Foss, Foss, and Trapp’s description of rhetoric where the key components of the definition are: human, symbols, and communicate (1).
Foss, Sonja K., Foss, Karen A., Trapp, Robert. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. thrid. Print.
:) ;-P B-)
To me, Foss et. Al’s definition of rhetoric describes how humans communicate and interact with one another through the use of symbols. As humans, we see everything and every object as a representation of something meaningful in our lives. The way we see these things, these moments or things in our lives to be symbolic. Whether it is through, or for religious purposes, or to symbolize love, hate, feelings/emotions, or to even represent ownership, there is always a symbol, it is just human nature.
Rhetoric is extremely profound in digital cultures and in my everyday life. It is significant when I am online participating in my social networking, as well as when I am texting on my smartphone. I am constantly using symbols or abbreviations to communicate to my peers what I am doing, and/or how I am feeling; whether it is the abbreviation of LOL, FML, or by using and emoticon to show that I am happy, or smiling, sad, sticking my tongue out, etc. Social networking allows us to use rhetoric as well. Facebook for example, allows users access to applications where people can send “hearts” to one another that represent friendship, love, happiness, and things of that nature. So what are they? Symbols of course. It goes back to Foss, Foss, and Trapp’s description of rhetoric where the key components of the definition are: human, symbols, and communicate (1).
Foss, Sonja K., Foss, Karen A., Trapp, Robert. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. thrid. Print.
:) ;-P B-)
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Final Paper Longer Proposal
I am still wrapping my hands around what specifically this paper should focus on and I believe with your comment Julie, I am going to argue that our reliance, or society's reliance on technology has allowed us to become so disembodied from ourselves and each other that we have given ourselves a false sense of what a community really is. Yes, there are two cases of community, those online, and those we have in real life, but we are losing sight of the fact that our real life communities need the focus more than our online communities do. If we don't realize that the latter is being neglected, the more we dive full force into our personal representations online, the further away we get from actually being connected with a real human. I will not be arguing that technology is bad, because i love it, i will focus on the fact that when technology, when and if it does, disappear, we will lose all skill to interact with one another and we will be alone. i am going to use Deborah Lupton, Allucquere Rosanne Stone, Donna Haraway, Michele Willson, David Tomas, David Bell, Kevin Robins, Maria Bakardjieva. My citation list will be following shortly.....
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Kaliya Hamlin....Phenomenal Woman in her own right....
I am very intrigued by Kaliya Hamlin. I love her passion and her ability to stay passionate about her cause. Kaliya has extensive knowledge and experience in designing and facilitating unconferences for professional communities. Kaliya brings together people in online communities that have a deeper basis and meaning about them. Not just because the people joining these communities eat cereal for breakfast. The tie is much more profound and Kaliya wants the online experience to be for the greater good of "online communities", not just socially, but environmentally as well. Her works focus is mainly on internet identity as well as nonviolence and spiritual activism. She attended school at UC Berkley and studied political science and human rights and worked for nonprofits while obtaining her degree. The turning point in her life was after she graduated and came across a paper titled "Augmented Social Network", and started focusing on user-centric identity. Kaliya is focusing on creating a space where there is mobility between sites, where we should have one identity within this space. She believes we should have one username and password between all sites while still being able to maintain control and privacy. I believe this is essential in online networking and all other aspects of being enthralled in any online community, banking, etc. We all at some point have visited more than one site which requires us to register, become a member, or login and at every new site, a new username and password must be created. This is fine if we only visit that one specific site, but when you are constantly visiting new sites, becoming members of new and different spaces, this can become extremely tedious. We are not always at liberty to create the username that we created for a different login because it has been taken or already is in use. I know it would definitely make my life easier if i could just have one username and password and use across all pages on the internet. She believes you can become passionate about anything at any given point/time in your life, without needing a degree in the related field. She also impressed me because she reinvested half of her own salary into promoting or back into the concept of user-centric identity.
Friday, March 12, 2010
Final Paper Proposal
I'm sort of still working out the kinks in this initial proposal, I know I want to focus on the discussion about the blurring of our two worlds: our virtual lives and our real lives and our embodiment, or disembodiment in each. I know this is somewhat broad, but I am having a somewhat hard time pinpointing my real argument.
My main focus will be on, and will incorporate a lot of Stone's concepts/ideas, how we have to keep the distinction between the two. I want to argue or show the importance of being human and what that entails, and how we are risking to lose more than gain if we completely lose our "humanness" if you will, by being completely engulfed in virtual reality and that we absolutely need a specific distinction, and that there should always be one, between the two.
I know this may not be what you are looking for Julie, but I am definitely looking for comments and suggestions on how to better formulate this paper.
Thanks!!!
My main focus will be on, and will incorporate a lot of Stone's concepts/ideas, how we have to keep the distinction between the two. I want to argue or show the importance of being human and what that entails, and how we are risking to lose more than gain if we completely lose our "humanness" if you will, by being completely engulfed in virtual reality and that we absolutely need a specific distinction, and that there should always be one, between the two.
I know this may not be what you are looking for Julie, but I am definitely looking for comments and suggestions on how to better formulate this paper.
Thanks!!!
Friday, February 19, 2010
Lawrence Lessig: Protecting Mickey Mouse at Art's Expense
Although I'm sure there are great articles produced and written by the other prominent theorists and authors that our groups were assigned to, I quite enjoy the articles written by Lessig.
This article is about how the Supreme Court decided that the Constitution grants congress to have full discretion over how long copyright protections can last, as well as if they even want to extend the protection.
Lawrence states that congress is wrong in extending certain copyright protection for a period of over 20 years. "The extension unnecessarily stifles freedom of expression by preventing the artistic and educational use even of content that no longer has any commercial value." Lessig is referencing the early Mickey Mouse movies that imminently made it into the public domain and has no commercial value, but which triggered congress to act in the first place. Even though that small portion of material/art has no commercial value, it will remain locked up with the rest of the material/art that is under the same protection, but does have commercial value.
A problem arises when people want to use the material/art with no commercial value, is that they have to try and figure out who the copyright holders are. You can see hos this can be tedious when some of these works are almost a century old.
Lessig believes that congress can eliminate the hassle without compromising the protection of copyright by doing something along the same lines as law governing patents. Patent holders pay a fee every few years to maintain their patents and Lessig feels that by requiring copyright holders to do the same, but extend it to a more profound amount of years. When the fee or tax is paid, then payment would be logged, as well as the copyright holders name. This would make it easier for people to access the material/art with an easier way to contact and get permission by the legal owner/s. If the tax wasn't paid for three consecutive years then the material could go into public domain for any and all to use and benefit from.
Lessig states and believes that no one should oppose to this because the copyright protection is there so that no one else can capitalize on the work, but if there is already no commercial value, then wouldn't that leave the protection to be pretty much pointless. Lessig acknowledges that there are people out there who would like their work protected and kept out of public domain regardless of commercial exploitation, or lack there of, and that's why the tax/fee would be low and only applied to publish work.
I believe Lessig has an excellent point and comes up with great ideas about how we can all benefit from the rules and regulations of copyright laws, as well as be able to edit the boundaries that are set, so that more of us can have access and benefit from the laws that are in place.
It is extremely hard and confusing for students to determine what material/art is okay for us to use and how we can use it. How long we can have this copyright material on our websites that we used on a school project for educational purposes. What are the actual backlashes, ,how do we go about determining what is public domain, and if protected, at what length.
It would be nice to have more access to works that do not have commercial value, and that can be used and viewed as learning tools.
This Lessig article makes me think about his basis for his "free software" movement, his "net neutrality" article I previously blogged about, and his ideas about remixing and so on. I highly urge any and all to take a closer look at Lessig and his endeavors because we as DTC students could all benefit greatly.
This article is about how the Supreme Court decided that the Constitution grants congress to have full discretion over how long copyright protections can last, as well as if they even want to extend the protection.
Lawrence states that congress is wrong in extending certain copyright protection for a period of over 20 years. "The extension unnecessarily stifles freedom of expression by preventing the artistic and educational use even of content that no longer has any commercial value." Lessig is referencing the early Mickey Mouse movies that imminently made it into the public domain and has no commercial value, but which triggered congress to act in the first place. Even though that small portion of material/art has no commercial value, it will remain locked up with the rest of the material/art that is under the same protection, but does have commercial value.
A problem arises when people want to use the material/art with no commercial value, is that they have to try and figure out who the copyright holders are. You can see hos this can be tedious when some of these works are almost a century old.
Lessig believes that congress can eliminate the hassle without compromising the protection of copyright by doing something along the same lines as law governing patents. Patent holders pay a fee every few years to maintain their patents and Lessig feels that by requiring copyright holders to do the same, but extend it to a more profound amount of years. When the fee or tax is paid, then payment would be logged, as well as the copyright holders name. This would make it easier for people to access the material/art with an easier way to contact and get permission by the legal owner/s. If the tax wasn't paid for three consecutive years then the material could go into public domain for any and all to use and benefit from.
Lessig states and believes that no one should oppose to this because the copyright protection is there so that no one else can capitalize on the work, but if there is already no commercial value, then wouldn't that leave the protection to be pretty much pointless. Lessig acknowledges that there are people out there who would like their work protected and kept out of public domain regardless of commercial exploitation, or lack there of, and that's why the tax/fee would be low and only applied to publish work.
I believe Lessig has an excellent point and comes up with great ideas about how we can all benefit from the rules and regulations of copyright laws, as well as be able to edit the boundaries that are set, so that more of us can have access and benefit from the laws that are in place.
It is extremely hard and confusing for students to determine what material/art is okay for us to use and how we can use it. How long we can have this copyright material on our websites that we used on a school project for educational purposes. What are the actual backlashes, ,how do we go about determining what is public domain, and if protected, at what length.
It would be nice to have more access to works that do not have commercial value, and that can be used and viewed as learning tools.
This Lessig article makes me think about his basis for his "free software" movement, his "net neutrality" article I previously blogged about, and his ideas about remixing and so on. I highly urge any and all to take a closer look at Lessig and his endeavors because we as DTC students could all benefit greatly.
Friday, February 5, 2010
Lawrence Lessig: No Tolls on the Internet
In Lessig's 2006 article: No Tolls on the Internet, he goes into detail about how congress will be deciding whether the internet will remain free and open or become the property of cable and phone companies. With the center of the debate, which is a most important public policy, being something called "network neutrality", which simply means that all Internet content must be treated alike and move at the same speed over the network. All of the intelligence and control is held by producers and users, not the networks that connect them.
The Federal Communications Commission eliminated this rule. So now congress faces the obstacle and will decide to reinstate it. By not reinstating this, it allows big companies and corporations, that back the commission, to control the content, that is the internet, by charging what they deem appropriate, and at what speed, and to who would get the better packages.
It's like having to pay the toll at a toll bridge. Once you pay the toll you are guaranteed access. So these companies would guarantee quality delivery for payment. But they would still have the power to control what you have access to and what content is available. They would not have any problems keeping out the competition.
The article states that without net neutrality, the Internet would start to look like cable TV. Major industries such as health care, finance, retailing, and gambling would face huge tariffs for fast, secure Internet use.
These limits and controls would put a dark cloud over those websites and services that equal about 60 percent of the web, which are created by us regular people. We would have to get permission, jump through hoops, and have to pay an insane amount of money to do so. It would eliminate a great deal of content and innovations because us regular people would not have the means or capital to be able to do this anymore. How could we DTC students afford our websites in order to gain clients and sell our services?
The internet, the way we know it, would be drastically changed and monopolozied upon. The way we would navigate through a page would change, our search engines would be different, options and links on a page would grow slimmer. We would not have access to all things one could imagine, unless we could really afford it. And at what cost, really? There is already a digital divide globally, this would cause an even greater digital divide. The way we look to the internet to be resourceful and useful could be changed dramatically.
How could we leave this up to congress to decide? People in congress have money and power, they can and have been bought, paid out, they have more to gain and really, nothing to lose. This effects us regular, everyday people.
Go to: http://www.savetheinternet.com/
The Federal Communications Commission eliminated this rule. So now congress faces the obstacle and will decide to reinstate it. By not reinstating this, it allows big companies and corporations, that back the commission, to control the content, that is the internet, by charging what they deem appropriate, and at what speed, and to who would get the better packages.
It's like having to pay the toll at a toll bridge. Once you pay the toll you are guaranteed access. So these companies would guarantee quality delivery for payment. But they would still have the power to control what you have access to and what content is available. They would not have any problems keeping out the competition.
The article states that without net neutrality, the Internet would start to look like cable TV. Major industries such as health care, finance, retailing, and gambling would face huge tariffs for fast, secure Internet use.
These limits and controls would put a dark cloud over those websites and services that equal about 60 percent of the web, which are created by us regular people. We would have to get permission, jump through hoops, and have to pay an insane amount of money to do so. It would eliminate a great deal of content and innovations because us regular people would not have the means or capital to be able to do this anymore. How could we DTC students afford our websites in order to gain clients and sell our services?
The internet, the way we know it, would be drastically changed and monopolozied upon. The way we would navigate through a page would change, our search engines would be different, options and links on a page would grow slimmer. We would not have access to all things one could imagine, unless we could really afford it. And at what cost, really? There is already a digital divide globally, this would cause an even greater digital divide. The way we look to the internet to be resourceful and useful could be changed dramatically.
How could we leave this up to congress to decide? People in congress have money and power, they can and have been bought, paid out, they have more to gain and really, nothing to lose. This effects us regular, everyday people.
Go to: http://www.savetheinternet.com/
Friday, January 29, 2010
Distance beyond distance to eliminate distance, which creates more distance?
Let me start off by saying The Cybercultures reader kicks ass!!! At least for the most part, not all of the readings are fascinating and extremely insightful, but definitely enough to lead me to the conclusion that it is in fact a great book.
So anyways….on to the blog…….
I quite enjoyed the essay Against Virtual Community, For a politics of distance by Kevin Robins. This essay is about the underlying issues about elimination of distance as we move towards being fully submerged in the virtual technologies, communities, and as technology becomes more, and more advanced. Is this a good thing, or a bad thing?
Robins will show some key points from various people that argue both sides of this. Robins references William Mitchells advances in City of Bits and his belief that we will exist as “disembodied and fragmented subjects” and goes on to state that we will finally be “freed from the constraints of physical space.” Mitchell believes that we will become fully submerged in cyberspace by allowing ourselves to become completely engaged in the virtual world and its endless possibilities. Also by doing this we would be closing the gap of distance by means of technology, advanced devices, mobilization, data gloves, robotic prostheses, and new technological effectors and sensors. This would in end lead to the creation of us becoming “cyborgs”, where we could completely reconstruct our boundaries, where the outward is turned inward and vice versus. Robins agrees that this is the case, if we are fully engaged and open to the limitless boundaries of these technologies, which is only available in a virtual space. Robins also references Marion Young and how he believes immediacy is better than mediation and in the Rousseauist dream: we are transparent to one another, purely copresent in the same space, close enough to touch, and nothing comes between us to obstruct our vision of one another (Young 231, 233).
Robins understands and accepts their points, but believes that when trying to close the gap and live with no limits, no distance, no ends in a virtual space, we lose the world. He states that this a cultural retreat from Real Life, the real world, it is an extension of ourselves from a physical space and that it a place we have to question, be realistic about, and completely understand what it really is, and not what we merely want it to be.
I agree with both sides, but believe Robins has a full grasp of being cautious of being completely intertwined with cyberspace and knowing that distance itself is needed. I am well aware of the advances in technology and that some of them are marvels in their own right. We are able to have the accessibility to talk to people across country through a wireless device, or on a computer. We will have the option of experiencing things, places, people like never before without the hassle of flying, driving, etc., but then we are losing a lot about experiencing the experience itself. The smells, the touches, the scenes can in fact be replicated, but isn’t the same as having it firsthand. They are experiences someone else had and made available to us by the technological advances and cool gadgets and gizmos, that do give us more, but at the same time would take so much away. Agree with me or not, there are a lot of things that cannot be replicated in a virtual space. We have to understand that by completely eliminating the distance takes away from who we are as the human race, we aren’t cyborgs, we aren’t robots, we aren’t avatars, we are people. We have these technologies readily available to make life easier, simpler, to eliminate some of the distance of living across country, of having hectic schedules, these are conveniences.
Could we all really be okay with having no real life social interaction, no real life sensations, no real life experiences, I believe this would lead to no real emotions, and then, would this really be a life?
I could go on and on and on and on and this may not have got my point across….but due to lack of sleep and the fact that I posted this after the deadline, I will officially end this here.
So anyways….on to the blog…….
I quite enjoyed the essay Against Virtual Community, For a politics of distance by Kevin Robins. This essay is about the underlying issues about elimination of distance as we move towards being fully submerged in the virtual technologies, communities, and as technology becomes more, and more advanced. Is this a good thing, or a bad thing?
Robins will show some key points from various people that argue both sides of this. Robins references William Mitchells advances in City of Bits and his belief that we will exist as “disembodied and fragmented subjects” and goes on to state that we will finally be “freed from the constraints of physical space.” Mitchell believes that we will become fully submerged in cyberspace by allowing ourselves to become completely engaged in the virtual world and its endless possibilities. Also by doing this we would be closing the gap of distance by means of technology, advanced devices, mobilization, data gloves, robotic prostheses, and new technological effectors and sensors. This would in end lead to the creation of us becoming “cyborgs”, where we could completely reconstruct our boundaries, where the outward is turned inward and vice versus. Robins agrees that this is the case, if we are fully engaged and open to the limitless boundaries of these technologies, which is only available in a virtual space. Robins also references Marion Young and how he believes immediacy is better than mediation and in the Rousseauist dream: we are transparent to one another, purely copresent in the same space, close enough to touch, and nothing comes between us to obstruct our vision of one another (Young 231, 233).
Robins understands and accepts their points, but believes that when trying to close the gap and live with no limits, no distance, no ends in a virtual space, we lose the world. He states that this a cultural retreat from Real Life, the real world, it is an extension of ourselves from a physical space and that it a place we have to question, be realistic about, and completely understand what it really is, and not what we merely want it to be.
I agree with both sides, but believe Robins has a full grasp of being cautious of being completely intertwined with cyberspace and knowing that distance itself is needed. I am well aware of the advances in technology and that some of them are marvels in their own right. We are able to have the accessibility to talk to people across country through a wireless device, or on a computer. We will have the option of experiencing things, places, people like never before without the hassle of flying, driving, etc., but then we are losing a lot about experiencing the experience itself. The smells, the touches, the scenes can in fact be replicated, but isn’t the same as having it firsthand. They are experiences someone else had and made available to us by the technological advances and cool gadgets and gizmos, that do give us more, but at the same time would take so much away. Agree with me or not, there are a lot of things that cannot be replicated in a virtual space. We have to understand that by completely eliminating the distance takes away from who we are as the human race, we aren’t cyborgs, we aren’t robots, we aren’t avatars, we are people. We have these technologies readily available to make life easier, simpler, to eliminate some of the distance of living across country, of having hectic schedules, these are conveniences.
Could we all really be okay with having no real life social interaction, no real life sensations, no real life experiences, I believe this would lead to no real emotions, and then, would this really be a life?
I could go on and on and on and on and this may not have got my point across….but due to lack of sleep and the fact that I posted this after the deadline, I will officially end this here.
Friday, January 22, 2010
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY, OR NOT....THAT IS THE ?
Let me see, where do I even start......
After our class discussion on Tuesday, or I should say before, I thought I could easily define "community". Though I still feel I can, our class discussion left me pondering more than I wanted to about the actual definition, and how much gray area there is still left for interpretation.
So when asked the question what virtual communities I am a part of, I came up with the following: Myspace, Facebook, Twitter, Second Life, Angel, and Blogger. Here comes the tricky part, after the discussion I felt myself wondering if these really were virtual communities or an extension of the physical ones I am truly a part of.
So for the sake of those of you who may not know much about these places/sites, probably far and few in between, I will offer some insight, at least pertaining to my life.
Myspace and Facebook are social networks. For me, they are an extension of myself that allow me to keep in contact with friends that I've known since I was younger or attended school with. It also helps me find people that I haven't seen since I was younger or attended school with. I have even befriended my fellow peers from college, as well as some of my professors. I even have friends that I've never met before. These two places allow me to stay "connected", meaning, I get to see what my "friends" are up to on a hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, or yearly basis, depending on how often my "friends" are on these sites and update their statuses. The basic interactions I have within these communities are simple. I talk to friends, I comment on their pages, I update my status (because in my mind I feel I am greatly important and that people really care to know). I like seeing what my friends, peers, and professors are doing. It may be profound enough to make a difference in my life, or just might be slightly interesting.
Twitter and Second Life I am still a part of, in the sense that my account is still active, but I never get on them anymore. I merely joined them for class assignments.
The last two, Blogger and Angel, I am merely a part of because my professors said to, and participate in, and are solely for academic purposes.
So with all that said, our class discussion has left me to believe that the virtual communities I believe I am a part of, aren't really virtual communities at all, but extensions of the physical communities I am a part of. For the most part, I see most of the people I interact with on these sites, in real life. I see them at school, some are my neighbors, relatives, real friends that I hang out with regularly, and some that I talk to on the phone. These sites just give me another way to do that. The only one that would be virtual for me, if I did participate, would be Second Life and that's because you are able to choose an avatar and interact with other avatars that people have created without knowing their true identity, or if I know them outside that world. But for a lot of people out there, this is a better community for them to partake in. It leaves out the social angst and anxiety that comes along with trying to fit it. It allows people to interact with people they never thought they could, or would, for that matter, in real life.
I believe most people are capable to enter and navigate through these sights, if, you are computer literate. You have to know your way around a computer, search engines, what links to go to, and have some knowledge of online "lingo". Some barriers for people for the academic communities, are that you must be enrolled in school, specific classes, etc. We did touch base on the fact that some communities are specific on invitation, and relevancy to your life, what your likes and dislikes are, as well as access.
I believe that about wraps it up.....and whew....with 9 minutes to spare! :)
Friday, January 15, 2010
Cyberspace Baby!!!
Though I agreed with all ten definitions of cyberspace listed by Michael Benedikt, and liked them all, the one that grabbed me the most was:
Cyberspace: Its corridors form wherever electricity runs with intelligence. Its chambers
bloom wherever data gathers and is stored. Its depths increase with every image or word
or number, with every addition, every contribution, of fact or thought. Its horizons recede in every direction; it breathes larger, it complexifies, it embraces and involves. Billowing,
glittering, humming, coursing, a Borgesian library, a city; intimate, immense, firm, liquid,
recognizable and unrecognizable at once.
I was laying in bed thinking about this assignment and what I thought cyberspace meant. In my own words, it means infinite possibilities. Anyone and everyone's ideas thrown out into open space for most or all, to do with them what they like. Ideas made to be reproduced into better versions, worse versions, even similar versions. Cyberspace crosses boundaries, pushes the limits of thought, interaction, socializing, accessibility, technology, marketing and has endless possibilities. We love it, we hate it, we are scared by it, but we embrace it. Its a place to advance our ideas, beliefs, thoughts, interests, and reach people we could never expect, or dream of reaching. Its anything and everything all wrapped into one, intertwined, becoming what it couldn't have been yesterday, what it is today, and possibly, what it could be tomorrow. And above all, and nothing else, it's a beautiful thing!!!
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
PHENOMENAL WOMAN....
Why hellllllllllooooo to all....
My name is Adriana Naccarato and I am in my last semester before I am a DTC major and two semesters away from my Psych major. I am also a single mother of two of the most beautiful children you will ever set eyes upon!!! I work part-time for the City of Richland and am a social butterfly to say the least.
I enjoy all things art and love expressing myself in anyway that I can! I am an extremely outspoken, opinionated, and unique individual. I love my family and friends and any chance I get to be with them, I take it.
I love music....I love to dance.....I love to sing (even though I can't carry a tune)......I basically make my presence known, and you know what....I am okay with that! Some might think I'm loud, or obnoxious, or maybe even both....but I don't give a s*@$! This is me!!!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
