Presentations week 4

Dan started us off this week, talking about the correlation between video games and virtual communities. He pointed out the notable correlation between learning principles of video and the rapid growth of virtual communities, and he plans to argue that learning principles are enhanced online and this may account for the increased number of users on say Xbox live. He is doing this by pulling together principles from James Paul Gee and statistics of online gaming. I think you have a lot of great information, and I like how you are pointing out the correlation between the two, not stating that learning principles ARE the reason for growth of virtual communities within gaming.

Lee talked about how YouTube has revolutionized political activism and has contributed to the perpetuation of hate. It is a way for citizens to participate and promote political awareness, but YouTube can also diminish the voice of activism. I think you provided a lot of information, and it would be beneficial to narrow it down. What is one thing that YouTube is doing for the culture, and why is that is important? I think a less generalized, more specific argument would be something to think about.

Mike argued that crimes are worse in the virtual than they are in the real, through the amount of avenues crimes can happen and the larger number of crimes accessibly through cyberspace. At the end you stated that we need to invest more time and money to protect ourselves against cybercrimes because they are growing exponentially and have the potential to be more dangerous than real life crimes. I think it would be interesting for you to look at why cybercrimes are increasing..

Angel argued that in order to bridge the digital divide, students need to be active in their learning, which can be accomplished by applying the concepts of video games. Gamers are active problem solvers and learn through trial and error. By combining principles from James Gee and different examples of active learning, I think you will have a great paper.

Derek talked about how the cell phone can help gap the digital divide. Phones are cutting out the middle man and use of mobile devices is increasing. Great info, great topic.

Kristin had the great idea to start project HOPE. This program would educate students on how to safely use the internet and share information. I think this is an awesome idea and has the potential to greatly reduce the amount of cyberbullying cases. Great work!

Brent argued that online activities change us. Very true. We are doing things online that we would not dare do in our physical spaces. You brought up a lot of great examples to back up your thesis. I think your thesis is very true, but is it too broad? What if you focused on one particular way in which we change because of technology or mobile devices? We are more willing to put ourselves out there? Unconventional behaviors are now a norm? I dunno… just an idea.

Cynthia showed us how cyberspace gives underrepresented groups more choices about representation that are not available through traditional media. I know you ran out of time, but it looks like you have a lot of great examples to back up your argument. I think you have good information and a great topic. I’m assuming you will also be using Nakamura to back you up as well??

Neil showed how smart phones are helping narrow the access portion of the digital divide. And this is a good thing! You have great info and a way to disprove the opposition. Nothing else to add.

Josh ended by talking about how internet activism is now necessary for physical activism in the real world. It can communicate info to a larger audience, and mobile devices are just as useful as computer in doing so. We see the evidence of your statement in the Obama campaign and in relief efforts such as those of Hurricane Katrina and the Earthquake in Haiti. I think, as was brought up in class, it is important to somehow tie in text messaging. Other than that, great work.

Presentations: Week 3!

Tuesday:

First off, Mark talked about online enabled environmental activism. His presentation showed a lot about how communication is changing. Cyberspace and online communities are vital for future communications and awareness. I find this very true, and since we are always connected to our cell phones, using iPhone apps for awareness is where we are going. I think this type of communication is useful because we no longer watch the news or call each other on the phone. Instead we use our phones to text or surf the web. I think you are headed in the right direction. I would follow Julie’s advice and focus on the information flow and the things you can do with the machine, not the history.

Sarah argued that people present themselves differently in cyberspace, namely on Facebook, than they do in meatspace. I like that you included the opposition (virtual spaces as an extension of real life) and explained that this is not true. Also, having personal stories really helped prove your point. It shows firsthand how your argument is valid. I think as long as you make sure to state your thesis clearly and stay focused on it with support and examples, you will be just fine. I think with so much time and so much discussion you were getting a little flustered, but not to worry. You have valid evidence supporting your thesis.

Cassie brought up the idea of using social networking sites in the classroom. The first site was WoogiWorld, a site created for educating kids on internet behavior and knowledge of the 21^st century. It includes events, challenges, and activities, which get the students actively involved in learning. The other site was A Really Different world, which was a class blog created by a teacher. Both of these sites I feel would be beneficial to learning, and create a more engaging learning environment. Also, being able to learn computer skills at a young age is vital. I like that you included a bad site, Facebook, and why sites like this one wouldn’t work. I guess the only thing I am left wondering is if there are any downsides to using social networking sites in the classroom. ?? I think this is a great idea to incorporate into education systems.

Thursday::

Dena started us off by talking about how ubiquitous computing and the popularity of social media sites lack government tools to prevent cyber culture bullying/stalking and other issues. Overall, in social network sites you’re on your own. She talked about different cases that have been brought to court, but ultimately, as of now, there are no laws in place enforcing ‘mis behaviors in cyberspace’. Great presentation. You are definitely headed in the right direction. Start writing!

Brittany talked about mobile location based advertising and how the rise of social networking sites has led people to change the way they think about privacy and publicized interaction. It is revolutionizing the way people interact with the places they live and they are more open to GPS enabled software. I think you included a lot of information. Maybe a little too much? (not that it’s not good to know for background info) I think narrowing things down a little bit would help. If I were you I would make sure to answer the question of why mobile advertising works? And also you may look at including the negative side to your argument and disprove it.

Mark presented on WOW. ‘The Cost of Access’. I feel like I learned a lot from your presentation. I have never played WOW before, but it was not over my head or anything. Nice work. I found it interesting that people were going to 3^rd party websites to figure out how to play the game, and the different ways in which the games were changing and affecting the way players work together was also interesting. Good work.

Chris finished off the day by explaining that even if we solve the problem of the digital divide in the physical world, it will just continue on to cyberspace. There will be divides between individuals, communities, and different forms of technology. This is a great topic and you have a lot of great support and ideas.

Round 2

So, today we underwent the second round of presentations, and I think it went quite well.

Katie started us off talking about how low income schools need a solution to bridge the digital divide, and she presented the project which she titled “Bridge the Divide”. This plan will be life changing for the teachers and administration as well as the students and their families. The first step would be to make a chart documenting the computer usage in schools to get a starting point. Then, would be to implement phase one: bridging the knowledge divide. I think this is a good place to start. Here, the plan would be for teachers to gain knowledge about technology. After the teachers were all on the same page, it would be time to begin phase two: bridging the access divide. This would get technology in the classroom. Katie’s idea of having an open lab night for students and teachers is a great idea. Also, I think it would be important to explain to families why having the technology and knowing how to use it is beneficial or important to them. What are they missing out on if they don’t have it??

Up next was Beau who argued that technology feeds off the gaming community. He explained that gaming is not a past time, but culture has been altered due to the evolution of gaming seen in faster internet, more engaging technologies, and learning via cyberspace. Gamers are no longer just the guys in their basements. They are a part of our culture. As Beau said, we are all gamers. All of our technologies enable us to be immersed in gaming whether we consider ourselves gamers or not.

James also discussed gaming, and wanted to show how people misunderstand games as being a bad thing because they haven’t been involved with them personally. We learn so many things from gaming. His argument was a little hard for me to grasp, but I think Julie was getting to argue that because people misunderstand gaming, it is holding us back from moving forward and to be sure and include the representational competence. There is a strong symbolism with gaming and it’s what makes people care about what’s going on in their fictional worlds just as much as their real lives.

Hans put on quite a show when talking about how social networks are bridging the chasm. What we got down to was how because of social networks, Facebook, Myspace, etc., there are more creators and commentators and less people who solely ingest. I think you should focus on how/why this is happening, which you have explained with various social networking sites.

Spencer wrapped up the day arguing that the amount of simulation training that is being used in the military is depriving soldiers of physical training. Although it is not replacing physical training completely, the percentage of simulation training is increasing. It is bad for many reasons. As Spencer stated, you don’t feel the pain, adrenaline rushes, the emotion, the stress, the physical senses, and many more things. I think he is on the right track with the information he has. As long as he makes clear that there is still physical training that goes along with this, this will be a great paper. He could also think about where this is going. Is the percentage of simulation training going to keep increasing?

Great job presenters!

Proposals

Lorena’s proposal was about the censorship in China: A Communication in Crisis. She talked about the Golden Shield, or the firewall, which blocks a multitude of online content from users. I was astonished to learn all the types of things they block, including social media sites, political content, activists, social issues, and more. It is very apparent that it needs to change, as Lorena is trying to point out. At the end of her presentation, Lorena posed the question, How does the internet censorship affect our culture? I agree with what we touched on in class. With the censorship in China, they are sort of left out of global issues. They have no input as well as no output of information. Overall, it was a good presentation and I think you’re on the right track Lorena!

Sheila went next and discussed how traditional gender roles are reinforced on social networks. She first talked about Facebook and Myspace. With these sites, it is obvious to tell who is male and who is female by their profile picture. She then brought up Club Penguin, which is a site with no gender identification associated with it. I found it very interesting how people are still trying to identify who is male and female through their conversation. “all males say i” This site really shows off how social site reinforce the gender roles we associate with in real life. I am with Julie in that this was the most interesting part of the presentation, and her idea of focusing on that is a great one! Great job Sheila!

Maurice had a cool idea about how cell phones are changing how agriculture is done is rural America. There is agriculture all over the country but not necessarily internet. With cell phones it keeps you connected and gives you an advantage over those farmers without them. You can check the weather and know exactly when it’s right to plant your crops, or what have you. Cell phones also act as the middle man. No one is having to go back and forth to the farmers, telling them information. This is a great way cell phones are closing the gap of the digital divide. Those in rural areas are still able to stay connected.

Corrinda discussed educating through gaming. She was asking if children learn through gaming and if they do, what do they learn and what do they miss out on. I think children do learn through gaming and she is on the right track. If I were her, I would make sure I included the answer to the questions above. What children are learning AND what they are missing out on.

Kathy wrapped it up with talking about the old school way of doing politics and Obama’s method. Obama used the internet to his advantage and won over the youth vote as well as many others. He transformed politics with the internet like Kennedy did with TV. She included a lot of great information, but the one thing I found missing was her argument. I wasn’t quite sure what she was arguing. What she could look at is how this is shifting culture or the so what?

Great proposals everyone!

EXTRA! EXTRA! Read All About It!.. (my extra credit blog)

In this article, the authors, Holcomb, Bakelaaar, and Zizzamia, are arguing that when the world changed after 9/11, the internet changed as well through more users, more technology (ways of accessing the internet), and more issues revolving around security and privacy, and because of this change we are more prepared for any future crisis. After the attacks of 9/11, we saw many positive as well as some negative uses of the internet. Many people were looking to the internet for information about the attacks as well as the victims. The internet offered more answers, than say TV, by giving more depth of information, more personal stories and more perspectives. There were also registries set up for survivors/victims of the attack. The amount of users on the internet was skyrocketing for means of communication with friends and family in New York. The internet also allowed people to donate to disaster relief efforts and the Red Cross.

The internet also acted as a double edge sword and allowed users to set up fake donation sites, where people thought they were donating to a good cause but really the money went to the user of the page, who was trying to capitalize on the country’s devastation. Another negative side to the internet was the miscommunication of the victim/survivor lists. With so many various lists, they did not all match up, so people were unsure of whether or not their friends and family were okay or not. If they did not see a certain name on one victim list, it caused them to panic. This was all due from the large amount of internet users brought about after the attacks.

We saw this same kind of thing happen with the earthquake in Haiti. Shortly after the earthquake, nearly everyone knew all about it, and we saw new technologies being used to spread the word and help the cause. Instead of donation websites being set up, you could text to donate. Relief efforts were changing their strategies due to the shift in technology in the last 9 years. According to the Mobile Giving Foundation, in the first ten days after the earthquake, “Americans used their cell phones to send text messages pledging more than $30 million for Haitian relief efforts” (Choney). This was a success because the relief efforts targeted the market based on how the culture is now using technology. We can log onto YouTube and watch videos about the area as well as read blogs, news stories, or firsthand stories from people who have gone overseas to help the people of Haiti.

Technology keeps us in the know of current events, sometimes faster than our local or national news, and the efficiency of technology has brought about quick and effortless way to help out a cause when the need arises.

Choney, Suzanne. “Mobile Giving to Help Haiti Exceeds $30 Million”. MSNBC. 21 January 2010. Web. 1 April 2010. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34850532/ns/technology_and_science-wireless/

YouTube = FREE Advertising!!

Internet use in political campaigns is becoming part of our mainstream culture due mostly to the most recent presidential election.

In the presidential election of 2008, Obama beat out his competition, and his use of internet campaigning may be the cause. Obama’s campaign used YouTube to post videos about his platforms. People preferred this method of campaigning and actually watched the videos instead of watching quick ads or long presidential debates which interrupt your regularly scheduled show. (I hate that). YouTube was effective for various reasons. For one, users could watch the videos whenever they had the time, and they did. They could also watch the videos as many times as they wanted to really get a grasp of the Obama’s platform. They could leave comments about the video or see what other people were saying about it.

After winning the presidential election of 2008, many news stories brought up the fact that Obama changed politics. He set a new standard as to how reach out to the country, gaining supporters of all ages. Some news stories, including the New York Times, even go as far to say that, “Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not be president. Were it not for the Internet, Barack Obama would not have been the nominee” (Miller). The internet was definitely a factor in the election. Obama grasped how the culture was using technologies, such as the internet, and he formatted his campaign around that, and it was success. The Obama campaign was relatable for the younger generation especially. The ones who always use the technology were being targeted by the Obama campaign, and the votes reflected this. Some people might think that the president doesn’t need a Facebook or Twitter account, but for others it makes the president appear as a real person. It may appear to take away his professionalism, but it makes him more approachable and authentic.

By using the Internet, Obama was also able to reach out and communicate with a large amount of people, and it worked out to his advantage.

Miller, Claire Cain. “How Obama’s Internet Campaign Changed Politics”. The New York Times Company. 7 November 2008. Web. 1 April 2010.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/how-obamas-internet-campaign-changed-politics/

Proposal Round 2

Argument: Computers are changing our sense of human identity.

There are two sides to this; one side being the way that scientists are trying to make humans more like computers, and the other side being how humans are trying to make computers more like themselves. To start, I will want to look at how we are so connected with the internet and our virtual communities and identities. We carry the internet in our pockets or our backpacks and are constantly checking to see the latest tweets and Facebook updates. I will use Adriana de Souza e Silva’s article while discussing this part of the paper.

I want to show how we are humanizing our computers and how this is changing our idea of ‘human’. We want our computers to be our companion or our pet. We tend to form these relationships with our machines for various reasons including to lessen the fear we have of technology. We do this by naming our computers and giving it characteristics. As humans we have a need for intimacy and relationships and for those that do not have a physical relationship which they can depend on, computers fill that void. For this portion of the paper I will draw from Deborah Lupton’s article: The embodied computer/user, as well as Sherry Turkle’s article, How Computers Change the Way We Think.

I will finally want to look at how science is trying to change the identity of what a human is. We see scientists toying with the idea of mutation as well as things such as robots and technology being implanted into humans. Technolgy is used in biology and medicine. We also see humans becoming more technological in the sense that we spend a majority of our time in cyberspace. If we engage in a relationship on the sims and have a ‘biological child’, is that a real person? We see technology constantly being infused into our lives, giving the younger generation a different kind of identity than say an older generation. They are more involved with their technology and it is in turn changing how the rest of the world perceives them. This portion of the paper will draw from Turkle’s book, Life on the Screen and Timothy Lenoir and Casey Alt’s article, Flow Process Fold.

De Souza e Silva, Adriana. From Cyber to Hybrid.: mobile technologies as interfaces of hybrid spaces. The Cybercultures Read, 2^nd Ed. David Bell and Barbara Kennedy. New York: Routledge, 2002. Print.

Adriana de Souza e Silva’s article talks a lot about hybrid spaces and how we are constantly connected to the internet. Because we have the internet in our phones, our computers, or what have you we can constantly keep connected.

Lupton, Deborah. The Embodied Computer/User. The Cybercultures Read, 2^nd Ed. David Bell and Barbara Kennedy. New York: Routledge, 2002. Print.

Throughout this article, Lupton discusses how we put emotion into our machines, and we often spend more time with our computers than we do with other people.

Turkle, Sherry. How Computers Change the Way we Think. http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~comp300/documents/HowComputersChangeThinking.pdf

Throughout this article, Turkle talks about what computers are doing for and to us. Computers are changing how we see ourselves, acting as a mirror, reflecting our identity back at us.

Turkle, Sherry. Life on the Screen.

This book, subtitled, Identity in the age of the internet, is simply about that. Turkle discusses how we interact with the internet and how our online relationships are effecting us.

Thoughts on my final project

I was very interested in Lupton's article from this week, about how we are forming relationships with our technology. For my project, I want to look at how (and why) we are forming these relationships with our technology and becoming dependent on them. As humans we have a need for intimacy and relationships, and we are turning to our technical devices to fill this need. But what is this doing to our real life interactions and relationships? I feel that with so many advancements in technology, our virtual communities are overtaking our real communities. This effect is not a good one, in my opinion anyways. We are replacing face to face interactions with virtual connectivity. What will relationships look like in 100 years if things continue to progress? Will more relationships be long distance? Will we do everything from our home computers and not have as much of a need for other human interaction?

I guess that overall I am looking at how technology is everywhere and is continually growing, and this is having a big impact on our lives. It may be good in some aspects, but I feel it is not so good when it comes to relationships. I will include points from De Souza E Silva's article on hybrid spaces and the ubiquity of computers. I will also want to look at Lupton's article on how computers are being humanized.

Reading through this, I am kind of realizing I do not have a strong argument anywhere... I know what I'll be working on over spring break.

Nerd Talk

In her article, OH NO! I’M A NERD!, Lori Kendall discusses the use of the MUD BlueSky and how the participants are very often white males and how they act in the cyber community. Kendall talks about men’s power. They tend to have power over technology as well as over women. While doing her research, Kendall noticed that most the participants worked with computers or have done so in the past. And a lot of the conversations these guys were having revolved around technology including new software and technological advice. Having this common interest helps them form bonds in their community. So why all the computer talk? Kendall refers to Turkle when saying that these men are obsessing over technology to compensate for their lack of power in the physical world. Maybe they could be the hero and save the damsel in distress from her computer crash… It’s a possibility.

In the space it is clear to see that the users are identifying themselves as nerds. It is not an onlooker calling them that in a negative way. These ‘nerds’ are accepting the way they are. They may not be the strongest and may never get the girls, but you see this play into their conversations. They joke around with each other. Asking on another if they ‘Spiked her’ when bringing up girls. Because everyone knows the answer will be no, the question is not seen as offensive. Kendall ends her article by discussing the ‘whiteness’ of the group. Even people of different ethnicities say they are white, just trapped in say a Chinese body. Claiming to be white online makes them seem like one of the norms and deters the harassment to someone else. And if a user does not define his or her race, it will be assumed that they are white based on the high number of white users.

When reading this article and thinking about what we typically think of as a nerd, my mind went straight to computers. Whenever I have a problem or question concerning my computer, the people I turn to are always guys. No question. I wouldn’t ask either of my best friends, who are girls, to come look at my computer. They may know what to do, yes. But I would not look to a girl first for answers to a computer problem. I just wouldn’t. Even in stores it’s the same way. I am in Best Buy quite often and I find that there are hardly ever any girls working the computer section. Instead, they are always at the check-out and customer service counters. Maybe this is because people feel more ensured of what they are buying by having a guy there explaining all the technological things.

Turkle's thoughts on Communities in Cyberspace

The article I chose is Virtuality and Its Discontents: Searching for Community in Cyberspace (Adapated from Life on the Screen) by Sherry Turkle. This article is all about the communities online that people are using to form bonds that they are not getting in the real world. She begins by describing her experience in Dred’s Bar, a virtual community, where her and a friend ordered drinks, listen the DJ, and hit the dance floor doing the tango and waltz. She explains how places like this seem so real because it is merely another dimension of mediated space, similar to television which we are so used to seeing. Computers are natural to us, we identify with places on the screen. The article goes on further to show the effects this is having on our culture. One thing being that we are retreating further into our homes than ever before. We don’t have leave the house for entertainment, shopping, or even good conversation. Also, with so many things available online, are we losing a sense of the real? Turkle describes how an active, moving robotic or computerized crocodile may be more appealing than a real one that just sleeps all day. Through simulation we are making the fake seem better than the real.

One question that arises with virtual communities is who will govern it? Should there be rules? And if there are who will enforce them? Say someone is sexually assaulted online, what is there to do? This is also the same dilemma if someone murders or steals. If someone kills someone online, then deletes their MUD character, what has the real life person done? Nothing. This raises the debate of civil order in virtual spaces. This was seen in a MUD called Habitat where some felt users should be allowed to have guns and others disagreed. This led to a vote where a sheriff was elected. The MUD users were immersing themselves as citizens of this virtual community, devoting all their free time to it.

We see so many virtual users, so how can affect our real world experiences? A virtual space lets you authenticate yourself. It also allows you to do most anything online, in the safety of your home. Forming a relationship online could become stronger than any real life relationship, and if things don’t work out, you don’t have to worry about running into them in the real world. Turkle sums up by saying that one way to use these virtual communities to enhance our real life is not to reject the screen life we have. We can use the virtual communities to improve our real ones.

I found this entire article very interesting and very true. We all use the internet to get things done. We send an email off to our family instead of going to visit them. We order a new pair of shoes online instead of actually going out to the store. We do so much online that for some that where they spend the majority of their time. Why is this? It could be for the sake of time. Doing your errands online takes a sufficiently smaller amount of time than actually driving around town all afternoon. Also, it could be because of the bonds we form online. It seems as though no one ever has enough time to get things done, yet we all have enough time to get online. So instead of hanging out with our friends or family physically, we will IM them or something.

As far as the governing of virtual communities, I feel that because people are so involved in their virtual communities that they are willing to follow rules, or vote on certain issues. If someone is not complying I suppose others will not treat them with the respect they give to other members of the community. I think virtual communities are really reflecting real life communities. People look online to find hobbies and friends that without the internet they may not have met. Because the lines between virtual and real communities are no longer distinct, I think the rules of the real world are carrying over to virtual spaces and vice versa.

http://hevra.haifa.ac.il/~soc/lecturers/talmud/files/547.htm

Chapter 5

At the very end of the chapter (p 199-201), Nakamura describes how the internet has allowed people of color to intervene in aspects of their culture industry. She includes the example of a campaign against Abercrombie and Fitch when they produced a T-shirt line depicting stereotypical images of Asians accompanied by text, which offended the Asian culture. Email campaigns were initiated immediately and "spread like wild fire." The petition was very effective, resulting in the removal of the T-shirt line and an apology form A&F to the Asian American community.

Nakamura sums up the chapter by looking at everything people of color contribute to the internet. This includes things like posting videos, creating websites, writing political messages and much more. This changes the way we think of people of color. Instead of consumers, they are producers of the internet content. With Latinos and African Americans being the "fastest growing groups of internet users," we can clearly see that they are no loner merely passive users. And with more people engaging in the internet, the meaning of participation on the internet is shifting from merely checking email and web surfing to producing the content.

I think that this chapter points out several interesting things about the Internet. First off, it shows just how efficient the Internet can be. We can see through the illustrations of the petitions just how quickly word got around. This is true for most news, big or not. One person might mention something, then someone else blogs about it, while yet another person vlogs about it. Word will spread and soon enough everyone knows the news, however important (or not important) it may be.

Second, throughout the chapter, and especially at the end, Nakamura describes the level of participation users of the Internet are at today. We are no longer a culture of passive users, especially the Net Generation. I see this in my own life. I have made a website and I post blogs as well as check my email regularly and occasionally surf YouTube videos. True, most of the content I've published on the web is for school, but still, I think this proves the point Nakamura is making. We are no longer just using the Internet to do research for our homework but using it to publish our homework assignments. And I think that as technologies are advancing, we are seeing more and more demographics jumping on the band wagon because if they don't learn how to use the new technology, they will have a hard time catching up down the road.

Who Holds the Power?

Throughout Chapter 3, Nakamura mentions several ways in which blacks and whites were portrayed in movies such as The Matrix and Minority Report. Nakamura talks about the different ways whites and blacks performed their jobs in The Matrix. She describes how Link, a black character, types on a keyboard while Zion, who is dressed cleanly in all white, is linked into the computer through gesture (99). These movies also relate whiteness to power. The lead characters in each film are white males, and everyone else is secondary to them. On page 98 Nakamura quotes Richard Dyer who says,

"the equation of being white with being human secures a position of power."

Now I know we are supposed to bring up another movie to support Nakamura, but what came to my mind when I was trying to think of a movie was Bruce Almighty (a guy who often complains about God is given almighty power from God himself... simply put if anyone hasn't seen it). This movie is about God, the all-knowing, all-powerful, supreme being. And who is he played by?? A black guy, Morgan Freeman. This completely goes against Nakamura's point that blacks are normally secondary to whites in movies. In this movie the black guy is the most powerful guy in the world!

This movie does support her point in several ways though. For one, when Bruce shows up to meet God, everything is white. The room is painted white, white columns, white floor, white furniture, God dressed in white. And I guess I wouldn't expect anything different, not to be racist. But going with the God theme, white, to me, represents purity and good, which is what God is all about. And ultimately the guy who is given God's power is white.

But I guess the question is why the directors chose to cast a Black actor?? Was that their plan all along or did Morgan Freeman just fit the role best? If God were a played by a white actor would the meaning be the same??

I think that the fact that they cast a black actor as God shows how our culture is changing. We are becoming more accepting of different races, and morphing into a melting pot of cultures. It is becoming a world that is less black and white, no longer saying that any one race is better than the other. We did elect a black president, which has to say something about our values as a culture.

We Are All Computer People.

I chose Sherry Turkle's article titled, How Computers Change the Way We Think....

which you can read for yourself at..

http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~comp300/documents/HowComputersChangeThinking.pdf

In this article, Sherry Turkle is discussing how technology is changing the way we think, and she is focusing on computers in particular and what they are doing to us. She also addresses the issue of privacy. Nowadays most everyone is using the web for blogging, email, or other purposes, and they are losing their privacy. It seems as though college aged people are less concerned about their privacy compared to the older generations who didn’t grow up with as much information out there on the web for most anyone to see. It is the younger generation that is more willing to put more personal information on social sites, and they don’t seem to care much about their loss of privacy. Also, people are representing themselves through avatars on different websites and games. Some even get so used to using their avatars that they forget how share feelings in the real world. She explains how computers are being introduced to children at elementary ages. At this young age, children are learning to understand more than just the content, and we have to wonder how this is affecting their thinking. Because of word processors, are we relying too much on them and no longer thinking ahead?? Whatever the case, we need to accept that technology is continually evolving, and we must form our cultures around this growing technology. Turkle ends her article by explaining that there is no longer a group of “computer people”, or trained techies, but everyone is now a computer person.

This article had many points that relate to what we have talked about or we are going to talk about in class I’m sure. One thing that first popped out at me was when she discussed the use of avatars. Possibly because we just discussed this. Turkle brought up the issue that a dominant use of avatars may hinder our real life experiences. I think this is somewhat true as well. If all somebody does is sit at home, hiding behind their avatar, they may forget how to act in the physical world. Maybe I shouldn’t say ‘hiding’. I guess I could say using their avatar for communication more than themselves personally, in ‘real life’. It makes me wonder if we will eventually lose all face to face communication.

I also find the issue of privacy very interesting and kinda scary. We have talked about this topic in DTC 375, so those of you in that class, feel free to skip ahead. The idea had come up that because of technology we are becoming a private-less culture I guess you could say. Because so many people are willing to publish more and more personal information on the web, they are losing all rights to their privacy. And it’s like they don’t even care, which is the scary part. The younger generation of internet users are so used to putting anything and everything on the web that they are immune to the fact that they have virtually no privacy whatsoever. I am not one of those people who post their every move in their Facebook status or Twitter update. For that fact I don’t even have a Twitter. I find it kind of weird that people I don’t know would ‘follow’ me. I’m not against Twitter or anything, it’s just not for me. I seldom personal information in my Facebook profile, because I like to feel that I still have some privacy. But with the way things are going these days, the up and coming generation of tech users will have no sense of privacy. And the only way to gain any privacy is to avoid technology altogether, which seems next to impossible.

So back to the article and how computers are changing the way we think…

I think computers are making us somewhat lazy. We no longer have to think before we write things out. If we don’t like how something is worded, we can change it in an instant. Backspace!

Computers are causing us to think in digital world mode, not real life mode. And I think we should cherish the face to face interaction we get now because who knows how long it will last.

hey team turkle!!

I'm choosing the following article...

How Computers Change the Way We Think

(this is different from my earlier post..)

Hybrid spaces.

There is no escaping the web.

I find this statement absolutely true. Unless, by chance, you find yourself on some remote island, with no internet access whatsoever. But that’s beside the point. I’m talking about here and now, in our culture. It seems next to impossible to get away from the internet. I’m not even sure if it is possible. One reason is because of our advancements in technology, particularly smart phones, which allow for internet access virtually anywhere.

In her article, Adriana De Souza e Silva, discusses hybrid spaces and mobile devices. I’m going to focus on page 758 where she describes hybrid spaces as being the space between the physical and digital world, mobile spaces. It is in this hybrid space where the lines are blurred between physical and digital worlds. Mobile devices are a cause of these hybrid spaces, cell phones being the top device. Cell phones are now portable microcomputers, and in some countries, voice communication is no longer the top priority use of a cell phone. It is due to the popularity in devices like smart phones that people are ‘always on’ the web, giving rise to these previously mentioned hybrid spaces.

Nowadays it is rare to see people without a cell phone. But really what are they mainly using it for?? I rarely see people ‘talking’ on the phone. They are either text messaging, emailing, or surfing the web… on their phone! My boyfriend is constantly on his iPhone, looking at Best Buy ads, engadget news, or CNN updates. When it is so easy to carry these things with you wherever you are, it makes hybrid spaces very applicable to our everyday lives. Take for example Facebook. I am a part of that community, yet I don’t have to be on a computer to have access to it. I can check my updates on any smartphone or even on my Zune HD. The ability for me to access the web without having to go ‘get online’ but merely pulling out a phone, music player or laptop, makes the distinction between physical and digital spaces almost invisible.

What is a virtual community?? Did we ever answer this?

Virtual community: A group of 2 or more people sharing common interests, communicating through certain mediums such as the internet, who may or may not ever meet in real life.

This is my definition of a virtual community. I really am not sure if it is right or not. I thought I knew what a virtual community was before going to class yesterday, but was more questionable after class was dismissed. But, going off my thoughts of what a virtual community is I can say there are several that I am involved in. One of these I would say is Facebook and another our class blogs, for this class as well as those of us in 375. I thought for sure these were virtual communities. But maybe I'm wrong. Ill get to that a little later on.

First, what sort of barriers are there to these communities?? Well, if someone is not in the DTC 475 class, they are not part of our blogging community. They may come across one or more of our blogs, but that doesn't make them a part of it. Being in the class is one barrier. Also, if I do not accept your friend request on Facebook, then you are not going to be part of MY community. You may be part of the overall Facebook community, but you will be left out of my personal sub community I guess you could call it. This, sub community, including people I know in real life. Another thing is a common interest. If you just plain don't want to be a part of a social network like Facebook, then you won't create a profile, which will keep you out of the know of Facebook. I think the biggest barrier of virtual communities though is competence. Just because you have the technology, doesn't mean you know how to use it. Like my dad, for instance, has a computer, knows how to check his e-mail, that's all. Without the knowledge of how to use a computer and look things up on the web, the computer is not much good. This is where the digital divide line comes into play. And personally I think a generation gap is part of the reason for the line.

So, I say I am part of the 'virtual community' of Facebook, and Myspace as well. But are these really virtual communities? If all the people I am friends with on these social networking sites are people I know in real life, does that make it a virtual community or simply a new medium for which to communicate with my real life friends and family?? I think they are virtual communities. It is a group of people with the common interest of socializing, communicating via the internet. I personally don't feel that just because you may meet in real life, or have already met in real life, takes away the idea of something being a virtual community. I'm just sayin.

What is CYBERSPACE??

Reading through the definitions, I can agree with part of many, if not all of the definitions given. So, how to choose just one….

I finally decided that I most agreed with the following definition of cyberspace: The tablet becomes a page, becomes a screen, becomes a world, a virtual world. Everywhere and nowhere, a place where nothing is forgotten and yet everything changes.

First, when I think of Cyberspace, I think something that is constantly evolving. The definition goes through just that. We started with a tablet. A stone tablet. Then began using paper. We went from writing on paper to writing on a screen. That screen eventually led us to virtual worlds. What’s next??? Who knows. That’s part of Cyberspace I guess. The unknown.

Second, Cyberspace brings to mind someone sitting at their computer, immersing themselves in some type of virtual world, escaping the physical/real world. A place where you can go anywhere, be anyone, yet you are not going anywhere at all, and you are not anyone other than yourself. It’s a place where you can escape the physical world and enter a virtual universe.

But Cyberspace is not something that just be forgotten. Once you post a picture of yourself on facebook, send a love note to someone special, reveal anything personal about yourself, anywhere, it is next to impossible for that information to be forgotten. You may delete it. But it is not forgotten. All of that information is stored somewhere. You may change your profile. Or delete it completely. But it’s not permanently erased.

Just like in the real world. You may have had some crazy nights in your life that you wish to forget. But you don’t. You still remember. Even if you have old pictures. Torn up. You still remember. That information is stored in your brain. Just as enormous amounts of information are stored on the web. In Cyberspace.

Everything constantly changing. Yet nothing ever forgotten.

This is Me!

Hello everyone. I'm Michelle.

Junior in the DTC program. and. Having so much fun with it.

I am from Yakima. If you've never been there.. you really don't need to go. You're not missing much. I moved to Portland when I was twenty. Stayed six months. Too Big for me. Moved back home for a bit. And am now living in Richland.

I love listening to music. The Rocket Summer is pretty much my favorite band and has been for quite a few years. Rare. Love Taylor Swift music too.

Huge fan of the biggest loser. Inspiring.

I would describe myself as happy. organized. low-key. kinda short. determined. quiet. smart.

I have an amazing family. and some pretty awesome friends.

Well thats a little about me. Michelle.