Digital Natives

This article by Marc Prensky is about the changing habits of the Internet generation and how it is becoming the norm to interact on the web. There is an unprecedented feeling of ease portrayed in the attitudes of modern surfers with their own customs and even language developing. The title Digital Natives is a clever way of summarising the content of his article. On the whole this is an interesting and informative read but I think it isn't quite as deep as the other article Small Pieces. It mentions mostly the same ideas and introduces a few more along the way but the only thing this really adds that could be said to be lacking from the other one is on the second last page where it states how this technology has changed the way an entire generation interacts and that those not of this generation should ACCEPT it and to LEARN as much as they can (me included) about it. I couldn't agree more. It tends to be those with a lesser understanding that hold the reigns and make the rules. Any rules based in ignorance make a mockery of the systems put in place to run society. Knee jerk reactions don't have the best track record when looking back through history.

Small Pieces

I'll break this into sub headings as the article is a bit long.
Being John Malkovich.
The first part of this article tells a story of "Internet intoxication" which involves a boy who made a comment to another on line person about a future second massacre at Columbine. His defence for this was that he had this intoxication and was acting as a character like his favourite actor John Malkovich. Four months in prison and a three year ban from using the Internet seems fair when you think about the distress that would of been felt in Columbine, the dragging up of old memories would have probably brought many to tears. Hopefully it should act as a deterrent from anyone else making such terrifying claims.
Anonymously Shopping & Learning In The TARDIS
The next part of the article dealt with purchasing a quilt on eBay. The story was told in relation to varying aspects. The first was preconceptions in that if it didn't cost enough it wasn't good enough. Next was the fact that there was no geographical boundary as there would be if buying from a shopping centre. After this the topic of time revealed how the bidding could be monitored in increments measured in hours. Try that at Christies. The anonymity of both the vendor and buyer are an apparent difference from shopping in the real world. Finally the buyer realised how much they had learnt from the whole process about quilts that they had not known before, and all from the confines of whichever room the computer is kept in.
The Web: Modern Day Mayflower
This section compares web surfers as modern day pilgrims. The only difference acknowledged between Internet enthusiasts and those that landed at Plymouth Rock is an understanding of geography. The author talks of the unfamiliarity of the new phenomenon that is the Internet. He then discusses the way this effects us depending on our personality "If we're egotistical, then the world appears to center around us. If we're gregarious then the world appears to be an invitation to be with others. If we're ambitious then the world appears to be awaiting our conquest." The main point to come from this is that the user can improve at will. This means increasing traits deemed desirable and lessening those not.
A Different Type of Social
Comparing two different studies, both reported widely in conventional media, that were poles apart in their findings. The first one basically stated that the Internet was a causal factor in significantly reduced social interaction. The second stating that this may have been so in the physical sense but the net gave a wider social circle to those who participate, therefor showing increased social interaction. Although I don't have access to the exact methodology of both studies, I feel fairly safe theorising that the second study would be much closer to the mark if carried out reputably today. Unfortunately this lack of understanding of new technologies has had a negative effect in many cases the funniest of which involved a rogue politician with a few left of centre ideas. To be honest, this blog is getting a bit long, and the rest of the article is more entertaining than informing so I'll end with a quote that I think sums up the rest of the article nicely "... the Web upsets our expectations".

Utopia And Dystopia

The final part of the lecture was called CyberUtopia. We learnt of the first electronic media age in which information generally came from one source to be broadcast to many. The second electronic media age was the decentralization of the source which meant one person could broadcast to an enormous audience. I also learnt a new word dystopia which is simply the opposite of utopia. These were discussed in the context of new media studies in so far as the technology has been viewed as utopia because it can create perfect and sanitised scenarios full of enjoyment but without the danger.

Virtual Philosophy

Although we were talking virtual philosophy all the references to The Matrix were lost on me as I am probably the only person not to have seen any of the series (although I met Keanu Reeves in Sydney when he was filming the third one) and was more interested in the philosophical views of the French philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari and their theory that in front of every moment in time (the actual) is a virtual which is like a cluster of possibilities and choices. Something else I found interesting was a quote by Benedikt "TV is images of a life not really lived anywhere but arranged for the viewing". I'm not positive of his intended message but to me it really states well the fact that people can get too immersed in media rather than just using it as a tool. Perhaps I'm reading too much into it but I have heard people talking of characters in soap operas as though they were close personal friends rather than a two dimensional representation of a writers imagination manufactured purely for entertainment.

Democratic Censorship?

The first of today's mini lectures was about cyber democracy. It's amazing how democratic governments can propose such censorship. The Internet is a source that holds information indefinitely. People have been prosecuted for content that still exists on line. As John Gilmore said "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it". Whether or not you have democracy such as the ancient Greeks, one man one equal vote, or whatever Australia's system is where you vote is worth more or less depending on where you live; whether or not you have a constitutional right to free speech such as America or not; whether or not it's truly representative is all irrelevant. When the basic nature of the internment works against censorship the argument should be more towards education and informed decisions.

Where's Peter Lalor When You Need Him

Today we learnt about some of the government restrictions trying to be enforced by Australia in the form of a content filter. We also found out that America has been "allegedly" filtering phone calls and emails. If this remains unpunished by the American court system the implications for it's replication in this country are scary. Also if this filter becomes law in this country it may just be the tip of the iceberg. There may be no problems I would encounter immediately if at all because I' not about to go onto Rotten.com or Boobies.com but I believe that as an adult I have the right to. If my Internet is accessible to children then it's my responsibility to police their viewed content. Another thing is what exactly will the government be filtering? It may or may not be fairly innocuous now but who's to say that it won't end up with the type of censorship found in other countries? Commercial interests could also come into the equation through back door deals. Governments always need campaign funding. I may sound a bit alarmist but in my 40 years on this planet I have seen many freedoms eroded through policy makers "good for you" decisions. Anyway let's all be a bit more aware of what's being done to "protect us" and use a bit more critical thinking and people power. Viva Le revolution! (I wonder if a filter will flag me as a dissident for saying this?)

All Fun And Games

Today we learnt about video games from a more academic perspective. It started off easy by stating that their played on bulky arcade machines, consoles hooked to the telly and computers. It started getting a bit heavier after that introducing a couple of new words to my vocabulary. The first is narratology which is quite simply seeing them as and through the story line. This works fine for some of the games that have a story such as the Spiderman games or television based games such as The Simpson's or Family Guy. I have these on my XBOX and know that the character you're playing as has tasks to perform to get further into the story. Although I'm not 100% sure, I would place my NRL and cricket games in this as in the game you have a certain role and a logical task to follow. The other word was ludology which is concerned with the game play aspects itself such as my first console Pong. Even though this may seem to contradict my previous statement about NRL and cricket, but Pong was very different in that you couldn't relate it to the real world with the same tangible aspects. Although you were performing a logical set of tasks, you couldn't feel the same attachment. There are those of the opinion that the story is only secondary to the game play making the idea of narratology redundant. I don't agree with this as the story is what gets me into a game whereas the game play is what stops me finishing. Even with the sports ones I feel I am a cricketer or a footballer during the course of the game. It's the role I play that makes it enjoyable. Conversely the role of the mindless shooter in other games would see me placing them in the ludology basket as the task doesn't follow a story or seem at all logical to me. I suppose at the end of the day your own preferences and perspectives play a major role as how certain games are classified.

No Cost & No Virus Worries

Software was originally free when computers were in their infancy in the late 70's early 80's. Programmers would share all the programmes they had written including the source code which is the computer language that commands the programme. Having access to this source code meant that anyone could fix any faults they found, make improvements or tailor the software to better suit their own usage requirements. Then came Windows. Bill Gates decided to sell software packages as finished commodities restricting access to the source codes. This quickly became the norm with other companies too until Richard Stallman had enough one day and started GNU. This was going to be completely free to anyone who wanted it but was incomplete. It needed the addition of a core component which coincidentally had just been written by Finnish programmer Linus T. These were combined as GNU/Linux, a platform that can run all sorts of other free software as equally well as windows but free of charge, with access to the source code and therefor refinable but most impressively untouchable by viruses.