Final Thoughts

The most important thing that I learned in this course was a basic conception of how the technology I use day to day actually works. I think it is becoming more and more common that people take for granted all of the wonderful technologies we have. As I have said previously, what would people do if water stopped coming out of their pipes or their refrigerator turned off? No one really knows how to grow their own food or make their own clothes. I think that one day this knowledge is going to be very important and you can observe it’s up coming importance in the rising cost of labor services like construction.
I wish we could have gone more in depth on this subject of functionality. I would have really liked to understand the working parts of the internet. Fiber optics fascinates me simple due to the fact that they run across oceans and through countries. We are connected by wires but most people don’t know this and believe that the Internet is this elusive technology that has simple sprung up out of no where.
Politics will never be a subject that I enjoy because of my own viewpoint. Unfortunately, I think that politics is a red herring. It is set up to be the center of power and also specifically deceit. I believe that today, politics detract attention from the atrocities committed by multinational corporations. Therefore, it is more interesting to me to learn who is in control on the Internet, than how the Internet is helping those “in control”.

Februry 27, 2006

How do you expect VoIP to impact cable and telephone networks (both are regulated infrastructure industries)

I think that the telephone network could be affected by VoIP in terms of long distance usage, however, the main thing to remember is to use VoIP, you are still going to need a connection to the internet. Who is providing the connection? The cable and the telephone companies. So while telephone companies will loss revenue, they have the power to increase dial-up prices (relative to cable prices that is) because they still control access to these systems.

It is very interesting to me that the control over access is often an overlooked problem. If any oligopoly had any power at all, it would be the telecommunication industry. By owning and installing their own systems in houses and offices across the world, these companies are setting themselves up to control all global content.

Discussion Question:
1.) What could we do if all of a sudden cable companies decided that not only were they going to increase the monthly cost of their services but they were going to start charging for traffic use such as email or downloads. What would we do since we have little power, even within our government, to control these corporations?
2.) Manuel Castells talks about a fourth world, which consists of those groups of people who are beyond the third worlds because they are completely disconnected from the information age. If these people are pushed to the bottom most depths of society, will they resort back to the Marxist idea of an uprising in order to gain a little ground?
3.) If the law becomes obsolete and governments have no control over multinational corporations, will anarchy become a reality? Who will keep the people in check? The advertisers?

February 20, 2006

So this is where I get lost. When it comes to telecommunication, I can handle the theory, however, the technology is over my head. I can't remember all of the acronyms and the numbers of specific equipment. I am barely figuring out how to work my new iPod. 1.) Does this mean that I am domed to a life of failure because I am unable to operate or conceptualize new technology? Lord I hope not! I mean I feel that I am a relatively creative person who has a lot to offer a company in terms of work ethics and organizational skills. But if I cannot manage technology, does that make me utterly worthless? 2.) More over, how many brilliant and innovative ideas will be lost because we are stifling the creative work force. I think that technology is an amazing thing but I feel that it is nothing without the capacity of the human mind.

So if cyperspace becomes the public domain and less than half the population can access it, then it is only the public domain to the bourgeois. Thus, we perpetuate are society of class and create yet another arena that is so out of reach that we are stifling our own growth.

Sorry slightly off topic but this article really frustrated me due to my inability to completely comprehend it:

So final question is 3.) am I being optimistic in saying that technology needs the human mind or am I just kidding myself and trying to create some kind of space where I can exist and be important or valuable?

Extra Credit February 13, 2006

It is interesting all of the aspects of a website that great a good user interface. I would be curious to see studied of viewers eye motion and what kinds of colors or designs attract their attention. I would question whether or not the left column design of most websites is the best practice for western eye movement. Yes our eye moves left to right but does the design of the website also depend on the placement of the mouse? I find it much easier for me to use Mozilla browser and have the tabs right under the url code than at the bottom because I find that my mouse stays in this upper half of the window and it is more timely to have to find the tabs at the bottom of the page when using internet explore.

February 13, 2006

The internet will have a huge impact on politics if the people who vote are the people that rely on the internet. At the moment, there is a higher turn out rate on voting day among the <30 year olds then there is of the 18-30 year olds. This is problematic due to the fact that it is the 18-30 year olds who use the computer more frequently. Thus, political campaigns should include some sort of internet education program where the help those how may vote get on the internet and go to their website or blog.
With regards to the authors claim that the internet is a substitute not a supplemental source of information, I would have to disagree. I feel that the only reason their studies might show a higher investment in newspapers as a medium is due to their availability in retail outlets. If you are at Starbucks or getting your hair cut, normally there is a paper or magazine that you can pick up and read. Many people sit in coffee shops and read papers that have been left behind not because they want to read the paper over the internet, but it is just more accessible at the time.

Discussion Questions
1.) What would happen to newspapers if the government ensured that everyone had free internet connection (it might not be the fastest but a connection none the less) , just like the UK provides its citizens with free health care?
2.) This free connection would mean that more businesses would have internet connections in their stores. So if Starbucks had a newspaper or a kiosk with an internet connection, what would more likely be used?
3.) What would be the problem with providing internet connections for the government, the multinationals, the telecom businesses, and the people receiving the connections themselves?

February 6 Blog Post

Blogs have many implications for the established media, just as hypertext does for the author. However, just like hypertext, it depends on the user and the content. I think that blog technology cannot change corporate media, however, they do have power if credible blogs can be established, which are also frequently viewed. Unfortunately, I think blogs have a tarnished reputation. Originally used as journals, the term "blog" lacks the notion of trust that the "wiki" some how manages to pull off. People might not attribute credibility to blogs and it is because of this that blogs do not have more impact against corporations. Although I believe that this can be changed quite easily.

Discussion Questions
1. If we are every going to impact corporate media control, we need to change the idea that those source are the only credible sources for information. How can we change the notion of credibility to include resources such as blogs?
2. How do you as a reader determine the credibility of the blog? Credentials? Content?
3. Is the expert the only credible source? I would argue that our trust in credentials gives the source the ability to decide what information is credible rather than making the reader accountable for assessing the information.

Extra Credit 01/30

So what about the "cool" factor of any group? This may seem like a weird question at first, however, what does a group do in order to make others want to join? I mean look at Gmail, you have to be invited!
There is a whole exclusionary aspect to these groups. Looking at the term "group" from a social constructionist point of view, we can acknowledge that this term while forming a community simultaneously establishes the existence of something that exists outside of that community. For example, a group such as mammals immediately suggests that there are animals that are NOT mammals. This is purely out of the rational thought that there was a need to distinguish between the two of them. This "us/them" mentality creates a huge divide simply in the linguistic construction of these groups. Is this division innately necessary for the establishment of a group?

I hope the ideas on this page make some sense. It seems that in my head they make sense, however, I might not have formulated them appropriately for others. Please let me know by responding with a question and I will try and reformat my ideas.

January 30: Open Source

Why should communication scholars study the open source movement? I would think that the reason for studying this movement would be similar to the reason scholars study the Zapatistas movement. Similar to the Zapatistas, the open source movement is using the internet as a channel for activism. It is creating a decentralized movement that encourages users to be producers. These activists are trying to provide free software to undermine the authority of transnational corporations who control the availability of that software. However, to what extend is this movement succeeding in reaching people is another question. I think this movement is grounded in a couple fundamental problems. First, I think the technology being distributed is more difficult to use than the software of say Microsoft or Apple. Second, I think it is difficult for programmers to volunteer their time and money to create this technology when corporations offer them with substantial monetary compensation. So is this movement going to go somewhere? I think that is what scholars are watching for.

Discussion Questions:
1. What does this campaign need to provide for users in order for them to invest the time to learn how to use open source technology?
2. Do enough people understand the consequences of closed programming? If programming software is not free and not able to be upgraded by anyone, will it begin to reflect the world of the Pharmaceuticals?
3. Is there anyway the open source movement can decrease the digital divide?