This would be ironic, all things considered, but the Internet issue most relevant to me would definitely have to be online communities, and online interaction within that community.
Of course, all of us use the Internet for various purposes - researching, chatting, entertainment. In this context though, I am specifically referring to meaningful interaction within an online community, which comes with its own set of rules, protocol, and sometimes, language.
Being away from home is tough - and being apart from a support group of close friends even more so. It's not hard to imagine that being in Buffalo alone takes its toll on the psyche of the average person, especially if you come from a drastically different climate. However, by participating in online communities, I have not only been able to actively keep in touch with friends and family back home and find out how everyone is doing, I am able to feel like there is still somewhere I belong. After all - online communities are not bound by geographical restrictions, even if the basis from which it started might have been otherwise.
Other than this, I have a personal blog on Livejournal, where I like to pen down my personal thoughts and feelings whenever I'm in the mood. One of the things that's good about livejournal is the fact that you can add friends, and restrict posts to various groups. In this way, not only can I keep track of what my friends are thinking, I can decide how much and what, to let different groups of people know about me. Communities within communities - some are close friends, but others are still closer.
Another thing I particularly enjoy about Livejournal are the various interest communities that spring from it. Depending on your own particular interests, you should be able to find like-minded individuals in just about any subject you can think of! This would probably come as another shock, but I'm actually an avid fan of the community bakebakebake, a community created by bakers for bakers, to share recipes for mouthwatering recipes (note: try going to the website on a full stomach. I warned you). Actively participating in this community, I've made quite a few friends from all around the world. Even though I've never met them before, I'm still able to call them friends by virtue of our shared passions and conversations on everything else.
Another community I am actively involved in is SOFT, singapore's unofficial music forum for all things music related. I've contributed there for years, fostered a few friendships online that even lead to real-life friendships, and it's a community I can truly say that I'm an inherent part of. We have our own lingo (I really love the term G.A.S, ask me about it sometime), our own rules and most importantly, our own identity. There are annual gatherings for SOFTies where we do fun things like barbeques and games (while talking about more boring things to other people, like music), most of which would be the first time most of these online friends actually meet for the first time. You'd never expect it though, that people could just hit it off like old friends even though they'd just met. That's the thing about online communities - you usually are old friends, before you do finally meet.
Kang, I., Lee, K. C., Lee, S., & Choi, J. (2004) Investigation of online community voluntary behavior using cognitive map. Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 23, Issue 1, January 2007, pg 111-126.
Noff, A. (2008) Why people participate in online communities. Retrieved November 16th, 2009, from http://thenextweb.com/2008/05/24/why-people-participate-in-online-communities/
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Monday, October 5, 2009
Assignment 3 - I process information the social way.
For me, the beauty of the Internet has always been how differences in both latitude and longitude (figurative and literally speaking) are so easily bridged across the broad spectrum of communication technologies we have today. In fact, some relationships that might have been harder to develop in face-to-face contexts are more easily developed online. In this post, I will be looking at the Social Information Processing theory.
Sparsely related to social learning and attribution theories, Social Information Processing theory (SIP) focuses mainly on the cognitive cues that each individual inherently possess from their own personal experiences, and how they react to stimulus from their environment and other people they meet. Simply put - in our online context, people actively seek out and interpret cues online like they would in normal face-to-face communication; instead of taking normal smiles and open hand gestures as cues, we are now instead, looking at things like emoticons from which to take our cues.
One of the biggest things I've been against is the idea of developing relationships online. Funny then, that I actually got to meet my girlfriend online, while studying in UB in Spring. Worse; she was back in Singapore, while I was stuck here in winter wonderland. The odd thing was, we talked alot more online then we did when in person (prior to being together, I'd met her in person a total of 3 times). For us, the words came out alot easier when we were on our MSN windows than when we standing in front of each other. I still fondly remember the nights when we'd both be laughing over jokes we'd make and the things we'd talk about - and then tell each other we were laughing by sending smilies and various other emoticons over.
I definitely felt the effects of the SIP theory while we were both dating online. Every time we talked, we delved deeper into actual conversation, rather than getting distracted by the more cumbersome physical things that would normally detract from the start of a relationship. We were able to just concentrate on really getting to know each other night after night - all this while we'd just be taking cues from each other on how next to proceed. She was able to read into my intentions more clearly over the Internet because it was more transparent and open than face-to-face communication.
On another note, I was also glad to know that because this online communication was limited to just text and the occasional emoticon, there was a much lower chance of there being unintentional miscommunications - something that was likely to have happened with non-verbal cues. Instead, we were able to clarify with each other what exactly we wanted and hoped to get out of this relationship.
So that's my story, my online romance. I'm glad to say, cheesy as it is, that we're still going strong, despite having started on something as cliche as the Internet and MSN. But honestly? Now that we're together? I'd pick face-to-face communication, any day.
Psychiatry Health SE. (2005) Social-Information-Processing Theory. Retrieved Oct 4th, 2009, from http://psychiatry.healthse.com/psy/more/general_developmental_theories_social_information_processing_theory/
Sohail, K. (2006) Internet Relationships - Blessing or Curse?. Retrieved Oct 4th, 2009, from http://www.chowk.com/articles/10388
Sparsely related to social learning and attribution theories, Social Information Processing theory (SIP) focuses mainly on the cognitive cues that each individual inherently possess from their own personal experiences, and how they react to stimulus from their environment and other people they meet. Simply put - in our online context, people actively seek out and interpret cues online like they would in normal face-to-face communication; instead of taking normal smiles and open hand gestures as cues, we are now instead, looking at things like emoticons from which to take our cues.
One of the biggest things I've been against is the idea of developing relationships online. Funny then, that I actually got to meet my girlfriend online, while studying in UB in Spring. Worse; she was back in Singapore, while I was stuck here in winter wonderland. The odd thing was, we talked alot more online then we did when in person (prior to being together, I'd met her in person a total of 3 times). For us, the words came out alot easier when we were on our MSN windows than when we standing in front of each other. I still fondly remember the nights when we'd both be laughing over jokes we'd make and the things we'd talk about - and then tell each other we were laughing by sending smilies and various other emoticons over.
I definitely felt the effects of the SIP theory while we were both dating online. Every time we talked, we delved deeper into actual conversation, rather than getting distracted by the more cumbersome physical things that would normally detract from the start of a relationship. We were able to just concentrate on really getting to know each other night after night - all this while we'd just be taking cues from each other on how next to proceed. She was able to read into my intentions more clearly over the Internet because it was more transparent and open than face-to-face communication.
On another note, I was also glad to know that because this online communication was limited to just text and the occasional emoticon, there was a much lower chance of there being unintentional miscommunications - something that was likely to have happened with non-verbal cues. Instead, we were able to clarify with each other what exactly we wanted and hoped to get out of this relationship.
So that's my story, my online romance. I'm glad to say, cheesy as it is, that we're still going strong, despite having started on something as cliche as the Internet and MSN. But honestly? Now that we're together? I'd pick face-to-face communication, any day.
Psychiatry Health SE. (2005) Social-Information-Processing Theory. Retrieved Oct 4th, 2009, from http://psychiatry.healthse.com/psy/more/general_developmental_theories_social_information_processing_theory/
Sohail, K. (2006) Internet Relationships - Blessing or Curse?. Retrieved Oct 4th, 2009, from http://www.chowk.com/articles/10388
Friday, September 25, 2009
COM 125 Assignment 2 - Internet killed the radio star
(Let me start things off by saying real quickly that though I may not, perhaps, be the most qualified to talk about this particular topic, I would probably be the one who feels the effects of this most keenly - being a musician myself, whose music is pirated off the Internet.)
The Internet has come a long way in helping budding musicians peddle their wares to the masses as well as record companies. Gone are the days when analog cassettes and demo tapes were the way to go. Today, it's all about ProTools, Garageband, Ipod-dj-ing, and a whole plethora of handy computer tools that make music production the new after-class fad (Fact: Nowadays, you can make music by pressing just one button. True story.) With all this convenient technology at our fingertips though, there is that inescapable fact that you cannot have the good without some of the bad; piracy is especially rampant, when it comes to music.
There has been quite a bit of discussion about Digital Rights Management (DRM), and how it is a bid by both the record labels (the "big four": Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI) and music store owners (namely Apple, Microsoft and Sony) to protect music copyrights and intellectual property owned by music artistes. The sad truth though, is that DRM has not, and perhaps never will, halt music piracy. In fact, with a little bit of technical know-how, unlocking music protected by DRM software is really easy. This, coupled with the fact that on the average, only 3% of the music found in most Ipods is DRM-protected content, is a pretty big indication of one simple truth - DRM technology is really mostly just for show (Jobs, 2007).
What does this mean for content creators, or musicians then? Right now, with the digital age upon us, almost all forms of music have been digitized and can be found somewhere on the World Wide Web. Sites like youtube, myspace and imeem stream digital media for free, whilst bittorrent applications and other peer-to-peer software encourage the downloading and sharing of files, whether legally or illegally obtained. There is no escaping digital piracy no matter how you look at it, simply because the Internet is too vast a place to properly regulate and police. In fact, this extends to all forms of content, not just music - simply put, if you have any content at all on the Web, be it audio, video, or plain text; it is akin to putting it up in the public domain. Even if your content and intellectual property is protected by sites like COMPASS, piracy manages to somehow ignore all that, hiding behind the vast, sheer anonymity of the World Wide Web (my band's album, distributed by Universal Music, was leaked onto torrent servers in March this year).
How then can we accommodate both the interests of the public and that of content creators? To look at the problem from a more specific angle, how can we protect the interests of the public and the music industry? Given the current trends of how music is being obtained and exchanged today, the music industry is facing an unprecedented crisis and might possibly, collapse on itself in the near future if it doesn't adapt to the changes in consumer patterns (Kusek, 2009). This would only serve to limit the amount of new music being produced, which would be counter-productive for the public.
The solution I propose will not be able to halt piracy at all - I think it is very important to be able to accept that whatever the age, some form of piracy will always exist on the Internet due to its' public nature. However, it should be able to serve both the public interest as well as improve the condition of the ailing record industry.
The solution is two-fold: the first part involves educating the public, whilst the second part involves a restructuring of the record industry.
The public should be made aware that the music they download is unsustainable in the long run if the artistes who write them recieve no renumeration of any sort. Things like record sales help fund and encourage artistes to continue writing more music, and helps in the creation of more content. True, there are musicians who would produce music without hope of any form of income; but financially supporting these musicians, and supporting them via album sales rather than pirated downloads, helps promote and create a greater variety of content.
For record companies, I believe there has to be a change in focus. Record labels need to start promoting things that the Internet cannot hope to replicate. For example, the experience of being at a live show, in the flesh, rather than merchandise which can be digitized and put online for everyone to share.
Because though Copyrights still have their use from a commercial perspective, for the average individual, Copyrights are pretty much a thing of the past.
Jobs, S. (2007, February 6). Thoughts on Music. Apple. Retrieved September 24, 2009, from http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
Kusek, D. (2009, September 14). Music Industry - Change or Die. Future of Music. Retrieved September 24, 2009, from http://www.futureofmusicbook.com/2009/09/change-or-die/
The Internet has come a long way in helping budding musicians peddle their wares to the masses as well as record companies. Gone are the days when analog cassettes and demo tapes were the way to go. Today, it's all about ProTools, Garageband, Ipod-dj-ing, and a whole plethora of handy computer tools that make music production the new after-class fad (Fact: Nowadays, you can make music by pressing just one button. True story.) With all this convenient technology at our fingertips though, there is that inescapable fact that you cannot have the good without some of the bad; piracy is especially rampant, when it comes to music.
There has been quite a bit of discussion about Digital Rights Management (DRM), and how it is a bid by both the record labels (the "big four": Universal, Sony BMG, Warner and EMI) and music store owners (namely Apple, Microsoft and Sony) to protect music copyrights and intellectual property owned by music artistes. The sad truth though, is that DRM has not, and perhaps never will, halt music piracy. In fact, with a little bit of technical know-how, unlocking music protected by DRM software is really easy. This, coupled with the fact that on the average, only 3% of the music found in most Ipods is DRM-protected content, is a pretty big indication of one simple truth - DRM technology is really mostly just for show (Jobs, 2007).
What does this mean for content creators, or musicians then? Right now, with the digital age upon us, almost all forms of music have been digitized and can be found somewhere on the World Wide Web. Sites like youtube, myspace and imeem stream digital media for free, whilst bittorrent applications and other peer-to-peer software encourage the downloading and sharing of files, whether legally or illegally obtained. There is no escaping digital piracy no matter how you look at it, simply because the Internet is too vast a place to properly regulate and police. In fact, this extends to all forms of content, not just music - simply put, if you have any content at all on the Web, be it audio, video, or plain text; it is akin to putting it up in the public domain. Even if your content and intellectual property is protected by sites like COMPASS, piracy manages to somehow ignore all that, hiding behind the vast, sheer anonymity of the World Wide Web (my band's album, distributed by Universal Music, was leaked onto torrent servers in March this year).
How then can we accommodate both the interests of the public and that of content creators? To look at the problem from a more specific angle, how can we protect the interests of the public and the music industry? Given the current trends of how music is being obtained and exchanged today, the music industry is facing an unprecedented crisis and might possibly, collapse on itself in the near future if it doesn't adapt to the changes in consumer patterns (Kusek, 2009). This would only serve to limit the amount of new music being produced, which would be counter-productive for the public.
The solution I propose will not be able to halt piracy at all - I think it is very important to be able to accept that whatever the age, some form of piracy will always exist on the Internet due to its' public nature. However, it should be able to serve both the public interest as well as improve the condition of the ailing record industry.
The solution is two-fold: the first part involves educating the public, whilst the second part involves a restructuring of the record industry.
The public should be made aware that the music they download is unsustainable in the long run if the artistes who write them recieve no renumeration of any sort. Things like record sales help fund and encourage artistes to continue writing more music, and helps in the creation of more content. True, there are musicians who would produce music without hope of any form of income; but financially supporting these musicians, and supporting them via album sales rather than pirated downloads, helps promote and create a greater variety of content.
For record companies, I believe there has to be a change in focus. Record labels need to start promoting things that the Internet cannot hope to replicate. For example, the experience of being at a live show, in the flesh, rather than merchandise which can be digitized and put online for everyone to share.
Because though Copyrights still have their use from a commercial perspective, for the average individual, Copyrights are pretty much a thing of the past.
Jobs, S. (2007, February 6). Thoughts on Music. Apple. Retrieved September 24, 2009, from http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/
Kusek, D. (2009, September 14). Music Industry - Change or Die. Future of Music. Retrieved September 24, 2009, from http://www.futureofmusicbook.com/2009/09/change-or-die/
Friday, September 18, 2009
COM125 Assignment 1: A long time ago, in a military installation far far away..
Ok, so the advent of the Internet did not exactly have grand fanfare and scrolling text to herald it's arrival. Instead, it was a rather quiet affair - evolving slowly from the precursor of the Internet, ARPANET (Advanced Research Projects Agency Network), which was a military directive. Most people didn't even realize the significant milestone on 10.30pm October 29, 1969 - when the first message was sent from one computer to another computer on UCLA's grounds, where ARPANET was deployed.
From then on, technologies for the fledging ARPANET burgeoned, with the first e-mail being invented and sent in 1971. By 1973, e-mail traffic made up 75% of the total volume of information exchanged on the ARPANET. FTP (File Transfer Protocol) was also invented in 1973, which allowed files to be sent from one location to another. These advances pushed and encouraged development of ARPANET into something more accessible and readily available for the public and commercial entities.
Fast forwards years later and ARPANET is now one of the fundamental components of the Internet and the World Wide Web. Many of the technologies used and developed during that time now form the basis of the different uses of the Internet. For instance, emails are still widely in use. FTP capabilities have grown cumulatively over the years, and allow for global access of files at speeds previously unimagined when ARPANET was developed.
The Internet today would definitely not have been able to progress at the speed which it did were it not for the development of ARPANET. The technologies discovered in the implementation of ARPANET formed the backbone of the World Wide Web's infrastructure in the early years. These technologies led to the development of other advancements, such as TCP/IP, and SMTP - protocols which have helped stabilize the Internet and from which more uses have been derived.
Today, we can even send video and audio signals over the Internet and talk to loved ones half a world away. All that, from a dingy laboratory in UCLA in 1969.
From then on, technologies for the fledging ARPANET burgeoned, with the first e-mail being invented and sent in 1971. By 1973, e-mail traffic made up 75% of the total volume of information exchanged on the ARPANET. FTP (File Transfer Protocol) was also invented in 1973, which allowed files to be sent from one location to another. These advances pushed and encouraged development of ARPANET into something more accessible and readily available for the public and commercial entities.
Fast forwards years later and ARPANET is now one of the fundamental components of the Internet and the World Wide Web. Many of the technologies used and developed during that time now form the basis of the different uses of the Internet. For instance, emails are still widely in use. FTP capabilities have grown cumulatively over the years, and allow for global access of files at speeds previously unimagined when ARPANET was developed.
The Internet today would definitely not have been able to progress at the speed which it did were it not for the development of ARPANET. The technologies discovered in the implementation of ARPANET formed the backbone of the World Wide Web's infrastructure in the early years. These technologies led to the development of other advancements, such as TCP/IP, and SMTP - protocols which have helped stabilize the Internet and from which more uses have been derived.
Today, we can even send video and audio signals over the Internet and talk to loved ones half a world away. All that, from a dingy laboratory in UCLA in 1969.
Friday, September 11, 2009
The introduction.
Introductions are tough. There's always that burst of panic when you're told to put something to paper - to create something from scratch - that just seems to flounder, vex and frustrate the general populace. For some people, perhaps it's because they have too much to say - or rather, there is that need to consciously decide what is meaningful enough to be given voice and life on parchment, papyrus, or even this Internet Window.
But I'm digressing.
Hello.
You can call me Shen, rather than my full Chinese name. Like a few other students here, I hail from the magnificently boring city state of Singapore. Well, boring is how you look at it really, but it is where home is.
In my free time, I like to think I'm quite a bit of a geek. I watch shows like the Travel Channel, Discovery Channel, Little Britain, How I Met Your Mother, and have the uncanny ability to retrieve useless bits of information about fore-mentioned shows at the most inopportune moments. Suffice to say, that is abit of an obstacle for my social life, which is currently vegetative at best.
Besides that, I play in a little band back in Singapore whilst masquerading (yup, it's all a facade) as a hardworking student. You should check it out here when you have the time - we try to / like to think we're cool.
So yes, music and random bits of trivia make up a majority of my life. If you're ever interested, do ask me what rojak is - that'd be the perfect summary for my introduction.
Till then. Have a seat, take your shoes off, relax, enjoy the show.
But I'm digressing.
Hello.
You can call me Shen, rather than my full Chinese name. Like a few other students here, I hail from the magnificently boring city state of Singapore. Well, boring is how you look at it really, but it is where home is.
In my free time, I like to think I'm quite a bit of a geek. I watch shows like the Travel Channel, Discovery Channel, Little Britain, How I Met Your Mother, and have the uncanny ability to retrieve useless bits of information about fore-mentioned shows at the most inopportune moments. Suffice to say, that is abit of an obstacle for my social life, which is currently vegetative at best.
Besides that, I play in a little band back in Singapore whilst masquerading (yup, it's all a facade) as a hardworking student. You should check it out here when you have the time - we try to / like to think we're cool.
So yes, music and random bits of trivia make up a majority of my life. If you're ever interested, do ask me what rojak is - that'd be the perfect summary for my introduction.
Till then. Have a seat, take your shoes off, relax, enjoy the show.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
