So I'm posting this blog a little late because I'm an idiot. My name is Carlos Molina, and I'm a senior communications major with a focus in media studies. I'm a big fan of the media and the transfer/availability of information, particularly online. I guess this would be the major phenomenon that interests me, is just how much information on any subject is available online.
You guys ever see the Terminator movies? You know how in the first one, the war with the machines is far enough away and fictional enough to be a possibility, but not a real threat? Then in the second one the logistics of it are explained some more and still, realistically, it would be very difficult for the machines to become self aware and rise up against their creators? The third one is where my interest in information kicks in. In the third one, SkyNet is a super secret government project that's a hugely complicated defense system, that ultimately gets a "virus" making it self aware. SkyNet itself was the virus, a weird concept I know, but SkyNet also was the entire network and pretty much had all the available information in the world, from the internet to defense secrets and everything in between. SkyNet just started off as a network that could access information.
What is Google? Isn't it just a database full of the world's information? How many different features does it have? All you have to do is look at the front page and see. Google video, google maps, google news, google images, google mail. Let's not forget the awesome Google Earth that everyone has looked their house up on at least once. And of course the massive Google Books project looking to scan every book available with the aid of libraries and publishers. Combine that with the acquisition of YouTube and it creates quite a vast system.
I realize it's a pretty huge stretch to compare google to skynet, and yes I realize the Terminator movies are science fiction. But just the idea and logistics of how much information is out there, how much everybody knows, and how easy it is for people to find baffles me. And we should all be scared of the day when the machines realize how much they know about us and how badly they could crush us. Dun, dun, dunnnnnn.........
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Ahoy
Ahoy all.
So since I added this class a few nights ago after learning that such supercool classes where you post on Google Blog such as this one exist, I'm writing my first post now seeing as I couldn't before and well, I'll spare you all of the whole drama that occurred (yes, gentlemen, drama) in the whole craze of getting it organized.
So I've learned something after spending a year at Cornell (I'm a sophomore in either ECE or AEP) that I didn't learn back in my hometown of Somewhere Around Boston, Massachusetts. Race is real. It's something you don't pick up at all going to a school system that's way over 90% white and a school itself that's almost 98% white (and all-male by the way). Man, you don't realize what you had and didn't have in a certain environment until you leave. And when I left and came here, this whole concept of people with different backgrounds hit me hard in the face. Therefore, though it may not seem that apparent at first that you're in a different environment, but it is. And don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed that kind of setting and sort of wish I could go back. But wishing for the past is a great way to waste your entire life.
By the way, I'm not white, I'm desi. I say desi because well, I think it's really dumb when people say "Indian" to mean Native Americans and also cause whenever you say the word "asian" people immediately seem to correlate that with places like China, Korea, Japan, etc. But to be honest and politically correct (which I support both of), you can't really cast so many people using one term, Asian, that's just a term that says "ahoy friends, my family comes from Asia." So I've started getting annoyed using terms of continental association like so. So desi it is. And I've started to identify with it a lot more now that I'm not in such a white community. Why? Go figure. But I've noticed that I've started listening to a lot of desi music of late. Especially Punjabi music. Punjab es la polla.
In any case. You know what I can't stand? The Times New Roman font. Think about it for yourself. Say you were browsing the web and you came to a page that's written entirely in 12-point unbold, unitalicized Times New Roman font on a plain white background. Well at least when I see things like that, it just drains my soul of everything lively and happy, like notions furry purple bunnies that emit lavender-scented bubbles when they nibble on carrots. In fact, adding colors and background images is part of what makes us creative. And in my experience, any time I go to a website that has something really actiony or intense and lively or whatnot, only two colors seem to emerge: either black or red.
Psychologically, every color in our brain is correlated subtly to certain characteristics. Red happens to be an extremely intense and fiery color and black seems to represent destruction to me. So let's face it: if you went to some site dedicated to, say, Counter-Strike (or whatever these kids are playing online these days) and it just happened to be themed in a bright pink starred-background with electric green font, you'd think you had run into the livejournal of someone with a barbie addiction or something like that.
So if you just happen to come across some webpage written in some language that you don't understand, you could probably still get an idea of what it's all about just by looking at the colors, couldn't you?
Maybe I'll think about that next time I browse the web. For now, I'll just sit here and pretend I'm infinitely wise and enlightening like Andy Rooney.
So since I added this class a few nights ago after learning that such supercool classes where you post on Google Blog such as this one exist, I'm writing my first post now seeing as I couldn't before and well, I'll spare you all of the whole drama that occurred (yes, gentlemen, drama) in the whole craze of getting it organized.
So I've learned something after spending a year at Cornell (I'm a sophomore in either ECE or AEP) that I didn't learn back in my hometown of Somewhere Around Boston, Massachusetts. Race is real. It's something you don't pick up at all going to a school system that's way over 90% white and a school itself that's almost 98% white (and all-male by the way). Man, you don't realize what you had and didn't have in a certain environment until you leave. And when I left and came here, this whole concept of people with different backgrounds hit me hard in the face. Therefore, though it may not seem that apparent at first that you're in a different environment, but it is. And don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed that kind of setting and sort of wish I could go back. But wishing for the past is a great way to waste your entire life.
By the way, I'm not white, I'm desi. I say desi because well, I think it's really dumb when people say "Indian" to mean Native Americans and also cause whenever you say the word "asian" people immediately seem to correlate that with places like China, Korea, Japan, etc. But to be honest and politically correct (which I support both of), you can't really cast so many people using one term, Asian, that's just a term that says "ahoy friends, my family comes from Asia." So I've started getting annoyed using terms of continental association like so. So desi it is. And I've started to identify with it a lot more now that I'm not in such a white community. Why? Go figure. But I've noticed that I've started listening to a lot of desi music of late. Especially Punjabi music. Punjab es la polla.
In any case. You know what I can't stand? The Times New Roman font. Think about it for yourself. Say you were browsing the web and you came to a page that's written entirely in 12-point unbold, unitalicized Times New Roman font on a plain white background. Well at least when I see things like that, it just drains my soul of everything lively and happy, like notions furry purple bunnies that emit lavender-scented bubbles when they nibble on carrots. In fact, adding colors and background images is part of what makes us creative. And in my experience, any time I go to a website that has something really actiony or intense and lively or whatnot, only two colors seem to emerge: either black or red.
Psychologically, every color in our brain is correlated subtly to certain characteristics. Red happens to be an extremely intense and fiery color and black seems to represent destruction to me. So let's face it: if you went to some site dedicated to, say, Counter-Strike (or whatever these kids are playing online these days) and it just happened to be themed in a bright pink starred-background with electric green font, you'd think you had run into the livejournal of someone with a barbie addiction or something like that.
So if you just happen to come across some webpage written in some language that you don't understand, you could probably still get an idea of what it's all about just by looking at the colors, couldn't you?
Maybe I'll think about that next time I browse the web. For now, I'll just sit here and pretend I'm infinitely wise and enlightening like Andy Rooney.
I just don't get it...
Hi, my name is Colleen O’Shea and I’m a junior communications major from Westchester, NY.
You will have to excuse my awkward and short introduction. I am awful at the “about me” thing. I had a myspace for a brief period of time but only because I was signed up by a friend and my “about me” stayed blank until that same friend filled it in for me. My facebook is equally as pitiful, containing nothing but my birthday, gender, and email address. I have never understood the need to put a lot of information about myself out for some imaginary audience to read and learn more about me as if they would really care. If you know me then you know all of that information already, and if you don’t know me, you probably won’t get to know me over the internet because I find that creepy. Instead of going online and having “chatting” with peers on the computer I really would rather go and hang out in person. I feel like humor and sarcasm are so often lost through typing and so I have not talked to anyone on AIM in probably over a year. So now that I’m sure everyone is thinking “Wow, what a freak,” I’ll get into the phenomenon of meeting people online.
There are so many ways to “meet” people via the internet; whether it’s talking to a future classmate through facebook or the “Class Of” website before arriving at school, or talking to random people in chat rooms, or using an online dating website, or befriending strangers on myspace. I mean maybe I just listened to attentively when I was told that going to meet someone that you’ve “met” or talked to online was a sure fire way of getting yourself abducted by a psycho/pedophile. Maybe it really is more like Eurotrip where you end up finding the super hot foreign love of your life and I should be less skeptical. However, I don’t believe I will ever be swayed and become the next spokesperson for e-harmony. There are too many nuances of people’s personalities that don’t come through when talking online. It’s my opinion that you can’t “click” with someone online. Even if all of the information you are receiving is true and you are not talking to a 5’5” bald man who has described himself as having Fabio-esque qualities, is an “lol” really the same as laughing with someone in the flesh?
Meeting and possibly dating people online can take place in many different online spaces. You can chat with someone in real time in a synchronous environment through AIM or chat rooms while asynchronous discussions through myspace or facebook as well as electronic mail are probably an even more popular means of a first encounter (just not for me).
You will have to excuse my awkward and short introduction. I am awful at the “about me” thing. I had a myspace for a brief period of time but only because I was signed up by a friend and my “about me” stayed blank until that same friend filled it in for me. My facebook is equally as pitiful, containing nothing but my birthday, gender, and email address. I have never understood the need to put a lot of information about myself out for some imaginary audience to read and learn more about me as if they would really care. If you know me then you know all of that information already, and if you don’t know me, you probably won’t get to know me over the internet because I find that creepy. Instead of going online and having “chatting” with peers on the computer I really would rather go and hang out in person. I feel like humor and sarcasm are so often lost through typing and so I have not talked to anyone on AIM in probably over a year. So now that I’m sure everyone is thinking “Wow, what a freak,” I’ll get into the phenomenon of meeting people online.
There are so many ways to “meet” people via the internet; whether it’s talking to a future classmate through facebook or the “Class Of” website before arriving at school, or talking to random people in chat rooms, or using an online dating website, or befriending strangers on myspace. I mean maybe I just listened to attentively when I was told that going to meet someone that you’ve “met” or talked to online was a sure fire way of getting yourself abducted by a psycho/pedophile. Maybe it really is more like Eurotrip where you end up finding the super hot foreign love of your life and I should be less skeptical. However, I don’t believe I will ever be swayed and become the next spokesperson for e-harmony. There are too many nuances of people’s personalities that don’t come through when talking online. It’s my opinion that you can’t “click” with someone online. Even if all of the information you are receiving is true and you are not talking to a 5’5” bald man who has described himself as having Fabio-esque qualities, is an “lol” really the same as laughing with someone in the flesh?
Meeting and possibly dating people online can take place in many different online spaces. You can chat with someone in real time in a synchronous environment through AIM or chat rooms while asynchronous discussions through myspace or facebook as well as electronic mail are probably an even more popular means of a first encounter (just not for me).
Could you imagine....john.smith@facebook.com!
Hello COMM245! My name is Katelyn McClellan and I am a senior in the ILR School. I still cannot believe I am a senior already! I had a guaranteed transfer to Cornell so I came here at the beginning of my sophomore year. Deciding to come up to lovely Ithaca was definitely one of the best decisions I ever made!
The internet phenomenon I am most interested in is the new craze with social networking sites such as facebook and my space. I am currently working on a thesis in ILR studying how facebook/MySpace/blogs, etc. have impacted the workforce. Therefore, learning more about why college students can spend several hours browsing profiles and updating personal pages most interests me. I remember back to freshman year at CUA when we were only added to facebook second semester. Weeks after word got out, it seemed as if the entire university was friending, poking and updating! The actual thefacebook.com website was so slow, probably from so many people logging on at once! Today Facebook had reached a new levels with applications, videos, the mini feed and common phrases such as “Facebook me.” Sometimes I wonder if the trend will ever end or will there be a generation of senior citizens in years to come with facebook/myspace pages!
I would not be surprised if one day facebook incorporated all types of online space. Currently, features such as wall posting could be considered asynchronous and messaging is somewhat a form of email. Yet with video and applications added, I would not be surprised of one day facebook chats or even email accounts became a part of the site. Could you imagine john.smith@facebook.com!
The internet phenomenon I am most interested in is the new craze with social networking sites such as facebook and my space. I am currently working on a thesis in ILR studying how facebook/MySpace/blogs, etc. have impacted the workforce. Therefore, learning more about why college students can spend several hours browsing profiles and updating personal pages most interests me. I remember back to freshman year at CUA when we were only added to facebook second semester. Weeks after word got out, it seemed as if the entire university was friending, poking and updating! The actual thefacebook.com website was so slow, probably from so many people logging on at once! Today Facebook had reached a new levels with applications, videos, the mini feed and common phrases such as “Facebook me.” Sometimes I wonder if the trend will ever end or will there be a generation of senior citizens in years to come with facebook/myspace pages!
I would not be surprised if one day facebook incorporated all types of online space. Currently, features such as wall posting could be considered asynchronous and messaging is somewhat a form of email. Yet with video and applications added, I would not be surprised of one day facebook chats or even email accounts became a part of the site. Could you imagine john.smith@facebook.com!
What?! No online pornography?!?!
Hey. I’m Mike Phillips, a Junior majoring in Information Science, Systems, and Technology in the
An Internet phenomenon that I am interested in is online gaming that exists in the “metaworlds” that Wallace described. I know online gaming is probably a relatively dated concept considering MUDs and all, but as a dude who only plays video games on gaming consoles, Xbox Live was my first taste of this experience. I used to play Halo 2 online all the time in high school but this was something that I both loved and hated. It blew my mind that I could go on Xbox Live at anytime of the day and play against people from all over the world who liked to play just as much as I did. Before I could play Halo online, multiplayer Halo was a big hassle. Someone had to bring his controllers and/or games and/or console to a friend’s house so we could take turns playing against each other four at a time. Xbox Live allowed us all to play at the same time from the comfort of our own respective homes. The fact that I could play a game with 32 people at the same time was the coolest thing I could think of at the time. As I started to play against people I didn’t know personally though, I started to become disgusted by some of the things I would hear other players say. I like to trash talk just as much as the next guy, but the truly malicious nature of the things certain players would say to each other and to me left a bad taste in my mouth. People would throw out so many racial, homophobic, Anti-Semitic and generally ignorant slurs that I would sometimes just have to mute my headphones. It didn’t quite shock me that people had these feelings, but it did shock me that they would share them so readily with the others that they were playing with so such candor. The fact that I could hear their voices saying these awful things was something that also got under my skin after a couple of rounds. I still like to play when I have the time but sometimes I wonder if people I know think such terrible things that they will only express to strangers under the guiss of a gamertag.
The Internet is a hell of a drug!
Hello, my name is Gerard, but I go by Scott (middle name). My hometown is Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania, a suburb of Philadelphia. I’m a sophomore majoring in Information Science in the College of Arts & Sciences. I’m into cycling, snowboarding, photography and graphic/web design and I’m a web designer for a well-known organization on campus.
I couldn’t come up with a specific phenomenon that interested me most because they all seem equally absurd, so rather than cover one particular subject, I chose to cover the general phenomenon of Internet addiction. It can occur because of one Internet phenomenon or as a combination of numerous online sources.
Many of the topics already discussed on this blog, such as Facebook fiends, omg txt chatters and MMORPG wizards are cases of concentrated Internet addiction. Facebook addiction is a condition that affects thousands of college students every day. From simply checking in every few minutes, hoping for a new notification, and flipping through random acquaintances’ photos, to writing on your best friend’s wall… as they sit next to you. We can all agree that Facebook addiction is real. Txt chatters are easy to pick out from across the lecture hall, you’ll either see the 2” screen light up every other minute, or you’ll hear it flip closed (sometimes preceded by the feverish click-clacking of the number pad). Many of my classmates have already attested to their personal texting addictions on this blog. While Facebook and texting are certainly addictive, they rarely become as serious as an MMORPG addiction. A few years ago the online game EverQuest was linked to suicide and child neglect because of its addictive nature. Similar games have been responsible for students neglecting work and in some cases, failing out of school. How can someone neglect the outside world to such a degree that a game can destroy his or her life?
The form of Internet addiction that plagues myself and many others is less concentrated in one online realm. It is simply the need to stay connected at all times. Whether I’m reading the newest entries to my favorite blogs, checking recent headlines around the world, answering email, or refreshing my Facebook news feed, there’s always something new online. In an increasingly wired world with new distractions every day, this type of addiction is only getting worse.
Internet addiction spans the whole spectrum of online spaces. Each of Wallace’s spaces can be addictive, one can spend hours surfing the web, become a slave to their email client, accumulate thousands of posts on discussion forums, spend too much time in chat rooms, or get lost in fantasy role playing games like MUDs or (nowadays) MMORPGs. Beyond Wallace’s online spaces, Internet addiction is sure to envelop every new aspect of the net, as it has in the case of Facebook, texting, blogs and more.
I couldn’t come up with a specific phenomenon that interested me most because they all seem equally absurd, so rather than cover one particular subject, I chose to cover the general phenomenon of Internet addiction. It can occur because of one Internet phenomenon or as a combination of numerous online sources.
Many of the topics already discussed on this blog, such as Facebook fiends, omg txt chatters and MMORPG wizards are cases of concentrated Internet addiction. Facebook addiction is a condition that affects thousands of college students every day. From simply checking in every few minutes, hoping for a new notification, and flipping through random acquaintances’ photos, to writing on your best friend’s wall… as they sit next to you. We can all agree that Facebook addiction is real. Txt chatters are easy to pick out from across the lecture hall, you’ll either see the 2” screen light up every other minute, or you’ll hear it flip closed (sometimes preceded by the feverish click-clacking of the number pad). Many of my classmates have already attested to their personal texting addictions on this blog. While Facebook and texting are certainly addictive, they rarely become as serious as an MMORPG addiction. A few years ago the online game EverQuest was linked to suicide and child neglect because of its addictive nature. Similar games have been responsible for students neglecting work and in some cases, failing out of school. How can someone neglect the outside world to such a degree that a game can destroy his or her life?
The form of Internet addiction that plagues myself and many others is less concentrated in one online realm. It is simply the need to stay connected at all times. Whether I’m reading the newest entries to my favorite blogs, checking recent headlines around the world, answering email, or refreshing my Facebook news feed, there’s always something new online. In an increasingly wired world with new distractions every day, this type of addiction is only getting worse.
Internet addiction spans the whole spectrum of online spaces. Each of Wallace’s spaces can be addictive, one can spend hours surfing the web, become a slave to their email client, accumulate thousands of posts on discussion forums, spend too much time in chat rooms, or get lost in fantasy role playing games like MUDs or (nowadays) MMORPGs. Beyond Wallace’s online spaces, Internet addiction is sure to envelop every new aspect of the net, as it has in the case of Facebook, texting, blogs and more.
Celebrity Gossip Blogs
My name is Anne Lucke and I’m a sophomore communication major with a minor in AEM. I’m from Hudson, NY (near Albany). I’m completely addicted to reality television, and if you block the TV during The Hills, we’ll have major problems. I also spend way too much time reading celebrity gossip blogs. I check Perez Hilton, TMZ, D-Listed, and Pink is the New Blog more than a few times a day.
Judging by Perez Hilton’s celebrity status and the fact that TMZ will soon be on TV, I think it is safe to say that I am not alone in my obsession with celebrity gossip. These websites get millions of hits each day and a ton of advertisers on their websites. In fact, celebrity bloggers Mario Lavandeira (Perez Hilton’s real name) and Trent Venegas (Pink is the New Blog) generate enough income to make blogging their full-time job. Although the public’s (and my own) obsession with celebrity gossip goes far beyond the internet and is not very new, the immense popularity of gossip blogs is an entirely new phenomenon.
Gossip blogs may be too new of a phenomenon to have any concrete research on them yet (“blog” is nowhere to be found in the index of Wallace’s book), but this is defiantly a major movement that should not be ignored. I think the best internet environment to place gossip blogs in would be the asynchronous discussion forum. The writer of the blog posts a new topic, and readers can comment on it and reply to other readers’ comments. One could also place gossip blogs in the newsgroup environment, which is very similar to the discussion forum. Gossip blogs bring people with similar interests together, just like other discussion forums, which may be a factor in their success. But I have to go now, tmz.com was just updated!
Judging by Perez Hilton’s celebrity status and the fact that TMZ will soon be on TV, I think it is safe to say that I am not alone in my obsession with celebrity gossip. These websites get millions of hits each day and a ton of advertisers on their websites. In fact, celebrity bloggers Mario Lavandeira (Perez Hilton’s real name) and Trent Venegas (Pink is the New Blog) generate enough income to make blogging their full-time job. Although the public’s (and my own) obsession with celebrity gossip goes far beyond the internet and is not very new, the immense popularity of gossip blogs is an entirely new phenomenon.
Gossip blogs may be too new of a phenomenon to have any concrete research on them yet (“blog” is nowhere to be found in the index of Wallace’s book), but this is defiantly a major movement that should not be ignored. I think the best internet environment to place gossip blogs in would be the asynchronous discussion forum. The writer of the blog posts a new topic, and readers can comment on it and reply to other readers’ comments. One could also place gossip blogs in the newsgroup environment, which is very similar to the discussion forum. Gossip blogs bring people with similar interests together, just like other discussion forums, which may be a factor in their success. But I have to go now, tmz.com was just updated!
The Internet and Dating
Hi everyone. My name is Mallory Biblo. I am from Mequon, Wisconsin, a suburb just north of Milwaukee. I am a junior in the ILR College, and I compete on the Varsity Women’s Track and Field Team. My events include long jump and triple jump. I am also an active member in my sorority, Delta Gamma. Cornell University and the east coast are very different from Wisconsin. However, I could not see myself at any other college and the east coast is growing on me.
The Internet-related phenomenon that interests me most deals with dating and the Internet. How does meeting someone over the Internet lead to a real relationship? Whatever the relationship is, a single date, a girlfriend or a boyfriend, or marriage, why is someone willing to trust someone else that he or she knows very little about? In fact, the only information that one person knows about the other person is what he or she has been typing, which could be completely untrue. The thought of meeting and dating someone over the Internet goes against what we have been conditioned to think our entire lives. Our entire lives we have been conditioned to think of love at first sight and physically interacting with someone. The Internet completely takes this aspect of dating away because the relationship that starts on the Internet does not start with seeing the other person or any actual contact with the other person. Also, the relationship that exists solely on the Internet has no physical interaction at all.
There are numerous online spaces where this Internet-related phenomenon takes place. One online space that a potential dater can communicate with another potential dater is a chat room. A chat room is a synchronous environment because the potential daters engage in a version of real-time conversation. Potential daters can also communicate with one another through electronic mail (email), which is another online space. People can also meet and possibly start dating using another Internet-related phenomenon, Facebook. There are numerous online spaces within Facebook itself. For example, “the wall” feature of Facebook is an asynchronous discussion forum. By definition an asynchronous discussion forum consists of an ongoing conference in which participants start topics, post replies to each other, and read what others have said. This definition describes “the wall” feature perfectly.
The Internet-related phenomenon that interests me most deals with dating and the Internet. How does meeting someone over the Internet lead to a real relationship? Whatever the relationship is, a single date, a girlfriend or a boyfriend, or marriage, why is someone willing to trust someone else that he or she knows very little about? In fact, the only information that one person knows about the other person is what he or she has been typing, which could be completely untrue. The thought of meeting and dating someone over the Internet goes against what we have been conditioned to think our entire lives. Our entire lives we have been conditioned to think of love at first sight and physically interacting with someone. The Internet completely takes this aspect of dating away because the relationship that starts on the Internet does not start with seeing the other person or any actual contact with the other person. Also, the relationship that exists solely on the Internet has no physical interaction at all.
There are numerous online spaces where this Internet-related phenomenon takes place. One online space that a potential dater can communicate with another potential dater is a chat room. A chat room is a synchronous environment because the potential daters engage in a version of real-time conversation. Potential daters can also communicate with one another through electronic mail (email), which is another online space. People can also meet and possibly start dating using another Internet-related phenomenon, Facebook. There are numerous online spaces within Facebook itself. For example, “the wall” feature of Facebook is an asynchronous discussion forum. By definition an asynchronous discussion forum consists of an ongoing conference in which participants start topics, post replies to each other, and read what others have said. This definition describes “the wall” feature perfectly.
"OMG Get Rid Of The News Feed!!!!"
Hi, my name is Tyler Armstrong, and I'm a junior transfer student. I was born and raised in Ithaca, leaving only for 2 years to attend junior college in Buffalo. My major is communications, and I hope to pursue a career in the mass media field, more specifically sports broadcasting.
I am willing to admit that I am a Facebook addict; not only do I find it entertaining, but who doesn't love getting a new wall post or friend request from that good looking girl you just met on Saturday night? As a fan of the infamous social networking site, I find it alarming that some people feel such a substantial sense of attachment and ownership towards it. Anytime a change is made or a new feature added, thousands and thousands of users are uproarious in protest. The first example that comes to mind is the News Feed. When Facebook first introduced it I was actually a fan. I didn't mind allowing my friends to see the things I had done to my profile, because I figured that was the point of Facebook; to keep your friends and family updated on your life. Not 12 hours had passed since the addition however, when seemingly hundreds of groups formed boycotting the new feature, with users threatening to delete their accounts if things weren't restored to how they "used to be." Little did these people know however, that the mob mentality they were feeding into was simply fueling the money machine that is Facebook.
As is the case with most media enterprises, any publicity is good publicity. Blogs and websites all over the Internet picked up on the frenzy that News Feed (and its sidekick mini feed) had created, and began reporting on it and adding their two cents to the debate. The extra attention that Facebook was garnering only added to the popularity of the site, as people who had never used the site in the past - whether uninterested or unaware - became intrigued or curious, causing a Facebook fever pitch. The increased awareness of the site brought more possibilities for the Mark Zuckerberg camp. With the demand for his product at an all time high, he opened the site to any and all users. This created an even larger outcry, as college students everywhere felt "betrayed" and no longer "elite." What many people were forgetting however, is that Facebook is a business. With more users, comes more money. Ad revenue and potential sale values have simply skyrocketed, and Facebook is as popular as ever.
I think that it's only natural for many users to feel an attachment to the site, as countless hours are spent surfing it. I feel it's important however for many members to realize that Facebook is a business first, and a service second. We ourselves pay no money to use the site (unless buying a 1.00 gift *coughripoffcough*), rightfully leaving us with limited-to-no say in its business operations. The number of users has increased exponentially since the introduction of the News Feed, so while some may have deleted their accounts in protest, their decision was pointless (and I'm willing to bet they re-activated within days).
Facebook is a conglomerate of almost every aspect of the internet. It provides a Search engine to navigate through a sea of resources and possibilities, it has its own e-mail feature (Messages), and the Groups and Wall entities allow for both asynchronous and synchronous discussions. The new Applications programs act somewhat as MUDs and metaworlds, sometimes adding visual effects, video, music, sounds and games to users' profiles.
Facebook is an internet giant and somewhat of an anomaly. It encompasses so many different areas of communication, it is an entity unto itself.
Comment 1
Comment 2
I am willing to admit that I am a Facebook addict; not only do I find it entertaining, but who doesn't love getting a new wall post or friend request from that good looking girl you just met on Saturday night? As a fan of the infamous social networking site, I find it alarming that some people feel such a substantial sense of attachment and ownership towards it. Anytime a change is made or a new feature added, thousands and thousands of users are uproarious in protest. The first example that comes to mind is the News Feed. When Facebook first introduced it I was actually a fan. I didn't mind allowing my friends to see the things I had done to my profile, because I figured that was the point of Facebook; to keep your friends and family updated on your life. Not 12 hours had passed since the addition however, when seemingly hundreds of groups formed boycotting the new feature, with users threatening to delete their accounts if things weren't restored to how they "used to be." Little did these people know however, that the mob mentality they were feeding into was simply fueling the money machine that is Facebook.
As is the case with most media enterprises, any publicity is good publicity. Blogs and websites all over the Internet picked up on the frenzy that News Feed (and its sidekick mini feed) had created, and began reporting on it and adding their two cents to the debate. The extra attention that Facebook was garnering only added to the popularity of the site, as people who had never used the site in the past - whether uninterested or unaware - became intrigued or curious, causing a Facebook fever pitch. The increased awareness of the site brought more possibilities for the Mark Zuckerberg camp. With the demand for his product at an all time high, he opened the site to any and all users. This created an even larger outcry, as college students everywhere felt "betrayed" and no longer "elite." What many people were forgetting however, is that Facebook is a business. With more users, comes more money. Ad revenue and potential sale values have simply skyrocketed, and Facebook is as popular as ever.
I think that it's only natural for many users to feel an attachment to the site, as countless hours are spent surfing it. I feel it's important however for many members to realize that Facebook is a business first, and a service second. We ourselves pay no money to use the site (unless buying a 1.00 gift *coughripoffcough*), rightfully leaving us with limited-to-no say in its business operations. The number of users has increased exponentially since the introduction of the News Feed, so while some may have deleted their accounts in protest, their decision was pointless (and I'm willing to bet they re-activated within days).
Facebook is a conglomerate of almost every aspect of the internet. It provides a Search engine to navigate through a sea of resources and possibilities, it has its own e-mail feature (Messages), and the Groups and Wall entities allow for both asynchronous and synchronous discussions. The new Applications programs act somewhat as MUDs and metaworlds, sometimes adding visual effects, video, music, sounds and games to users' profiles.
Facebook is an internet giant and somewhat of an anomaly. It encompasses so many different areas of communication, it is an entity unto itself.
Comment 1
Comment 2
Internet's Endless Boundaries
When I was a young kid, if you had asked me about myself I would have told you that my name was Becky and that I had straight, long brown hair. Although I got away with telling strangers that my name was Becky, the fact that I had curly hair was not as easily deceiving. However, my parents did get used to strangers coming up and complimenting them on their very friendly daughter, Becky. Unfortunately, that only lasted a summer and then I decided to stick with my real name, Jillian. I grew up right outside Washington DC and am currently a sophomore at Cornell University studying communication and business.
Choosing my major wasn’t hard once I considered things I love: talking, people, animals and traveling. I travel a lot for community service as well as for pleasure and enjoy learning about different cultures and lifestyles. It might sound corny, but my major allows me to go wherever and do whatever which is how I like things to work. This is also why I am very intrigued and addicted to the Internet. The Internet allows me to travel beyond the walls I’m in and let me be whoever I want to be and do whatever I want to do, when I want to. As a result, I am extremely interested in how unrestrictive the Internet is. The chance to explore a person’s true interests and desires is unbeatable and I wonder whether it fosters feelings that would never have surfaced without the opportunity the Internet provides. Additionally, I am interested in the friendships and opportunities that would have never formed with out the Internet being at their fingertips.
All of these ideas lie in a very complex online space that involves asynchronous discussion forums, electronic mail, and synchronous chats. It is an environment that begins with a blog posted on an asynchronous discussion forum relating to some idea or opinion. It then develops into a response to the post or an email responding either in confirmation or rebuttal. It finally ends in an synchronous chat where a friendship has been made and one-on-one contact is being conducted between these new peers. The opportunities are endless as the web connects people all over the globe who might have never had found each other otherwise. As a person, I am always longing to learn more about other people but I am severely limited by time, money and other obstacles that stand in my way. The Internet allows me to do more than I could have ever dreamed and I am excited to see how it grows to connect more and more people in ways unimaginable!
Choosing my major wasn’t hard once I considered things I love: talking, people, animals and traveling. I travel a lot for community service as well as for pleasure and enjoy learning about different cultures and lifestyles. It might sound corny, but my major allows me to go wherever and do whatever which is how I like things to work. This is also why I am very intrigued and addicted to the Internet. The Internet allows me to travel beyond the walls I’m in and let me be whoever I want to be and do whatever I want to do, when I want to. As a result, I am extremely interested in how unrestrictive the Internet is. The chance to explore a person’s true interests and desires is unbeatable and I wonder whether it fosters feelings that would never have surfaced without the opportunity the Internet provides. Additionally, I am interested in the friendships and opportunities that would have never formed with out the Internet being at their fingertips.
All of these ideas lie in a very complex online space that involves asynchronous discussion forums, electronic mail, and synchronous chats. It is an environment that begins with a blog posted on an asynchronous discussion forum relating to some idea or opinion. It then develops into a response to the post or an email responding either in confirmation or rebuttal. It finally ends in an synchronous chat where a friendship has been made and one-on-one contact is being conducted between these new peers. The opportunities are endless as the web connects people all over the globe who might have never had found each other otherwise. As a person, I am always longing to learn more about other people but I am severely limited by time, money and other obstacles that stand in my way. The Internet allows me to do more than I could have ever dreamed and I am excited to see how it grows to connect more and more people in ways unimaginable!
Botnets
Hello fellow COMM 245 bloggers, my name is Jeffrey Hertzberg and I’m from Chapel Hill, North Carolina. I’m currently a sophomore planning on becoming a computer science major. I’m an officer on the Rubik’s Cube club here at Cornell and also a brother of the Tau Kappa Epsilon fraternity. I enjoy web designing/developing/graphic designing/programming/as well as many other computer related activities. I look forward to my first semester at Cornell as a sophomore and reading everyone’s blogs here in COMM 245 RED.
I'm interested in the growth of botnets over the past few years and the targets chosen. The word botnet refers to a group of bots, which run autonomously and remotely. These bots, often referred to as "zombies" are usually under the control of individuals with malicious intent. They are compromised computers(possibly any one of you reading this blog) that have been infected by malicious code. They are commonly used in a variety of internet attacks and are often overlooked as a machine can be executing attacks without it's actual owner ever being aware. There are estimates that over 1/4 of all computers connected to the internet are zombies in a botnet somewhere. It somewhat perturbs me that my computer could be used as a part of a massive distributed denial of service attack while I remain completely unaware. I have read about several large attacks carried out against botnets, but am interested in seeing how they will be prevented in the future.
As far as online spaces go, I would have to describe botnets in their own category. I would best describe them as largescale internet crime. Information security is somewhat of a passion of mine, and I find it intriguing as to the type of people who create and mastermind these large botnets that exist around the internet. Creating a gargantuan following of zombie computers to control can hardly be an easy task and is most likely an interesting process. Hopefully the chance will arise to research this topic more throughout the semester and keep you fellow bloggers updated.
I'm interested in the growth of botnets over the past few years and the targets chosen. The word botnet refers to a group of bots, which run autonomously and remotely. These bots, often referred to as "zombies" are usually under the control of individuals with malicious intent. They are compromised computers(possibly any one of you reading this blog) that have been infected by malicious code. They are commonly used in a variety of internet attacks and are often overlooked as a machine can be executing attacks without it's actual owner ever being aware. There are estimates that over 1/4 of all computers connected to the internet are zombies in a botnet somewhere. It somewhat perturbs me that my computer could be used as a part of a massive distributed denial of service attack while I remain completely unaware. I have read about several large attacks carried out against botnets, but am interested in seeing how they will be prevented in the future.
As far as online spaces go, I would have to describe botnets in their own category. I would best describe them as largescale internet crime. Information security is somewhat of a passion of mine, and I find it intriguing as to the type of people who create and mastermind these large botnets that exist around the internet. Creating a gargantuan following of zombie computers to control can hardly be an easy task and is most likely an interesting process. Hopefully the chance will arise to research this topic more throughout the semester and keep you fellow bloggers updated.
Monday, August 27, 2007
Aren't we friends on Facebook?
Hey, I’m Marli Sussman and I’m a sophomore Communications major from Monroe-Woodbury, NY, home of the Woodbury Common Premium Outlets. Although my Myspace currently contains little more than an overused Jack Kerouac quote and a picture of Bob Saget, there actually is much more to me (and I’m sure all other such “users”) than can be appropriately depicted on a Myspace or Facebook account. Unfortunately, after limiting our personal descriptions to the blank boxes telling viewers everything from the profound “Who I’d Like to Meet” (Lance Bass) and “About Me” (iPhone enthusiast), social-networking websites end up being less telling than they are exceptionally contrived. And while I know that there is much more to a person than what, say, their Facebook “Interests” explain, time and time again I find myself searching for my soul mate by way of matching up our “Favorite Music” and “Quotes.” And while it should come as no surprise that I am not the only person at Cornell University to like Radiohead and Kurt Vonnegut, recognizing these simple similarities is, well, the beginning of the end. I am a Facebook stalker.
Though relatively new to the Internet, the phenomenon of Facebook, and particularly Facebook stalking has already begun to take its toll on college students across the country. Oftentimes, incoming college freshman begin their first day of classes well versed in the faces and interests of their wide variety of Facebook-Friends acquired throughout the summer. While some may be brash enough to eventually utter the words “Aren’t we friends on Facebook?” many a time Facebook-Friends will remain just that (stalking ensues).
Of course, actually making friends with those we “meet” on Facebook bares little to no importance as this remarkable website equips us with all the tools necessary to adequately track the lives of others. From Wall-to-Wall to Mini-Feed, and down tagged-photo trails, the world of Facebook never fails to be educational—we can enhance our knowledge about those we know, and learn more about those we don’t. And beyond our new college friendships and relationships, Facebook has helped our generation to keep in touch with old friends in ways our parents never dreamed of. Through this short overview of the Facebook experience, one would think that it is a flawless website, enhancing not only users’ Internet experience, but life in general. Unfortunately, things are not so simple when it comes to the ways of the Internet.
As with similar “online spaces” such as MySpace and even dating services, Facebook allows users to collect a wide range of information about a person with little to no effort, ultimately leaving our social skills to pay the price. Additionally, Facebook profiles are often contrived depictions of a person, sometimes allowing people to perpetuate false identities. With a continuous, growing reliance on such websites to meet and keep in touch with others, what is this world coming to?
This is a question I clearly cannot answer at the moment. So for now, I will just Facebook stalk the rest of the people on this blog, and try to figure out how I’m making the 45- minute trek to class. See you tomorrow.
Though relatively new to the Internet, the phenomenon of Facebook, and particularly Facebook stalking has already begun to take its toll on college students across the country. Oftentimes, incoming college freshman begin their first day of classes well versed in the faces and interests of their wide variety of Facebook-Friends acquired throughout the summer. While some may be brash enough to eventually utter the words “Aren’t we friends on Facebook?” many a time Facebook-Friends will remain just that (stalking ensues).
Of course, actually making friends with those we “meet” on Facebook bares little to no importance as this remarkable website equips us with all the tools necessary to adequately track the lives of others. From Wall-to-Wall to Mini-Feed, and down tagged-photo trails, the world of Facebook never fails to be educational—we can enhance our knowledge about those we know, and learn more about those we don’t. And beyond our new college friendships and relationships, Facebook has helped our generation to keep in touch with old friends in ways our parents never dreamed of. Through this short overview of the Facebook experience, one would think that it is a flawless website, enhancing not only users’ Internet experience, but life in general. Unfortunately, things are not so simple when it comes to the ways of the Internet.
As with similar “online spaces” such as MySpace and even dating services, Facebook allows users to collect a wide range of information about a person with little to no effort, ultimately leaving our social skills to pay the price. Additionally, Facebook profiles are often contrived depictions of a person, sometimes allowing people to perpetuate false identities. With a continuous, growing reliance on such websites to meet and keep in touch with others, what is this world coming to?
This is a question I clearly cannot answer at the moment. So for now, I will just Facebook stalk the rest of the people on this blog, and try to figure out how I’m making the 45- minute trek to class. See you tomorrow.
Leeroy Jenkins and Other Internet Memes
Hello blogosphere, my name is Gregory Stephens and I am a junior majoring in Applied Economics and Management at Cornell. I transferred to Cornell this year from Johns Hopkins University, where I was studying Electrical Engineering. I made the switch to business once I realized that I either wanted to go into finance or run a small business, like my dad. Unfortunately, JHU did not offer a major in business, so coming to Cornell seemed like the perfect choice, and so far I really enjoy it here.
As you may or may not know, Leroy Jenkins is a famous Internet pseudo-celebrity from the online role-playing game World of Warcraft. One day, he was questing with a group of players in-game when he “charged into a high-level dungeon with a distinctive cry of ‘Leeeeeeeerooooy... Jeeenkins!’, ruining the meticulous attack plans of his group and getting them all killed" (from the Leeroy Jenkins Wikipedia article). A video of the incident popped up on sites like Youtube [link to video] and, due to the stupidity and hilarity of the event, Leeroy’s popularity skyrocketed. The video has now been viewed over 2.1 million times and has since been remixed and put up again on dozens of video sites. Leeroy Jenkins was later featured in comic strips and TV promotions, mentioned in an episode of South Park, featured on Howard Stern’s radio show, referenced in hundreds, if not thousands, of forum threads and blogs, and even used in a Jeopardy question, all because of a single, 3-minute-long incident in which an absent-minded player returned to his computer and haphazardly ran into a dungeon before he was supposed to.
Why do these kinds of isolated events become so popular on the Internet? Leeroy Jenkins certainly isn’t the only Internet meme to have captured the imagination of millions of web surfers. Many of us remember the Star Wars Kid and have heard many a Chuck Norris “fact.” You may have even experienced the charm of the Dramatic Chipmunk meme or the laughed at the mischievous LOLcats. Many of us have probably heard the infamous phrase “All your base are belong to us,” a simple translation error found in a Japanese game titled Zero Wing that has since been repeated over a million times on numerous internet forums and blogs. But why do so many people obsess over these seemingly random and oftentimes silly or mindless events that happened to have been caught on camera and uploaded to the web? Perhaps we often get caught up in the excitement of being “in” on a joke or experience that is shared by millions of people – an experience that was never really possible before the advent of the Internet and social computing. Maybe we are still getting used to this relatively new channel of information sharing that we are still amazed by the ability to connect with people hundreds and thousands of miles away and share such unique experiences with one another. Maybe we simply enjoy laughing at the mistakes and embarassments of others because it makes us feel better about ourselves. Or perhaps it is that we are developing shorter and shorter attention spans as a result of the fast-paced, on-demand world of the Internet and we simply use these memes as disposable bits of random entertainment for our own insatiable pleasure. Who knows?
This phenomenon takes place in a combination of Wallace’s Internet Environments. It exists in asynchronous discussion forums and synchronous chats, where users often reference various memes and spread them to other people. It also takes place in MUDs and metaworlds, where users share the stories behind the memes or reference them in casual conversation with others. I will also come up with a new online space this takes place in – the videosphere, where memes are often spread through video sites or remixed into variations of the original meme.
A question remains: will the popularity of these memes eventually cause us to live our lives more cautiously in order to prevent becoming the next famous Internet meme?
As you may or may not know, Leroy Jenkins is a famous Internet pseudo-celebrity from the online role-playing game World of Warcraft. One day, he was questing with a group of players in-game when he “charged into a high-level dungeon with a distinctive cry of ‘Leeeeeeeerooooy... Jeeenkins!’, ruining the meticulous attack plans of his group and getting them all killed" (from the Leeroy Jenkins Wikipedia article). A video of the incident popped up on sites like Youtube [link to video] and, due to the stupidity and hilarity of the event, Leeroy’s popularity skyrocketed. The video has now been viewed over 2.1 million times and has since been remixed and put up again on dozens of video sites. Leeroy Jenkins was later featured in comic strips and TV promotions, mentioned in an episode of South Park, featured on Howard Stern’s radio show, referenced in hundreds, if not thousands, of forum threads and blogs, and even used in a Jeopardy question, all because of a single, 3-minute-long incident in which an absent-minded player returned to his computer and haphazardly ran into a dungeon before he was supposed to.
Why do these kinds of isolated events become so popular on the Internet? Leeroy Jenkins certainly isn’t the only Internet meme to have captured the imagination of millions of web surfers. Many of us remember the Star Wars Kid and have heard many a Chuck Norris “fact.” You may have even experienced the charm of the Dramatic Chipmunk meme or the laughed at the mischievous LOLcats. Many of us have probably heard the infamous phrase “All your base are belong to us,” a simple translation error found in a Japanese game titled Zero Wing that has since been repeated over a million times on numerous internet forums and blogs. But why do so many people obsess over these seemingly random and oftentimes silly or mindless events that happened to have been caught on camera and uploaded to the web? Perhaps we often get caught up in the excitement of being “in” on a joke or experience that is shared by millions of people – an experience that was never really possible before the advent of the Internet and social computing. Maybe we are still getting used to this relatively new channel of information sharing that we are still amazed by the ability to connect with people hundreds and thousands of miles away and share such unique experiences with one another. Maybe we simply enjoy laughing at the mistakes and embarassments of others because it makes us feel better about ourselves. Or perhaps it is that we are developing shorter and shorter attention spans as a result of the fast-paced, on-demand world of the Internet and we simply use these memes as disposable bits of random entertainment for our own insatiable pleasure. Who knows?
This phenomenon takes place in a combination of Wallace’s Internet Environments. It exists in asynchronous discussion forums and synchronous chats, where users often reference various memes and spread them to other people. It also takes place in MUDs and metaworlds, where users share the stories behind the memes or reference them in casual conversation with others. I will also come up with a new online space this takes place in – the videosphere, where memes are often spread through video sites or remixed into variations of the original meme.
A question remains: will the popularity of these memes eventually cause us to live our lives more cautiously in order to prevent becoming the next famous Internet meme?
When it comes to Facebook, you’re probably an A.S.S.
Hi, my name is Samantha. I’m a sophomore Animal Science major from
Oh Facebook, you might be the best/worst thing that has happened to the online world. This Internet phenomenon has taken the college world and beyond to a new level of communication. I would classify Facebook’s online space as a “social network” that integrates email (messaging), discussion boards (groups), and the homepage (self-descriptions, contact info, personal info, etc.), linking people across the globe. It’s really quite exciting but it’s also a little creepy…
I have to admit that I am an A.S.S. when it comes to Facebook. Now when I say A.S.S., I am referring to a(n) addict, stalker, or stranger, and I’m pretty sure that you might be one too. Whether you check your Facebook ferociously every few hours, or look into those News Feed updates to see what your friends are up to, or befriend someone you’ve only met for a brief time (but just long enough to exchange names to find each other on Facebook).
I mean, we all love that we can keep in touch with our friends without having to worry about new mailing addresses or new phone numbers; you can stay in contact with friends and family across the country by the click of a mouse. But some of the relatively new features on Facebook are slightly concerning. Now, every time you update your profile (by adding pictures, changing personal info, etc.) all of your “friends” are notified through News Feed. And I say “friends” because, how well do you really know the people on your friend list? I know that you might have been going to school together for years with some of them, and you maybe even grew up together, but most are probably acquaintances that you know little about.
Now I’m not totally against Facebook. I just think that because it’s a relatively new program, there’s still room for improvement and changes to accommodate for the needs of users (as seen with the new applications and expanding privacy settings). We still have a ways to go and with technology advancing, who knows maybe Facebook will be outdated by some new program in a few years…we’ll just have to wait and see…But until then I guess we can just keep being A.S.S.’s on Facebook.
Texting
Hi, my name is Paul Justin Mancuso but I prefer to go by P.J. I am a sophomore at the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences majoring in Communications. This is my first semester at Cornell after transferring from Marymount-Manhattan College in New York City. I have lived in the city my entire life, and I am still getting used to the very different lifestyle up here in Ithaca. I have also played basketball my entire life, and I am currently deciding whether I should walk on to the men’s varsity team.
Anyway, over the past few months I have noticed an exceeding number of individuals who appear to be consumed and obsessed with the texting features on their cell phones and blackberrys. Though sending an occasional text message that relays fact, such as “I’ll be 10 minutes late,” is definitely a healthy function of text messaging, all too often, individuals, like myself, engage in day-long text conversations. While it is convenient to converse in hour-long conversations through text messages alone, obsessive text messaging definitely has negative repercussions. It is arguable that text message, immediate-response-conversations, which Wallace would categorize as a quasi-synchronous form of communication, negatively affect face-to-face social interaction. Obsessive text messaging, for example, can potentially offend individuals who are not texting, but are in the presence of an obsessive texter; and, text messaging may also instill the false notion that it can substitute for speaking to someone in person, or over the phone. Also, constant text messaging may lead to multi-tasking, which may not be as productive as talking to one person at a time, or doing one anything at one time.
Interestingly, however, I find that the more I text, the more I feel the need to text. Though people who text know that it is rude to do it in the presence of others, and that it is perhaps the least involved form of communication, individuals still engage in long text message conversations. Trying to remember what it was like before text messaging came about, I wonder if we were all better off without it. It seems that aside from its efficient way of relaying facts and short messages to one another, which is undoubtedly helpful, text messaging has negatively affected us, as it is has lowered our standard of communication to short, nonverbal messages.
Anyway, over the past few months I have noticed an exceeding number of individuals who appear to be consumed and obsessed with the texting features on their cell phones and blackberrys. Though sending an occasional text message that relays fact, such as “I’ll be 10 minutes late,” is definitely a healthy function of text messaging, all too often, individuals, like myself, engage in day-long text conversations. While it is convenient to converse in hour-long conversations through text messages alone, obsessive text messaging definitely has negative repercussions. It is arguable that text message, immediate-response-conversations, which Wallace would categorize as a quasi-synchronous form of communication, negatively affect face-to-face social interaction. Obsessive text messaging, for example, can potentially offend individuals who are not texting, but are in the presence of an obsessive texter; and, text messaging may also instill the false notion that it can substitute for speaking to someone in person, or over the phone. Also, constant text messaging may lead to multi-tasking, which may not be as productive as talking to one person at a time, or doing one anything at one time.
Interestingly, however, I find that the more I text, the more I feel the need to text. Though people who text know that it is rude to do it in the presence of others, and that it is perhaps the least involved form of communication, individuals still engage in long text message conversations. Trying to remember what it was like before text messaging came about, I wonder if we were all better off without it. It seems that aside from its efficient way of relaying facts and short messages to one another, which is undoubtedly helpful, text messaging has negatively affected us, as it is has lowered our standard of communication to short, nonverbal messages.
Text Messaging
Hey guys! My name is Megan Frink and I’m a junior psychology major in Arts & Sciences. I love Cornell and couldn’t imagine myself anywhere else! My brother is joining me here this year as a freshman, but I probably won’t be seeing him too often as he is an engineer and I try to avoid the Engineering Quad as much as possible. I’m in Kappa Delta where I am living this fall. This semester I’ll be a second year Psych 101 TA. I’ll also be working again as a research assistant in the Social Psych Research Lab in Uris, where I will usually be most of this semester.
In between running participants in the psych studies over in Uris, I know that I always find myself texting friends. Though I could technically make a few calls and actually talk on the phone, I never do. I’m always texting. When I stopped to think about it, texting is just so much more efficient. I’m usually running around the lab finishing up with one set of participants and preparing for the next group to come in. If I chose to make a phone call it’s practically impossible to organize papers and write down lab notes while juggling the phone to my ear and carrying on a conversation. Texting allows me the great ability of multi-tasking. I can accomplish so many things while just stopping for the brief moment to read and respond to a quick text. Also, if other research assistants are running their studies and I’m standing in the same room making copies, I don’t feel as obnoxious if I am just texting as opposed to gabbing away. I’ve found that another great wonder of texting is that when I’m out of service (as I often seem to be in Uris), that the odds are way greater that a text will come through as opposed to a call. It is much harder to keep a phone call going when your service bars keep jumping. A text might take an extra minute or two, but I always seem to receive it.
I think that texting is both a form of synchronous and asynchronous discussion forums. I know that sometimes I’ll have texting conversations with my friends when we respond to texts back and forth as instantaneously as possible, almost like IMs. While at other times I might send a text and not receive an answer for a couple of hours. Regardless, I feel that texting is definitely more efficient. It cuts through all the small talk and gets right to the point, which is important when you’re in your research lab and probably shouldn’t be on your phone at all.
In between running participants in the psych studies over in Uris, I know that I always find myself texting friends. Though I could technically make a few calls and actually talk on the phone, I never do. I’m always texting. When I stopped to think about it, texting is just so much more efficient. I’m usually running around the lab finishing up with one set of participants and preparing for the next group to come in. If I chose to make a phone call it’s practically impossible to organize papers and write down lab notes while juggling the phone to my ear and carrying on a conversation. Texting allows me the great ability of multi-tasking. I can accomplish so many things while just stopping for the brief moment to read and respond to a quick text. Also, if other research assistants are running their studies and I’m standing in the same room making copies, I don’t feel as obnoxious if I am just texting as opposed to gabbing away. I’ve found that another great wonder of texting is that when I’m out of service (as I often seem to be in Uris), that the odds are way greater that a text will come through as opposed to a call. It is much harder to keep a phone call going when your service bars keep jumping. A text might take an extra minute or two, but I always seem to receive it.
I think that texting is both a form of synchronous and asynchronous discussion forums. I know that sometimes I’ll have texting conversations with my friends when we respond to texts back and forth as instantaneously as possible, almost like IMs. While at other times I might send a text and not receive an answer for a couple of hours. Regardless, I feel that texting is definitely more efficient. It cuts through all the small talk and gets right to the point, which is important when you’re in your research lab and probably shouldn’t be on your phone at all.
Text Messaging: When a Phone Call Simply Won't Do
Hi, I'm Jenny Niesluchowski and I'm a sophomore communications major considering a business minor. I'm from Camarillo, California where I enjoyed 18 years of endless sunshine until I stumbled upon this cozy town of Ithaca. I have an identical twin, and in response to the typical "are you guys twins?" we love making up elaborate stories about how completely unrelated we are. I'm afraid some people are still under the impression that we are second cousins twice removed and we met here at Cornell where we happened to be assigned as roommates.
The question I'd like to propose is why text messaging has become so popular. I, for one, am ecstatic with Verizon's free Verizon to Verizon texting, but why do people need unlimited text messages? Why is it sometimes more convenient to type out a conversation when you can simply dial the number and have a direct conversation? Well I believe one answer can be spelled out in two words: awkward silence. Think back to those high school days when you and a crush were just starting to get acquainted. The one way to avoid the dreaded silence was to have a conversation through text message. This way, the casual "Hey what are you doing this weekend?" can sound as cool and collected as you hoped it could be.
And who can argue with the ease and secrecy of text messaging your way through that boring lecture series? I can attest that it has kept me alert and staring somewhat in the direction of my blank notebook for what has seemed like hundreds of powerpoint slides. Thank you Verizon.
But most importantly, what is it that makes us meticulously( or for some people manically) type our words rather than speak them. I believe that text messaging, like instant messaging, allows for people to "think before they speak." By this I mean that text conversations are not instantaneous. It is easier to find a false sense of security within a cell phone as there is behind a computer screen. The more people are removed from face to face interaction, the more likely they are to create a false persona. This gap of time, however long the texter wishes to take to reply to a message, enables him or her to manipulate the words that would have otherwise come naturally in a face to face conversation.
The question I'd like to propose is why text messaging has become so popular. I, for one, am ecstatic with Verizon's free Verizon to Verizon texting, but why do people need unlimited text messages? Why is it sometimes more convenient to type out a conversation when you can simply dial the number and have a direct conversation? Well I believe one answer can be spelled out in two words: awkward silence. Think back to those high school days when you and a crush were just starting to get acquainted. The one way to avoid the dreaded silence was to have a conversation through text message. This way, the casual "Hey what are you doing this weekend?" can sound as cool and collected as you hoped it could be.
And who can argue with the ease and secrecy of text messaging your way through that boring lecture series? I can attest that it has kept me alert and staring somewhat in the direction of my blank notebook for what has seemed like hundreds of powerpoint slides. Thank you Verizon.
But most importantly, what is it that makes us meticulously( or for some people manically) type our words rather than speak them. I believe that text messaging, like instant messaging, allows for people to "think before they speak." By this I mean that text conversations are not instantaneous. It is easier to find a false sense of security within a cell phone as there is behind a computer screen. The more people are removed from face to face interaction, the more likely they are to create a false persona. This gap of time, however long the texter wishes to take to reply to a message, enables him or her to manipulate the words that would have otherwise come naturally in a face to face conversation.
Making the First Move
Hi, my name is Steve Spagnola and I’m a sophomore in the College of Arts and Sciences majoring in Economics and Information Science. In the few hours spent out of Uris Library, you can find me at my Fraternity brushing up on Web Design, blasting 80s music, and just having a good time with my friends.
The economist in me has always been interested in the psychology and game theory of initiating communication and friendship online. One of the most obvious examples is one-on-one communication on instant messenger: someone must initiate the conversation. Assuming each person has the others’ screen name and is aware the other friend is online, we have an interesting two-player, two-strategy game. At any given point in time before the chat is initiated, each person makes an active decision to initiate the chat or to ignore the other person. The chat begins when one of the two players chooses to initiate.
We can assume the initiator wants to chat with the other, but what about the receiver who chooses to ignore the other? Was the receiver about to initiate the chat while the initiator beat him or her to the punch? Does the receiver want to chat, but not enough to go through the effort of initiating the chat? Is the receiver busy doing something else and wants to chat at a different time? Or does the receiver dislike the initiator, and never wants to chat? As the chat continues, the initiator is able to gauge which of the four possibilities is true, and possibly reformulate his or her strategy in initiating the chat with this person in the future. In this sense the receiver may also alter his or her future strategies, as a good chat may sway the receiver to become the initiator the next time.
In the chatting example we assumed the initiator wants to chat, revealing this small fact to the receiver. However, Facebook frienders have different reasons and incentives to friend request people, clouding the information given from the initiator to the receiver. Facebook friending has many meanings depending on who makes the friend request. Does the initiator like the receiver, does the initiator want to become better friends with the receiver, or is the initiator one of the people who friend requests everyone? This perceived information from the initiator adds a twist to the game, where the initiator and receiver may hold conflicting interpretations of the motives behind the first move. While such complexities don’t have a large effect in reality, they are unavoidable psychological inferences arising from the game of making the first move.
The chatting example lies in the online space of a synchronous chat, while Facebook friending is a little more complicated and most closely resembles a MUD. Instead of slaying dragons with people via a text line, Facebook acts as a MUD through an asynchronous forum. It utilizes the same virtual interactions as MUDs do (like friending, poking, and wall posting) through a static, HTML medium rather than via synchronous text.
The economist in me has always been interested in the psychology and game theory of initiating communication and friendship online. One of the most obvious examples is one-on-one communication on instant messenger: someone must initiate the conversation. Assuming each person has the others’ screen name and is aware the other friend is online, we have an interesting two-player, two-strategy game. At any given point in time before the chat is initiated, each person makes an active decision to initiate the chat or to ignore the other person. The chat begins when one of the two players chooses to initiate.
We can assume the initiator wants to chat with the other, but what about the receiver who chooses to ignore the other? Was the receiver about to initiate the chat while the initiator beat him or her to the punch? Does the receiver want to chat, but not enough to go through the effort of initiating the chat? Is the receiver busy doing something else and wants to chat at a different time? Or does the receiver dislike the initiator, and never wants to chat? As the chat continues, the initiator is able to gauge which of the four possibilities is true, and possibly reformulate his or her strategy in initiating the chat with this person in the future. In this sense the receiver may also alter his or her future strategies, as a good chat may sway the receiver to become the initiator the next time.
In the chatting example we assumed the initiator wants to chat, revealing this small fact to the receiver. However, Facebook frienders have different reasons and incentives to friend request people, clouding the information given from the initiator to the receiver. Facebook friending has many meanings depending on who makes the friend request. Does the initiator like the receiver, does the initiator want to become better friends with the receiver, or is the initiator one of the people who friend requests everyone? This perceived information from the initiator adds a twist to the game, where the initiator and receiver may hold conflicting interpretations of the motives behind the first move. While such complexities don’t have a large effect in reality, they are unavoidable psychological inferences arising from the game of making the first move.
The chatting example lies in the online space of a synchronous chat, while Facebook friending is a little more complicated and most closely resembles a MUD. Instead of slaying dragons with people via a text line, Facebook acts as a MUD through an asynchronous forum. It utilizes the same virtual interactions as MUDs do (like friending, poking, and wall posting) through a static, HTML medium rather than via synchronous text.
Dude Looks Like A Lady
Hey everyone. My name is Spencer Dorcik, and I’m a junior Psych major from Cleveland. I originally considered a minor in Communications but ended up deciding against it. However, as a result, I’ve taken a decent amount of Comm courses and the idea of applying what I’ve already learned in my Psych classes to the field of communications (and especially the internet) was too good to pass up.
I’ve always been kind of intrigued by the issues of gender identity and equality, including the idea that gender is a socially constructed concept, not a biological one. The internet provides a unique environment for the playing out of gender roles because it is both anonymous and socially constructed, whether it’s an instant messenger conversation, a chat room, a blog, or an online game. Specifically of interest to me are the cases of males adopting female personae online.
My topic of interest exists in just about every online space that Wallace has a category for. However the two most important to this phenomenon, I feel, are the spaces of synchronous chats and what Wallace calls metaworlds, that are more common today in programs such as Second Life and online games such as World of Warcraft and Everquest. We’ve probably all heard the stereotypical story of a guy that meets a girl in a chat room but then the girl turns out to also be a guy. Most of our immediate reactions would be to laugh about the ridiculousness of the situation, but it can also be examined more closely. In a society that is (albeit slowly) working towards a more tolerant atmosphere surrounding homosexuality and transgendered individuals, why do such a large number of people still feel the need to hide behind the internet’s all-encompassing anonymity? Perhaps it is because our society still is not that accepting. Perhaps it is because an individual wants to play out some personal fantasy in the comfort of not being “discovered”. It seems, in some ways, a risky game to play, especially with how many sexual predators use the internet to find new potential victims, as specials like To Catch a Predator have shown us.
Bob already touched on the gender role-play found in MMORPGs below, but I’d like to further examine the motivations for this particular kind of identity alteration. The alternate gender role experience found in online games and social programs such as Second Life varies from that of the chat room in one key way. First, the gender identity in these programs is maintained through the use of visual avatars, characters that can appear masculine or feminine as one chooses. In a chat room, gender is only confirmed through what one says. However, the other side of that coin is that males playing female characters has become such a routine fact of life in online gaming that discovering a female character is actually a man at a computer somewhere is much less weird than the same experience in a chat room.
This issue has grabbed my attention and I look forward to hearing what the rest of you have to say about this.
I’ve always been kind of intrigued by the issues of gender identity and equality, including the idea that gender is a socially constructed concept, not a biological one. The internet provides a unique environment for the playing out of gender roles because it is both anonymous and socially constructed, whether it’s an instant messenger conversation, a chat room, a blog, or an online game. Specifically of interest to me are the cases of males adopting female personae online.
My topic of interest exists in just about every online space that Wallace has a category for. However the two most important to this phenomenon, I feel, are the spaces of synchronous chats and what Wallace calls metaworlds, that are more common today in programs such as Second Life and online games such as World of Warcraft and Everquest. We’ve probably all heard the stereotypical story of a guy that meets a girl in a chat room but then the girl turns out to also be a guy. Most of our immediate reactions would be to laugh about the ridiculousness of the situation, but it can also be examined more closely. In a society that is (albeit slowly) working towards a more tolerant atmosphere surrounding homosexuality and transgendered individuals, why do such a large number of people still feel the need to hide behind the internet’s all-encompassing anonymity? Perhaps it is because our society still is not that accepting. Perhaps it is because an individual wants to play out some personal fantasy in the comfort of not being “discovered”. It seems, in some ways, a risky game to play, especially with how many sexual predators use the internet to find new potential victims, as specials like To Catch a Predator have shown us.
Bob already touched on the gender role-play found in MMORPGs below, but I’d like to further examine the motivations for this particular kind of identity alteration. The alternate gender role experience found in online games and social programs such as Second Life varies from that of the chat room in one key way. First, the gender identity in these programs is maintained through the use of visual avatars, characters that can appear masculine or feminine as one chooses. In a chat room, gender is only confirmed through what one says. However, the other side of that coin is that males playing female characters has become such a routine fact of life in online gaming that discovering a female character is actually a man at a computer somewhere is much less weird than the same experience in a chat room.
This issue has grabbed my attention and I look forward to hearing what the rest of you have to say about this.
Personal Interactions on the Internet
What’s good ya’ll?
I’m Sam Levine. I’m a junior, history major in the
One internet phenomenon that really fascinates me is how the impersonal atmosphere of the internet sometimes breeds very personal interactions. Let me give you an example: A few years ago, my cousin, (a really shy but great, down-to-earth guy), was having a lot of trouble meeting girls, and in frustration, actually ended up turning to JDate.com—a now famous dating site for Jews. Two and a half years, and one wedding later, he is now happily married to his online crush. I still make fun of him about it, but in all seriousness, what really struck me about his experience was how much easier he said it was for him to meet women online. “What’s the worse that could’ve happened,” he told me today. “I couldn’t see her, there certainly weren’t nearly as many awkward moments, and hey—if there were, I could just type ‘brb!’”
Giving it some thought now, I think that this impersonal/personal internet ‘phenomenon’ probably resonates with a lot of people. It’s almost as if the impersonal, non-judgmental setting eliminates the social constraints that people are forced to accept in “real,” face-to-face interactions. You can talk about relationships, family, your likes and dislikes, or anything else that comes up in your mind, all on a whim. After all, what’s the worst that could happen? This person doesn’t know you, he or she doesn’t know your friends or family, and if it goes poorly, all you have to do is click out of the IM box: It’s as simple as that. I’m not suggesting that everyone is going to meet their significant other or best friend online. I just think it’s very compelling how such an impersonal setting, where the social cues and boundaries of face-to-face interactions don’t necessarily apply, can breed such personal interactions between people.
According to Wallace, this online space is referred to as a ‘synchronous chat,’ which is a type of asynchronous discussion forum.
Do I have a point here? Can interactions online lead very quickly to personal interactions, or is my cousin just one heck of a shy, lucky guy?
The Facebook Phenom
Hi all, my name is Amber Saylor and I'm a senior majoring in Development Sociology. Development Sociology is basically a branch of Sociology that tries to understand all the factors that go into a country's development, such as agriculture, health-care systems, trade etc. (whether it is a "developed" country like the US or a "developing" country like Bangladesh). I am from Neversink a verrrrry small town in Sullivan County, NY. I had dial up internet for way too long, and I have never posted a blog before.
I became really interested in how different forms of media could affect people as individuals and societies as a whole after taking a related freshman writing seminar (Cultural Studies) and also Mass Media and Society, where we briefly discussed the implications of websites like Youtube for the power relations between individual 'viewers' who could now become producers of media and the established media conglomerates of the US. When I read the description for this class I thought it would be fun to further explore these issues with a specific focus on the internet.
One aspect of social computing that intrigues me is Facebook (originally The Facebook). When I first arrived as a freshman at Cornell, Facebook was relatively new. The idea of posting your picture and all of your personal information for other people to see and judge seemed very strange and somewhat creepy to me. However, after eventually checking it out, I saw it as harmless fun since it was restricted to college students , and at that time only a few universities. Facebook turned out to be a good way of keeping in touch with people you happened to meet briefly or that you had classes with. I was surprised how useful Facebook could be. It helped me to keep in touch with friends from high-school and the photo album option was also an interesting new way to actually see what your friends have been up to rather than just hearing about it. I also occasionally used it to get the email addresses of classmates for homework when I'd missed class.
Its kind of amazing how quickly Facebook has evolved in the short time since its creation. Throughout my freshman year more and more schools were invited to join Facebook, and somewhere between sophomore and junior year, high-schools, bussinesses, and eventually anyone with an email address were allowed to join. I was slightly surprised at this rapid transformation from a somewhat "elite" network to a very open one. I also realized that even though I was initially skeptical of Facebook, I wasn't all that anxious about the site opening up to everyone.
Facebook also introduced some new concepts, such as the "poke" option, which has recently been extended to include "super poke" where you can hug, tickle etc. to your heart's content...what is happening here? In some ways Facebook helps people stay connected, but could it also encourage someone to give you a virtual hug when they know you are upset rather than a real one?
Facebook has also shaped our perceptions and understanding of friendship. A "friend" on Facebook is not always a friend in the traditional sense of the word. They could be someone you talked to at a party, and never spoke to again, or someone who went to the same high school and never talked to you while you were there.
Another strange development surrounding facebook is the tendency for employers to screen prospective employees by viewing their facebook accounts. I have heard and read advice not to post outrageous party pictures or any other incriminating evidence on the site just in case your potential employer is super sneaky. I also heard about some students getting in trouble after their RHD saw photos of underage drinking in the dorms in a Facebook album. I would never have guessed that this new social network would become policed by authority so quickly.
Facebook seems to have aspects of asynchronous interaction through posting within groups or on other people's walls, as well as updating your "status." As far as the groups go, they can sometimes be monstrous with members from around the world or very specific to a certain club at a certain school. Facebook also has what is basically an email function with the "Facebook message." Sometimes interactions are almost synchronous when people write back and forth on walls instantaneously. I can't leave out the convenient feature that sorts your friends based on those with "recently updated" profiles so that you don't have to trudge through your 1257 friends to find out whats new with everyone. Genius.
I became really interested in how different forms of media could affect people as individuals and societies as a whole after taking a related freshman writing seminar (Cultural Studies) and also Mass Media and Society, where we briefly discussed the implications of websites like Youtube for the power relations between individual 'viewers' who could now become producers of media and the established media conglomerates of the US. When I read the description for this class I thought it would be fun to further explore these issues with a specific focus on the internet.
One aspect of social computing that intrigues me is Facebook (originally The Facebook). When I first arrived as a freshman at Cornell, Facebook was relatively new. The idea of posting your picture and all of your personal information for other people to see and judge seemed very strange and somewhat creepy to me. However, after eventually checking it out, I saw it as harmless fun since it was restricted to college students , and at that time only a few universities. Facebook turned out to be a good way of keeping in touch with people you happened to meet briefly or that you had classes with. I was surprised how useful Facebook could be. It helped me to keep in touch with friends from high-school and the photo album option was also an interesting new way to actually see what your friends have been up to rather than just hearing about it. I also occasionally used it to get the email addresses of classmates for homework when I'd missed class.
Its kind of amazing how quickly Facebook has evolved in the short time since its creation. Throughout my freshman year more and more schools were invited to join Facebook, and somewhere between sophomore and junior year, high-schools, bussinesses, and eventually anyone with an email address were allowed to join. I was slightly surprised at this rapid transformation from a somewhat "elite" network to a very open one. I also realized that even though I was initially skeptical of Facebook, I wasn't all that anxious about the site opening up to everyone.
Facebook also introduced some new concepts, such as the "poke" option, which has recently been extended to include "super poke" where you can hug, tickle etc. to your heart's content...what is happening here? In some ways Facebook helps people stay connected, but could it also encourage someone to give you a virtual hug when they know you are upset rather than a real one?
Facebook has also shaped our perceptions and understanding of friendship. A "friend" on Facebook is not always a friend in the traditional sense of the word. They could be someone you talked to at a party, and never spoke to again, or someone who went to the same high school and never talked to you while you were there.
Another strange development surrounding facebook is the tendency for employers to screen prospective employees by viewing their facebook accounts. I have heard and read advice not to post outrageous party pictures or any other incriminating evidence on the site just in case your potential employer is super sneaky. I also heard about some students getting in trouble after their RHD saw photos of underage drinking in the dorms in a Facebook album. I would never have guessed that this new social network would become policed by authority so quickly.
Facebook seems to have aspects of asynchronous interaction through posting within groups or on other people's walls, as well as updating your "status." As far as the groups go, they can sometimes be monstrous with members from around the world or very specific to a certain club at a certain school. Facebook also has what is basically an email function with the "Facebook message." Sometimes interactions are almost synchronous when people write back and forth on walls instantaneously. I can't leave out the convenient feature that sorts your friends based on those with "recently updated" profiles so that you don't have to trudge through your 1257 friends to find out whats new with everyone. Genius.
CMC in Education
My name is Dan and I am the web director for the Language Resource Center here at Cornell. I'm taking this course because I am fascinated by how much the online universe has changed since I started working at Cornell, not to mention how drastically different the internet is now compared to when I first started getting involved. My introduction to the online world began in the early nineties where I became completely addicted to the world of MUDding. I stayed up until all hours in an entirely new reality, one in which I had the power to create new worlds as a "wizard." Of course it was all text-based, accessed via telnet on my little 2600 baud modem. Things have evolved enormously since then and I can't help but feel that we are all very lucky to be witnessing the creation and evolution of the Internet.
I've spent the last seven years developing online language learning tools for teachers to use in their courses. I am interested in Computer Mediated Communication within the context of a learning environment. What sort of user interface issues are more or less conducive to learning? What limitations are there in educational CMC which can only be supplemented in a classroom? Will the classroom ever become obsolete? What features of CMC are particularly helpful in learning a foreign language?
Of the various tools which language teachers have adopted here at Cornell, I'm very interested in the explosion of a system which we at the Language Center call Web Audio Lab (WAL.) The system consists of a client CD which a student uses to listen to a variety of language-related audio. They are then asked to respond to the material orally, using the microphone on their computer. The system submits their recordings to a server at the Language Resource Center, and teachers can access the audio submissions and respond accordingly by means of a web-based interface. It has grown to become extremely popular among language teachers
WAL is clearly asynchronous. The student and teacher are communicating, but never with immediate feedback. I suppose it crosses between "asynchronous discussion" and "interactive video and voice" in terms of how Wallace classifies online space. The fact that the system allows a user to communicate in their own time and physical space, and that a teacher is given a web environment for feedback to the student gives us an entirely new mode of teaching and learning.
I've spent the last seven years developing online language learning tools for teachers to use in their courses. I am interested in Computer Mediated Communication within the context of a learning environment. What sort of user interface issues are more or less conducive to learning? What limitations are there in educational CMC which can only be supplemented in a classroom? Will the classroom ever become obsolete? What features of CMC are particularly helpful in learning a foreign language?
Of the various tools which language teachers have adopted here at Cornell, I'm very interested in the explosion of a system which we at the Language Center call Web Audio Lab (WAL.) The system consists of a client CD which a student uses to listen to a variety of language-related audio. They are then asked to respond to the material orally, using the microphone on their computer. The system submits their recordings to a server at the Language Resource Center, and teachers can access the audio submissions and respond accordingly by means of a web-based interface. It has grown to become extremely popular among language teachers
WAL is clearly asynchronous. The student and teacher are communicating, but never with immediate feedback. I suppose it crosses between "asynchronous discussion" and "interactive video and voice" in terms of how Wallace classifies online space. The fact that the system allows a user to communicate in their own time and physical space, and that a teacher is given a web environment for feedback to the student gives us an entirely new mode of teaching and learning.
Hello! My name is...
Hi! My name is Anneliese Schrotenboer and I am a senior majoring in Communication here at Cornell. I’ve decided to do a double concentration in Media Studies and Social Influence, because they both seemed so interesting, and I couldn’t really just pick one. Although I am a senior, this will only be my second year at Cornell. Last year I transferred from the warm and sunny Florida State University and even after a year here I’m not so sure I’m ready for another Ithaca winter. I just finished a great summer internship working for an in-house marketing department with a design and engineering firm in Florida. The experience has sharpened my interest in my field of study and has gotten me exited for what lies ahead after graduation.
I’ve always been extremely skeptical of online chatting, in fact despite years of pestering by my friends to get AIM I’ve only used the software twice…and even one of instances those was for a class related assignment. I do not understand why anyone would want to type up a whole conversation, when they can just talk. In addition, there is a complete loss of the human element when we converse though a computer mediated form. It is odd that people actually think that a colon and closed parentheses can even come close to replacing a human smile. Perhaps though am just too nostalgic about the value I put on an old fashioned face to face conversation. Also, the way people seem to trust so much on the internet is really scary, considering first time “chatters” know nothing about each other except for what is chosen to be told. In the additional article we had to read about Impression Formation in CMC the authors talk discuss that principal, which is called selective self presentation. Individuals can choose to portray likable and positive cues, and leave behind anything that may be less desirable.
Online chatting, which is my area of particular curiosity, takes place mainly in the synchronous environment on the Internet described by Wallace. However, online chatting can also take place in the asynchronous environment, because the dialogue between chatters does not necessarily have to be instantaneous; it could take place over time in the form of a discussion forum. I do not believe that another environment has to evolve to guarantee the longevity of online chatting, but that doesn’t mean that another environment won’t develop.
I’ve always been extremely skeptical of online chatting, in fact despite years of pestering by my friends to get AIM I’ve only used the software twice…and even one of instances those was for a class related assignment. I do not understand why anyone would want to type up a whole conversation, when they can just talk. In addition, there is a complete loss of the human element when we converse though a computer mediated form. It is odd that people actually think that a colon and closed parentheses can even come close to replacing a human smile. Perhaps though am just too nostalgic about the value I put on an old fashioned face to face conversation. Also, the way people seem to trust so much on the internet is really scary, considering first time “chatters” know nothing about each other except for what is chosen to be told. In the additional article we had to read about Impression Formation in CMC the authors talk discuss that principal, which is called selective self presentation. Individuals can choose to portray likable and positive cues, and leave behind anything that may be less desirable.
Online chatting, which is my area of particular curiosity, takes place mainly in the synchronous environment on the Internet described by Wallace. However, online chatting can also take place in the asynchronous environment, because the dialogue between chatters does not necessarily have to be instantaneous; it could take place over time in the form of a discussion forum. I do not believe that another environment has to evolve to guarantee the longevity of online chatting, but that doesn’t mean that another environment won’t develop.
Everyone's a Producer
Hey, I’m Dan Goldstein. I’m a Sophomore Communication major, minoring in AEM. I’m from Merrick, NY, on Long Island. I love watching Friends, Seinfeld, and Fresh Prince. The only current TV shows I watch are Entourage and Flight of the Conchords. I’ll watch any sport, but I really only follow basketball. March Madness is my favorite time of year. Kind of off topic, but anyone who hasn’t seen Superbad needs to go see it. Pronto.
One thing that interests me about the Internet is how easy it is to share your own media content. Through websites like YouTube, PureVolume, Freewebs, and blogs like the one we’re currently using, anyone can create and publish media content, whether it’s music, movies, podcasts, writing, art, websites, or anything else. Even Wikipedia lets us create content in the form of history, news, and other information.
While large corporations that own publishing companies, film studios, and other media sources still produce what we might consider the best quality media, or make the most money, or be the most widely known, the fact that any single person could potentially be a creator of media content shows how far the Internet has brought our society. It used to be that these companies were the only option. Now, the common people have a louder voice.
While these opportunities aren’t news to anyone, I still find them worth talking about and exploring. I would love to learn more about the history and development of this Internet trend of large scale self-production, and I would be very interested to watch how it transforms and how it affects society as it continues to grow.
Right now, sites like YouTube and PureVolume are basically just a platform for people to share completed material. It’ll be interesting if these sights, or new sights that develop, start providing tools to create the content as part of the experience.
There are many directions this trend of widespread media production can go. Advancements will probably be made that we cannot even imagine now. That is one of the beautiful things about the Internet: the possibilities are endless. There were points in time where there was no electricity, computers, or Internet. Now, we are at a point in time where there is no ___. What will fill in that blank is yet to be seen, but when it comes, we won’t be able to remember what it was like when we didn’t have it.
One thing that interests me about the Internet is how easy it is to share your own media content. Through websites like YouTube, PureVolume, Freewebs, and blogs like the one we’re currently using, anyone can create and publish media content, whether it’s music, movies, podcasts, writing, art, websites, or anything else. Even Wikipedia lets us create content in the form of history, news, and other information.
While large corporations that own publishing companies, film studios, and other media sources still produce what we might consider the best quality media, or make the most money, or be the most widely known, the fact that any single person could potentially be a creator of media content shows how far the Internet has brought our society. It used to be that these companies were the only option. Now, the common people have a louder voice.
While these opportunities aren’t news to anyone, I still find them worth talking about and exploring. I would love to learn more about the history and development of this Internet trend of large scale self-production, and I would be very interested to watch how it transforms and how it affects society as it continues to grow.
Right now, sites like YouTube and PureVolume are basically just a platform for people to share completed material. It’ll be interesting if these sights, or new sights that develop, start providing tools to create the content as part of the experience.
There are many directions this trend of widespread media production can go. Advancements will probably be made that we cannot even imagine now. That is one of the beautiful things about the Internet: the possibilities are endless. There were points in time where there was no electricity, computers, or Internet. Now, we are at a point in time where there is no ___. What will fill in that blank is yet to be seen, but when it comes, we won’t be able to remember what it was like when we didn’t have it.
You can't spell virus without us.
Hello! My name is Eden Mayle and I’m a junior communications major. I was originally an animal science major until I quickly realized I like to play with animals rather than study them. I’m from a suburb outside of Houston, Texas, and yes, believe what you’ve heard - everything is bigger. In my spare time I’m in a sketch comedy group (the Skits-o-phrenics, come laugh with us!), and follow all things pop culture, except music, which I’m generally pretty pretentious about. My constant submersion in television, movies, Perez Hilton, and other things that rot my brain has recently gotten me interested in the Internet-utilizing advertising technique known as viral marketing.
Viral marketing began to infect my life when I saw a movie trailer before Transformers this summer. The trailer was a great teaser to a new monster movie, but ended abruptly, revealing only the release date, 1-18-08, and producer J.J. Abrams (known for scary smoke monsters on Lost and scary haircuts on Felicity). No title, no actors, not even a catchy monster name like Godzilla. I was hooked.
When I got home, the nerd in me took over. Well, let’s be honest, I was seeing Transformers, so the nerd was pretty much already in control. I googled the movie on the few details that I knew, and apparently I wasn’t the only one interested in Abrams’ new project. There were a ton of websites about the film – blogs on monster theories, youtube videos of people spying on the film set, discussion boards on possible plots, anything and everything you could ever want to know about this 90-second trailer. I stumbled upon one website with a posted video that deconstructed the trailer essentially frame-by-frame, even going so far as to attempt to determine the party’s exact location within New York City. As I was watching, I couldn’t help but think, Why was this made? What possessed this person to put in this much effort? And inevitably, Why am I watching this?
This is viral marketing. Products relying on its audience to voluntarily spread its message through accessible networks, and what better network than the Internet? This movie has generated more buzz without any conventional advertising than most films ever dream to. I suppose what viral marketing makes me wonder most is, Is this the new marketing frontier? What makes this work? Would this kind of campaign have been as successful if J.J. Abrams hadn’t been attached? And finally, am I (Eden Mayle, a free, young, independent thinker) just a pawn to the advertisers of this film? After all, I just spent a long time spreading the word on a blog about some movie that’s depending on me spreading the word.
Viral marketing depends on an infiltration of almost all of Wallace’s Internet environments, including asynchronous discussion forums, e-Mail, synchronous chats, and interactive videos. It’s worked pretty well for this movie, but can it for others?
Viral marketing began to infect my life when I saw a movie trailer before Transformers this summer. The trailer was a great teaser to a new monster movie, but ended abruptly, revealing only the release date, 1-18-08, and producer J.J. Abrams (known for scary smoke monsters on Lost and scary haircuts on Felicity). No title, no actors, not even a catchy monster name like Godzilla. I was hooked.
When I got home, the nerd in me took over. Well, let’s be honest, I was seeing Transformers, so the nerd was pretty much already in control. I googled the movie on the few details that I knew, and apparently I wasn’t the only one interested in Abrams’ new project. There were a ton of websites about the film – blogs on monster theories, youtube videos of people spying on the film set, discussion boards on possible plots, anything and everything you could ever want to know about this 90-second trailer. I stumbled upon one website with a posted video that deconstructed the trailer essentially frame-by-frame, even going so far as to attempt to determine the party’s exact location within New York City. As I was watching, I couldn’t help but think, Why was this made? What possessed this person to put in this much effort? And inevitably, Why am I watching this?
This is viral marketing. Products relying on its audience to voluntarily spread its message through accessible networks, and what better network than the Internet? This movie has generated more buzz without any conventional advertising than most films ever dream to. I suppose what viral marketing makes me wonder most is, Is this the new marketing frontier? What makes this work? Would this kind of campaign have been as successful if J.J. Abrams hadn’t been attached? And finally, am I (Eden Mayle, a free, young, independent thinker) just a pawn to the advertisers of this film? After all, I just spent a long time spreading the word on a blog about some movie that’s depending on me spreading the word.
Viral marketing depends on an infiltration of almost all of Wallace’s Internet environments, including asynchronous discussion forums, e-Mail, synchronous chats, and interactive videos. It’s worked pretty well for this movie, but can it for others?
I blog, therefore I am. (whatever I pretend to be)
Hello Internet journalists and readers. My name is Zeyu Zhu and I am currently a junior majoring in Electrical Engineering at Cornell University. My interests in my field are signal processing and telecommunications, thus I am fairly well-versed in the technical area of electronic communications. My hobbies include bowling, taking walks around the lake, reading, and listening to music. After living for two years in a slightly damper, much greener and inconceivably colder version of Death Valley that some refer to as "Ithaca" I have become quite accustomed to the ever shifting weather and the permanent need to carry an umbrella. On weekends I like to visit the Pyramid Mall, a small collection of stores bunched together at a rather inconvenient location that, in a real city, would likely be dismissed as no more than a local shopping center.
Of all the recent explosions of Internet trends and phenomena, online journalism or "blogging," has experienced arguably the most rapid adaptation by Internet users. Despite the inelegant name ("blogging? Does that mean microwaving all the leftovers from over the week so they would mush together and form something marginally edible?") and the requirement of personal will to type up articles for (generally) no pay, blogging has blossomed from a geeky, technically-minded version of "Dear Diary" to a form of expression used by anyone of almost any age and mindset (aside from the Luddites, of course).
Wonderful. The First Amendment has being guaranteed by no more than creating an account at blogger.com and spend 10 minutes each day ranting about jobs, neighbor, friend, dog, professors, etc. Yet in a day where a child can pose as a college lecturer, a young man yet to experience puberty can experience the cyber-glamour and attention of his online alter-ego (a beautiful 18 year old female currently studying to be a nurse at UCLA), we still mindlessly (or worse, mindfully) read through articles online and rarely doubt the information contained in each statement. That is the nature of anonymous writing, a paradise-like online space for those craving free expression, a nonexclusive and all-inclusive Internet society that we have termed “Blogosphere.” (A term that would have likely made Wallace wrinkled her nose in distaste…)
“Oh no, Dear Zeyu, I always check my facts!” says the considerate reader. But it is nigh impossible to completely shield oneself from the barrage of false advertisements, sensationalism, half-guessed “research,” and incoherent flames of the average Internet users and publishers. Did the reader check any facts in this article? Of course not, it doesn’t matter if there is a lie or two, it has no effect on anyone’s personal life anyway. But that is exactly why it is so easy to establish a lie as an e-journalist. I am not a junior in EE major. I am a sophomore in Applied Economics and Management, concentrating in Business Finance. I know little to nothing about “signal processing” and “telecommunications,” and in fact the only science class I’ve taken at college is Physics of Musical Sounds. Yet I gained in your mind, hopefully to some degree, a level of authority in the field of electronic communications. Imagine millions of “Electrical Engineers” around the world posting on Wikipedia, on forums, on blogger.com about ideas and concepts that they haven’t a clue about, then you can see the potential Achilles’ Heel in the mighty complex world of online journalism.
WOW! What’s the deal with World of Warcraft?
Hey all, my name is Robert Jerry, but I usually go by Bob. I’m from a town called Ardsley which is located in
In my opinion, one of the most fascinating online phenomena in recent years has been the growing popularity of the MMORPG. Is this acronym familiar to you? If not, it stands for Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Game. This is a type of video game where most characters are controlled by players interacting with each other in order to complete quests in a computer-generated virtual world. Two of the most popular MMORPGs are World of Warcraft and Everquest. Warcraft alone currently has over 9 million players who each pay a monthly subscription fee.
My personal experience with MMORPGs was short lived. I tried playing one called Final Fantasy XI for two months but I found that in order to progress in the game, I had to spend exorbitant amounts of time playing. I purely could not sacrifice large portions of my real life in order to excel in my virtual one. However, many people are willing to make this commitment. The fascinating aspect of these games is that in spending hours upon hours as a virtual avatar (the character that represents themselves in the game), such as a warrior or a wizard who walks through a digital landscape with fellow elves, dwarves, orcs, or whatever, users get to experience a new virtual identity.
Users have the privilege of choosing the appearance, gender, race, and clothing of their virtual selves. Male gamers can create a female avatar and experience life as a woman, and vice-versa, a female gamer could choose to be a masculine warrior, commanding fear from those who see him (or her?). But besides playing around with gender, friendships are born, social networks are formed, and even economies are shaped. To some people the line between reality and the MMORPG is so blurred, that real world currency is often traded for the virtual tender of the game to help the gamer buy progress in the form of more powerful equipment or magical elixirs.
The MMORPG is certainly an evolved version of the MUD (multiuser dungeon) that Wallace describes, and she touches on possibly an early MMORPG with her mention of metaworlds. MMORPGs can be a fun daily escape or a dangerously addictive trap, and I find it so interesting that so many people spend so much time in these rich virtual worlds.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Assignment #1: Online vs. Face-to-Face Interaction
Hi, my name is Selina Lok. I was born in Queens, NY but was raised in East Hanover, NJ, where shockingly, there are more dead than living people! I’m a junior majoring in Electrical and Computer Engineering and minoring in Information Science. For the first time, I spent my summer in Ithaca where I got to visit many of the beautiful waterfalls in the nearby state parks. I like swimming, skiing, and playing tennis, and I love traveling, music, and watching movies. I’ve used internet for as long as I remember; from playing computer games like Starcraft, World of Warcraft, and Counter-Strike to shopping online for clothes or books (from Amazon or half.com) to meeting people online to webcamming friends from other schools.
I’m very interested in the different personas we have online, such as through instant messaging, versus in the physical world. I know many people that I can talk to for hours with online, yet only manage to have a few minutes of conversing in person. There are these awkward moments of silence as we sit face-to-face that don’t exist when we instant message. Is it possible that awkward moments don’t really exist online because we may be chatting with other friends at the same time or surfing the web and not notice the moments we don’t chat? How can 2 hours pass by so quickly when we are talking through instant messages, like AIM, yet 5 minutes never seems to pass by when I see the person? It’s not the same case with everyone though. For some people, it’s the total opposite. I will have no problems interacting in person but when we talk online we have absolutely nothing to talk about. We’d say hi, ask what’s up, update each other about how our day was and that’s about it. What is it that makes it easier to speak with someone on an instant messaging program like AIM versus in person or vice versa? I’m curious in what other people think about this and if you share the same experiences.
The online space this phenomenon fits under would be synchronous chat space, in which instant messaging programs like AIM, Google Talk, and Yahoo Messenger are a part of.
hi!
My name is Hallie and I am a sophomore Comm major from New York City. I love Tate’s chocolate chip cookies, hiking and Italian food. I am also an assistant at Carol Tatkon center and am a part of EARS. When I came to Cornell last year, I was really worried about losing touch with my friends from high school. Fortunately, a couple of us had bought the new Macbook computers for the new school year. With these computers comes a built in “i-sight” camera on top of the screen. This camera allows any two users with the “ichat” program (or any windows user with a webcam) to video-conference with each other over the AIM instant messenger network. Not only can we actually speak to each other through the computer, but we can see each other live with crystal clear quality and up to three different people can join in to a chat. While this technology is relatively new, Wallace predicted videoconferencing would take place in chapter 1 of her book, and she labeled this technology as “interactive video and voice”. It is a type of synchronous chat, as the interaction between the persons involved takes place in real time, as opposed to a message board where conversations evolve over a period of hours, days or even weeks. One reason I prefer this method of keeping in touch, as opposed to just regular instant messages, is because it eliminates the possibility of misinterpretation. When you are instant messaging with somebody you are not able to see their body language or hear their tone of voice, so you might mistake a casual joke for a jab or a genuine comment as something sarcastic. However with video chatting it is almost as if the person is in the same room as you; it is the closest you can get to a real life interpersonal interaction over the computer. While Wallace argued that this technology may “kill the magic that makes the internet liberating”, I disagree. First of all, most people that video chat are probably talking to close friends that they are not able to see on a regular basis due to going to college, moving away etc. Therefore being able to see them in person though the camera actually makes the experience more liberating because one is able to express themselves more effectively. The only way in which video chatting could diminish the freedom of the internet, in my opinion, would be if somebody was video chatting with a person they had just met in a chat room. With the real-time interaction, they would not have the luxury of time to think about how they wish to portray their self to the “new friend”. Video chatting on ichat helps to bridge the geographical divide between close friends and makes times spent apart from loved ones not so difficult - I am really happy to have it!
Email: The solution to awkward communication
Hello everyone. My name is Jason Feldman and I’m a sophomore in the Industrial and Labor Relations School here at Cornell. I’m from a suburb of Rochester NY which is about an hour and a half drive from Ithaca. Despite how close I live to Cornell, I was shocked at the winter weather my freshman year. Maybe it’s my imagination due to that long trek to central campus from north, but I can’t remember ever being as cold and damp as I was last December and January. That being said, the sledding conditions were unparalleled and I only appreciated the sunshine that much more when it finally did arrive towards the end of second semester.
Being part of the Internet generation, we grew up learning the nuances of cyber communication and becoming fluent in mediums like instant messaging, browsing the web, uploading digital photos, and all other things computers. However, one aspect of this new online dialect that, unlike my peers, I never mastered until recently was email.
Email is not considered a new online environment. According to Wallace, it falls under the classification of electronic mail, and rivals the web as the most vital technology of the Internet era. My first email account was the one that was supplied by Cornell University through uportal just one short year ago. It didn’t take me long to understand why using email was indispensable to my academic life; after all, how many professors do we know that would give out there cell phone numbers to their students so they could call them every time they had a question about an assignment? Email is not only more rational, but more efficient as well. However, unlike most, the only mail I got in my inbox were emails from Denise Cassaro and other such list serve items, messages about classes from professors, and the occasional facebook notice that let me know that the kid that sits next to me in my writing seminar just sent me a friend request. Email never entered into the personal arena for me (outside of facebook), and as such my cell phone contact list was much larger than my saved gmail, yahoo, and hotmail addresses.
After reflecting on why I make the unconscious distinction between what medium of communication I use depending on a given situation, I realized that in general, the people that I get more enjoyment talking to I use my cell phone to call. Email is advantageous due to the fact that it provides you with a forum that you can communicate carefully thought out ideas and messages with the most minimal interaction possible. People tend to email instead of call when they feel they are in an awkward situation. After all, how awkward can someone really be via email? Not only do they not have to here the other persons voice or see them face to face, but they get to strategically plan out word for word what they are going to say beforehand. While now it is virtually unheard of and embarrassing to end relationships using email, perhaps someday soon people will be sending messages entitled: “I think we should just be friends.”
Being part of the Internet generation, we grew up learning the nuances of cyber communication and becoming fluent in mediums like instant messaging, browsing the web, uploading digital photos, and all other things computers. However, one aspect of this new online dialect that, unlike my peers, I never mastered until recently was email.
Email is not considered a new online environment. According to Wallace, it falls under the classification of electronic mail, and rivals the web as the most vital technology of the Internet era. My first email account was the one that was supplied by Cornell University through uportal just one short year ago. It didn’t take me long to understand why using email was indispensable to my academic life; after all, how many professors do we know that would give out there cell phone numbers to their students so they could call them every time they had a question about an assignment? Email is not only more rational, but more efficient as well. However, unlike most, the only mail I got in my inbox were emails from Denise Cassaro and other such list serve items, messages about classes from professors, and the occasional facebook notice that let me know that the kid that sits next to me in my writing seminar just sent me a friend request. Email never entered into the personal arena for me (outside of facebook), and as such my cell phone contact list was much larger than my saved gmail, yahoo, and hotmail addresses.
After reflecting on why I make the unconscious distinction between what medium of communication I use depending on a given situation, I realized that in general, the people that I get more enjoyment talking to I use my cell phone to call. Email is advantageous due to the fact that it provides you with a forum that you can communicate carefully thought out ideas and messages with the most minimal interaction possible. People tend to email instead of call when they feel they are in an awkward situation. After all, how awkward can someone really be via email? Not only do they not have to here the other persons voice or see them face to face, but they get to strategically plan out word for word what they are going to say beforehand. While now it is virtually unheard of and embarrassing to end relationships using email, perhaps someday soon people will be sending messages entitled: “I think we should just be friends.”
Oh no she did not just post that on her MySpace
Hi RED blog! My name is Grace Oh and I am a junior communications major. I previously was in the
An Internet-related phenomenon I’m interested in is how people can act so differently online than their true personalities. From conversations with my neighbor who is in 8th grade this year, I realized how young people are starting to use the Internet and programs such as MySpace and AIM. She frequently shares with me how one girl posted on AIM profile a rumor about my neighbor’s best friend and every other sort of drama filled situation your imagination can conjure up. After talking with my neighbor, I realized how brave people can be online. It baffles my mind how harsh 6th, 7th, 8th graders can be to one another online these days. Sometimes I think it is so out of control how now even teachers and other school administrators are getting involved in student arguments and gossip based on the Internet.
Another issue with conversing online is the idea of asking people to be in relationships through email, AIM, and any other tool of Internet communication. It seems somewhat bizarre to me now that people start relationships online when relationships seem like such a personal form of life that there is no other way to be effective other than in real life interaction. Then again, in a couple of years, the norm might be that most relationships will start the internet and people rarely start them in person.
So I guess I’m still trying to decide weather synchronous chats such as AIM and MSN are a positive contribution to society or if they are just a way our society is getting desensitized and become less interactive in the physical world. That is why I guess I’m interested in this topic and hopefully by the end of this class I’ll have a better or even different perspective on it all.
Clickity click click, click on the link
My name is Henry Chan and I am a sophomore in ECE. I come from New York City. I love walking around the city, visiting museums, relaxing in parks, and hanging out on the beaches. I also enjoy eating. Ithaca is a bit smaller than NYC, but I'm glad that I'm still able to enjoy a nice selection of cuisines.
I'm interested in the propensity for users to follow links. The mechanics of the world wide web is based on linking. Referring to Wallace's analogy of the world wide web as a magazine rack, web pages can be considered the magazines on the rack of links that gives the user access.
I often find myself on Wikipedia just browsing the articles. I finish reading one article and then I immediately go on to the next article by clicking on one of the links in the article or the “See Also” section. Before I know it, I go from an entry about Facebook to a page about Tamagotchi. From there, I go to an article about Game Boy. Why do some users continue to read linked articles? At what point does the user decide to get off a site like Wikipedia?
It's not just Wikipedia. I often click on links I receive in instant messages. However, in this case, I don't always have an idea of what I am about to view. For example, if I was linked to http://www.cornell.edu/academics/calendar/, I can ascertain that this will be a calendar, probably related to academics. However, if I am linked to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcXLE-wvVBw, I can only deduce that it is probably a video. I find myself clicking on the latter link as often as I click on the former one. Why would I almost blindly follow a link? Outside of the net, if someone was given an arbitrary address, like 1152 Danby Rd, would they make their way there? Internet providers caution users against going to links from strangers. Yet, some users continue to click without thinking, while others actually heed these warnings. What accounts for the difference?
YouTube
Hello everyone! My name is Rianna Puno and I’m a junior majoring in Communication. I was born in Virginia but my hometown is in Manila, Philippines – where it’s summer all year long! (Imagine how miserable I am in the winter.) My guilty pleasures are watching bad reality TV and reading Us Weekly.
The Internet phenomenon that interests me is our current YouTube generation. Since YouTube is fairly new, I believe that it falls into a new Internet environment that hosts all amateur, user-created content. Instead of just seeking information on the World Wide Web, the public now has their input on it (blogs, wikis, etc.)
I don’t even know where to start, considering the many uses people have for YouTube – video blogs, spoofing music videos, or posting some crazy stunt your friends attempted last night. What motivates people to post these (sometimes useless) videos online? Are they even aware of who is watching their videos?
On the other hand, I am also amazed by how YouTube can be used for “legitimate” things as well. We all saw/heard of the Presidential Debate on CNN, which used questions via YouTube videos from the public. Justin Timberlake’s record label signed a girl who was discovered only through YouTube. P. Diddy thinks he can find his new assistant by viewing applicants’ videos on his site. At this rate, what is the future of YouTube?
Posting a video on YouTube could probably feel like a contribution to society. It may be communication to the outside world, or someone’s 15 seconds of fame. Whatever it is, I still cannot believe that millions of videos are uploaded each day, and that the Most Viewed ones are receiving over a million hits everyday as well. I have definitely had my share of entertainment from YouTube (Remember Evolution of Dance? Or OMG Shoes?!), but I still wonder why people choose to post all these videos online. Why has YouTube become such an icon in popular culture?
It’s even a separate application on the iPhone!
The Internet phenomenon that interests me is our current YouTube generation. Since YouTube is fairly new, I believe that it falls into a new Internet environment that hosts all amateur, user-created content. Instead of just seeking information on the World Wide Web, the public now has their input on it (blogs, wikis, etc.)
I don’t even know where to start, considering the many uses people have for YouTube – video blogs, spoofing music videos, or posting some crazy stunt your friends attempted last night. What motivates people to post these (sometimes useless) videos online? Are they even aware of who is watching their videos?
On the other hand, I am also amazed by how YouTube can be used for “legitimate” things as well. We all saw/heard of the Presidential Debate on CNN, which used questions via YouTube videos from the public. Justin Timberlake’s record label signed a girl who was discovered only through YouTube. P. Diddy thinks he can find his new assistant by viewing applicants’ videos on his site. At this rate, what is the future of YouTube?
Posting a video on YouTube could probably feel like a contribution to society. It may be communication to the outside world, or someone’s 15 seconds of fame. Whatever it is, I still cannot believe that millions of videos are uploaded each day, and that the Most Viewed ones are receiving over a million hits everyday as well. I have definitely had my share of entertainment from YouTube (Remember Evolution of Dance? Or OMG Shoes?!), but I still wonder why people choose to post all these videos online. Why has YouTube become such an icon in popular culture?
It’s even a separate application on the iPhone!
Video Chat
Hello everyone. My name is Gretchen Schroeder and I’m a sophomore Communication major and Applied Economics and Management minor. I’m from Fairport, New York, which is a small suburb outside of Rochester. I’m a diver for the Cornell Swimming and Diving team, and really enjoy being involved in my sorority, where I am living this year. When I’m not at the pool, I like to watch other sports such as baseball, hockey, and basketball. I’ve been a St. Louis Cardinal fan since I was born, and always enjoy cheering on the Big Red.
I have grown up using Apple products, and so when it was time to buy a laptop before going to Cornell last year, I naturally chose a nice white MacBook. Besides your basic computer functions, the MacBook has quite a few extra gadgets. The most noticeable would have to be the built-in camera to be used for video chatting. I have been using instant messenger for a good portion of my life, but the first time I used video chat, I was thrown for a loop. For some reason, it feels extremely uncomfortable to be staring at a computer screen, and yet having a conversation with someone as if they were directly across from you. I even found myself staring down at the keyboard when I talked due to the fact that direct eye contact felt odd. What is it about this technology that makes us feel uncomfortable about having a connection with a human being? When I’m standing face-to-face to someone I don’t feel weird making eye contact with him or her, but online it doesn’t feel right.
Part of what attracts so many people to the Internet is the mysteriousness of it all. You may continue to visit a complete stranger’s blog just because you like to read about his or her dangerous experiences, romantic evenings, or busy work schedule. It most likely would not be as interesting, however, if you were to actually meet the author. By meeting the author, you destroy the fantasy human that your mind has created through this person’s text. When it comes to video chatting, one can no longer hide solely behind his or her text. Video chat falls into Wallace’s seventh category: interactive video and voice. What’s interesting, though, is that when this book was published eight years ago, video chat was not widely available. I am intrigued by how fast technology changes, and the impact it has on our lives.
I have grown up using Apple products, and so when it was time to buy a laptop before going to Cornell last year, I naturally chose a nice white MacBook. Besides your basic computer functions, the MacBook has quite a few extra gadgets. The most noticeable would have to be the built-in camera to be used for video chatting. I have been using instant messenger for a good portion of my life, but the first time I used video chat, I was thrown for a loop. For some reason, it feels extremely uncomfortable to be staring at a computer screen, and yet having a conversation with someone as if they were directly across from you. I even found myself staring down at the keyboard when I talked due to the fact that direct eye contact felt odd. What is it about this technology that makes us feel uncomfortable about having a connection with a human being? When I’m standing face-to-face to someone I don’t feel weird making eye contact with him or her, but online it doesn’t feel right.
Part of what attracts so many people to the Internet is the mysteriousness of it all. You may continue to visit a complete stranger’s blog just because you like to read about his or her dangerous experiences, romantic evenings, or busy work schedule. It most likely would not be as interesting, however, if you were to actually meet the author. By meeting the author, you destroy the fantasy human that your mind has created through this person’s text. When it comes to video chatting, one can no longer hide solely behind his or her text. Video chat falls into Wallace’s seventh category: interactive video and voice. What’s interesting, though, is that when this book was published eight years ago, video chat was not widely available. I am intrigued by how fast technology changes, and the impact it has on our lives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)