Internet in my Underwear? No Thank you

The Internet of things, such a ridiculously interesting topic!!

When Ted gave the example of a table connected to te Internet my mind immediately jumped to TRON the movie and their table tops. Then I thought about it and I've actually used a table connected to the Internet (see right).

I know that this isn't a valid example but it's what my mind first jumped to. (If anyone cares, the example is Touchmagix multitouch table computer which runs Apple Mac Mini OS. Another win for Apple!)

I love the cute definition of it: objects and appliances working together to make my life easier. It would be lovely to wake up in the morning to the TV playing a show I recorded last night, but hadn't had a chance to watch yet, the kettle on ready to make tea and the room being the perfect temperature from the automated aircon.

I can also see how it would be helpful: My brother, Sam, often walks around the house wearing his favourite pair of green footy shorts, he has been seen to be wearing them for 6 days in a row. My mum observed this and asked him how long it had been since he washed his shorts (I would estimate about 2 months), Sam just shrugged and walked away. If these shorts were connected to the internet they would have probably self-destructed, alternatively, they could have told my mum to wash them.

However, despite the convenience the Internet of things would create, I can't help but worry about the implications. After reading Julian Bleecker's article about blogjects I freaked out, and I mean really freaked out. I'm a private person, I hate it when anyone touches my phone or even looks at it over my shoulder, I respect other people's privacy, why don't I deserve the same? Blogjects goes against everything I  believe in and hold dear.

Firstly, to be constantly tracked by my clothing, car and all other items I take with me is unsettling. I hate the idea that my whereabouts could be found by my clothing, I'd resort to leaving the house naked just to get a bit of privacy, and trust me, noone would want to see that.

Secondly, I shudder at some of the stories my objects would blog about. For example, the dress I wore (and ripped) on an extremely fun and messy night out. I find the memories funny despite the embarrassment, but if my mum read it she would promptly throw the dress away and disown me. Then throwing the dress away means that my story would be carried on to whoever finds it and I'm not cool with it becoming public and ruining my reputation.

Thirdly, I'm afraid of the computers turning on their owners. Simple as that.

iDroid

So when it comes to iPhone vs Android I am all about the iPhone. I've owned about 9 since its release in Australia and actually use the boxes they get sent in as storage in my room. I love the layout, I love iTunes and I love that it has become a part of me.

But then Ted started going on about how it is a closed network and reminded me of how frustrated I get when I need Flash and can't get it!! So I started thinking about Apple in general vs Google in general... 

My chosen internet server is Google Chrome, my preferred search engine is Google, right now I'm blogging via Google's Blogger, I have had a Gmail account for about 6 years, I use Picasa to upload and edit pictures, I YouTube constantly as well as have my own channel, 3 of my group assignments are run through Google Docs and I have the Google places, Google+ and Google App all on my iPhone. 

On the other hand...

I have a 30GB iPod 5th generation, an iPod shuffle 2nd Generation, an iPod nano 4th generation, iPod nano 6th generation, an original iPad, 2 iPhone 3, 4 iPhone 3GS, 3 iPhone 4 and am just waiting on iPhone 4S to be available in White. However, I am not a Mac user and I don't think I ever will be. I used a Mac one time in the computer lab and didn't know how to log off so I just remained logged in until the next person used it. 

From my personal experiences, there doesn't seem to be a clear winner between Apple and Google, I use different things for different purposes, just like most people and I think that pitting them against each other and boycotting ones products and services out of loyalty to the other is silly. I am a happy customer of Google and Apple as a collaboration, perhaps I will send this post to Sergey, Larry and Tim Cook and see if they can set aside their differences and create an iDroid specially for me. They're pretty close to hybridding as it is:

I know this post isn't very opinionated or informative or interesting but I read 

'Google's Open Source Android OS Will Free the Wireless Web' by Daniel Roth and couldn't really deal with the bias against my precious iPhone. We get the picture, good on ya Google.

Internet = Improving leverage for citizens seeking democracy

I never thought I'd consider myself an idealist, but I definitely am one when it comes to social media. Clay Shirky defines idealists as those who "believe social media will, on average, improve leverage for citizens seeking representative government" (2011) when put like this, it's hard to believe that there are people out there who aren't idealists, it is even harder to believe that these people are given the title of "realists". 

Now, I'm no Thomas More (Utopia) and I am definitely not trying to claim that "Internet = democracy" (Morozov 2011) so giving those who believe that social media is a facilitator of social change the title of idealists is unfair. In the same token I challenge the title of realist because these people who ignore the impact and role social media play in events such as Tunisia and Tharir Square. This obviously is not real and they are resisting a force that can't be fought. 

 Morozov, a determined 'realist' argues "that these digital tools are simply, well, tools, and social change continues to involve many painstaking, longer-term efforts to engage with political institutions and reform movements" (Nelson 2011). Whilst this is true, Morozov doesn't consider the fact that these 'tools' were designed to reach innumerably large networks of people and groups and the output and spreading of this information by said 'tools' is how messages and support of social change begin.  

 The best reason to believe that social media can help synchronize and coordinate insurgent action against autocrats is that both the insurgents and autocrats believe that, beliefs that seem to be strengthening on both sides as real-world evidence mounts (Shirky 2011)

An insightful comment made by a reader of Shirky The technology will work about as well as the humans responsible for making it work make it work. This ties in with the idea of the Power of Individuals. Social media is nothing without those who created it, those who use it and those who consume it. Similarly, individuals who wish to facilitate social change, who wish to have their voice heard, could not do this without social media.

Whilst writing this blog post I received some very disturbing news, my favourite subject (no offence Ted) MEDA102 was cancelled because two students got into a fight over the last assignment (a set of instructions which lead to the creation of a work of art) the fight was so bad that one student is now in a coma and the other has 3 broken bones in their face. 3 tutors, including the co-ordinator were fired because the University placed blame on the subject. I was extremely upset by this news and I immediately posted it on Facebook and Twitter, not only as a way to vent my frustration at the decision to punish 3 very competent tutors, one of which just had a baby, but also to rally those who I have on Facebook to see if there is any way we can make our voice heard and fight for these tutors. I am using social media to get my message out there and to gain support for the next step, which will be to confront the University and challenge their decision of blaming the subject. Morozov may call it slacktivism, but without these outlets for people to get their voices heard, it would be very difficult to organise any kind of action at all.

So in conclusion, I'm a person that believes social media is an amazing way to rally supporters and get our voices heard, I'm not so extreme as to say that internet=democracy, but I'm not so dumb as to ignore the role internet has played in social change instances. Morozov needs to wake up and Tweet his feelings if he really wants them to be heard.

I'm Phreaking out over this hacking thing |_0 |_

When it comes to computers I like to think that I am competent. I can search for things, I can type up things, I can even transfer files from the computer to a USB.
When it comes to the internet I like to think I have more skills than most. I can do basic HTML and CSS coding through notepad, I have several blogs and billions of social media accounts, I even claim to understand  1337 5P34K.
However, when it comes to hacking, phreaking and elite type speaking I am a total n00b.

Ted scared me with his lecture on counter networks and how viruses, worms, Trojans, root hits etc could all be lurking on my laptop eating away at my computer's nervous system as I write this. I have lost too many laptops and computers full of photos, music, documents and memories in the hands of viruses, and to be honest, I hated hackers more than anyone...

HateD <-- note the past tense.

The typical image that pops up into most people's mind when the word "hacker" is mentioned is a  nerdy looking boy who is allergic to the outdoors, locks himself in his room and hurts other people's computers for fun. Well, this is how I imagine a hacker.
But then I was introduced to the idea of hacktivism and given examples of how hacking could be used to benefit society.

In James Crabtree's article Civic Hacking: a new agenda for e-democracy, he explains how the internet may be the answer to e-democracy's problems IF it focuses on self-help (ie using the internet as a way to help the causes that a person personally cares about eg. community needs etc).
The article basically outlines fundamental aspects of online culture such as reciprocity and the power of networks and explains how these aspects can be applied to e-democracy to make it more accessible to citizens and therefore more popular.

Even though civic hacking is just the term used by Crabtree to define his ideas and isn't typical hacking, there are other ways that hacking benefits society. For example, Wikileaks has exposed many many government cover ups for the benefit of society. People all over the world owe Julian Assange and his team for the priceless information he has provided us with, most of which he has acquired via hacking. So when I think about the positives and the negatives of hacking, what is my conclusion?

In the words of Julian Assange

Don't damage computer systems you break into; don't change the information in those systems (except for altering logs to cover your tracks); and share information.

These should be the rules of hacking. This way, we get the information, but cause no damage.

Top reasons as to why people hate twitter

I've selected the following Reasons that various people have blogged about on how much and why they hate Twitter. These are ones I've related to and will use in arguments against Twitter lovers.


Please note that this list is a shortened one and by no means an exhaustive list of why people hate Twitter due to it being a second post and I don't want to overload my readers


Follow the leaderTwitter exhibits how so many people just latch onto the popular thing. If a TV show is trending, like spoken about above, then everyone feels the need to talk about it. Oh, Family Matters is trending? Time for me to post a tweet about how "I love Family Matters #familymatters".

Justin BieberThe presence of this kid has turned Twitter into a Bieber fan board. I don't personally hate the kid as much as everyone else, but I don't find his music entertaining, I don't find his celebrity status to make much sense, and I DO find his fans to be incredibly annoying in Twilight fashion. I try not to associate with Bieber fans for this reason, yet as much as I try to avoid them, Twitter is a place I can always run into a dozen or so with ease.

Fail Whale"Twitter is over capacity". We've all seen it. Twitter experiences problems all the time...so often that they shouldn't even use that dumbass bird up above as the mascot, they should use the fail whale. But that right there says a lot - that despite the reasons up above, Twitter is still so popular that the site can't handle it.
http://www.outonlimbs.com/2011/01/ten-reasons-i-hate-twitter.html

Twitter is the epitome of the current wave of Web 2.0 content, which can be essentially summarized as the following:

“Everybody cares what I had for lunch today.”

http://open.salon.com/blog/graysondavis/2009/03/04/i_hate_twitter

The whole concept of limiting Tweets to 140 characters is obnoxious. I usually don't care about what my "friends" on Facebook are doing, but I really don't care what somebody is doing if that activity can be expressed in 140 characters or fewer ...We've already lost thoughtful debate in the Western world to the insidious and intentionally controversial sound bite; we don't need a popular Web site that not only encourages sound-bite "discussions" but actually excludes all other form of communication. 


Twitter and texting are killing the English language ... But when there's more value in knowing how to shorten words to the greatest extent possible than in knowing how to skillfully string them together, that's a bad sign for a language. 


http://rcpmag.com/blogs/lee-pender/2011/03/five-reasons-i-hate-twitter.aspx

First of all, I hate Twitter because it feeds off a society with short attention spans. Apparently, we can no longer read newspapers, magazines or books — we just have time for 40-word, misspelled blurbs about someone really needing to get a smoothie.

And this thing where politicians use Twitter to avoid having to face actual questions by the media? OMG! Really annoying. And for some reason, the media falls for it and reports the ducking politicians’s Tweets as news. (I LOVE this reason, I was the only one in my POL224 class to say that technology has not improved the quality of political debate and I based my answer on Twitter and politicians reliance on it with a case study on the first ever political debate held via Twitter. I got 90/100. Lauren 1 Twitter 0)

Follow up questions? Nah. We’ll just let them tell us what they want to tell us – they don’t need to answer all those “uncomfortable” ones.

Read more: http://sloblogs.thetribunenews.com/sidetracked/2011/05/19/why-i-hate-twitter/#ixzz1YLRsy2W2

Will Twitter change the way I live? I really hope not.

In the words of Hilary Clinton 

"I wouldn't know a Twitter from a tweeter, but apparently, it's very important" Morozov 2009

If I was American I'd probably have voted for her based on this comment alone.


I only tweet as part of my 40% online presence requirements because I just don't understand the appeal or the interface.
When Twitter first came out I had no idea what it was about or what it's purpose was and despite having a Twitter account, reading many articles on it and being alerted to the fact that 140 word posts are the future, I still don't like it.






In the lecture, Ted explained that the internet combined individual conversations and mass broadcasting and because of this it changed the way we receive and interact with information. The abundance of information available to anyone with an Internet connection grew exponentially and due to this, the value of information decreased.
I think this is an important point because this influx of invaluable information defines Twitter in my eyes, I find it difficult to use because of the thousands of meaningless comments and opinions which sandwich relevant and reliable information.


In Steven Johnson's article "How Twitter Will Change the way we Live," it is important to note that rather than highlight its scarce positive attributes as Ted did, he attempted to put a positive shine on the thing I hate most about Twitter... People Tweeting about their breakfast. Johnson has said that this kind of insight into their daily lives has created an "ambient awareness" and "social warmth", to me it creates a person with very few followers. 
He also puts up an example of how Twitter was incorporated into a conference and that the input from strangers created a second layer of discussion, I understand how this can be exciting and valuable to hear people's thoughts first-hand. However, because of the way Twitter is all of these thoughts would come flooding in at the same time and it is so difficult to keep up with. In the words of Morozov, "Twitter adds to the noise".   


In keeping with my point of unnecessary and inconsequential tweeting, I have found that when people have used Twitter in a positive way, for example, alerting others of some danger eg Tsunamis, earthquakes etc, I find myself thinking "Why are these people Tweeting about this? Shouldn't they be running?!" To me, this is the worst aspect of Twitter, it is the epitome of time wasting, actually putting yourself in danger to make time to Tweet is taking our need for immediacy having to know everything first all the time wayyyyy toooo farrrrrr.  


In conclusion, I apologise for the longer than usual blog post but I really hate Twitter and if our attention spans didn't decrease because of the internet and we didn't have platforms such as Twitter to nurture it then it wouldn't be such an issue.


P.S I'm waiting for a Twitter lover to challenge me on my views, but I warn you, I will always hate it.



Johnson, S. (2009). How Twitter Will Change The Way We Live. Time [URL: 
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1902604,00.html



Morozov, E (2009), 'Iran: Downside to the "Twitter revolution"', Dissent, pp10-14, vol.56, no.4, http://tinyurl.com/3l2jqvl

The L O N G Tail

I heard the term "long tail" last year but had no idea what it meant and now that I know what it means I think that it could have a better name which is more self-explanatory.


Instead of my usual regurgitation of info from the reading I'm going to tell a story that helped me understand what the long tail is. 
Just before new years 2011 I bought the cutest black bow ring for $5 from Diva (on the hand holding the bottle, even though it's broken at this point), 

I loved it so much and I wore it to Field Day cause it matched my outfit. It broke that day and i was devastated so I spent the next few months looking for it in every Diva I could get to. Eventually I gave up, even though I always keep an eye out every time I go shopping.


This past weekend I went up to Port Macquarie and my boyfriend bought me a ring. I love the ring because he chose it and got it for me but whilst he was off buying this ring i spotted a black bow ring in a specialty jeweler. When I told him about my obsession with replacing my original $5 ring he was upset because he had just purchased the non-returnable love heart ring. I told him it was OK but I spent the next hour thinking about the bow ring and wanting to buy it. My final decision was made up when I remembered that I hadn't tried to find the ring on eBay. 


When i searched for black bow ring I found a ring 100x better than the original and it was $10. 
It was one of the happiest days of my life, sadly enough, and I couldn't believe I hadn't thought of it sooner. 


eBay is my go-to place for dresses and jewellery that I will know noone else will have and obscure pieces that I envision in my head but can't find in mainstream stores. Chris Anderson's explanation of the long tail helped me understand why eBay is so successful, it's huge selection of rare and one off pieces that can be found by keyword searches open up new markets and expand existing ones. 


Anderson outlined 3 Rules:
1. Make everything available: eBay was one of the only places I could find an assortment of rings that fit my bow criteria.
2. Cut the price in half, then lower it: The bow ring in the shop was $55. The one I found on eBay was $10.23.
3. Help me find it: The search tool on eBay helped me find my ring in about 0.3 seconds.


Hopefully my little story helps you understand the long tail like it helped me