Tyler's COM 300 Blog

Final Blog Post

2006-03-09T19:58:00.000-08:00

I feel that the most interesting and important thing I learned this quarter was how to go about building a website. I recognize that I do not know much about webaite creation, but I think that I have a great base to start from. I feel that this is so interesting and important, because of the fact that I am looking to expand my interests online. I am in teh process of creating an independent magazine, and the ability to put it up online will give me the opportunity to greatly expand my readership. Not only expand my readership, but I will be able to get contributions, and also get feedback from people outside my social circle.

In terms of social significance, I think that I would have liked to spend more time on the internet and political campaigns. We live in such a politically apathetic time, and I have yet to fully examine the roleof the internet in politics. I have high hopes that the interactive form of communication will help people feel as though they are a part of politics on a more personal level, which will allow them to get more involved. We only got to survey the internet, and the effect that it has on politics, but I am curious to knwo more about how the two will interact in the future.

I think that the topic I enjoyed the least was that on teh open software movement. I felt that the reading was too technical, and I am still a little unsure on what the whole movement is/was and how it affects computer technology today. It could be that I am just not interested in computer software technology, but I could not focus on the topic, or really find anything interesting about it.

Week 9 Readings

2006-02-25T21:03:00.000-08:00

I feel that with the advent of VoIP there is a definate threat poised at the cable and television industries. The new, unregulated technology allows the consumer to get the same product adn results for a fraction of the price. Since VoIP is unregulated there is room for expansion into the cable industry, which will surely create some market monopoly. If a consumer will be able to get both phone and cable service over the internet for a fraction of the price, there is no longer any need to have separate bills from different companies which still costs more. There is also the added benefit with having all digital technology. By having an all digitized network there is less problems that can occur, and a much more clear picture/voice connection.
I think that VoIP has the potential to completely revolutionize the telephone and cable industries. By utilizing a much more efficient way to offer these services, at a much more affordable price, there is great chance that VoIP will become the industry leader in the telephone and cable industries.

Discussion Questions:
1. With the digital divide in the U.S. how will this cheaper techonolgy be able to help those who could really benefit from it?

2. How will VoIP change the landscape in how we communicate throughout the world? With cheaper service possible, will this allow for more cross-cultural communications, a sort of overseas penpal possibility?

3. What sort of action do you see the telephone industry taking to try an deter this technology from permeating this market? Do you see future regulations being imposed?

Week 8 Readings

2006-02-20T23:56:00.000-08:00

What is interesting about the correlation between cyberspace as a public space and accessibility, is the appaent lack of a correlation. It would seem that the internet is a vast area that anyone can freely access and put information on, but that is far from the truth. As Michael Best walked us through in his article, there are countries where small numbers of countries have access to phones, and internet is seeminly out of the question. The notion that the internet is in some way a public space is only in respect to our country's priviledged position.
In the United States, the internet has advanced rapidly. Because we were already lucky enough to have effective communications systems, it was easy to incorporate the internet into it. Here we have the availibility of computers in a plethora of public places, and it seems almost like anyone could at any time access the internet if they needed to. This is, however, only a very small part of the world's population. Both India and China have limited access to the internet, and they hold the two highedt populations throughout the world.
With such a large amount of the world population without internet, it is hard to call it a public space. A more accurate term may be "a priviledged place."

Discussion Questions:

1. How do you think further accessibility alter the way the internet is run? What kids of information do you think would become availible, if anything more?

2. How would worldwide access to the internet alter communication practices with people throughout the globe? Do you think that there would be more empathy if we were able to communicate better with others across the world?

3. What sort of political issues do you think could arise from this access? Would all world governments be supportive of the access? Do you think this could have political ramnifications throughout the world?

Week 7 Readings

2006-02-13T07:24:00.000-08:00

It seems that both of the articles think that politics will be or has been profoundly affected by the internet. Whether it be through blogging, websites or extra access to news, the internet has altered the way that people learn about politics, and the way politicians run campaigns. In the realm of voters the internet has allowed voters to connect in ways that were not possible before. It has revolutionized the way that politicians are able to communicate with and mobilize their voters. In the case of Howard Dean’s campaign, Trippi used to internet as a quick, cost-efficient way to raise a large amount of money for the campaign. In addition he used the internet to produce a large amount of guaranteed votes. By using different devices on the internet grassroots campaigns are now finding ways to level the playing ground as far as elections are concerned. Now it does not take millions in advertising and postage to reach voters. The internet has made it possible for candidates to interact with their voters with little cost, and at a moments notice.
With the supplemental research from the University of Minnesota which shows that more and more people are using the internet in addition to other forms of media which is making them more informed. By having more informed voters, with access to their politicians, the internet has completely changed the way that politicians work. It now forces them to acknowledge their voters, and take notice of issues. In turn, it also allows politicians to mobilize their campaigns when it comes time to vote. It seems for the first time that politicians have to be entirely connected with their voting base in order to make any ground in the political sphere.

Discussion Questions:

1. How do you feel that the internet will continue to change the political sphere? With more technologies released everyday, how politics and the internet continue to evolve?

2. Blogging has surged since the last election. With a more extensive web of bloggers, how do you think that that will affect the next election?

3. Do you think that the internet has made it possible for a third party candidate to run a successful campaign against the two that we currently have? With more access to voters, has the internet made it possible for a grassroots campaign to be successful in major politics?

Week 5 Readings

2006-01-29T21:12:00.000-08:00

I feel that it is important for communications students to study the open source software movement, because it is another way for communications barriers to be broken down. If there is a software program that enables people to share information with each other, there would obviously be a more free-flow of information. The WSIS has been focusing for years on how to establish a more free-flow of information, something that the open source software would allow.
After reading the Q and A I am still a little confused exactly what the software would allow, but I chalk that up to my not understanding much software jargon. I feel as though the purpose of this new type of software is to allow a more connected network of users. By creating this jointed network, people would all be able to communicate much more easily, and effectively.
Communications scholars should be paying special attention to the movement that this could cause, not only because it could alter the IT market in a significant way, but it could/will alter the way that people are able to communicate with one another.

Discussion Questions:
1. Although there is something to be said about free software, would there be problems of people making changes to it that could negatively impact your computer? In other words, could/would other software manufacturers intentionally sabotage the software in order to reclaim buying customers?

2. How would this new type of software affect the average home computer user?

3. The article sort of addressed the support that would be offered to home computer users, but to those who do not really know how to effectively use a computer, how difficult would this be to use, and why would this software be able to wean us away from operating systems like Windows and the like that we are already familiar with?

Week 4 Reading Post

2006-01-22T21:53:00.000-08:00

I think that the articles were meant to fill the gap between the man-machine misunderstanding, but it did not really work for me. I found that as I was reading the article, I was looking around at all of my electronic appliances with disgust. I have a TV, a couple of stereos, an ipod, my laptop and a plethora of other appliances that are seemingly making my life easier, but are actually complicating things. I feel as though there is potential in the harmonious relationship between man and computer, but there will always be some contempt. As long as we look at computers as a way to enhance our life and make monotonous things easier, there is going to be a human inferiority complex. The fact that a little machine can do a job more precise than you in a fraction of the time, is a threat to the individual. There is also the threat that comes from the loss of jobs to a more automated system of doing things. We have seen through the years an increase in production, but at the same time, and streamline of jobs. For the last century job after job has disappeared because of computers, and it will surely keep happening.
Humans do have an advantage in the realm of creativity, but that offers little comfort in a society that places value on production over creativity. It may be that I am a little skeptical about technology that becomes more and more obscure to me, but I find myself feeling more unsure about the technology that surrounds me.
This article has changed my perception of the man-machine relationship in the sense that it made me realize why I am so frustrated with machines. Its not that I am particularly worried about a machine replacing me in any way, but it’s the idea that I am becoming more and more dependent upon them. There is loss of personal autonomy that comes with realizing that you are dependent on technology for almost every aspect of your life. Entertainment, work, education…everything that I place any sort of value on is somehow tied to technology. I am hoping that there will be some sort of theory based understanding of a reconciliation between man and machine, but for now I am going to remain a skeptic, and watch my computer use to reading books ratio, and maybe use my math skills in favor of a calculators.

Week 3 Reading Response

2006-01-15T21:53:00.000-08:00

The readings for week three really made me take a step back and look at the way information affects me on a day to day basis. Up until the last few communications classes I have taken, I have mainly thought that I was in control of the information that I allow myself to process, but that is far from the truth. I have realized that I am innundated with information from every angle, all day everyday, and I can identify with the readings' mention of information overload/stress. I have noticed that there are times that I feel so overrun with media and information that I just sit in my apartment and read or listen to music. This is still getting information, but I am the mediator, and there will be no subversive messages being directed at me.
I think that I am completely overrun by too much information, and I'm still not aware of the implications that that has. The articles really never address any possible emotional/mental issues that could possible come as a result of living in a society where you are always be propogated.
Another thing that I thought was interesting that the articles focused on, was the inability to find information on the internet. I whole-heartedly concur. It would seem that as a student that has grown up in the technological age, I would be somewhat proficient in being able to navigate my way around the internet, but that is just not true. I still find it hard, if not impossible, to find information that I am looking for at times. Things that I think would be so easy to find on the internet end up taking me twice as long to find, if I can even find them at all. With the reading, I agree that I'm not sure there is any sort of way to remedy this. The internet is founded on the principle of a free-flow of information, and it would seem that by controlling the content of the internet, you would be going against its main objective.

Week 2 Reading Response

2006-01-08T15:18:00.000-08:00

In the readings for week 2 I was caught off guard by some of the information that I read. One of my "ah-ha" moments was simply finising out that the BBC was the initial television broadcaster in the United States. I find it very interesting that they were responsible, with the invention of Baird's early TV, for the first shows broadcasted on television in the U.S. This sort of sets up the tradition of quality and committment to furthering technological resources that the BBC has been operating under for decades. I also think it is interesting that in the 1920's when the BBC was the only one broadcasting, the United States was getting its cultural television for England and Europe, complicating its quest for a seperate cultural identity.

Another "ah-ha" moment that I had was when "Networks of Remediation" mentioned Rheingold's idea that "computer mediated technology" could help bring political power back to the people in democracy. I have taken many classes on technology and its political implications, and have yet to run across Rheingold. The idea that the internet could be a way to restructure democracy and capitalism as we know it/was fascinating to me. With the advent of all sorts of new technologies on the internet, it is no suprise that alternative voices in politics are now being heard throughout a country that polarized by a dual party system that has been thoroughly disappointing in recent years. The idea that the internet could help revolutionize politics is a great idea to embrace.

In regards to Bush's article, and his explanation of "memex," it is nothign more than a prophesy of what has finally arrived. Bush describes memex as: "a device which an individual can store all his books, records, and communications, which is mechanized so that it may be consulted with exceeding speed and flexibility." This is a near perfect definition for a modern home computer. Everything that I deem imporant is on my computer. I have all my music catalogued, my past papers stored, pictures, and literally everything involving communication is somehow tied to my computer. It would seem that Bush foresaw the dependency that we as peopel would have on such a machine, and was able to recognize just how we would e able to use it in order to maximize our potential.
Bush's foreshadow of what is a reality today can be assessed again for what is to come in the next 40 years. If so much of our lives is already tied up in internet and personal computers, how can it possibly saturate out lives any more? With computing devices already becoming ultra portable, and with ever growing ease, it could be possible that our lives will be digitized. Everything we do could be moonitored and catalogued on the internet. You could essentially have a minute-by-minute archive of your life online. It is already reaching a point where all of your personal information is collected and archived. Now, when you fly you are flagged, whenever you shop with a card you are recorded. The internet could, and likely will, be used as a device to keep tabs on citizens in an ever expanding global community.

My First Post

2006-01-04T12:42:00.000-08:00

This is my first attempt to post for COM 300.