December 9, 2008
By Hannah Ringheim
This article describes how new technologies not only apply to everyday consumers, but that they are also utilized in dangerous aspects. I thought it was intriguing in that it presents a new vision of the dangerous effects of technology 2.0. The recent terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India were actually made possible by the use of contemporary high technology. What happened was that the terrorists navigated across the Arabian Sea from Pakistan to Mumbai using a global positioning system. They also communicated with a satellite phone to those who coordinated the attacks in general. The targets were also seen because “[the terrorists] had studied satellite photos from Google Earth.”
Also, the Pakistanis carrying out the task communicated with individuals already their using Internet phones that make tracing calls very difficult. Lastly, terrorists who were watching the television presenting the news were able to inform the attackers of the security measures being taken.
These “once complicated technologies” are becoming easier to use and more accessible, and all consumers, including terrorists, have become custom to using them. The article discusses how Indian security forces were attempting to track and intercept the phone calls to the terrorists, but were unable to due to the a voice over “Internet Protocol phone service” that complicates whereabouts and identities. The calls led to companies in New Jersey and Austria, however it is believed the individuals were actually in Pakistan and the attempted interference in phone calls were deceptive and unreliable.
Overall, we see here how these new technologies not only progress society in various advantages and developments, but they also present new issues of danger; terrorism becomes more capable with technologies that be difficult to decipher. What possible measures could be done about this? How will these technologies worsen in the future?
December 9, 2008
By Hannah Ringheim
I found this article in the New York Times, and I thought it was interesting and somewhat ironic. The article describes a government and technology panel on cyber-security that believes the federal government should stop its’ reliance on passwords and “should enforce a stronger authentication.” What exactly does this stronger authentication imply?
It means that all government computer users would have the ability to gain access to the online social networks, and the panel is advocating that even nongovernmental services should have this device that can secure safety. What I found ironic about this is that the panel wants to establish more security on cyber-networks by giving the ability to easy accessibility by the government, and even nongovernmental groups, to hold the “key” to these networks. By eliminating passwords, if anything, consumers lose the security they once felt for cyberspaces.
The article presents various statistics that promote that the advocating for more restrictions, and the opinions many have of possible “cyber attack.” The report the panel made states that “cyber-security is one of the most significant national security threats and that it can no longer be relegated to information technology offices and chief information officers.”
The past efforts of groups to demand that the government control cyberspaces in case of possible attacks or break ins into privately-accessed information have led to the federal government agreeing to spend more than 30$ billion in the next seven years to regulate better security. What I want to ask is if these regulations are really necessary? Can they be considered a higher priority than other issues that demand governmental actions? Or can they be seen as ironic actions that really give more security away?
December 9, 2008
This short article talks about the influence of Fans in Web 2.0. My final paper has a similar topic.
The dead tree media are continuing to come around to Web 2.0. To wit: the announcement yesterday that venerable leather-helmeted Sports Illustrated is making a big boy move and will acquire sports community FanNation. The belly-up further illustrates a begrudging awareness by the old media that Bubble Generation consumers see themselves as citizens not subscribers.
It has been clear for some time that something dramatic was needed to shake things up at sleepy SI. The flagship Time, Inc. property (accounting for 20 percent of corporate intake) has been sucking wind on line behind more interactive sports sites like ESPN.com, Yahoo Sports, AOL Sports, and CBS SportsLine. On January 30, the SI site relaunched with a new look and feel and a video-heavy design. Two days later, the FanNation deal cements SI’s intentions to be a player.
Given that the BubbleGen demographic–15 to 25–is the sweet spot for sports advertising targets, it was only a matter of time before Time came over to the dark side. BubbleGen sports fans need more than an online magazine, they need a community within which to trash talk, debate and chest beat. It is the perfect Web 2.0 environment. Want to know where the future of social media is heading? Spend some time in online sports communities. Go Bosox!
December 8, 2008
A current age of new music is emerging and is taking the entertainment industry into a new era. “Chiptune” music, now a dominating genre in the music scene, is created through modifications to vintage video games, and it sounds something like a cross between pop music and a video-game soundtrack that has been sped up.
An example of this growing popularity was through the third-annual Blip Festival in New York, which featured 40 artists from China to Swtizerland, and was promoted by local non-profit art and tech collective group. This movement is rapidly expanding, attracting a younger, teenage audience.
One group is called Graffiti Monsters, who play punk-influenced chiptunes on Sony PlayStation Portable and Game Boys, and many of the genre’s fans usually post their songs and videos on MySpace and YouTube.
If technology and video games can so as far as influencing music genres, how else can we expect to see change in the future? Will this new music genre grow and eventually take over more conventional genres?
December 7, 2008
By Taylor Gould
I found this article in the New York Times and thought it looked pretty interesting. This article talks about individuals creating unique music through the use of older gaming consoles. One of the artists, known as Sidabitball, performed in the Blip Festival 2008 in New York City this weekend, is considered a “chiptune musician: [one who] modifies Ataris, Commodore 64s or other vintage video game consoles or computers to be played as an electronic instrument.” Musicians can create a wide variety of sounds that fit into different genres of music by utilizing this system of artistic development. “Although chiptune musicians prefer to play on older consoles- – the more obscure and archaic, the better — and can only produce a handful of notes, the range of styles and genres can be dizzying.” Such as the case with Graffiti Monsters, which work to produce a punk-rock sound utilizing one of the more popular consoles of today – playstation portables (PSP) and game boys. Another performer, Nullsleep, has previously described his crafted sound resembling “electronica bordering on romantic pop.”
At the performance yesterday, workshops were available throughout the entirety of the day to explain the mechanics involved in the creation of various sounds using gaming consoles. In addition, they also explained the logistics of how people created the backgrounds developed from various visual effects in order to demonstrate the complexity of the artistic creation.
It is stated in this article that individuals are putting their creations up on Myspace and Youtube. Do you think that this kind of music may become popular in the future of the music industry? Or is it simply a current fad? Would it be possible for individuals who already post videos of themselves on Youtube to utilize the mechanics of this music in order to produce a more novel sound?
December 6, 2008
In a time of recession one man, Frank DeRose — managing partner of Ferrata Capital Management– plans to invest at least $1 million into Total Prestige, an invitation-only social networking site for rich. The website will be an invite only site that will more than 50,000 of the richest names throughout the US. This social networking site was launched in September and it’s popularity is spreading worldwide rapidly. There is about 600 members and another 400 private accounts already up on the site. Ten members are billionaires, most of them from Europe and the Middle East. The site has been used recently for talking about yachting hotspots, or even for business ideas.
Total Prestige has had success so far while just using a basic website format. They are looking into updating the website within the near future to gain more popularity among the rich. “Unfortunately, right now I can’t offer you a glass of Champagne or Scotch for a welcome toast, but I sincerely hope to meet all of you very soon,” Perez writes as a welcome in a sidebar. The introduction page on the website does– the “lounge”– however play classical music and greets it’s member’s with a warm welcome. The maker of the website says he has gotten hundreds of interested millionaires and he is looking forward to the future progress of the website. The company is expanding fast physically as well. Already located in New York and London, the company looks to move into Paris, Moscow, Rome and Copenhagen. Lastly, the company looks to have a giant “meet up” of it’s millionaire users sometime in the near future.
Total Prestige claims since their business model will carry billions of dollars, they will surpase Facebook in terms of a financial standpoint. Will Total Prestige flourish within an economic reccesion? Will the website benefit those within it with it’s social networking abilities?
December 6, 2008
Hulu VS Youtube
To compete in today’s day and age the media industry needs to make sure that they have some place in the virtual world. The American Broadcast Company started this trend of showing full episodes online after it aired on television. Youtube, which was basically born out of copyright infringement, is being very careful as to what is being uploaded. Youtube VS Hulu, in essence all that is, is consumer versus business. Consumer related material and video versus actual movies, and episodes. Hulu has recently been getting more and more popular, but the company won’t make that big of a profit until they have gained bigger market share. According to the article “Hulu has two things going for it: copious professionally produced content and stellar technology” Even though Youtube is still winning the race, and consumers are still using Youtube over Hulu, businesses would prefer Hulu to advertise content, because they are not dealing with the scrutiny that Youtube has to deal with.
As a regular Youtube and Hulu fan, I prefer Hulu for watching full episodes. Youtube may be nice for fun and laughs now and again, but the fact that Hulu offers quality approved content is quite amazing. It offers users the chance to watch movies, catch up on episodes etc. Businesses are obviously fighting back the consumer driven website of Youtube, by offering quality material online, for free! “Youtube is the one night stay in Atlantic city while Hulu is the weekend in Vegas”
December 6, 2008
So the institution of marriage has come under fire recently, whether it be proposition 8 or the divorce rate skyrocketing for new couples. Couples divorce for many reasons, with infidelity being one of the many causes. Here’s a new one: cheating 2.0. The interactive video game, Second Life, has become very popular recently. With games such as Second Life or World of Warcraft, often times virtual life takes precedence over real life. In the case of Amy Taylor and David Pollard, this was and is the case. The two, who meet on Second Life, had a lavish wedding on the server, and also wed in real life. However, Amy caught David in the act, online.
David did not cheat in real life, but was caught having sex with another female character in the game. This just goes to show that while we may extol the Web 2.0 explosion for its new found convenience and opportunity, it has also brought along some strange things, this being a chief example. In my opinion the actions (see sheer idiocy) of these people are not even worth looking up in the bigger picture. For however many virtual lives gone awry there are on the internet, there are exponentially more benefits due to Web 2.0. So while Amy may have a new man in her life from World of Warcraft, businesses are lowering costs and knowledge is being spread.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/11/14/second.life.divorce/index.html
December 6, 2008
Who would have thought that losing weight was something that could be done online. Obviously this doesn’t translate to you sitting behind your computer, and shedding off the pounds. This site takes a new twist on blogging and communication. It includes many weight loss applications. For example a nutrition log that counts the calorie intake in your diet as well as an exercise log.
Many times community websites like this one exist for the simple reason that people want to engage in conversation and share ideas and thoughts. This website does a similar thing but focuses on specifically your health. It tells you your “optimal” calorie intake, and allows you to monitor your food daily. Personally I find this website great. Staying healthy and having “Gym Buddies” to help you overcome challenges is really good.
This site is very helpful for people who need that extra kick start, it really is an interesting way to lose weight. Keeping up with friends,while challenging each other to work harder . If a person were to join this website and just simply keep track of their calorie intake they would be much healthier then they usually are. This website isn’t for “gym-aholics”, rather a community of people who want to stay healthy.
December 6, 2008
Viral spam has moved from you e-mail inbox to your facebook messages. This new “koobface” virus works the same way many other internet viruses work, it all starts with an eye-catching message title of somekind. It takes you through a complicated maze where it asks you to download software, and if you fall for that, you get the virus. So what effect, if any will this have on facebook?
First off, it doesn’t seem like facebook is making anything of this as there has been no precautionary warning against this virus. The way the virus spreads seems long and drawn out, and even if someone was naive enough to open up a message with that kind of title instead of deleting it as spam, a person would probably be too lazy to download a file. The facebook braintrust will probably not want to even bring this issue up for the fear that it may cause some users to permanently logoff.
Viruses come an go, but as long as users are somewhat aware of what spam is, this shouldn’t be an issue. If facebook can continue it’s innovative ways, “koobface” will be long forgotten.
