Our recommendations can be found at http://yellowpod.wikispaces.com/message/view/home/16429379
while the history of our discussions can be found: http://yellowpod.ning.com/
While I contributed to the discussions, the aforementioned personal issue took some attention away from my contributions towards the end. I hope my participation was sufficient.
Thank you
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Topic 9
Q1. Social networking as a business model.
A social network business model is prime ground for advertisers and really any business that intends to employ the crowd mentality for the sake of creativity and diversity. The amount of raw information generated from a social network as a bi-product of simply existing. It is, after all, how a great many of the web 2.0 tools we use today came to be. So why not find a way of harnessing it?
On the flipside however. "We are the angry mob, we read the papers everyday, we like who we like and we hate who we hate but we're also easily swayed." By this I mean, when you take on a social network you take on a group of people. Sometimes large groups of people. They'll love what you're doing until they don't and when that happens the results can be wildly unpredictable. Every time facebook makes an interface change a new group rises up opposing the change. There is also the question of whether social networks should even be considered a business model? True it's a weak question, but the moral and ethical considerations of running a for profit business around the personal information and social interactions of individuals does warrant a mention.
Q2. Government 2.0
Wiki Drafts: These are items set to be processed within the system of government that are open for discussion. It's like making a document an open forum so the majority can have a direct influence over what is happening in their parliament.
Twitter in government: It's a way for politicians to have a direct voice to their constituents. Uncensored information is able to make it from the hands of our government representatives straight to the people.
Do I support government 2.0? I don't know. Call me cautiously optimistic. I think being able to get more interaction and involvement happening between politicians and the people is a good idea but California have demonstrated an ability to over democratise the state to a point where nothing gets done. So yes, I guess I do support it as all things must evolve. I foresee in it an ability to stall government productivity (there's an oxymoron for ya) as well though.
A social network business model is prime ground for advertisers and really any business that intends to employ the crowd mentality for the sake of creativity and diversity. The amount of raw information generated from a social network as a bi-product of simply existing. It is, after all, how a great many of the web 2.0 tools we use today came to be. So why not find a way of harnessing it?
On the flipside however. "We are the angry mob, we read the papers everyday, we like who we like and we hate who we hate but we're also easily swayed." By this I mean, when you take on a social network you take on a group of people. Sometimes large groups of people. They'll love what you're doing until they don't and when that happens the results can be wildly unpredictable. Every time facebook makes an interface change a new group rises up opposing the change. There is also the question of whether social networks should even be considered a business model? True it's a weak question, but the moral and ethical considerations of running a for profit business around the personal information and social interactions of individuals does warrant a mention.
Q2. Government 2.0
Wiki Drafts: These are items set to be processed within the system of government that are open for discussion. It's like making a document an open forum so the majority can have a direct influence over what is happening in their parliament.
Twitter in government: It's a way for politicians to have a direct voice to their constituents. Uncensored information is able to make it from the hands of our government representatives straight to the people.
Do I support government 2.0? I don't know. Call me cautiously optimistic. I think being able to get more interaction and involvement happening between politicians and the people is a good idea but California have demonstrated an ability to over democratise the state to a point where nothing gets done. So yes, I guess I do support it as all things must evolve. I foresee in it an ability to stall government productivity (there's an oxymoron for ya) as well though.
Topic 8
Q1.
You know what? It's hot. It's f@$&ing hot. It's 8:30pm and it's still 36C outside. It's also overcast and dusty. So as I wander around submersed in the heat I can taste a fine layer of dirt forming in my mouth as I draw breath. The light from the streetlamps washes through the air with a certain haze only a Broken Hill dust storm can bring. The prickles crunch underfoot as I pass through the entrance to the terminally ill football field across from my home. I grimace at the thought of pulling them from the soles of my shoes later, or worse, finding them in my feet after one or two are smuggled into the house. I can smell rain in the air, albeit faint. The notion of rain mingled with all the dust in the air leads me to suspect the local car washes are going to have a few more lucrative days ahead of them. The hot wind blows in my face, my eyes narrow as flecks of dust obscure my gaze. It's almost like wandering around a fan forced oven. Now the rain starts. Big, hot, dirty rain drops intermingled with dust muddy up the world around me as I retreat back home. Back home to a balmy 27C. Feeling a little guilty that I'm privy to such a luxury.
Q2.
Do we need this many web 2.0 tools? I feel like I'm playing jeopardy having to come up with the question to an answer that I simply wish to give as a statement. I have begun to wonder where the line between want and need has been drawn. I can't help but suspect, through what I've learned about marketing and consumerism, is that many of the Web 2.0 apps have been developed before identifying a clear need. Sort of "It seems like a good idea, we'll figure out how to use it when we're done". Take twitter for instance. Do you honestly think someone was sitting on their computer one day and thought to themselves "You know what? There really needs to be a quicker way to tell people how much I like toast." And while twitter has seen widespread use, even to practical ends, it still feels like another contributor to a world saturated in methods of distr.... oooh shiny.
How much social interaction do we really need? So many apps are palmed off as methods of maintaining social interaction. But how many people mixed up in your networks are you really friends with? I begin to wonder if these facilities contribute to the erosion of socialization as a whole. Without sounding too much like a Luddite though I acknowledge that I do use several social networks and without web 2.0 applications I wouldn't be able to maintain my relationship with my fiance at the distance we are currently living apart. I guess my underlying concern is to do with excess. People are overdosing on social networks. Now a quick break to check facebook, brb.
What hazards are there in being saturated with web 2.0 applications? First point that my fiance raised while discussing this is how many children are using age restricted social networks? We are awash with so many options that it is impossible to police them all. It's unrealistic to want to police them all but it is still a concern.
Q3.
The difference between FOAF and semantic web confused me a little but the relationship between the two as I understand it is that FOAF allows us to roam with the same set of data across multiple services. Like we learn from normalising databases, reducing redundant information leads to greater efficiency, so this is the goal of FOAF and the semantic web.
FOAF in particular in this context runs along the social networking sites in such a way that members of different social networks have a means of connecting on a meta level via their FOAF information.
Q4.
a)
RSS or Really Simple Syndication is a a way of providing summarised news to subscribers. It is a form of syndication in that it automatically sends out information to interested parties as soon as there the information is published. An aggregator is a drunk alligator, but not really, it's not actually a word but I liked the joke. A site that provides aggregation services means that it collects headlines from many different locations and displays them, usually chronologically. DIG is a good example of this.
Swarm refers to the users subscribed to the RSS feed and stack refers to the news being provided.
b)
Delicious. It's an online record of your bookmarks. But it's SO MUCH MORE THAN THAT! It is also an online record of what everyone is bookmarking and keeps lists of what's the most popular. The tags for each bookmark refer to a word you assign to a bookmark. The tags allow the bookmark to be filed under that category. So if you have a video tagged as funny and video it will show up when your search criteria include funny or video.
c)
Web 2.0 repository's, now that I know they exist, will certainly feature in my future when looking for a tool for a particular project. I'm a little overwhelmed by the number listed but I honestly got a little excited when I saw how many there were and how diverse they were. I was a little disappointed to see so many twitter apps though. I am not a fan of twitter.
d)
Elgg.
When I read 'social engine' my immediate reaction was that it probably wouldn't be suitable for use in a workplace but after perusing the features offered I've come 180 and have to say this is almost the ideal application for the workplace. One could configure it around different departments in an office, share project files and perform interoffice collaboration and it's all easily moderated.
You know what? It's hot. It's f@$&ing hot. It's 8:30pm and it's still 36C outside. It's also overcast and dusty. So as I wander around submersed in the heat I can taste a fine layer of dirt forming in my mouth as I draw breath. The light from the streetlamps washes through the air with a certain haze only a Broken Hill dust storm can bring. The prickles crunch underfoot as I pass through the entrance to the terminally ill football field across from my home. I grimace at the thought of pulling them from the soles of my shoes later, or worse, finding them in my feet after one or two are smuggled into the house. I can smell rain in the air, albeit faint. The notion of rain mingled with all the dust in the air leads me to suspect the local car washes are going to have a few more lucrative days ahead of them. The hot wind blows in my face, my eyes narrow as flecks of dust obscure my gaze. It's almost like wandering around a fan forced oven. Now the rain starts. Big, hot, dirty rain drops intermingled with dust muddy up the world around me as I retreat back home. Back home to a balmy 27C. Feeling a little guilty that I'm privy to such a luxury.
Q2.
Do we need this many web 2.0 tools? I feel like I'm playing jeopardy having to come up with the question to an answer that I simply wish to give as a statement. I have begun to wonder where the line between want and need has been drawn. I can't help but suspect, through what I've learned about marketing and consumerism, is that many of the Web 2.0 apps have been developed before identifying a clear need. Sort of "It seems like a good idea, we'll figure out how to use it when we're done". Take twitter for instance. Do you honestly think someone was sitting on their computer one day and thought to themselves "You know what? There really needs to be a quicker way to tell people how much I like toast." And while twitter has seen widespread use, even to practical ends, it still feels like another contributor to a world saturated in methods of distr.... oooh shiny.
How much social interaction do we really need? So many apps are palmed off as methods of maintaining social interaction. But how many people mixed up in your networks are you really friends with? I begin to wonder if these facilities contribute to the erosion of socialization as a whole. Without sounding too much like a Luddite though I acknowledge that I do use several social networks and without web 2.0 applications I wouldn't be able to maintain my relationship with my fiance at the distance we are currently living apart. I guess my underlying concern is to do with excess. People are overdosing on social networks. Now a quick break to check facebook, brb.
What hazards are there in being saturated with web 2.0 applications? First point that my fiance raised while discussing this is how many children are using age restricted social networks? We are awash with so many options that it is impossible to police them all. It's unrealistic to want to police them all but it is still a concern.
Q3.
The difference between FOAF and semantic web confused me a little but the relationship between the two as I understand it is that FOAF allows us to roam with the same set of data across multiple services. Like we learn from normalising databases, reducing redundant information leads to greater efficiency, so this is the goal of FOAF and the semantic web.
FOAF in particular in this context runs along the social networking sites in such a way that members of different social networks have a means of connecting on a meta level via their FOAF information.
Q4.
a)
RSS or Really Simple Syndication is a a way of providing summarised news to subscribers. It is a form of syndication in that it automatically sends out information to interested parties as soon as there the information is published. An aggregator is a drunk alligator, but not really, it's not actually a word but I liked the joke. A site that provides aggregation services means that it collects headlines from many different locations and displays them, usually chronologically. DIG is a good example of this.
Swarm refers to the users subscribed to the RSS feed and stack refers to the news being provided.
b)
Delicious. It's an online record of your bookmarks. But it's SO MUCH MORE THAN THAT! It is also an online record of what everyone is bookmarking and keeps lists of what's the most popular. The tags for each bookmark refer to a word you assign to a bookmark. The tags allow the bookmark to be filed under that category. So if you have a video tagged as funny and video it will show up when your search criteria include funny or video.
c)
Web 2.0 repository's, now that I know they exist, will certainly feature in my future when looking for a tool for a particular project. I'm a little overwhelmed by the number listed but I honestly got a little excited when I saw how many there were and how diverse they were. I was a little disappointed to see so many twitter apps though. I am not a fan of twitter.
d)
Elgg.
When I read 'social engine' my immediate reaction was that it probably wouldn't be suitable for use in a workplace but after perusing the features offered I've come 180 and have to say this is almost the ideal application for the workplace. One could configure it around different departments in an office, share project files and perform interoffice collaboration and it's all easily moderated.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Topic 7
Q1. Mobile Touch Screens
A summary of how touch screens work:
The screens are able to sense and interpret the small electric charge given off by our bodies. So when we touch a touch sensitive device the electric field changes within the sensory grid. When this happens the area in which the touch occurred is processed in such a way that the relative center of the touch is established and it initiates the equivalent of a mouse click. Fascinating, I really didn't know that.
How do touch screens improve the efficiency of interactivity? The immediate answer to that is that it cuts out the middle man, a pointing device. The ability to do what comes intuitively to us and point at what we want on a device. Apple are the easiest examples of efficient use of touch technology. All their portable devices nowadays employ some use of touch technology. From the simple pressing of an icon on an iphone to open an application to the pinch gestures used to zoom in on pictures they have really made touch technology almost ubiquitous. One personal favourite of mine is ebook readers. The method with which you turn the page is to drag your fingers across the screen as if you were turning the page.
I would like to note though that an article I read in the sydney morning herald recently points out that intuitive design is only efficient for the culture this intuition is designed around. What is thoughtless habit for one person is a completely foreign practice to another. But for the majority touch screen technology is pretty efficient.
Q2. Technology and accessibility.
It's bland, it's almost common knowledge but it's still worth mentioning the accessibility features built into windows nowadays. Magnifiers to enlarge wherever the mouse pointer is positioned, narrator speaks whatever text is on the screen, there are high contrast modes that increase the visibility of all screen elements (admittedly at the cost of aesthetics) and there are methods of enlarging fonts well beyond the normal sizes. I'd like to note with the font enlargements that the operating system now is quite accommodating to larger fonts sizes reshaping itself around the larger font to retain ease of visibility. For more exotic advances there are now biometric monitoring devices that the elderly can wear and in the event of a dramatic change in their vitals emergency services can be automatically summoned as well as contact made with other nominated parties.
A summary of how touch screens work:
The screens are able to sense and interpret the small electric charge given off by our bodies. So when we touch a touch sensitive device the electric field changes within the sensory grid. When this happens the area in which the touch occurred is processed in such a way that the relative center of the touch is established and it initiates the equivalent of a mouse click. Fascinating, I really didn't know that.
How do touch screens improve the efficiency of interactivity? The immediate answer to that is that it cuts out the middle man, a pointing device. The ability to do what comes intuitively to us and point at what we want on a device. Apple are the easiest examples of efficient use of touch technology. All their portable devices nowadays employ some use of touch technology. From the simple pressing of an icon on an iphone to open an application to the pinch gestures used to zoom in on pictures they have really made touch technology almost ubiquitous. One personal favourite of mine is ebook readers. The method with which you turn the page is to drag your fingers across the screen as if you were turning the page.
I would like to note though that an article I read in the sydney morning herald recently points out that intuitive design is only efficient for the culture this intuition is designed around. What is thoughtless habit for one person is a completely foreign practice to another. But for the majority touch screen technology is pretty efficient.
Q2. Technology and accessibility.
It's bland, it's almost common knowledge but it's still worth mentioning the accessibility features built into windows nowadays. Magnifiers to enlarge wherever the mouse pointer is positioned, narrator speaks whatever text is on the screen, there are high contrast modes that increase the visibility of all screen elements (admittedly at the cost of aesthetics) and there are methods of enlarging fonts well beyond the normal sizes. I'd like to note with the font enlargements that the operating system now is quite accommodating to larger fonts sizes reshaping itself around the larger font to retain ease of visibility. For more exotic advances there are now biometric monitoring devices that the elderly can wear and in the event of a dramatic change in their vitals emergency services can be automatically summoned as well as contact made with other nominated parties.
Topic 6
Q1. Forum Experience.
Over the years I have participated in many forums. The instance that sticks out in my mind most strongly though was when I was developing little game mods for a game called Morrowind. It came with a very easy to use editing tool. I became very enthused about developing mods for this game, in particular the scripting language that was integrated into it. Because of the ease of use and the creative possibilities there was a large following of modders behind Morrowind. These modders would rally around modding websites that invariably featured forums. The morrowind modding website titled "Morrowindfiles" was where I dropped my roots for a time.
We were there with a common purpose, the development, distribution and appreciation of game mods. The people participating were all fans of the game, most people were merely there to download and use the mods that were being developed. Most were helpful and supportive towards the sites purpose. As far as size goes, it was big. Morrowind was a very popular game and as such there was a strong international following. I know I met people from every continent bar Antarctica while I was participating with this group.
Unfortunately, nothing is forever, and as I recall server hosting became too expensive for the admins as it was only a fan run site and they decided to close their doors. There were plenty of other sites doing exactly the same thing.
I remember feeling great disappointment over the closure of the site but the community dispersed and moved on. Another similar site rose in its wake called "Gamer's Roam" which inevitably followed the same fate. While participating though I loved answering peoples questions on development problems they had. As I had a pretty firm grasp of the scripting language I LOVED helping people realize their creative scripting ideas.
Q2. Wiki & Moodle
Design-wise I notice that wiki's rely more on a search premise while Moodles categorize their information. Apart from that difference they both have left boxed navigation and a centralised display for the requested information.
The thing that strikes me most about the differences between Wikis and Moodles is the way they present their content. A wiki feels like a broader general repository of knowledge used for reference while Moodle seems to have a goal in mind. What I mean by that is that Moodle facilitates information that will achieve a specified objective. They are both, however, facilitators of information. I could see a wiki being used to compliment the objectives of a moodle.
Q3. Trust and reputation.
You know what? Pop-ups. I've only got my own opinion to go on here but as soon as you ram a pop-up down my throat my respect for a site diminishes significantly. Then there's site design; if a site looks badly constructed then chances are it isn't as reputable as you'd like. I know this sounds judgmental but it's simply a rule of thumb. Personally, if I see flaming text for the title, I'm out of there. Fortunately, personal experience isn't the only thing one can do to determine a sites trustworthiness. Look for a privacy agreement, while boring to read they do hold very important information. Coupled with digital certificates of authenticity one has a good footing to begin trusting a website. You can also do a search on the site in question for forum opinions or any word of mouth information to further improve your stance.
Over the years I have participated in many forums. The instance that sticks out in my mind most strongly though was when I was developing little game mods for a game called Morrowind. It came with a very easy to use editing tool. I became very enthused about developing mods for this game, in particular the scripting language that was integrated into it. Because of the ease of use and the creative possibilities there was a large following of modders behind Morrowind. These modders would rally around modding websites that invariably featured forums. The morrowind modding website titled "Morrowindfiles" was where I dropped my roots for a time.
We were there with a common purpose, the development, distribution and appreciation of game mods. The people participating were all fans of the game, most people were merely there to download and use the mods that were being developed. Most were helpful and supportive towards the sites purpose. As far as size goes, it was big. Morrowind was a very popular game and as such there was a strong international following. I know I met people from every continent bar Antarctica while I was participating with this group.
Unfortunately, nothing is forever, and as I recall server hosting became too expensive for the admins as it was only a fan run site and they decided to close their doors. There were plenty of other sites doing exactly the same thing.
I remember feeling great disappointment over the closure of the site but the community dispersed and moved on. Another similar site rose in its wake called "Gamer's Roam" which inevitably followed the same fate. While participating though I loved answering peoples questions on development problems they had. As I had a pretty firm grasp of the scripting language I LOVED helping people realize their creative scripting ideas.
Q2. Wiki & Moodle
Design-wise I notice that wiki's rely more on a search premise while Moodles categorize their information. Apart from that difference they both have left boxed navigation and a centralised display for the requested information.
The thing that strikes me most about the differences between Wikis and Moodles is the way they present their content. A wiki feels like a broader general repository of knowledge used for reference while Moodle seems to have a goal in mind. What I mean by that is that Moodle facilitates information that will achieve a specified objective. They are both, however, facilitators of information. I could see a wiki being used to compliment the objectives of a moodle.
Q3. Trust and reputation.
You know what? Pop-ups. I've only got my own opinion to go on here but as soon as you ram a pop-up down my throat my respect for a site diminishes significantly. Then there's site design; if a site looks badly constructed then chances are it isn't as reputable as you'd like. I know this sounds judgmental but it's simply a rule of thumb. Personally, if I see flaming text for the title, I'm out of there. Fortunately, personal experience isn't the only thing one can do to determine a sites trustworthiness. Look for a privacy agreement, while boring to read they do hold very important information. Coupled with digital certificates of authenticity one has a good footing to begin trusting a website. You can also do a search on the site in question for forum opinions or any word of mouth information to further improve your stance.
Complicated.
These are late. Quite late.
I'm not sure what I was supposed to do, I'm pretty sure I missed a step somewhere but bureaucracy fails to make sense in the face of tragedy.
I lost a cousin to cancer recently. He had only just turned 20; scarcely out of his teens. It has... hampered productivity to say the least.
So following this, here it all is.
Be kind.
I'm not sure what I was supposed to do, I'm pretty sure I missed a step somewhere but bureaucracy fails to make sense in the face of tragedy.
I lost a cousin to cancer recently. He had only just turned 20; scarcely out of his teens. It has... hampered productivity to say the least.
So following this, here it all is.
Be kind.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Essay
Here we go, this is going to be awful: It's a day late, I've had barely any sleep the last few days and I go overseas tomorrow (for which I am yet to start packing!).
Wikipedia. (2009). Dave Winer. Retrieved 15th September from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Winer#Podcasting
Wikipedia, (2009). Daily Source Code. Retrieved 15th September from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Source_Code
Wikipedia, (2009). Adam Curry. Retrieved 15th September from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/adam_curry#podcasting
Wikipedia, (2009).History of podcasting. Retrieved 15th September from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_podcasting
Yes, it's pretty crap. Yes I'm the sod that left it this late. No I probably won't learn from my mistakes and get it done faster next time.
This essay will seek to compare and contrast the works and contributions of Adam Curry and Dave Winer to the world of online communications as we know it today. These two are arguably two sides of the same coin. Dave Winer is more responsible for the architectural development of many web features, such as blogs, RSS and podcasting. Adam Curry, while not credited with having any notable technical skills, is renowned for popularising podcasts. What we seek to examine here is how these two contributors to the popularisation of podcasting have brought to the table, how they brought it and where their efforts overlap.
The crux of the work Dave Winer is really responsible for is in RSS (Really Simple Syndication). Dave Winer’s contribution to podcasting stemmed from several requests for auidoblogs in 2001 (Wikipedia 2009). He answered this call by implementing audio components into his RSS feeds. He demonstrated that it was possible to stream music through RSS by enclosing a grateful dead song into his usual feed. Dave took this innovation and developed “Radio Userland” and challenged other developers to find a way to further support and advance his RSS music system. What evolved, through the contributions of Kevin Marks and Adam curry was a way to download an RSS and hand it to an iPod through iTunes.
Adam Curry is the man who made podcasting popular. Dave Winer set the groundwork, but Adam Curry gave the technology legs. Using Radio Userland Adam Curry launched a podcast called “Daily Source Code” (Wikipedia 2009) which basically operated as your standard radio show, just on the internet. It has been said (Wikipedia 2009) that Curry saw himself as the celebrity for this new medium. Curry has worked on numerous podcasts since Daily Source Code but has apparently kept it alive. He has also been sighted on second life advertising from “Curry Castle”.
What the analysis of these two contributors illustrates is the creative, innovative ways a seemingly arbitrary implementation can lead to. Dave Winer was given a challenge by his readers, developed a tool to deliver audio files in small increments and a system to utilise it. Adam Curry saw the potential and created material that was worth accessing through the medium. Now the internet has implemented all manner of different ways to implement streaming audio and video. The Canadian Prime Minister is a podcaster! (Wikipedia 2009)
Reflecting on what I have learned here I would say that I associate most with Adam Curry. I get excited when some new innovation hits the street (metaphorically speaking of course) and start thinking up ways to make use of it. Take virtual machines for example: With Windows 7’s implementation of an XP virtual machine I can’t stop thinking of ways to get more mileage out of my computer now!
References:Wikipedia. (2009). Dave Winer. Retrieved 15th September from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Winer#Podcasting
Wikipedia, (2009). Daily Source Code. Retrieved 15th September from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Source_Code
Wikipedia, (2009). Adam Curry. Retrieved 15th September from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/adam_curry#podcasting
Wikipedia, (2009).History of podcasting. Retrieved 15th September from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_podcasting
Yes, it's pretty crap. Yes I'm the sod that left it this late. No I probably won't learn from my mistakes and get it done faster next time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
