Well this morning we had the exam for NCT. It went well. The first bunch of questions as well as the last page i found easy. But the questions on the movies i was completly lost as i didnt think there would be a focus on directors, years and such specific things of the movies. Apart from that i think over all i will do okay on the exam and i am happy with how it went.
This is most likely to be my last post as i dont have any more tutorials or lectures left for the semester.
I have enjoyed New Communication Technologies and found it intriguing and interesting, unike my other courses. Adam and Stephen are both friendly and easy going and made me feel comfortable throughout the course.
Overall i am glad i took this subject and look forward to being able to expand my knowlegde further and put new skills to work.
It has been a fun semester and i hope my marks are good!
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Essay - Social Networking Vs Email
Social Networking Vs. Email
Email is often seen is a dying fad, whilst social networking sites are on the rise, with Facebook signing up its 30 millionth user in July 2007 (Joinson, 2008). So to what extent has email evolved and if so diminished in the last century, especially with the introduction of new communication methods such as instant messaging or social networking sites. Perhaps it is the issue of generation, that has effected the use of email, and if so, could generation Z perhaps revive the fascination and extent of use that email once had? Issues of Spam have also affected email that could be contributing to the increasing unpopularity of email. Whereas social networking sites have continued to expand and gain popularity as new sites such as Facebook appeal to more people and offer new exciting aspects in their sites. But perhaps email itself has expanded past its original aspects of Outlook Express or webmail etc, perhaps in the future email and social networking sites will evolve into one application or network.
Email, or electronic email, “is a virtual mail system which sends documents from one sender to either one or multiple receivers” (Stockwell, 2008) In email’s early days, it was revoluntionary and cool, allowing for people who were once not contactable to become instantly available. (Stebbins, 2007). However over time, email has faced a lot of ridicule and many people have lost trust with email due to the infamous spam viruses. More and more users “are falling victim to phishing, a growing form of online identity theft”. (Garreston, 2004, Pg 1). Although people are trying to cure these many viruses and put a stop to them, new forms of spam are constantly being discovered, that means there is no “practical cure” (Garreston, 2004). Spam has done well to prove itself a persistent and permanent problem, with it taking up approximately 80% of email across the world (Garreston, 2004)
Social networking sites allow a user to edit profiles and status, post bulletins, blogs, comments and photos, join groups, events, and networks, and of course send mail. Whereas all email can really do is the latter. The main function for social networking sites is that you have the ability to connect with other people or ‘friends’. This is also one of the main reasons that these sites are so popular, as people can keep in contact with old friends from all over the world and also have the opportunity to meet new people online. (Joinson, 2008). The April introduction of Facebook chat that incorporates instant messanger on a social networking site has been received well, despite a few teething problems. (Smith, 2008). This is just one example of how new communication technologies are becoming more popular and more advanced, leaving behind the ‘old media’ like email, that don’t provide the same dynamic communication and interaction. (Joinson, 2008)
Social networking sites are considered more appealing than email, due to their ever-changing attractions, “A social network profile is more engaging if it changes frequently”. (Lenhart & Madden, 2007, Pg 4). Social networking sites are constantly creating new things to do on their sites, and have come along way from the basic models of Friendster or Myspace. On Facebook, you can play games from poker to sodoku to beer pong, however games applications are only one of the many applications available on Facebook. You can add your favourite TV program, and take trivia tests or get funny quotes from any series. You can rate your friends on their personality and looks, and compare them with other friends for titles such as “most likely to make me laugh”. On Bebo you can create polls or quizzes for your friends to participate in. The list goes on for the endless amount of possibilities that are available on these sites, which is one of the reasons that they have attracted such popularity. “The rapid increase in participation in very recent years has been accompanied by a progressive diversification and sophistication of purposes and usage patterns across a multitude of different sites.” (Gross & Acquisti, 2006, Pg 71).
Unlike social networking sites, email has the ability to attach files, documents and photos from your computer. However, there is no need to attach photos to the email, when the photos are already in an album in on your profile. And there is not need to create mailing lists when you have the ability to send messages to all of your ‘friends’. And of the people using social networking sites, 82% of them use it to send private messages to other friends within the networking site. These private messages can be considered a sort of internal email. (Lenhart & Madden, 2007)
However for many people the simplicity of email is more appealing than the chaos of social networking sites, they are able to use email as a sort of task manager or to do list. (Stebbins, 2007). Also email allows for contact when the sender wants to contact the recipient, and the recipient can contact back on there own terms, when they want. This efficiency and simplicity can be debated as factors that make email an appealing program that has just started to evolve and develop. By regularly monitoring the flow of your inbox, email can help to gain control and help people to “stay in touch in our increasingly fragmented world” (Smith, 2007).
Even though generation X are normally associated with being techno phobic, they use email more than generation Y. Described as the ‘social networking teens’, generation Y prefer to use instant messenger and networking sites to communicate with friends rather than email. (Marriot, 2007). For teenagers, email is often only used to communicate with teachers, bosses and parents, those of generation X. (Stebbins, 2007). 55% of teenagers or generation Y who use the internet have profiles on social networking sites such as Facebook or Myspace, whereas the 75% of adults that are using the internet, only 16% use the same networking sites, however 92% are using email. (Internet Activities, 2000 – 2007). It can be argued that as generation Y continue into the workforce, they will be forced to use email to communicate with colleagues. Also as networking sites, especially Myspace is blocked at many workplaces and schools, they will only be able to go onto social networking sites in their own personal time.
The debate over whether email is dying out, has been disputed and supported over the years, especially as new technologies are coming into creation. Perhaps only time will tell as to emails place in the future. It could remain in the workforce or be reinvented. As social networking sites continue to change and increase in popularity, not just for college students and teenagers, they continue to endanger the future of email. Social networking sites have come along way since one of the firsts, sixdegrees.com, which failed to find a purpose to its concept. (Gross & Acquisti, 2006). Integration of both social networking sites and email, in some ways already exists and will perhaps develop further.
References
Journal Articles
Joinson, A.N (2008). ‘Looking at’, ‘Looking up’ or ‘Keeping up with’ People? Motives and Uses of Facebook. CHI 2008 Proceedings. 1027 - 1035.
Stebbins, L (2007). Email is Evolving – Are You? Searcher Vol 15. 2 - 6
Lenhart, A, and Madden, M (2007). Social Networking Websites and Teens: An Overview. Pew Internet & American Life Project. 1 – 7.
Gross, R and Acquisti, A (2006). Information Revelation and Privacy in Online Social Networks. Carnegie Mellon University. 71 - 75.
Garretson, C (2004). E-mail At a Crossroad. Network World Vol 21. 1 - 3
Lectures
Stockwell, S. Lecture 6 – The History of Computer and Internet. New Communication Technologies. 16th April 2008.
Websites
Marriot,, C (2007). Is Email Facing Extinction? Retrieved from http://www.imdeiaconnection.com/content/15637.asp
Internet Activities. Pew Internet & American Life Project Tracking Surveys (March 2000 – December 2007). Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/Internet_Activities_2.15.08.htm
Smith, M.A (2007). Is Email Dead? Retrieved from http://advice.cio.com/miles_a_smith/is_email_dead
Smith, J (2008). Facebook Chat Launches- Tour & First Impressions. Retrieved from http://www.insidefacebook.com/2008/04/06/facebook- chat-launches-tour- first-impressions/
Lee, T (2008). Social Networking Sites Turn Outward. Retrieved from http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080511/11461 51076.shtml
Email is often seen is a dying fad, whilst social networking sites are on the rise, with Facebook signing up its 30 millionth user in July 2007 (Joinson, 2008). So to what extent has email evolved and if so diminished in the last century, especially with the introduction of new communication methods such as instant messaging or social networking sites. Perhaps it is the issue of generation, that has effected the use of email, and if so, could generation Z perhaps revive the fascination and extent of use that email once had? Issues of Spam have also affected email that could be contributing to the increasing unpopularity of email. Whereas social networking sites have continued to expand and gain popularity as new sites such as Facebook appeal to more people and offer new exciting aspects in their sites. But perhaps email itself has expanded past its original aspects of Outlook Express or webmail etc, perhaps in the future email and social networking sites will evolve into one application or network.
Email, or electronic email, “is a virtual mail system which sends documents from one sender to either one or multiple receivers” (Stockwell, 2008) In email’s early days, it was revoluntionary and cool, allowing for people who were once not contactable to become instantly available. (Stebbins, 2007). However over time, email has faced a lot of ridicule and many people have lost trust with email due to the infamous spam viruses. More and more users “are falling victim to phishing, a growing form of online identity theft”. (Garreston, 2004, Pg 1). Although people are trying to cure these many viruses and put a stop to them, new forms of spam are constantly being discovered, that means there is no “practical cure” (Garreston, 2004). Spam has done well to prove itself a persistent and permanent problem, with it taking up approximately 80% of email across the world (Garreston, 2004)
Social networking sites allow a user to edit profiles and status, post bulletins, blogs, comments and photos, join groups, events, and networks, and of course send mail. Whereas all email can really do is the latter. The main function for social networking sites is that you have the ability to connect with other people or ‘friends’. This is also one of the main reasons that these sites are so popular, as people can keep in contact with old friends from all over the world and also have the opportunity to meet new people online. (Joinson, 2008). The April introduction of Facebook chat that incorporates instant messanger on a social networking site has been received well, despite a few teething problems. (Smith, 2008). This is just one example of how new communication technologies are becoming more popular and more advanced, leaving behind the ‘old media’ like email, that don’t provide the same dynamic communication and interaction. (Joinson, 2008)
Social networking sites are considered more appealing than email, due to their ever-changing attractions, “A social network profile is more engaging if it changes frequently”. (Lenhart & Madden, 2007, Pg 4). Social networking sites are constantly creating new things to do on their sites, and have come along way from the basic models of Friendster or Myspace. On Facebook, you can play games from poker to sodoku to beer pong, however games applications are only one of the many applications available on Facebook. You can add your favourite TV program, and take trivia tests or get funny quotes from any series. You can rate your friends on their personality and looks, and compare them with other friends for titles such as “most likely to make me laugh”. On Bebo you can create polls or quizzes for your friends to participate in. The list goes on for the endless amount of possibilities that are available on these sites, which is one of the reasons that they have attracted such popularity. “The rapid increase in participation in very recent years has been accompanied by a progressive diversification and sophistication of purposes and usage patterns across a multitude of different sites.” (Gross & Acquisti, 2006, Pg 71).
Unlike social networking sites, email has the ability to attach files, documents and photos from your computer. However, there is no need to attach photos to the email, when the photos are already in an album in on your profile. And there is not need to create mailing lists when you have the ability to send messages to all of your ‘friends’. And of the people using social networking sites, 82% of them use it to send private messages to other friends within the networking site. These private messages can be considered a sort of internal email. (Lenhart & Madden, 2007)
However for many people the simplicity of email is more appealing than the chaos of social networking sites, they are able to use email as a sort of task manager or to do list. (Stebbins, 2007). Also email allows for contact when the sender wants to contact the recipient, and the recipient can contact back on there own terms, when they want. This efficiency and simplicity can be debated as factors that make email an appealing program that has just started to evolve and develop. By regularly monitoring the flow of your inbox, email can help to gain control and help people to “stay in touch in our increasingly fragmented world” (Smith, 2007).
Even though generation X are normally associated with being techno phobic, they use email more than generation Y. Described as the ‘social networking teens’, generation Y prefer to use instant messenger and networking sites to communicate with friends rather than email. (Marriot, 2007). For teenagers, email is often only used to communicate with teachers, bosses and parents, those of generation X. (Stebbins, 2007). 55% of teenagers or generation Y who use the internet have profiles on social networking sites such as Facebook or Myspace, whereas the 75% of adults that are using the internet, only 16% use the same networking sites, however 92% are using email. (Internet Activities, 2000 – 2007). It can be argued that as generation Y continue into the workforce, they will be forced to use email to communicate with colleagues. Also as networking sites, especially Myspace is blocked at many workplaces and schools, they will only be able to go onto social networking sites in their own personal time.
The debate over whether email is dying out, has been disputed and supported over the years, especially as new technologies are coming into creation. Perhaps only time will tell as to emails place in the future. It could remain in the workforce or be reinvented. As social networking sites continue to change and increase in popularity, not just for college students and teenagers, they continue to endanger the future of email. Social networking sites have come along way since one of the firsts, sixdegrees.com, which failed to find a purpose to its concept. (Gross & Acquisti, 2006). Integration of both social networking sites and email, in some ways already exists and will perhaps develop further.
References
Journal Articles
Joinson, A.N (2008). ‘Looking at’, ‘Looking up’ or ‘Keeping up with’ People? Motives and Uses of Facebook. CHI 2008 Proceedings. 1027 - 1035.
Stebbins, L (2007). Email is Evolving – Are You? Searcher Vol 15. 2 - 6
Lenhart, A, and Madden, M (2007). Social Networking Websites and Teens: An Overview. Pew Internet & American Life Project. 1 – 7.
Gross, R and Acquisti, A (2006). Information Revelation and Privacy in Online Social Networks. Carnegie Mellon University. 71 - 75.
Garretson, C (2004). E-mail At a Crossroad. Network World Vol 21. 1 - 3
Lectures
Stockwell, S. Lecture 6 – The History of Computer and Internet. New Communication Technologies. 16th April 2008.
Websites
Marriot,, C (2007). Is Email Facing Extinction? Retrieved from http://www.imdeiaconnection.com/content/15637.asp
Internet Activities. Pew Internet & American Life Project Tracking Surveys (March 2000 – December 2007). Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/Internet_Activities_2.15.08.htm
Smith, M.A (2007). Is Email Dead? Retrieved from http://advice.cio.com/miles_a_smith/is_email_dead
Smith, J (2008). Facebook Chat Launches- Tour & First Impressions. Retrieved from http://www.insidefacebook.com/2008/04/06/facebook- chat-launches-tour- first-impressions/
Lee, T (2008). Social Networking Sites Turn Outward. Retrieved from http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080511/11461 51076.shtml
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Essay Outline
Is Email Dead??
Websites:
http://advice.cio.com/miles_a_smith/is_email_dead
http://email.about.com/cs/spamgeneral/a/email_is_dead.htm
http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/2007/04/03/i-only-use-email-to-communicate-with-old-people/
http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/Internet_Activities_2.15.08.htm
http://www.pewinternet.org/topics.asp?page=2&c=3
Journal articles - Workplace user frustration with computers: an exploratory investigation of the causes and severity.
http://libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/pqdweb?did=1214305691&sid=2&Fmt=4&clientId=13713&RQT=309&VName=PQD
http://libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/pqdweb?did=734525531&sid=2&Fmt=4&clientId=13713&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Include history of email – when it was first invented, when did msn etc come into and what happened to email when other uses of communication were introduced. Who primarily used it when it was first introduced?
What was it first used for and how has this changed today?
How alternatives to email have affected the lifeline of email?
The introduction to instant messaging and webcam – how did this take away from email?
Networking sites that allow for comments and messaging. Can this still be considered email. And if not has it taken the place of email.
The popularity of cell phones has txting and calling meant less emails.
Who uses email, and over the years how have they contributed to the lifeline of email? What factors contribute to there email use?
People overseas – keeping up to date with people back home.
Business people – instead of face-to-face meetings. Keeps a record.
Students – often a percentage that don’t know how to access it.
Who do people most often email? Family or friends or colleagues?
Does Generation Y or X use email more and what do they use it for? Will Generation Z bring email back to life or kill it for good?
Maybe also think about:
Hotmail, Gmail, Yahoo. Outlook Express etc. – does a particular email network influence how the email gets used.
The influence of spam and prank emails – has this made people not want to use email anymore. Who is the most gullible to this sort of forwarding emails.
Has safety become an issue to greatly effect email?
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/evolution_of_communication.php
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/21/technology/myspace.fortune/index.htm
After talking with Adam and researching further my main issue/topic is going to be about how email has evolved alongside networking sites etc. and how networking sites can be considered just another form of email. I also want to touch on the different age groups that use email or networking sites and who they use what to communicate with.
Websites:
http://advice.cio.com/miles_a_smith/is_email_dead
http://email.about.com/cs/spamgeneral/a/email_is_dead.htm
http://www.web-strategist.com/blog/2007/04/03/i-only-use-email-to-communicate-with-old-people/
http://www.pewinternet.org/trends/Internet_Activities_2.15.08.htm
http://www.pewinternet.org/topics.asp?page=2&c=3
Journal articles - Workplace user frustration with computers: an exploratory investigation of the causes and severity.
http://libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/pqdweb?did=1214305691&sid=2&Fmt=4&clientId=13713&RQT=309&VName=PQD
http://libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/login?url=http://proquest.umi.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/pqdweb?did=734525531&sid=2&Fmt=4&clientId=13713&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Include history of email – when it was first invented, when did msn etc come into and what happened to email when other uses of communication were introduced. Who primarily used it when it was first introduced?
What was it first used for and how has this changed today?
How alternatives to email have affected the lifeline of email?
The introduction to instant messaging and webcam – how did this take away from email?
Networking sites that allow for comments and messaging. Can this still be considered email. And if not has it taken the place of email.
The popularity of cell phones has txting and calling meant less emails.
Who uses email, and over the years how have they contributed to the lifeline of email? What factors contribute to there email use?
People overseas – keeping up to date with people back home.
Business people – instead of face-to-face meetings. Keeps a record.
Students – often a percentage that don’t know how to access it.
Who do people most often email? Family or friends or colleagues?
Does Generation Y or X use email more and what do they use it for? Will Generation Z bring email back to life or kill it for good?
Maybe also think about:
Hotmail, Gmail, Yahoo. Outlook Express etc. – does a particular email network influence how the email gets used.
The influence of spam and prank emails – has this made people not want to use email anymore. Who is the most gullible to this sort of forwarding emails.
Has safety become an issue to greatly effect email?
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/evolution_of_communication.php
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/21/technology/myspace.fortune/index.htm
After talking with Adam and researching further my main issue/topic is going to be about how email has evolved alongside networking sites etc. and how networking sites can be considered just another form of email. I also want to touch on the different age groups that use email or networking sites and who they use what to communicate with.
week 8
Task 1:Advanced Uses Of Microsoft
I found the first few parts of this task very easy to follow and very easy to do. The software where you can trace what you were editing was very intriguing to me and i wasnt aware it existed, and i also adapted to it easily. The Mail merge was a problem for me and my MACword didnt go along with the instructions for the word in the task, this meant that i had to find what the equivilent for mail merge was on my software.
Task 2: Basic Microsoft Excel
I also found this task easy and i was very familiar with alot of the tricks and shortcuts that can be used from my last year at schooling and also from my old work. Maths in Year 13 involved alot of graphs and cell data and so i was aware of more than the basics for microsoft excel.
Task 3: Internet Field Trip
I first tried out habbohotel.com. Creating a person was very easy, although i wasnt impressed with the limited range of clothing and hair options. But you can gain more options the more you are at the hotel, which i guess is one of the insentives to continuing playing in the hotel. I found it hard to follow, on exactly where to go other than your room and how exactly to chat to people. In my opinion i think that much like the real world, you can choose who you want to talk to you and you often base this on there clothing (to a certain extent) as in habbo hotel your first impression is what the other persons avator looks like. which means that to make your avator more popular you would want to make your avator look appealling. i think that i was more wary of who was behind the people as there could be a completly different person to the avatar and this made me stand offish. unlike in real life you are unable to see people for face value and make your own judgements correctly. so i didnt really get used to the chatting sort of thing and i didnt like it that much. It is different to IM as in IM you know all the people you are chatting to and have met them in person previously.
I found the first few parts of this task very easy to follow and very easy to do. The software where you can trace what you were editing was very intriguing to me and i wasnt aware it existed, and i also adapted to it easily. The Mail merge was a problem for me and my MACword didnt go along with the instructions for the word in the task, this meant that i had to find what the equivilent for mail merge was on my software.
Task 2: Basic Microsoft Excel
I also found this task easy and i was very familiar with alot of the tricks and shortcuts that can be used from my last year at schooling and also from my old work. Maths in Year 13 involved alot of graphs and cell data and so i was aware of more than the basics for microsoft excel.
Task 3: Internet Field Trip
I first tried out habbohotel.com. Creating a person was very easy, although i wasnt impressed with the limited range of clothing and hair options. But you can gain more options the more you are at the hotel, which i guess is one of the insentives to continuing playing in the hotel. I found it hard to follow, on exactly where to go other than your room and how exactly to chat to people. In my opinion i think that much like the real world, you can choose who you want to talk to you and you often base this on there clothing (to a certain extent) as in habbo hotel your first impression is what the other persons avator looks like. which means that to make your avator more popular you would want to make your avator look appealling. i think that i was more wary of who was behind the people as there could be a completly different person to the avatar and this made me stand offish. unlike in real life you are unable to see people for face value and make your own judgements correctly. so i didnt really get used to the chatting sort of thing and i didnt like it that much. It is different to IM as in IM you know all the people you are chatting to and have met them in person previously.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Wikipedia Search
Dazed and Confused (movie)
Is this an accurate article? and Does it cover all the basic facts you need to understand this topic? Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines used for useful articles? Is this article fair or balanced or is it biased towards a paticular article? What changes would you make to benefit the wider wikipedia community?
Firstly i thought that the general information was really bad and didnt give the film justice. especially when it mentioned that high school films 'sucked'. however on reading the plot section i felt it gave too much information. instead of a summary of the plot it pretty much told teh story of the movie, badly too. This would give away the movie to anyone who had not seen the film, especially as it has a event by event detail. it is not biased but i dont think it is that balanced and it gives a run down of the film rather than the meaning of the film. i would personally make the plot less event detailed and more about the meaning of the movie as a whole. I would also got more trivia and facts from www.imdb.com as that is accurate and provides useful information on movies.
Donnie Darko (film)
Is this an accurate article? and Does it cover all the basic facts you need to understand this topic? Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines used for useful articles? Is this article fair or balanced or is it biased towards a paticular article? What changes would you make to benefit the wider wikipedia community?
i think that this is an accurate account of the film donnie darko and it certainly seems that the person who wrote understands the film well (which not many people do!) however i would like to see more triva in there, once again things that could be attached from www.imdb.com and also more about the production and behind the scenes, not just the movie itself. the trivia of this movie is often some of its best attributes so i think that adding trivia in would benefit the wikipedia search of this movie, and help others to understand what is a fairly complex movie. i thnk that on the whole it is a fair and balanced article. although lacking in trivia, it is still informative and well written.
Is this an accurate article? and Does it cover all the basic facts you need to understand this topic? Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines used for useful articles? Is this article fair or balanced or is it biased towards a paticular article? What changes would you make to benefit the wider wikipedia community?
Firstly i thought that the general information was really bad and didnt give the film justice. especially when it mentioned that high school films 'sucked'. however on reading the plot section i felt it gave too much information. instead of a summary of the plot it pretty much told teh story of the movie, badly too. This would give away the movie to anyone who had not seen the film, especially as it has a event by event detail. it is not biased but i dont think it is that balanced and it gives a run down of the film rather than the meaning of the film. i would personally make the plot less event detailed and more about the meaning of the movie as a whole. I would also got more trivia and facts from www.imdb.com as that is accurate and provides useful information on movies.
Donnie Darko (film)
Is this an accurate article? and Does it cover all the basic facts you need to understand this topic? Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines used for useful articles? Is this article fair or balanced or is it biased towards a paticular article? What changes would you make to benefit the wider wikipedia community?
i think that this is an accurate account of the film donnie darko and it certainly seems that the person who wrote understands the film well (which not many people do!) however i would like to see more triva in there, once again things that could be attached from www.imdb.com and also more about the production and behind the scenes, not just the movie itself. the trivia of this movie is often some of its best attributes so i think that adding trivia in would benefit the wikipedia search of this movie, and help others to understand what is a fairly complex movie. i thnk that on the whole it is a fair and balanced article. although lacking in trivia, it is still informative and well written.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Thoughts on Benjamin's Theorys
How do the ideas from Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" apply to contemporary digital media?
Benjamin argues that art has always been able to be replicated, and the new digital media has increased this likely hood, as well the fact that now art can be modified. Yet this recreation of art through the computer (slow motion and other effects), cant that be considered another or further form of art rather than a remodification of a different piece of art. Benjamin also talks about the prescene of time and space in art. With new contemporary digital media, this makes this lack of existence even more so. A piece of art can be stored on a computer for years and not change, so who is to say who or when it was created? However dosn't this new age digital media not show a time and prescene not found in past artworks. Is digital and computer modifed art not a representation of the time we are currently in?
There was a time when "Art" was made by artists who were skilled professionals. Now that anyone with a computer can create things digitally (music, images, videos, etc), what does that mean for "art"?
This can be viewed as a postive or a negtive thing for art depending on where you stand. If you were someone with true artistic ability it could benefit you by helping to broaden your artistic oppourtunites but this is the same for the case of people with basic artistic abilities. Therefore this would make it harder for real artists to get noticed and it would also enhance the risk of people copying your art and modifying it to take it as there own. It gives art a broader meaning with less direction. New applications such as garageband, photoshop and imovie make it possible to achieve new wave advancments, but it makes it possible to everyday people with no artistic backgroud. However i still think that real artists should be able to be so good compared to the everyday people that there work is far more advanced and set aside from the work of others. yet it would also be hard to tell what really is art if it were made on the computer. a person could take a photo and modify it using photoshop but who is to say that is art? do we not still have the same critics and definition for art that people can tell what is really art, be it digital and what is not art but a persons attempts to make something artistic using the computer.
Is a photoshopped image "authentic"?
This depends on the image that is being made. If someone where to take a photo or image that is not theres and change it using photoshop then it would not be authentic. Whereas if someone were to make a design from photoshop using there own images accompanied by the tools of photoshop i think this would be authentic.
Do digital "things" have an "aura" (in Benjamin's terms)?
Benjamin argues that digital things do not have an "aura" as they are detached from significance behind the art. That the risk and reality of reproduction makes for a destruction of tradition and creativity that takes away a piece of arts "aura".
Benjamin argues that art has always been able to be replicated, and the new digital media has increased this likely hood, as well the fact that now art can be modified. Yet this recreation of art through the computer (slow motion and other effects), cant that be considered another or further form of art rather than a remodification of a different piece of art. Benjamin also talks about the prescene of time and space in art. With new contemporary digital media, this makes this lack of existence even more so. A piece of art can be stored on a computer for years and not change, so who is to say who or when it was created? However dosn't this new age digital media not show a time and prescene not found in past artworks. Is digital and computer modifed art not a representation of the time we are currently in?
There was a time when "Art" was made by artists who were skilled professionals. Now that anyone with a computer can create things digitally (music, images, videos, etc), what does that mean for "art"?
This can be viewed as a postive or a negtive thing for art depending on where you stand. If you were someone with true artistic ability it could benefit you by helping to broaden your artistic oppourtunites but this is the same for the case of people with basic artistic abilities. Therefore this would make it harder for real artists to get noticed and it would also enhance the risk of people copying your art and modifying it to take it as there own. It gives art a broader meaning with less direction. New applications such as garageband, photoshop and imovie make it possible to achieve new wave advancments, but it makes it possible to everyday people with no artistic backgroud. However i still think that real artists should be able to be so good compared to the everyday people that there work is far more advanced and set aside from the work of others. yet it would also be hard to tell what really is art if it were made on the computer. a person could take a photo and modify it using photoshop but who is to say that is art? do we not still have the same critics and definition for art that people can tell what is really art, be it digital and what is not art but a persons attempts to make something artistic using the computer.
Is a photoshopped image "authentic"?
This depends on the image that is being made. If someone where to take a photo or image that is not theres and change it using photoshop then it would not be authentic. Whereas if someone were to make a design from photoshop using there own images accompanied by the tools of photoshop i think this would be authentic.
Do digital "things" have an "aura" (in Benjamin's terms)?
Benjamin argues that digital things do not have an "aura" as they are detached from significance behind the art. That the risk and reality of reproduction makes for a destruction of tradition and creativity that takes away a piece of arts "aura".
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Tutorial 4, Task 2
How do search engines rank the stuff they find on the internet?
Who or what, makes one page (that you might get in your search results) more useful than another one, so that it is put at the top of your search results?
Who or what, makes one page (that you might get in your search results) more useful than another one, so that it is put at the top of your search results?
The following answers both questions and was taken from http://www.monash.com/spidap4.html
What follows is a basic explanation of how search engines work. For more detailed and technical information about current methods used by search engines like Google, check out our discussion of Search Engine Ranking Algorithms
- Keyword Searching
- Refining Your Search
- Relevancy Ranking
- Meta Tags
- Concept-based Searching (This information is dated, but might have historical interest for researchers)
Search engines use automated software programs knows as spiders or bots to survey the Web and build their databases. Web documents are retrieved by these programs and analyzed. Data collected from each web page are then added to the search engine index. When you enter a query at a search engine site, your input is checked against the search engine's index of all the web pages it has analyzed. The best urls are then returned to you as hits, ranked in order with the best results at the top.
Keyword Searching
This is the most common form of text search on the Web. Most search engines do their text query and retrieval using keywords.
What is a keyword, exactly? It can simply be any word on a webpage. For example, I used the word "simply" in the previous sentence, making it one of the keywords for this particular webpage in some search engine's index. However, since the word "simply" has nothing to do with the subject of this webpage (i.e., how search engines work), it is not a very useful keyword. Useful keywords and key phrases for this page would be "search," "search engines," "search engine methods," "how search engines work," "ranking" "relevancy," "search engine tutorials," etc. Those keywords would actually tell a user something about the subject and content of this page.
Unless the author of the Web document specifies the keywords for her document (this is possible by using meta tags), it's up to the search engine to determine them. Essentially, this means that search engines pull out and index words that appear to be significant. Since since engines are software programs, not rational human beings, they work according to rules established by their creators for what words are usually important in a broad range of documents. The title of a page, for example, usually gives useful information about the subject of the page (if it doesn't, it should!). Words that are mentioned towards the beginning of a document (think of the "topic sentence" in a high school essay, where you lay out the subject you intend to discuss) are given more weight by most search engines. The same goes for words that are repeated several times throughout the document.
Some search engines index every word on every page. Others index only part of the document.
Full-text indexing systems generally pick up every word in the text except commonly occurring stop words such as "a," "an," "the," "is," "and," "or," and "www." Some of the search engines discriminate upper case from lower case; others store all words without reference to capitalization.
The Problem With Keyword Searching
Keyword searches have a tough time distinguishing between words that are spelled the same way, but mean something different (i.e. hard cider, a hard stone, a hard exam, and the hard drive on your computer). This often results in hits that are completely irrelevant to your query. Some search engines also have trouble with so-called stemming -- i.e., if you enter the word "big," should they return a hit on the word, "bigger?" What about singular and plural words? What about verb tenses that differ from the word you entered by only an "s," or an "ed"?
Search engines also cannot return hits on keywords that mean the same, but are not actually entered in your query. A query on heart disease would not return a document that used the word "cardiac" instead of "heart."
Refining Your Search
Most sites offer two different types of searches--"basic" and "refined" or "advanced." In a "basic" search, you just enter a keyword without sifting through any pulldown menus of additional options. Depending on the engine, though, "basic" searches can be quite complex.
Advanced search refining options differ from one search engine to another, but some of the possibilities include the ability to search on more than one word, to give more weight to one search term than you give to another, and to exclude words that might be likely to muddy the results. You might also be able to search on proper names, on phrases, and on words that are found within a certain proximity to other search terms.
Some search engines also allow you to specify what form you'd like your results to appear in, and whether you wish to restrict your search to certain fields on the internet (i.e., usenet or the Web) or to specific parts of Web documents (i.e., the title or URL).
Many, but not all search engines allow you to use so-called Boolean operators to refine your search. These are the logical terms AND, OR, NOT, and the so-called proximal locators, NEAR and FOLLOWED BY.
Boolean AND means that all the terms you specify must appear in the documents, i.e., "heart" AND "attack." You might use this if you wanted to exclude common hits that would be irrelevant to your query.
Boolean OR means that at least one of the terms you specify must appear in the documents, i.e., bronchitis, acute OR chronic. You might use this if you didn't want to rule out too much.
Boolean NOT means that at least one of the terms you specify must not appear in the documents. You might use this if you anticipated results that would be totally off-base, i.e., nirvana AND Buddhism, NOT Cobain.
Not quite Boolean + and - Some search engines use the characters + and - instead of Boolean operators to include and exclude terms.
NEAR means that the terms you enter should be within a certain number of words of each other. FOLLOWED BY means that one term must directly follow the other. ADJ, for adjacent, serves the same function. A search engine that will allow you to search on phrases uses, essentially, the same method (i.e., determining adjacency of keywords).
Phrases: The ability to query on phrases is very important in a search engine. Those that allow it usually require that you enclose the phrase in quotation marks, i.e., "space the final frontier."
Capitalization: This is essential for searching on proper names of people, companies or products. Unfortunately, many words in English are used both as proper and common nouns--Bill, bill, Gates, gates, Oracle, oracle, Lotus, lotus, Digital, digital--the list is endless.
All the search engines have different methods of refining queries. The best way to learn them is to read the help files on the search engine sites and practice!
Most of the search engines return results with confidence or relevancy rankings. In other words, they list the hits according to how closely they think the results match the query. However, these lists often leave users shaking their heads on confusion, since, to the user, the results may seem completely irrelevant.
Why does this happen? Basically it's because search engine technology has not yet reached the point where humans and computers understand each other well enough to communicate clearly.
Most search engines use search term frequency as a primary way of determining whether a document is relevant. If you're researching diabetes and the word "diabetes" appears multiple times in a Web document, it's reasonable to assume that the document will contain useful information. Therefore, a document that repeats the word "diabetes" over and over is likely to turn up near the top of your list.
If your keyword is a common one, or if it has multiple other meanings, you could end up with a lot of irrelevant hits. And if your keyword is a subject about which you desire information, you don't need to see it repeated over and over--it's the information about that word that you're interested in, not the word itself.
Some search engines consider both the frequency and the positioning of keywords to determine relevancy, reasoning that if the keywords appear early in the document, or in the headers, this increases the likelihood that the document is on target. For example, one method is to rank hits according to how many times your keywords appear and in which fields they appear (i.e., in headers, titles or plain text). Another method is to determine which documents are most frequently linked to other documents on the Web. The reasoning here is that if other folks consider certain pages important, you should, too.
If you use the advanced query form on AltaVista, you can assign relevance weights to your query terms before conducting a search. Although this takes some practice, it essentially allows you to have a stronger say in what results you will get back.
As far as the user is concerned, relevancy ranking is critical, and becomes more so as the sheer volume of information on the Web grows. Most of us don't have the time to sift through scores of hits to determine which hyperlinks we should actually explore. The more clearly relevant the results are, the more we're likely to value the search engine.
What are some of your favourite search engines? Why do you like one more than the others?
I prefer to use google the most, it is bookmarked. I always use it when i want to find images and would go there first to use it to find general or international topics. google is the most common and is proven to be reliable. I also like www.ask.com or www.askjeeves.com, cause you can actually ask and type in full questions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)