Convergence

Jenkins understands convergence not as a shrinking force that will bring together all of our media into a "Black Box" but rather a force that is ever-changing and constantly being processed. The new technologies are just new ways for the media that we love to be experienced. He brings upon the example of how music did not disappear when 8-tracks became popular, it was only the technology that held it that disappeared. No popular media will ever fade out like a 'fad' it will continue to be a part of our lives, but just in different forms. Convergence has contradictory paths that Jenkins explores, 1. Media is cheaper, easier to access, and in a variety of different forms, and 2. Media conglomerates are growing larger and more powerful as convergence continues. He describes convergence as a way that old media and new media collide into new forms of technology in which to experience it. Creative engagement is the new ways that media companies are engaging with the consumer. They are allowing instantaneous feedback from the viewers and even allowing them to become a part of the process rather than sit back. It also allows users to create their own content. Whether this be through a YouTube video or even through creating Tumblr posts about the TV program, or Video game they play. This leads to the question about participatory culture. This is not only where consumers are participating in a new media in a way that they never have been able to before. Twitter tells the news now, people can tweet hashtags about their favorite shows, they can become an active member of a certain medium and are able to give their feedback instantaneously instantaneously With these new technologies its easy for people who have creative talents to become more involved and creative in that participatory. Certain companies have competitions where the best ad made by regular consumers will make it to the SuperBowl. The consumers are actively participating in what kinda of content they want, and traditional media is responding.

Downloading Music

The government is having a hard time controlling the amount of 'free' and 'illegal' downloads of copyrighted content that consumers have access to. One of the main problems is that there is virtually no regulatory system that is used to control what people upload and download while online. The government having access and information on how we are using our networks would be, to most people, a violation of privacy. So what are we do to when almost all the students in our class raised their hands for downloading music illegally? Should the government have more access to our personal computers to decide who should be punished for their illegal actions. I myself download music illegally, but only stream movies or TV shows--which could also be considered illegal. I would not want the government to have access to how I am using my internet. There are three things I would propose that would discourage these types of downloads.
1. Stricter punishments for smaller downloads. Many users get WARNING messages from their internet providers if it is clear that they have been downloading a lot of illegal content. The WARNING serves as just that, a warning. There are no punishments involved. If the first WARNING message came with a 30 dollar fine-- that would definitely prevent people from even considering downloading in the first place. Of course there would have to be a court system where people could appeal the charge and prove that they weren't downloading anything illegally.

2. There should be stricter privacy settings on CD's, DVDs, and even on itunes, where purchased files cannot leave their original folder, and no copies can be made. I know on many DVD's this security system is set in place but it is not very strong, and CDs and itunes have almost no security, allowing you to copy music on to many different computers. Stricter security on the original hardware of the technology will discourage those from trying to extract all the files information.

3. There recently was an Ad campaign out there that tried to guilt those who downloaded music or movies by saying-- "You wouldn't steal a car" This did not have the effect that the campaign was supposed to, because there was some backlash to the Ad and it became more of a joke (see youtube video below). There should be a new campaign that shows insight to who the consumer is taking money from when they download music. If consumers could see how they are affecting struggling artists, they may pay the 15 dollars for a CD.

Privacy Enhanced Personalization

This article deals with the trade off between privacy and personalization that many consumers don't know they are involved in. While we indulge in the great benefits of personalization on the web such as product recommendations, online search aggregations, and personalized tutoring systems, we do not realize the implications these features have on our privacy. How much a citizen/consumer is willing to share online is connected to their personality, cultural based attitudes, the type of information disclosed, and the value that is assigned to personalization benefits. These factors all combine to create categories for how much information citizens divulge. In my personal inexperience, I am privacy pragmatic, I absolutely love any personalization feature that can save me time, money, or anything that could ultimately make my web browsing experience more enjoyable. On the other hand my father is a privacy fundamentalist- he hates sharing any personal information due to his upbringing in soviet Poland where all information was owned by the government. While I love having my information more personalized, I do believe that I may over valuate small but immediate benefits of divulging personal information and undervalue any future negative impacts; This way of thinking is called Acquisti and it is something that many people other than myself may deal with. With the recent allegations made by Edward Snowden pertaining to how the United States uses our data, it is imperative that we take a harder look at our decision to trade off privacy for personalization. This leads to the question, when does personalization ultimately overstep its bounds? At what point will I feel violated? This answer is different for many people, but shouldn’t companies constantly be working to make sure that their guidelines fit with the consumers needs? In the article 93% of people said they should have a legal right to know everything a website knows about them, BUT we never read the terms and conditions. In fact- a mere presence of privacy statements provide more trust, even if the level of privacy was very low. Consumers and businesses should work together to make terms, conditions, and privacy statements more customizable to our personal needs. I should be able to select what I am comfortable with the company having and what I am not. At the same time, none of the information the company has on me should be used for any other purpose besides personalization.

Throughout reading this article I was bombarded with an ethical question that happened recently in the news: A man claimed that he accidentally left his baby boy in a hot car- and the baby died. Later news revealed that he had actually googled how long and what temperature he could leave a baby in a car for it to become fatal. Should this information be used in court? Is it okay to breach a citizen’s privacy for the overall safety of the community?

The Future Of Planning Your Trip

http://www.fastcolabs.com/3037306/elasticity/a-watson-powered-travel-agent-from-the-founder-of-travelocity I travel a lot with my family, and there is a lot more to decide than just hotel reservations and flight information. While websites like Expedia and Kayak are allowing us to find the best rates on hotels and flights, there is so much more that goes into planning a trip. When I am looking for a restaurant to go to with my family, I am on a number of different sites looking for reviews, menu's, proximity, etc. I am using Yelp, Trip Advisor, Google Maps, Zagat, all to find a place to eat when traveling. On top of that, I never really know what type of events are going on in that specific area. There isn't a 'hub' for me to find comprehensive information about where I am staying, and what I can do there. Instead of vacations being relaxing, they have become stressful because of the amount of info on so many sites that my family just cannot make up their minds. I recently traveled to Chicago and my mom had printed out a 15 page document detailing every website with everything there was to possibly do in the 2 days we were there. While the internet is allowing more exposure than ever before when it comes to information on restaurants, concerts, festivals, hotels, it also allowing a huge amount of clutter. This is where this new technology comes in. Its is called the Watson-Powered Travel Agent that uses a search tool that allows users to search specifics like "Im in the mood for some live jazz in Austin tonight" and get reccomendations that streamlines data from Twitter, Facebook, Yelp, Trip Advisor etc. It is a new way to find exactly what your are looking for without visiting 100 sites to get there. Soon this website will include data about weather, traffic, venue check outs, and how people enjoy different areas. Many companies collect data on their users, but none are optimizing it to their full potential. This website will change how we travel and how we search to make coming to a city more exciting and engaging. Here is a video showing the process

Network Laws

In class we learned about many different laws pertaining to networks function to distribute 'value'. There are two different types of networks, a LAN network, which are local area networks and confined to relatively small area such as school's or businesses. There are also WANS, which are wide area networks that connect networks from all over the world. When exploring each network law, it is important to understand what 'value' is and how it changes. In broadcasting, value may be determined by how many viewers an ad may receive. If one places their advertisement in a medium that has very little viewers, that ad holds much less value than an ad placed in the Superbowl. Sarnoff's law states that the value of a broadcast network is directly proportional to the amount of viewers. In broadcasting, Sarnoff's rule bodes true. TV shows, Radio programs, infomercials, and more are constantly relying on the amount of viewers they have to keep the program in business. No viewers means advertisers will not pay for that specific time slot because it holds no value. However, the media landscape is changing, people are streaming more of their television experience online through Netflix or Hulu, and large companies like HBO run on a subscription basis void of any advertising. Sarnoff's law is losing relevance with the changing climate, but its relevance is not all lost, I still tune into the Superbowl, and the TV's are still up and running at many different households in the nation. The law I most agree with is Reeds law, which utilizes the concept of Web 2.0, or the introduction of social networks into our internet use. It claims that the usability of a network increases 2^n with n being the introduction of new members into the social network. It seeks to explain the power of social networks and how various groups can form because of network affiliations. Facebook, Twitter, News websites, would all be useless if no one interacted with them. The value in Reeds law is placed on interpersonal connection. There is a reason millennials have said goodbye to traditional media, and chosen interactive methods to get their information instead. It is because we find value in interactivity, and connectivity, something that is nearly impossible with broadcast or print media. Reed's law is a great example of how our information landscape is changing, instead of just hearing the news, we are able to interact with it, and have a voice. In five years I think a whole new network will emerge, and this will be the network of cell phone banking and payments. So many of our daily life duties are done through the app system on our phones. I see the future of payments to be an integral part of our smartphones. Instead of paying with a physical card, our money will be tracked through our smart phones network, and we will pay for things through only smart phone technology. The Square is the first step in processing money through the smartphone based interfaces, and the next will be utilizing our money through our smart-phone network. Using bank systems on our phones will allow for consumers to get more information on how and where they are spending their money, as well as alerts directly to their phone if they are running low.

Why We Blog

Why We Blog explored various reasons why people choose to share their thoughts online. There were five motivations documented by the study that influence how we use blogs to interact with our world. Each motivation came from in depth case studies that interviewed many bloggers habits. The first motivation was to 'Document My Life', where these users blogged for the purpose of informing others about daily happenings and events. A great example of this was Don's use of his blog when his wife got sick. He was able to update those who were interested in his wife's health on a day to day basis. This allows Don to connect with a variety of people personally and perhaps initiate action from those who would like to help. I believe the 'Document My Life' motivation can be used to create a separate identity, in the same way social media does. We choose what updates we will share, what ideas, what pictures, etc to represent ourselves on our blog. Using blogs for documentation purposes creates a narrative of who we are, and a story in which others want to follow. The next motivation the publication explored was to 'Blog as Commentary', where bloggers would express their views on pertinent issues and opinions. This type of blogging is very useful for those who may choose to be informed on a variety of opinions that aren't just from the news. User blogs dedicated to share opinion can actually change viewers opinions or give them a new perspective on a subject. These insights would not be publicized normally in traditional media, but this does not make the bloggers opinions any less valuable than those that are being shared in say, the editorial section of the New York Times. The third motivation was 'Blogging as catharsis', where bloggers will post in order to let out their feelings, work through issues, as well as give them a healthy place to express themselves. I believe this is important because it allows an outlet for bloggers to feel closure with an issue and gives readers the ability to relate and respond. Blogs can be very personal and with a catharsis styled blog, we can learn more about our peers than we would in any other mode of communication. The fourth motivation identified was to 'Blog as muse' which allows bloggers to work out their thoughts and opinions on a subject by writing. I identify most with this mode of blogging because I only begin to form concrete ideas and opinions when I start to write them down. I have vague ideas about what I believe in, but they aren't thoroughly evaluated until I formulate them in written form. Blogging in this manner can allow those to become more experienced and advanced writers and possibly become published later on. The last motivation was 'Blog as community form', this motivation is most relevant when your blog relies on user comments and feedback. It also can evolve to a forum style in which users interested in a certain topic, such as poetry, can post their poems for the purpose of feedback. This allows discussion on many different topics as well as a constant exchange of knowledge. Overall, we blog for a variety of different reasons, each with a particular goal in mind. This type of communication is beneficial for the world because anyone's story is meaningful and important. Blogging allows us to hear other voices that otherwise wouldn't have a chance to speak.

Me this morning.....