Attention

I was planning my 309 assignment, but all of a sudden i just couldn't be bother and started to watching clips of youtube.

The issue i want to address and talk about is "attention"

Has the development of technology decrease our attention spam??

The development of technology has contributed to the development of multitasking where the user can consumer multiply about of media at once.

Now that leads to another question: the so called dumbest generation, lacking the ability to think, is it causes by the content from the website or just due to the lack of attention we contribute to thinking about the information?

In Mark Bauerlein's article "the dumbest generation" stated that youth are more comfortable with multitasking, and the information they consume from the website are dumb ed down, made shorter, easier to consume.

The way we consume information from books, in the library at home, the focus that we put towards the material is close to 100%. No distraction from music from ipods, calls and txts from mobile phones.

But now the distribution of attention is different due to technology, the fact that technology have developed in to some more personal made it apart of our everyday life. Good example of this would be music and the use of ipod. The size of the ipod made it so its easier to carry music on the go, allowing users to listen to music on the bus, in the library and even in a lecture. The multitasking function on mobile phones allows users to listen to music and play games while sending a txt all at the same time, with out saying the same goes for the computer, allowing multiple different application to be open at the same time.

Which divides our full concentration towards a certain subject and decreasing our attention spam, as the applications allowing users to jump around from program to program and site to site in a instant

Anahid Kassabian in the article "inattentive engagement" is interested in the problems of listening and how general people divides the attention in to primary and secondary, where primary is the main focus of sound, eg at the lecture, taking notes so the main focus is what the lecturer says. Secondary is the spill over or the other kind of sound that occurs at the same time but we do not take full awareness of, eg the entry of late comers to a lecture, or the quick comment from people in the class.

The point is that the ear can't really select what they want to hear, its the brain the labels the information that comes in.

With little information from silents and the book, the brain doesn't have to organize and arrange information that is coming in hence allowing the readers to fall in to the state of deep think about the subject their reading. but due to the distraction, people now don't have a main focus and don't remain on a subject for long as there's always something new hence people don't spend a lot of time considering and questioning the ideas the consume.

That's my assumption... happy to hear you perspective on this idea.

That's Not Natural

Zizek makes a really good point; that "ecology" is a concept which likens "nature" to spirituality. Humans are not out of nature, we haven't been thrown from the garden. In fact if we took notice that the world is still our garden, that shit doesn't just disappear, then we might actually want to do something about it. As it is, when we consider ourselves as cyborgs or machines or somehow separate and above nature, then we can see our problems as also separate, and we look for some solution that isn't there, like moving to space.

If God is punishing you, it is still a universe of meaning. Reason has developed out of something, it is not enough to listen to your own thoughts for no amount of money. A universe of meaning equates the dollar amount of your time to your effort, a love triangle of fetish. A universe of meaning doesn’t do charity work for nothing, and if our shit disappears then we let it because it doesn’t affect us in our segmented space.

‘Space’—your personal space, private space, public, mental, ecological, social, natural, workspace etc.—is all one thing. The walls of your house don’t segment it or contain it. Your house is like a machine with pipes and lines in and out, or it’s like an organism. “Visible boundaries, such as walls or enclosures in general, give rise for their part to an appearance of separation between spaces where in fact what exists is an ambiguous continuity. The space of a room, bedroom, house or garden may be cut off in a sense from social space by barriers and walls, by all the signs of private property, yet still remain fundamentally part of that space” (Lefebvre, Henri. The Production of Space. 87). In other words we all live in the same space, our boundaries are arbitrary, and they work to create a sense of property and ownership when in fact the world is a shared singular space.

Categorizing space into natural vs. unnatural (us) creates problems which we cannot fix until we realize that we’re all part of the same space, and moving off the planet isn’t going to save us. It might save some of the richer ones though.

Power and Technology

They aired this on Channel 7 last night, it is a documentary called Us Now which explores the idea/s of changing the way we manage government to use new technologies. They are looking at this idea that democracy could be truly transparent and truly run by everyone. But first the current administrations have to get over the paranoia of being transparent, and get over the need for copyright etc. I like what he says at the last bit of this video, that revolution happens not when people adopt a new technology but when they adopt a new behavior, a remark which itself gives people power over government instead of the other way around.

worth having a look at their site too which includes all of the content of the film in sections. “The potential for transforming democracy is huge. People are leaving the democratic realm in their droves because they have little purchase on it, it doesn't seem to respond to them, they don't have a voice in it, it is not talking about what they are talking about. In contrast the web allows people to have conversations with other people, to voice their views, to meet, to share and mobilise and so all through the world you see now new forms of political mobilisation, whether they are very, very local campaigns about traffic or noise, to global campaigns about the environment and poverty enabled and organised by the web. So the web is a really powerful tool for mobilising people around things they share and they care about and that should have and does seem have the effect of re-energising democracy and, of course, in the developing world, in authoritian regimes, the web is the only place where democratic debate takes place. So the big contests about democracy in China, in Vietnam, in Burma, the web is the place where democratic debate is taking place. It is the best hope for promoting democracy in any of these places.”

This optimistic view is what early internet advocates were hoping for when they suggested that the internet was going to be a free democratic tool. Is it too optimistic? I think perspectives like this one leave out the business side of the web. The ‘web’ doesn’t really exist as it used to, and it is problematic to consider the web as a place. Most users of the web are users of applications like email, facebook, google. These are businesses that want our activity. They get advertising revenue from it. They can also potentially influence the way we think and the way we communicate. These ‘places’ are not free of capitalist influence. Furthermore, the web in general is not free of its materiality. If we think of the web as a place, we can forget where we are when we use it. And the fact is that there are more people who don’t use the internet than those that do, especially in the countries that might profit most from democratic debate. (http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm). Ultimately, people need computers, they need interfaces, and they need access. How can it be a democratic tool when most of the time, access is purchased?

Might As Well Face It You're Addicted To.... Porn.

Out of everything available in the world today is porn really that bad? Who are the people hurting? If you're addicted to drugs then you can kill yourself or others with the habit, the same goes for alcohol or cigarettes. So who are these people hurting with their "porn addictions"? Looking at some of the factors that help label anything as an addiction I came across these, "recurrent failure to resist impulses to engage in a specific behaviour," as well as "pleasure or relief at the time of engaging in the behaviour," so does that make every 16 year old boy an addict as well? It seems slightly on the ridiculous side to me. Perhaps we as a society are still uptight about sex in the first place and that's why such an overt expression of sexuality like pornography is so frowned upon by people the world over. I think we just haven't ever really moved on from those Victorian era sensibilities that meant a women who chose to stray from her husband was looked on as sick or evil, or that enjoying sex was a crime.

The young married couple who were trying to cope with the husbands "porn addiction" sort of baffle me if im being honest. What if the wife didn't have issues with pornography? Would his daily porn habit go from being a dirty little secret to something they did as a couple, or perhaps even become part of their foreplay? It seems to me that the only reason it was looked on by that couple as bad, dirty or even an addiction is because the wife took an issue with it. What if he had been doing something else on the computer? I don't know about anyone else but I play Tetris at least twice a day to either relax or if I'm bored and have nothing better to do.... and sometimes when I should be doing something like working on university assignments for example. What if he had been playing Tetris instead? Would he have been addicted to Tetris instead of porn, or wouldn't it not have been as big of a deal because society doesn't really frown upon Tetris the way it does pornography.

How much do you love your technology?

It may seem strange to us to think about falling IN LOVE with technology, not just a mere love for your new ipod or iphone but physically, emotionally and psychologically in love with an artificial object.
Take this man for instance he is the creator of Roxxxy, the life-sized, doll which comes with artificial intelligence, an articulated skeleton and flesh-like synthetic skin.

This has become the companion of many men, it has given them the opportunity to fall in love, get married and you never know maybe in the future creators will start to make baby dolls and men will regard it as their first born daughter/son, can a person really fall in love with a doll or anything technological to be frank and still experience the same emotions a person experiences when they find their true love?

*note the (XXX) in Roxxxy's name, this doll was originally designed as a sex doll, but with the advancement of technology Roxxxy now has an inbuilt personality, five to be exact...

Your interested?

Okay let’s go through the choices of selection

Bachelor number one is called Wild Wendy she is outgoing and adventurous

Bachelor number two is called Frigid Farrah she is reserved and shy.

I think you get the point..... This doll can literally hold conversations with its partner supplying men with not only sexual needs but emotional needs..... this doll allows men to choose everything about their doll from the skin colour to the size of the dolls breasts, giving men the opportunity to "build" their perfect ideal women for prices ranging from 5,600 and up (depending on the choice of features of course) you can have your very own doll.....

Still not convinced? Okay, okay....."She can’t vacuum, she can’t cook but she can do almost anything else, if you know what I mean,’ =D (Douglas Hines, of manufacturers TrueCompanion.)

Don’t worry Ladies a male sex robot is coming out soon his name is Rocky (how romantic).

But hey I guess these days you can fall in love with almost anything...no really I mean anything...take this man for instance he has fallen in love with a pillow...

Lee Jin-gyu fell for his 'dakimakura' - a kind of large, huggable pillow from Japan, this pillow has the picture of a popular anime character printed on the side. The image is Fate Testarossa, from the 'magical girl' anime series Mahou Shoujo Lyrical Nanoha.

Technology has become so a part of our lives that it can even enable us to fall in love with it...even if it means marrying a pillow with the picture of the anime character printed onto it.

Can’t wait to see what technology has in store for us in the future.

Source: http://www.metro.co.uk/home/

Jobs for the (Play)boys

Yes, I'm a frustrated headline writer. Anyway, apropos of this week's topic, here's an interesting piece on the rather awkward way in which squeaky-clean Apple and squeaky-but-not-so-clean Playboy have come to a mutual arrangement for the iPad.

Is the Internet ruining porn?

Recently I read an article that was recommended in our Pornography lecture, titled “Lights, Camera, Lots of Action. Forget the Script”. The article discusses how the pornography industry is slowly starting to lose interest in plot and dialogue. They believe ‘moviemakers’ are beginning to focus less on story lines, and are instead filming shorter scenes that can be uploaded onto the Internet in “several minute chunks”. The article states that the rise in popularity of the Internet has caused the pornography industry to lose money in DVD sales. Mr Fishbein has estimate that DVD sales have fallen at least 50% in the past few years. It is because of this that porn stars, like Savanna Samson aren’t getting the chance to emerge themselves in their character roles.

The pornography industry has successfully transformed with the Internect. In order to keep making money, they have cut back on making DVD’s and focused more of their time on creating small clips to upload to the Internet. Most pornography sites offers a monthly/yearly membership, this small fee allows audiences access to the sites pornographic content.

Personally, I don’t think porn stars such as Savanna Samson should worry about not being able to develop their characters. It should be the least of their worries; after all they are porn stars not actors. If there not excited anymore then maybe it’s time to leave their chosen profession. Even with fewer story lines, the porn industry is doing just fine. As the Internet has grown in popularity, the porn industry has grown with it. The Internet has provided its users with instant access to pornography, making it just a mouse click away.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/08/business/media/08porn.html?_r=3&scp=3&sq=porn%20internet&st=cse

Cyborgs

The thought of scientists and artists creating cyborgs or integrating humans with machines is a scary thought.
There is just something creepy about mixing humans with metal, it is just so unnatural. But with the studies that were described in our reading for this week, it seems as though human society is heading that way.

There have been so many different stories about cyborgs and the most recent that I have heard of was featured on the news a few months ago. Japan has created a life-sized female robot who posses "human emotions" and she is used to look after the elderly. She looks like a real person, she even blinks and talks like a real person and she is used to make sure the elderly take their medicine and are well looked after.

Is this what society has come to? What happened to the good old days where people were looked after by real caregivers and family? Maybe the world has become too technological and work-focused so the family of these elderly people no longer have the time to care for them.

I think that is quite sad.
I definitely would not want my parents to end up in a robotic nursing home simply because I have no time to look after them myself.

It's funny to remember watching Terminator when I was younger and think "wow, what a great concept, but thank goodness our world will never end up like that! It's just impossible".
I guess anything is possible in this world and I will just have to wait and see if Terminator 1, 2, 3 and 4 unfolds in my near future. *Shudder*.

To be, or not to be - that is the question

“To be, or not to be”, this is the question I asked to myself, when I was reading Japanese comics “The Ghost in the Shell” few years ago. It is a Sci-Fi theme, depicted a highly mechanized human society in near future.

Well, I have to admit that I am would quite happy if I had a chance to be ‘upgrade’ into a Cyborg, just like those characters in that comics, jumping and flying in the concrete jungle; seeing things miles away, and be able to cloak whenever I want to.

I have little resistance to the idea of the Cyborg, because I really think what the most important thing is what does “Human” mean to us, rather than what it is. The form can change over the time, as long as the content remains. Back into history, the physical condition of human being itself have been changed a lot, as from apes to what we are look like today, we still call ourselves – human. It was that first sense of self-esteem, made us different with other creatures.

In fact, human has been using all kinds of man-made devices to help us overcoming difficult, such as medical devices to patients and disabilities; synthetic materials to cosmetic surgery, and so on. Cyborg just pushes the boundary a little bit further.

I still remember one article I read from a Sci-Fi magazine few years ago, it predicts human will eventually ‘evolve’ into a form of Electronic Ents, which is more suitable for living in the universe.

Addiction or Ridiculous?

Don’t you love that feeling you get when you feel that you’ve gone to a lecture that actually stimulated your interest and aroused questions in you that you probably wouldn’t have thought to ask before.

Call me a nerd if you will but that was exactly the feeling I felt after today’s lecture on Sexuality and Intimacy Online. It finally prompted me to actually write my first blog.

Pornography.

Porno.

Porn.

However you like to call it, questions were raised in class about the seriousness of an addiction to pornography. A mini-documentary style video about a married man who is addicted to pornography was played and many class members, myself included, giggled and chuckled while watching. The reason for my giggle and chuckle was prominently because of the very serious and ominous tone that the reporter was using during the whole clip. As if he had just recently overcame some sort of disease that put their family through traumatic hell. This of course caused a debate to stir in class as to whether or not addiction to porn should be treated like any other addiction such as drug or alcohol addiction.

An addiction is an addiction and should be treated as such, no matter the subject matter. Today we seem so desensitized to anything remotely close to sex that some will lose grip on what is normal and what is abnormal in relation to sex. The TV show Friends gives a good example of what happens to you when you start to watch too much porn. Watch 3:52-4:46.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8y_XELbssc

I personally believe that porn is all well and good in moderation just like anything else. But when you start to think that any girl in a uniform will just rip your clothes off for you, well that’s when you know there is something weird.

An Interview With the Worlds First Cyborg

Professor Kevin Warwick became the world's first cyborg twelve years ago.
(The image above is not the worlds first cyborg)


http://gizmodo.com/5610432/watch-an-interview-with-the-worlds-first-cyborg

I found this clip intersting and believe it relates to the idea of post-humanism and other things we discussed in tutorial this week.
I think this is realistic in terms of post-humanism as he is simply turning on a light. I think that the more people research and development into these new technologies the more robotic and post-human we could become. I think this is pretty scary to think about.
I found some points in Kingsley Dennis's article interesting.
It is interesting to think about being able to see people's thoughts when going through airports. I think this would be very dangerous as I am sure many people would also think... I am sure people have had bad thoughts when going through aiports although they might not have bad intentions or plan to do anything.
I see how this could prevent terroism as you would be able to catch the people who plan to do things although you need to be able to differentiate between bad intentions and an active imagination.





I think if they could develop a way to filter through and establish who is going to be a threat then this would be awesome. Otherwise I think this would be ridiculous as they would be catching heaps of people for simply thinking about terroism.
It would be handy as you could also scan through and see who has drugs or is carrying illegitimate items.


Gemma Ward

New Media Technologies and The Spoilt Generation

It seems that what constitutes ‘good parenting’ is one of those topics forever destined to attract heated debate. In reflection of this, TVNZ’s Breakfast Show recently featured an interview with UK psychologist and child-rearing expert, Dr Aric Sigman, about his latest book provocatively entitled The Spoilt Generation. He argues that children today are not developing the social skills and empathy necessary for them to successfully interact with others in a civilised manner, in part due to the number of hours they spend looking at screens rather than other people. And so a generation of “little emperors” has emerged, oblivious of others’ reactions to their own behaviour. In this sense, Sigman is suggesting that we are indeed the product of our relationships with technology, and he casts this in a negative light.

But surely the nature of the content being watched or accessed matters? For example, what about the use of new media technologies as teaching tools, evidenced by the plethora of educational games available online? From the technologically deterministic perspective of Sigman, this is irrelevant. "Parents have been preoccupied by content, but these effects occur whether your children are watching the most educational thing in the world or porno,” he said in an interview with The Press.

Yet, even if we wholeheartedly accept the notion that we are the product of our relationships with technology, Sigman’s argument still fails to acknowledge the potential for positive impacts on children’s development. Certainly, there is research indicating that by playing computer games, children expand their problem solving, cognitive, spatial and coordination skills.

I would argue, however, that the emergence of Sigman’s so-called “spoilt generation” is a reflection of the broader societal shift towards individualism which in turn shapes the development and use of technology, rather than a phenomenon arising from technological change itself.

One final point which struck me towards the end of the Breakfast interview was the discussion about the need for parents to clearly establish boundaries and limits. For Sigman, this is of utmost importance so that children have something to rebel against during their teenage years. According to this logic, pushing or challenging boundaries is both a natural and necessary stage of healthy human development. When considered in light of debates surrounding post-humanism, could we not also, by extension, conclude that it is natural to push against the boundaries of the human form through technology?

New Cyborgs

I would like you all to met the new generation of cyborgs .... us

After reading some blogs and having done some independent thinking, I've got a new way of thinking about the topic at hand.

I've noticed that most people as well as my self have used the definition of cyborgs to argue the situation.

Now i want to play with the idea that the development of technology have created many blurs, such as the boundaries between image and sound. everything is developing, we're upgrading our phones, our laptops, our cars, our way of learning, now i believe we should also upgrade some of our definitions to suit the situation and not confuse the further generation.


How many of rely on technology and wouldn't know how to survive without it??

Me!



Few months back in the middle of the there was a power cut, i lost all access to my usual entertainment material (internet, music, TV) i also had no idea how to make dinner without power, the microwave didn't work the oven wouldn't heat up, my only option was to go out to eat.

Yes!!

Many of you would argue maybe without technology we can cook over food on a open fire after some period of adaptation.

But, have you thought about where the food is going to come from? we're living in the city and transportation of food was done through the development of technology, not to mention there use to a major shortage of food and that technology efficiently increase the supply of food.

The medicines provided to protect us from disease a major point to us being cyborgs.

Here's why, the early setter's of European settlers in America killed of most of the natives population not through war but through disease, diseases like chicken pox! ask any historian and they'll tell you that this is true!

We're living in a multi-culture country with we that shoots to avoid disease and these shots are keeping us alive!!

Even our living condition such as the heater and air conditioning, as weather changes.


The point I'm trying to point out is the fact that, We, as digital natives have been raise around technology and tasted the benefits of technology, and we have become reliant on it! it has become apart of our life, terms such as "i can't live without my phone" suggested that fact that we are closely tied with technology.

If technology packed up and left to help the development of the martians, Will we as digital natives be able to survive? will we be able to survive and create a better future than the one we live in right now?

The definition of "cyborg" can be viewed from a different angle, and i would like to point out that we as digital natives can be considered as cyborgs as we are highly reliant on technology!!

Further more the development of technology have become smaller and more portable making them more personal creating a greater connection between the user and the machine.

If you like to oppose that idea, than walk away from your every day consumption of technology and see how long you can last before you start using them again? Go on put down that phone, sign out of facebook, better just shut down!! turn off the light!! boil your own water to take a bath!! walk to uni!!


How long will you last?? Will we be able to adjust?? Will we return to the stone age??

Questions is... Are u a Cyborg??

Cyborganic Redundancy: Nature, Naturalness, and Novelty

The term cyborg, seems, in a way, redundant. Humans and technology have coexisted since we could first be called human. It is one of the defining features that separates us and certain fellow primates from the rest of the animal kingdom. The primary, if not sole aim of technology is to extend and remedy humans' capabilities.

By this logic, we have always been cyborgs, and there is nothing to be gained from calling us such. However, the notion of the cyborg has received currency in both academic discourse and popular culture, and thus must be assumed to have some merit, or at least a set of defining features.

There is a common stigma surrounding cyborganicity that it is in some fashion 'unnatural', as if the cyborg were some inhuman tryst between machine and man. However, such circumstances are part of what define the current human condition.

Is it unnatural that I cannot make intelligible marks on paper with my hands alone and must instead rely on a device containing ink? What of the fact that I require a precisely shaped piece of metal to gain access to my dwelling?

Am I a perhaps a cyborg because I attach a device to my wrist which enables me to arrive at meetings on time?

If we assume natural to mean 'produced by nature without the aid of humans', then, certainly, none of this is natural, along with the entirety of human culture. If, instead, we take natural to mean 'accepted and not seen as unusual', then arguably all of this is natural, as it has become integrated into our common experience.

What is the exception here is the very latest in technology — that which is yet to be assimilated into to human culture. Novelty is thus the defining characteristic of cyborgs. Those who are at the very cutting edge of technology, before such technology has any presence in the mainstream whatsoever, will continually be seen as cyborgs, until the time when said technology simply fades into what is human life.

Inanimate Object Lovin'

So I heard about this guy awhile back, and in our lecture yesterday, he came to mind.

The article is about a man that had fell in love with a female character within a game on the Nintendo DS called "Love Plus". He then decided to take it that step further; by marrying, in an unofficial ceremony, his virtual love.

The man and his Bride on vacation in Guam.

I thought about the image of this man, carting around his "wife" in the form of a video game... and couldn't help but to think of how strange this seems to me, and not only because he's deciding to marry what is essentially a non-human object...

It would be frustratingly insufficient to be in a relationship with a Nintendo DS character (for me at least).

I think it would be impossible to have a normal relationship with "her" because you would just be too different. The level of emotional exchange would be minimal; physicality would be impossibly dissatisfying, not to mention ridiculous.

But who am I to tell him he can't have feelings for something I deem inappropriate? I do have a question for him though:

What would happen if he lost or damaged his"wife"?

Sub Question: Is she the same wife he married if he goes out and re-purchases the game? Or is this new "person", someone who he hasn't had all the same unique experiences with, thus making her someone that looks like his wife, but is not his wife?

I can imagine the future holding very complicated issues regarding "cyber-spouses" vs. "real" spouses and the legitimacy of the relationship they will undoubtedly have.

The things that define "love", will be thoroughly looked at and argued over in future courts. It should raise interesting debates regarding love and how much control the law will have over who can love who, or what. As well as what happens when someone wants to take their love to the next level and marry their object/thing of choice.

After a little bit of research, I also found a man in England that has a peculiar sexual preference.

He even runs a website dedicated to people with the same preference in vehicular love, and says there's about 500 others just like him. Because this is really rare, it seems that the law doesn't even mention his preference and thus, he is permitted to continue (assumedly).

But as technologies advance, I feel this issue will have to be addressed eventually; and certain versions of this behaviour will fall on the wrong side of the law.

Changing technologies

As we all know, Marshall McLuhan famously stated that technologies can be seen as extensions of the human self, though it is not only this concept which i find interesting, but also the issue of our dependency and attitude towards new media technologies. Concerns which were raised in the third lecture questioned whether or not humans have come to identify themselves through technology, the idea of technology being an adornment/attachable/detachable accessory, and our reliance on external technologies to function within society today. Other ideas which grew from these key concepts can be identified when looking at the argument as to whether or not technology is used to remedy deficiencies of the human body, or, if in fact these deficiencies are just the limitations. An example of this can be seen through the use of the telephone which carries the voice over a large distance, does this technological invention remedy the human voice?

The idea that media shape the way we organize our thoughts is also of high relevance, for example, post-it-notes aid the transportation of our ideas in comparison to the note pad. Our daily activities are so heavily influenced by external technologies that they have become a vital part of our regular routines. I do not view this as a negative thing though, just a consequence and outcome of the technological age in which we live in. The idea of Cyborg theory is also significant within society toady, it can be explored thorough the breakdown of three important factors, those being: Animal/human, organism/machine and physical/non physical. Understanding the ideas of cyborg theory can be identified through the concept of celebrating hybridity and warning against essentialism. It warns against believing in the idea that all humans share the same traits, and supports the belief that what makes us unique is the different technologies that we utilize and therefore how we use them. Ultimately these developments play an extremely important role in the way this current generation think about, act towards and use changing technologies.

iPhone and its others.

As I was interested in the video shown in the previous lecture on the release of the iPhone, led to the thought about the iPhone's applications and how it has substantially developed in not only as a communication device but also thegaming world within a short period of time. First of all being touch sensitive the iPhone has no physical buttons in comparison to other gaming consoles such as the PSP or Nintendo DS. This has become a threat to Sony and Nintendo in the gaming market for portable consoles as these simple games and applications on the iPhone have gained more interest in consumers.Traditionally when a gaming console is bought people tend to buy new games every so often if something hot has come out. With the iPhone there are over 1500 applications that can be downloaded for free (majority as some are purchased) with the ease of just storing it in your phone. There are many offerings and have varieties in which you can choose from.The iPhone gaming experience is unlike traditional devices where the game revolves around smashing buttons and other keypads but is centered on a wide touchscreen which has a buit in accelerometer. This allows the people to tilt the phone for different circumstances in game play i.e fishing games where you would flick the phone forward in motion to a fishing rod. Although there are advantages with other consoles i.e graphics, gameplay etc such as the PSP and Nintendo DS, it comes to mind thinking what single device functions as an iPod, Phone, Computer and a gaming machine that brings joy and entertainment without the hassle of carrying something else around?..

Michael

Psycho-Civilised Society

Kingsley Dennis' unexpectedly immersive reading on the future of psychological technology highlighted several reasons why what he calls a "psycho-civilised society" is frightening and abhorrent.

At the end of the day a shift towards scarier forms of technology is unavoidable and to be expected. When the first working television system was demonstrated in 1928 no one would have expected the next generation of gigantic plasma screens and LCD televisions, creating images so clear that it is almost unbelievable.

Evolution is an important part of humanity. We ourselves, (depending on your beliefs) evolved from hairier, less intelligent life forms into intellectually and physically gifted individuals. With the evolution of our intellect came the creation of technology, which we can see now is also evolving. To deny the evolutionary aspect of technology is to deny your iPod, television, Xbox 360 and iPhone. Four things that for some people are the very essence of day to day life.

Dennis paints a slightly bleak picture of 'neuro-technology' and the possibilities that it may hold for human beings in the not too distant future. Attention is even paid to current and past attempts at manipulating the biology of the human body through technology. However thorough Dennis' explanations are though, one can't help but feel as though Dennis is providing frequent nudges, of negativity throughout each explanation to force his interpretation of this research on the reader.

In my opinion, it was bound to happen, and it is. But articles such as Dennis' only serve to render a sense of false alarm amongst techno-phobics and Luddites. This new biologically threatening technology is not being forced upon people and it is very unlikely that projects such as the Active Denial System will be let loose on innocent civilians, at least not in developed countries... Research into the area of technology's possibilities in the realm of the biological is harmless and could very well provide the information needed to combat potential threats, if any arise.

Are we considered as Cyborgs?

This is the topic that was brought about in the wk 3 lecture.It has a point in that as the technologies are making the lives convenient for people entering the 21st century. People are increasingly making the use of tech devices such as mobile phones and computers and there are unlimted possibility of the development in technological devices.

When i hear the word Cyborg, immediately the movie Terminator comes into my mind.

I watched the movie a long long time ago but the movie somehow has strongly embedded the image of a Cyborg.

By defintion taken from dictionary.com, it is a person whose physiological unctioning is aided by or dependant upon a mechanical or electronic device.

Well we can depend on technology in some way to make our lives easier to live in he 21st century but we dont have our physiological functioning dependant or aided by technological devices. Robots are Cyborgs as they are dependant upon mecanical body parts and its a must have item for them.

People can choose to have these technological devices,it is considered as a want not a need for

individuals like is to survive in this world. It aids our life in some kind of way but we can live

without it if we want. We have the options so i believe that humans are not considered as Cyborgs as we can live without the technological devices but also taken into account that lives will be very inconvenient because people nowadays depend on techonolgy to a extent that you cannot think of a world without cars, internet, mobile phones etc..

Speaking of digitization and the film industry...

The grinding and tearing you can hear is the professionals in the film industry adjusting to the brave new world...

Digitization and the film industry

Luke's week one reading 'Digital' points up the cornucopia of opportunities for "sophisticated independent cultural production" created by the digital age and the difficulty of actually making a living from this (p.1163). One of the outcomes of this paradox is a constantly shifting definition of what it means to be professional (as opposed to amateur).

Until quite recently it was easy to define, for example, a professional filmmaker. And it wasn't necessarily about money. It was about what are quaintly called standards.

Standards are the benchmarks we set ourselves, and a profession sets for its participants, which define the level of skill, creativity and commitment brought to an enterprise. So it used to be easy for instance to tell if a director had created a professional piece of work - because their film would attract a distributor and through that distributor, reach a paying audience (we're talking mainstream here). Distributors had their own reputations to preserve and audiences were "trained" by experience to expect a certain standard of story, performance etc.

Just doesn't work like that any more - well, it does, but traditional distribution is in its dying throes and the Hollywood film industry is (still!) thrashing around trying to morph into a structure that can accommodate the brave new world we live in. I don't rate their chances (look at the money they are throwing at 3D - interesting to watch the panic now they've discovered audiences still need, surprise surprise, a good story).

Now that distribution is out of the control of the corporations, and gear costs nothing, anyone can make a film and distribute it. Don't need a story. Don't need watchable characters. Doesn't matter how messy it is. Just bang off some footage and upload. There's an audience out there for anything.

Or is there? Is there a difference between reaching a few random eyeballs or reaching an audience, if we take an audience to be, at the least, a group of people with a common desire to watch/read/absorb the same product?

Seems to me the key to all this is, as it always was, does the product/film tell a good story? If it tells a good story, it will find an audience - or the audience will find it. Latest local film success in finding an audience is This Way of Life and coming up is Russian Snark. Both these films, while scoring some traditional promotion (e.g. this year's NZ Film Fest), are pursuing the new mantra of film distribution as articulated by Thomas Mai. In the old days you got the money, made the film, then promoted it - most films still do this. The new model is first promote your film, then raise the money, then make it - a fantastic example of this is El Cosmonauta.

Which brings me back to standards. It's a rough ride going through a revolution - and the IT Revolution is as big an upheaval as the Industrial Revolution. But the democratization of distribution, while its killing those filmmakers who can't adjust, is opening up so many new possibilities that the definition of what constitutes professional as opposed to amateur is shifting permanently, in favour of the amateur.

Just got to figure out how to make a living at it.