Category: Jordan Mohr

The questions I had for this week were:

What benefits does augmented reality really have?

Is it necessary?

The addition of Augmented reality does seem to be an improvement to how we oriented ourselves towards technical subjects. For instance, there are talks of the U.S. Military making available a VR headset that can automatically guide a Specialist E2 in repairing the internal components of an Abrams Main Battle Tank. Also imagine that a Nuclear Technician can wear a glove that can automatically adjust the system valves in a power plant in the safety of a control room. These two options do hold the potential for increased efficiency. However, what does it do to mankind’s ability to learn? Is this more of a crutch then a benefit? Will there be a need to learn key technical terms before the use of these technological innovations? Most importantly we must gauge the necessity of said devices.

The questions for this week are:

What benefits does augmented reality really have?

Is it necessary?

The questions I had for this week were:

1.     The power of virtual economies could potentially match that of those in the real world. How can revenue services track transactions?

2.     Will MMORPGs replace real world social interaction?

3.     Why isn’t gaming addiction classified as an abusive habit?

In reviewing articles about the evolution of interactive gaming, we see the frightening new possibilities that on line entertainment has. In 1970 the advent of the command hack/slash dungeon game placed the user into a virtual world that they can create. Today, entire communities exist on line where hundreds if not hundreds of thousands of individuals can band together and kill imaginary dragons all day.  There are, however, drawbacks that have become apparent with being part of the experience. In the documentary we see an Australian boy that destroyed his room over gaming tantrums. He also admitted to playing, on average, 16 hour gaming days. Even more disturbing than this young boy’s addiction is the role game avatars have as part of a virtual barter economy. We see a grassroots industry in China called “Gold-Farming” where hired teenagers play games in order to level up an avatar. The on line figure is then sold to a Western player for a considerable sum of money. In reviewing these two backlashes of the virtual world we we see that an underground economy is being fueled by an increasingly large population of gaming addicts. These are truly frightening times we live in.

The questions I have for the week are:

1.     The power of virtual economies could potentially match that of those in the real world. How can revenue services track transactions?

2.     Will MMORPGs replace real world social interaction?

3.     Why isn’t gaming addiction classified as an abusive habit?

My questions for the week were:

How do games effect people?

Do games allow the player express individual morality?

What sociological impact do games make on groups of people?

The creation of interactive entertainment has redefined, but not reshaped how human being compete with one another. Like other entertainment formats, video games have both positive and negative effects on how human beings act. It is arguable that games allow the individual to express their own morality. Today in class I thought that it was a very striking thing to talk about a small child’s reaction to playing one of the controversial Grand Theft Auto games. The boy committed several acts of murder and extortion, yet obeyed traffic laws and wept over hitting pedestrians. Could it be that games like so many other forms of expression allow people to act out their beliefs? The effect of games is even more dramatic in regards to group interaction.

In terms of sociology, gaming in this medium has allowed a wide variety of individuals to interact and form bonds over objective based gaming. Whether it is storming the beaches of Normandy for the umpteenth time, helping Mario defeat Bowser, or gunning down the Nuremberg speedway in sports cars a community is creating by this shared experience. Whether it is an individuals satisfaction via entertainment or meeting of like minded individuals, the interactive gamer remains a fixture in the interactive consumer landscape.

The questions I have for this week are:

How do games effect people?

Do games allow the player express individual morality?

What sociological impact do games make on groups of people?

The question I had asked previously were:

1. By surreptitiously publishing stories on Illegal activities, does the investigative reporter violate privacy, regardless of the content?

2. By airing graphic content involving the deaths of individuals, does the reporter violate the dignity of the victim and their families?

3. How do we toe the line between getting the truth out and respecting those that are aggrieved?

Almost 40 years ago, Daniel Ellsberg leaked the Pentagon papers detailing Nixon’s expanding war in Vietnam by revealing targeting data in Laos and Cambodia. To many, Ellsberg was a hero, standing up to a corrupt administration that sanctified the invasion of additional countries in a seemingly unwinnable war. Today the situation is strikingly similar. Julian Assange, director of the secretive Wikileaks digital activist site has leaked numerous reports on the conduct of the current “War on Terror” in Iraq and Afghanistan. The information given by the site is informative and highly relevant to the digital format of participatory democracy. The site does inspire several objection from me. What I must say is that while the freedom of the press is fundamental to a functional society, the manner which the information is presented today and the public’s reaction is most disturbing.

The most controversial video Assange’s group has released is the gun camera footage of an American Apache gunship firing upon and killing a crowd of eighteen civilians including two Reuters journalists. Despite the horrific losses and damage inflicted upon the helicopter’s ground unit in the days before, the conduct of the pilots and gunners was both unbecoming and inhumane of uniformed personnel. Yet, while this footage is being aired over the web the fact that the victim’s families and their dignity are never taken into consideration. This horrifies me. Today I viewed this footage on, of all things, a talk show-esque seminar with Assange personally attending. The fact that this file was shown on such a platform instead of a more solemn environment is a testament to how society views death from a world away.

I personally would not have shown this in a theater and have had a celebrity crow about his accomplishment. I would have sought the approval of the aggrieved families first, as the images of their loved ones would be viewed by masses of anonymous strangers. Pending approval I would have ushered the crowd in a bare area, shown the footage with an explicit message of victim support and ushered the crowd out, leaving the viewers to form their own questions. We must always understand that while truth and integrity are virtues that we can all abide by, we must never forget those that have suffered and died in incidents such as this. To be a true reporter we must respect each others common humanity instead of viewing death as an offensive abstract.

The question I have for this week are:

1. By surreptitiously publishing stories on Illegal activities, does the investigative reporter violate privacy, regardless of the content?

2. By airing graphic content involving the deaths of individuals, does the reporter violate the dignity of the victim and their families?

3. How do we toe the line between getting the truth out and respecting those that are aggrieved?

My questions for the week were:

1. How do we separate valid information from hearsay in our digital age?

2. Is the future about collaboration rather than competition between news sources?

3. How reliable is the citizen Journalist?

In our time the divide between traditional media formats and the public is rapidly closing. Today the average person can generate content, place it on the web, create discussion forums, and other social attributes. We also have to question just how reliable the average person can be.

The issue has been raised about whether the citizen journalist, individuals that often do not have the training or funds for producing news, can be considered infallible. We must keep in mind that news has existed for centuries without centralized news agencies. I would argue that the presence of independent news providers are a new method of interacting with one another as well as larger news organizations. We must never forget that in Burma and Iran, individuals on the ground posted content that was later displayed on network television. Also in Mexico, twitter users are now informing the public of dangerous areas frequented by drug traffickers. In all, the citizen journalist fills out the niche as a sort of secondary information source on the local level.

My questions of the week were:

1. If infoenterpropagainment is the order of the day for political media platforms, is the constituency just as complicit in allowing out-of-context information to stand in for the truth?

2. Doses the advent of Web 2.0 technologies truly mean that the political due process is in the hands of a community-by-community basis rather than a centralized political machine?

3. Are grass-roots social networking sites more powerful than the traditional central governments in regards to making immediate, localized social change?

The current trend for political parties, both established and grass roots is to rely on digital communication to rally their constituencies. While the use of media isn’t new, the speed of organization and mobilization has changed dramatically. Since new technology is controlled and personalized on a user basis, there is also a greater emphasis on responsibility. For instance, the rise of infopropagainment by organizations such as the Tea Party has lead to the skewing of facts and blatant usurpation and distortion of the truth. This type of behavior is not only irresponsible but should also be a criminal act. Another example that has come to mind on Web 2.0 politics is Gunnar Grimmson’s lecture on his country’s political machine. The rise of the Shadow government was to mobilize the facebook oriented population towards libertarian goals. Iceland and other nations have led to a form of community activism that  has never been heard of before. There are several concerns that come out of this reliance on digital technology.

Since today’s social activists rely on social networks to get out the word they are also at the mercy of the private companies that own the said site. For instance, Grimmson mentioned in his lecture that the established political parties in Iceland immediately complained to the offices of Facebook that their opponents site was spreading unsubtatiated claims about the economic policies of the incumbent parties and the effectiveness of central government. As a result the Shadow government and other activist sites were closed by facebook. All on hearsay. What will happen to activist organizations in other parts of the world?