One of my favorite uses of virtual world technology is the use of it in video games. It is a new method still in the early stages that is undergoing improvements to make it more interactive with multiple players. There are also virtual worlds (sites) where people can create avatars that represent themselves to communicate with each other or to express their creativity. A more practical use of a programmed virtual world is realistic simulators. For example flight simulators, driving simulators, and even zero-gravity machines can train individuals without the risks of operating dangerous vehicles.
The pros of these simulations is the ability to prepare for real-life use of airplanes, space shuttles, trains, and cars in a completely safe environment. Not having experience before flying an airplane or space shuttle is definitely a bad idea because once you are in the air, you must be able to land the plane safely. In order to fly safely, you need experience, but to have experience, you need to fly. Virtual simulations were created to solve this paradox, to allow pilots to practice in a virtual world with no risk.
The pros of a virtual world made to foster communication and community is to allow users to customize their avatars as much as their creativity takes them, without the limits of the real-world. In Second Life, "Ms. Rayna, an avatar on Second Life, and her free-spending cohort can quaff Champagne, teleport to private islands and splurge on luxury brands that are the cyber equivalent of Prada waders or a Rolex watch" (Ferla). Despite not being a millionaire in the real world, Ms. Cocke can use her avatar to live a different life without worrying about the big 2008 recession, paying for rent, or all the designer clothing she wants. She can dress her avatar however she wants to express herself.
The cons of simulations is very simple. The program is never going to be exactly the same as a real-life operation. As in all cases, you can practice and study as much as you can, but the real deal can sometimes be slightly different. It can be hard to create the same atmosphere and pressure of a real flight, where real people are depending on you. Programs can have a lag between inputs and situations may not be able to include an infinite of real-life factors. A simulation may not respond the same way as in real life. There are always unpredictable factors like a sudden storm, instrument malfunction, or human error. Still, it is the best way to gain practical knowledge without putting others at risk.
The cons of the virtual communities is the accurate depiction of real-life. The virtual worlds are not real-time representations of places, but give a general environment for everybody with a computer to visit. According to Jennifer Lyon, a nightspot owner, "Normally MTV is all Spring Break-y and blah blah blah. At 3 o’clock in the morning we do not look like they do on ‘T.R.L.’ It’s not cute" (Itzkoff). Another possible con is people may be tempted to stay home more to visit the virtual world, instead of going to the actual club. However, at the end, for non-locals, it is a great opportunity to see the sights of another city from their home.
I think the future of virtual worlds will be worlds where we can interact as more than avatars clicking and typing. With the introduction of VR technologies, we will be interacting as if we were walking around in the real world, and speaking through microphones instead of typing.
Works Cited:
La Ferla, Ruth. "No Budget, No Boundaries: It’s the Real You." NY Times. The New York Times, 21 Oct. 2009. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.
Itzkoff, Dave. "I’ve Been in That Club, Just Not in Real Life." NY Times. The New York Times, 6 Jan. 2008. Web. 25 Oct. 2016.
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
Tuesday, October 18, 2016
Blog About Twitter
A Twitter discussion is more similar to Blackboard than an in-class discussion because we have the option to take as long as we like to reply to a tweet. I feel more comfortable replying to online discussion because it's more clear what others are trying to say. Usually they include a #(subject) and some context. I can edit my reply as I type to make it clearer before posting, something a lot harder to do in person. However, it is annoying sometimes discussing on Twitter because of the 140 character limit. There are times I want to reply with a lot more words to explain my opinion on the matter.
Even though BB and Twitter are online, a Twitter discussion is much more easier to share than a Blackboard discussion. I can not share a Blackboard discussion with someone that isn't a student. Twitter is accessed by many more users, anyone, anywhere there is internet. You can tag people and subjects, so anyone interested in the tag can see the tweet, not just classmates. And a BB discussion is less interactive than tweeting. There is no app on my phone to access BB, and someone has to start a thread for people to reply in that thread. Twitter collects all the recent activity on the user's page for everyone to reply to. Twitter is a lot more fast-paced, due to instant alerts. A popular tweet can have thousands replying and re-tweeting, so it can get quite chaotic. You will not be able to respond to them all before more people voice their own opinions.
Even though BB and Twitter are online, a Twitter discussion is much more easier to share than a Blackboard discussion. I can not share a Blackboard discussion with someone that isn't a student. Twitter is accessed by many more users, anyone, anywhere there is internet. You can tag people and subjects, so anyone interested in the tag can see the tweet, not just classmates. And a BB discussion is less interactive than tweeting. There is no app on my phone to access BB, and someone has to start a thread for people to reply in that thread. Twitter collects all the recent activity on the user's page for everyone to reply to. Twitter is a lot more fast-paced, due to instant alerts. A popular tweet can have thousands replying and re-tweeting, so it can get quite chaotic. You will not be able to respond to them all before more people voice their own opinions.
Social Networking Sites
Twitter is comprised of many short tweets about anything and everything. It reminds me of my news feed on Facebook, where I can see friends' status updates and content they "liked." The limit to the characters (140) feels like a limit on a deep understanding between users. I could post the same short messages on Facebook, or do long ones as well. I don't really understand the buzz about Twitter. According to an article that did a study in 2009, tweets are mostly nonsensical babble or a conversation between people. My impression is that this 80% of tweets are people looking for attention. I would prefer to have a conversation with people in private because replying to thousands of people at the same time will be chaotic.
Facebook is like an all-in-one package. There's browser games, trending news, updates from friends, video sharing, more personal details that I can enter in my profile. I also feel Facebook is much easier to navigate and to share/like posts. The first time I used Twitter, it was difficult to re-tweet, or see other users' replies. The new sponsored ads is definitely a negative aspect right now. It was implemented recently I believe. It takes information from my browsing history or something because it recommends products I have literally searched 5 minutes ago on online retailer sites (amazon, walmart, etc).
I also visit Reddit frequently for news sharing. I think Reddit is one of the easiest places to spend a lot of time reading random posts. There are sub-reddits for almost any topic you can imagine, and if there isn't, I think you can start one! You can find users that share interests in a movie, game, trending topic, hobby, and the list goes on forever. There are super fun posts like TIL (today I learned) where you hear some interesting stories and facts you never knew. For example, "witch windows" are diagonal windows that exist almost exclusively in Vermont, and the name comes from the belief that witches can't fly through slanted windows on their brooms.
YouTube is also a form of social media and one of the most popular sites. YouTube is good for looking for videos, it's not that great of a 2-way conversation. You can only comment on videos, which sometimes don't get responses for a while. Even viral videos that get millions of views sometimes start at Reddit, where a user will post the link and it gets shared instantly to millions of people. But people can make any kind of video they want, so it encourages a lot of creativity. You can listen to music, watch how-to videos, learn academics, or upload your own videos - all for free!
In conclusion, the usefulness of a social networking site depends on how the people use it. They can do amazing things like change the world through petitions, charitable causes, and spread awareness of those less fortunate. But people can also post about eating a bagel with cream cheese this morning, which may be interesting to their friends, but is a waste of time in my opinion.
Facebook is like an all-in-one package. There's browser games, trending news, updates from friends, video sharing, more personal details that I can enter in my profile. I also feel Facebook is much easier to navigate and to share/like posts. The first time I used Twitter, it was difficult to re-tweet, or see other users' replies. The new sponsored ads is definitely a negative aspect right now. It was implemented recently I believe. It takes information from my browsing history or something because it recommends products I have literally searched 5 minutes ago on online retailer sites (amazon, walmart, etc).
I also visit Reddit frequently for news sharing. I think Reddit is one of the easiest places to spend a lot of time reading random posts. There are sub-reddits for almost any topic you can imagine, and if there isn't, I think you can start one! You can find users that share interests in a movie, game, trending topic, hobby, and the list goes on forever. There are super fun posts like TIL (today I learned) where you hear some interesting stories and facts you never knew. For example, "witch windows" are diagonal windows that exist almost exclusively in Vermont, and the name comes from the belief that witches can't fly through slanted windows on their brooms.
YouTube is also a form of social media and one of the most popular sites. YouTube is good for looking for videos, it's not that great of a 2-way conversation. You can only comment on videos, which sometimes don't get responses for a while. Even viral videos that get millions of views sometimes start at Reddit, where a user will post the link and it gets shared instantly to millions of people. But people can make any kind of video they want, so it encourages a lot of creativity. You can listen to music, watch how-to videos, learn academics, or upload your own videos - all for free!
In conclusion, the usefulness of a social networking site depends on how the people use it. They can do amazing things like change the world through petitions, charitable causes, and spread awareness of those less fortunate. But people can also post about eating a bagel with cream cheese this morning, which may be interesting to their friends, but is a waste of time in my opinion.
Wednesday, October 5, 2016
Social Networking
A very common way of using social media nowadays is job recruiting! As students and future fresh graduates, sometimes it is difficult to get yourself noticed by employers. Companies have started to use sites like LinkedIn to connect with millions of potential employees. It is a more expansive network than manual advertisements and meeting every employee in person. It would be impossible to meet with millions of employees efficiently, but with LinkedIn, Steckerl, a recruiter of talent for Microsoft, can exponentially reach out to thousands. According to Steckerl in Langfitt's article, "I don't need to go to Bob directly to find out who Bob's friends are. Or Bob's friends' friends. So, effectively, I have a thousand contacts that could potentially lead me to 100,000, now I have 8,500 contacts that could potentially lead me to 4.5 million" (Langfitt). Being able to contact colleagues of colleagues multiplies the candidates, making the recruiter's job to find the best fit employee much easier and more likely. However, once they have passed the preliminary screenings, it is still necessary to get a feel for them in a personal interview. This process makes finding employment much more efficient and I expect it to continue to be the dominant method for a long time.
Social media is not always used appropriately, or efficiently. Some users harass others while remaining anonymous on the internet. There are some that fall in the middle, using legitimate services, but are subjective in their experiences. In the article "Can You Trust Crowd Wisdom?" researched discovered that most reviews for products were voted by the same people because other users didn't bother voting. This can skew the data, says Vassilis Kostakos, a university professor in Portugal, in Grifantini's article. Kostakos says, "they can paint a distorted picture of a product if a small number of users do most of the voting" (Grifantini). Every individual has their own preferences and experiences with products and services. If it is only a small percentage of users writing reviews for all the products we see, we may be biased toward how they think. Consumers may be persuaded to not purchase something that otherwise was a perfect fit for them. Even with reviews from our peers, we should always take their testimonies with a grain of salt.
Langfitt, Frank. "Social Networking Technology Boosts Job Recruiting." NPR. NPR, 22 Nov. 2006.
Web. 04 Oct. 2016.
Social media is not always used appropriately, or efficiently. Some users harass others while remaining anonymous on the internet. There are some that fall in the middle, using legitimate services, but are subjective in their experiences. In the article "Can You Trust Crowd Wisdom?" researched discovered that most reviews for products were voted by the same people because other users didn't bother voting. This can skew the data, says Vassilis Kostakos, a university professor in Portugal, in Grifantini's article. Kostakos says, "they can paint a distorted picture of a product if a small number of users do most of the voting" (Grifantini). Every individual has their own preferences and experiences with products and services. If it is only a small percentage of users writing reviews for all the products we see, we may be biased toward how they think. Consumers may be persuaded to not purchase something that otherwise was a perfect fit for them. Even with reviews from our peers, we should always take their testimonies with a grain of salt.
Works Cited
Grifantini, Kristina. "Can You Trust Crowd Wisdom?" MIT Technology Review. MIT Technology
Review, 16 Sept. 2009. Web. 04 Oct. 2016.
Web. 04 Oct. 2016.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)