This blog has moved

This blog is now located at http://icom630sp06.blogspot.com/.
You will be automatically redirected in 30 seconds, or you may click here.

For feed subscribers, please update your feed subscriptions to
http://icom630sp06.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default.

Betsy_Ch.8_Hayles_I

First off, I enjoy metaphysical stuff and messing with ontology of things. So this article was cool.

Second, I searched for Lexia to Perplexia, but could not find a working version, so I was dissapointed. If any one found a working one please let me know where it is.

The last statement "these connections perform human subjects who cannot be thought without the intelligent machines that produce us even as we produce them." Hayles seems to be constructing a circle stucture of creation. Where we create the machines that create ourselves. The concept of 'God' within ourselves has always facinated me.

RAFAEL_CH-7_JEREMIJENKO_I

CAN U CAPTURE A VOICE?
VOICE IS THE ICON OF PERSON. "TO BE GIVING A VOICE" IS SHORTHAND FOR THE FUNDAMENTAL UNIT OF DEMOCRACY: VOTING, "BEING REPRESENTED," OR PARTICIPATING. A DEVICE OF SOCIALITY AND THEREFORE INTERACTION, IT IS USED TO INTERPOLATE A SUBJECT(PRESUMABLY A PERSON) INTO SOCIETY, OR AS A PERFORMATIVE DEVICE TO INSTANTIATE SOCIAL AGREEMENTS AND IDENTITIES.
WHAT ABOUT VOICELESS PEOPLE? I DISAGREE HERE WITH THE REFERENCES FROM THE WRITER OF THE BOOK.
ALSO, I DO NOT THINK VOICE IS THE FUNDAMENTAL UNIT FOR DEMOCRAY. DEMOCRACY CAN BE ACHIVE WITH OUT VOICE. THE WRITER GOES TO FAR TRYING TO MIX A TOPIC CLEARLY OUT OF THE BOUNDS WHEN IT COMES TO THE BOOK. INFORMAL AND FORMAL COMMUNICATION ARE BLEND TOGETHER, THEY NEED EACH OTHER IN OTHER TO SURVIVE, USING ONLY "VOICE" AS A FUNDAMENTAL SOURCE ITS WRONG FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.

Betsy_Ch.7_Sack_Q

I really liked Sack's article because its dealing with questions I have had with all the added information on the web. How can all this be organized and categorized. At the end of his article he states: "the group of participants involved in a VLSC need a means to recognize themselves as a socially, politically, or economically (in) cohesive entity for purposes of self-governance."

"The Conversation Map system is an attempt to provide one effort towards building tools for community self-recongnition and self-governance."

Do you think these are good tools for building community and self-governance? Is this replacing going down to the town meeting to find out what's going on? Is this a form of education, persuasion, or propaganda? How could this change the face of the government/economy/and communities as we know them?

Nick_Ch8_Montfort_I

"What is important to realize is that while there are such things as 'games' and 'stories,' many new media artifacts are neither of these, but employ elements from both." (p. 311)

This is essentially what I have been saying through out this whole book. I think most of these authors have been trying to examine nitches, which are admittedly very important, but I think they seem to be missing the big picture. Everything here is so new that I think we must examine the larger picture and not narrow it done and pigeon hole any of these new technologies in to one or two limiting categories. That is my big idea for this whole book, while all of this is important I think we must not try to limit or simplify any of these new media.

Nick_Ch7_Sack_Q

I really, really dig Warren Sack's theories on very large scale conversations. It is such an interesting theory, which seemingly combines a number of different organization structures into concise way to track larger community discussions. I found a couple of updated articles on the subject by Sack and are interested to see how he addresses how the internet has changed in the last 5 years. For instance, if he has a way to incorporate blogs and large community sites, such as myspace.com or facebook.com.

Either way past this, my actual question is...does all this organization, filtering and narrowing of information cut down the possibility of random exposure to information that goes against a persons belief? Does this just bring out only information which confirms people's current beliefs?

Blog 3.4 - Posting Instructions

1) TOSS A COIN.
HEADS = Read the articles in a section FIRST to LAST.
TAILS = Read the articles in a section LAST to FIRST.
2) ONE POST per person PER UNIT (NOT the book's responses) by Wednesday PM.
2) THREE OR MORE COMMENTS TO POSTS by 5:30 PM Thursday.
3) Your first post may be an idea OR a question.
4) You may add up to TWO additional posts about CHAPTERS or RESPONSES per week.
5) Label each "Big Idea" post like this:
YourFirstName__CHAPTER_AUTHOR__I - Example: John__MURRY__I
6) Label each "Big Question" post like this:
YourFirstName__CHAPTER_AUTHOR__Q - Example: John__MURRY__Q
7) TOTAL NUMBER of Ideas Posts / Question Posts / Comments:
4+/person/week
8) Blogger will automatically sign each post w/ your name.
9) Pick a favorite "thread" (your's or someone else's) by classtime.
10) Each week's discussion will BEGIN with an examination of these "threads."

Betsy_Ch6_Cayley_Q

"I'm trying, as it were, to turn our attention from lines of verse to the letters of literal art and to place the latter in a significant contructive relationship with the pixels of digital graphic art." (213-214)

Cayley is trying to create a meaningful relationship between letters and pixels. --- I think.

"My argument is that the material manipulation of pixels derives, culturally, from an underlying gasp of the manipulation of letters." (214)

Is he trying to say people have been holding their breath to finally be able to manpulate letters??

RAFAEL_CHAPTER 6_CAYLEY_I

I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH MR CAYLEY. IN PAGE 210 HE CITES THE FOLLOWING: THE WORLD OF LETTERS HAD PLAYED A CRUCIAL ROLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF DIGITAL ART AND CULTURE.
THEN HE GOES ON: TEXT IS INDEED "THE WEB'S PRIMARY FOUNDATIONAL MEDIA"
I DISAGREE HERE. A BOOK PRIMARY FOUNDATION IS TEXT (PHONEMES), IN MAGAZINES TEXT (PHONEMES) BECOMES THE SECONDARY SOURCE AFTER PHOTOGRAPS. I THINK "EFFICIENCY" IS THE PRIMARY FOUNDATION OF THE NEW MEDIA.
VIVA ZAPATA!!!!!

Nick_Ch6_Seaman_Q

"Thus text presents one field of meaning force that can only be understood contextually in relation to other "neighboring" meaning forces - other media elements and living processes" (p. 230).

I know this is probably getting old, but Seaman states the above example, like many other comments in his article, as if it is something new and revolutionary. I don't understand when it was that context wasn't important in any type of visual art or narrative?

I also don't like that there is an advertisement for Seaman's upcoming work, funded by Intel, in the article.

Betsy_Ch.5_Strickland_Q

This question is close to what Taco was saying with how we learn to read/interpret differnt symbols.

Strickland says, "We shift differently, we censor differently, we move differently, to sound, to text, to image, and to animation. Today, perforce, we are learning to oscillate differently, in new 'ratios..'" With this change in ratios is our brain really keeping up? I'm not a brain expert, however I would enjoy some brain research to see if brains are changing along with the technology to keep up. Is it that kids now, who are growing up with computers are faster because they can interpret faster?

How is our brain adapting to these new faster technologies?

RAFA_Ch.5_Douglas&Hargadon_I

" PG 196.- WHETHER BY ACCIDENT OR DESIGN, EARLY GAMES DEVELOPERS HAD HIT DIGITAL PAYDIRT BY FOUNDING THEIR FIRST VENTURES ON THE BEDROCK OF TWO ESSENTIALS: A RECIPE FOR INTERACTION THAT ALL BUT GUARANTEED A DEEPLY IMMERSIVE EXPERIENCE AND STRONG, NORMATIVE SCHEMAS BORROWED FROM ALREADY FAMILIAR FORMS OF ENTERTAINMENT". I DISAGREE HERE, I DO NOT THINK THE "PRIMITIVE" STYLE OF ARCADE GAMES HAS ANYTHING TO DO WHIT THE IMMERSIVE EXPERIENCE. PERSONALLY REGARDLESS THE GAME I'M PLAYING THE IMMERSION IS THE SAME, DOES NOT MATTER IF THE GAME IS A "RETRO" GAME OR ONE OF MY GAMES FROM MY X-BOX, PS2, NINTENDO, OR SEGA.

Nick_Ch5_Bernstein_Q

I really like the idea of Card Shark. I think it is a simple organization system, but would work. It really seems to make the whole idea of hypertext or interactive narrative simple. It breaks it all down to a bunch of If-Then loops, which makes sense to me from the ol' C++ programming. My question is simple...is it this simple? Card Shark has spawned alot of ideas in my head...I just don't understand what I am missing.

RAFA_Ch4_ZIMMERMAN_Q

IN THIS ESSAY, ZIMMERMAN TALKS ABOUT NARRATIVE, INTERACTIVITY, PLAY AND GAMES.
THE PRODUCT IS EASY TO READ. MR. ZIMMERMAN CUT MY ATTENTION (NOT AN EASY TASK
SINCE I'M ADD POSITIVE) IN THE WAY HE DESCRIBES NARRATIVE AND I TOTALLY AGREE
WITH HIS VIEW (PG 156)
2. A NARRATIVE IS NOT MERELY A SERIES OF EVENTS BUT A PERSONIFICATION OF EVENTS THOUGH A MEDIUM SUCH AS LANGUAGE. THIS COMPONENT OF THE DEFINITION REFERENCES THE REPRESENTATIONAL ASPECT OF NARRATIVE.
HE ALSO GOES ON TO DESCRIBE GAME AS FOLLOWS: (PG 160)
A GAME IS A VOLUNTARY INTERACTIVE ACTIVITY, IN WHICH ONE OR MORE PLAYERS FOLLOW RULES THAT CONSTRAIN THEIR BEHAVIOR, ENACTING AN ARTIFICIAL CONFLICT THAT ENDS IN A QUANTIFIABLE OUTCOME.
I TOTALLY DISAGREE HERE WITH MR. ZIMMERMAN, "GAME CAN BE VOLUNTARY UNTIL A GAME NO LONGER IS A GAME AND BECOMES A ADDICTION OR A WAY OF LIFE" DO YOU AGREE WITH ME? DO POKER PLAYERS ARE PLAYING A GAME? OR ARE POKER PLAYERS NO LONGER PLAYERS BUT WORKERS?

Nick_Ch4_Pearce_Q

Pearce states, "the largest controversy has to do with the use of 'cut-scenes' also known as 'cinematics'" (p. 148). This is where the game stops and there is a segment of high quality video or graphics, usually used as the major narrative section of the game. My problem is that it stops the game dead in its tracks. You could be completely immersed in the energy and action of the game, but then you get to the cut-scene and bang-o* all action stops. I think this is also a major problem in many of the ideas of interactive television or DVD's.

So, how can we tell a story and keep the action going? Is this a technical limitation in the gaming world or something else?

*ha

Betsy_Ch.4_Zimmerman_I

Zimmerman says, "It's important to note that the "story" of the Ms. Pac-Man game-story certainly does not provide the same pleasures of a novel or film. But why should we expect it to? The question is, what pleasures can it provide that books or films cannot?"

Here is my attempt to answer:

Playing a Ms. Pac-Man game is very simple, I would think many people know the story of Ms. Pac-Man and what you have to do to survive, eat the yellow things and stay away from the ghosts. It's not as deep or as rich in a plot line such as a novel or a film. However Ms. Pac-Man adds a dimension, sort of like Mystery Science Theater 3000, in which you can add your own comments. You can laugh, yell, make fun of, talk, or not talk. You can do all these other actions that you cannot do in a movie theater or with reading a novel.

If someone has not read the novel you are reading, then any reactions will fall on deaf ears. Yet with Ms. Pac-Man you can 'play' and exagurate dying by a ghost and really get emotional with the game. So in summary, I think they pleasures it provides that books and films cannot is the emotional exprience that can be shared quickly with many.

RAFAEL BRIONES RODRIGUEZ

RAFAEL BRIONES RODRIGUEZ

RAFAEL_Ch3_Penny_I

PG 76 "AND HAVING ACCEPTED THAT SIMULATORS ARE EFFECTIVE ENVIRONMENTS FOR TRAINING, WE MUST ACCEPT THAT SO TOO ARE THE DESKTOP SHOOTERS GAMES. THE QUESTION IS: WHAT EXACTLY IS THE USER BEING TRAINED TO DO?
I THINK THE RIGHT ANSWER FROM MY PERSPECTIVE GOES AS FOLLOWS: ANY VIDEO PLAYER HAS A "GOAL" OF BEING MORE EFFICIENT WHILE PLAYING. I THINK THE "TYPE" OF GAME BECOMES A SECONDARY ISSUE HERE TO THE PLAYER. WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE NARRATIVE OF THE GAME FLOATS AROUND THE PLAYER'S EFFICIENCY IN THE GAME.

Betsy_Ch3_Penny_Q

Penny says "The emerging range of digital social practices calls for a new range of sociological studies..." (page 82)

My question is why "sociological?" We've been learning in Digital Storytelling 1 & 2, that there is a digital media type world out there emmerging, and needs to be studied and classifiyed, but is sociological the best way?? Why not try to impliment communication theories or narrative theories to study this??

Would it be best to pull a Medici Effect and pull together many different disciplines to study this massive forming area??