Writing History In Real Time

"Twitterers are writing history in real time." (link)  

My Experience

Quite frankly, for the longest time I never really understood what all the buzz was about with Twitter.  When I was in high school, the popular social network (a phrase that had not been coined yet) was Myspace.  I left the country to serve a mission and returned two years later only to realize Facebook had taken over as the most widely used means of social networking, and a lot of things had changed.  I didn't know it at the time, but I definitely wasn't in Kansas anymore as far as what I understood about the internet and social media.

The first time I ever remember having a real conversation about Twitter was at the Scera Amphitheater in Provo watching Singing in the Rain.  It was a double date, and the guy in the other couple started talking about how he had a Twitter account with six followers.  At the time, I had no idea what that meant.  When they explained that it was basically the status feed on Facebook, I thought it was stupid.  Why would I want to hear about what someone had for breakfast on Facebook only to hear about it again on Twitter?  Absurd.

Fast forward.  I had left for the Philippines in 2009.  Six years later, I could never have imagined that tweeting would become such a regular source of, not only personal information, but information from a wide variety of sources, a lot of it being news.  Who could also have predicted that tweets could become such a big part of how we see the world?

A Few Articles

I found an interesting article (and we may have discussed this in class already, I can't remember) about five french-speaking journalists who secluded themselves in a cabin in southern France.  Their only sources for connecting with what was happening beyond that cabin were social networks and social media.  The journalist who wrote the article went over several observations that he had made about the experience.  He talked about an experience where he was scanning different feeds only to find in real time a man being taken into custody for a crime that he had committed... in Moscow.  He mentions, there was probably no way he would have found that source if he had not been on Twitter.  I find it interesting that the author of the article compared Twitter to a radar, in that there are often events going on that no one initially knows about.  Those events are being broadcasted by the very people that are experiencing them in real time, much like a police radar.  

In this case, Tweeting live happenings can be useful, at least in the sense of getting a story out there where traditional media sources, as Goldman mentioned, would be behind in reporting.  Now this might not have been a story for the news, but it illustrates a principle of immediacy where no other source would have had the same information at the same time as Twitter because it was literally being tweeted by someone experiencing it in real time, because often times it's hard to be in the right place at the right time where news happens.

However, another paragraph in the article talks a lot about what Gladstone and Goldman discussed on the podcast - that it is very easy to be led off course following Twitter feeds.  While they were at the cabin, there was a loud noise in Northern France that no one was able to identify.  There was so much speculation as to what the noise was - an explosion, a fire, a nuclear problem - that the French Twitter-sphere exploded with ideas.  The author later came to find out by traditional news media sources that the loud noise was just a jet breaking the sound barrier, something that no one in the Twitter-sphere had guessed.

In this case, a real life feed was of no use, because no one really knew what was going on.  Much like what had been discussed in the podcast, people reporting on the police scanner sometimes misreported what was happening and the wrong information was disseminated to the public.  In instances such as these, a "live feed," or that "zing," would be negative.

In both cases, perhaps an instant update becomes more useful as it moves from a spectator's perspective to someone who is actually experiencing the event.

Bundy

In drawing from sources even closer to home, I will admit, I haven't been much for following the Bundy story.  I was a little turned off by the fact that something that may have started out as little dispute has grown into an opportunity for both sides of the aisle to lob political grenades at each other.  However, just for fun I decided to do my monthly Twitter check to see what all hoo ha was about.  As soon as I clicked on the hashtag #bundyranch I immediately saw remarks about racism.

Like I said, I have not been following the story, but at my house, Fox News is constantly turned on on one of the television sets somewhere, and between all the accounts I had not heard anything about this yet.  It sparked some interest for me to look into it a little further.  Most of the comments that I initially saw about the incident were all negative, which I think did frame my understanding of additional sources that I came across in more formal news outlets.

Again, in this case, my initial reaction and the additional information I gathered from the tweets really flavored how the rest of what I researched felt.  As I was looking for a better source for information (the first site on Google search was Times), I was bracing for the worst.  It was hard to imagine how, based on what I had seen, Mr. Bundy could dig himself out of this one.  Now that I see the issue a little more clearly, after having watched the actual clip, I have formed my own opinion about what happened, but not without a lingering taste of what I had initially heard and felt.  Typically, I like to think that when I really research something, I my interpretation can stand alone without falling back on someone else's previous beliefs or statements, yet it is pretty hard not to discredit the initial shock or "zing" that I experienced when I first read someone else's account of what had happened.

Conclusion

I want to hearken back to the very first line of this post.  "Twitterers are writing history in real time."  That's pretty powerful when you think about it.  It was a line in an article I found as I was searching out different sources for this post.  Being a communication major, I have a pretty strong belief that communication shapes the world in which we live.  How we communicate about something determines our reality of it.  That being said, maybe that's the reason that being the first person to tweet about something is so appealing.  This initial communication, is not just the first interpretation, but an opportunity to lay the foundation for future interpretations.  If we're the first person to tweet about a situation, we are the first ones to shape the reality of what actually happened.  It's ours.  Other people will only build upon it, but that initial foundation will only be added to.  That "zing" just might be the desire in all of us to be able to say, "yeah, that's mine."

I think about my experience with the racist comments of Mr. Bundy, even though I might not agree with what was tweeted, no one will ever be able to erase that initial feeling that I got when I first read someone else's interpretation of what happened.  I measured it against everything else I read and interpreted personally and, at least for some short period of time, it was what I saw as the reality of the situation.  Even though I modified it by adding my own interpretation to it, the foundation was laid by that first tweet.

We Americans treasure the idea of "land." What was this whole Bundy ordeal about? Perceived rights about land. In this case, however, the land we're discussing is the psychological ownership of being the first to tweet something. Much like the early settlers expanding to the West, we stake our piece of land by having the fastest fingers, and everyone is to know that it's ours. In reality, that "zing" has been around a lot longer than we might have imagined. The only difference is now, instead of saying , "That plot of land there? That's mine." It's, "That tweet there? That's mine."

- Carlos

Happiness and Utility

The way I see it, according to what we had read, happiness is a feeling of fulfillment, while utility is a sense of practicality and accomplishment.

I know I have felt a lot of happiness in the past regarding apps, mostly in the form of games.  Jetpack Joyride, Punch Quest, and more recently, 2048, have all been culprits of much of my wasted time.  Visiting the app store I know I had a particular need.  In this case, the need for me was entertainment.  Believe me when I say, I got plenty of entertainment out of all of these.  Probably much more so than I would have liked or had time for.  Similarly, I think many people come to the app store with some kind of metaphysical need.  Whether it is a need to be entertained or to express themselves, or even to feel more organized.  All of the apps come as an answer to some type of need.

Utility on the other hand, is more based on things I want done, accomplishment or practicality.  For example, I can play a game for hours on end, but in the end, nothing was really accomplished.  There a lack of a sense of practicality and a sense of accomplishment.  Some apps, such as those that are geared toward making life easier or finding something, or even meeting people, help us feel like we are actually accomplishing something, therefore justify our purposes in buying them.

The trick is to get both of these with the same product.  An app that is fun to use, and fills some sort of metaphysical need, but is also very practical and leaves us with a sense of accomplishment after having used it.  I think the earlier apps that caught on exemplified both of these.

I do agree, there are many apps out there for us to pick from, far too many to use practically on a daily basis, but I do believe the ones that really catch on are the ones that emphasize both fulfillment and practicality and accomplishment.

If Only I Could Do This More Often: Forty-Eight Hours Without Technology

To be quite honest, at the very beginning I was really quite nervous.  I suppose that might be the case for someone who frequently receives texts because of responsibilities associated with a leadership position in an organization.   Fortunately, all of this happened during Spring Break, after student government had taken care of all the big items for the first half of the semester.  When I knew the time to commit was at hand, I made a post on my Facebook about what I was about to do, just to inform people that I would be participating in a fast (the post actually received 17 likes and several comments)  I then gave my phone to a trusted friend for safe keeping, and just in case there was a real emergency that I needed to respond to.  Then it began.

In the very early stages I would frequently think of something that I needed to do, but then realized it was something that I could only do with my phone.  Check texts and emails.  Do some homework.  Even play some instruments.  I remember sitting in a band room, after having practiced a piece for choir, and sitting down to play a piano, only to have one of my friends point out to me later that the very piano that I was playing was a digital piano.  I quickly moved to another instrument.

Oddly enough, I felt much more productive not having my phone on me.  It was at that point that I realized just how much time I actually spent on my phone, and how much using that wretched thing drew me away during conversation with people and living in the actual moment.  Also, oddly enough, I did not feel disconnected with the world.  In fact, I'm sure I felt more connected than I had been in a very long time, because my mind was there in the present conversation, and not concerned with the text that I just received or wondering what my inbox looked like.

I suppose for me, losing technology, and my phone, felt like shedding some of the responsibility that I had.  I no longer had to worry about people calling me and reminding me about events, or no longer had to scan my inbox for emails about meetings or different votes that needed to be taken.  At the same time I felt free to actually live in the present physical moment.  I didn't need to take pictures, but I could actually enjoy the animal warmth of my friends, the texture of the sand between my feet, and the cool breeze as it hit the lake and coursed over my arms.  Life felt more real.

Really, the only downside to all of this was, first, I really did have a lot of responsibilities to take care of that needed to be tended to at some point.  There was no escaping that fact.  And second, it made it hard to look up tabs for guitar when we were camping.  Also, we couldn't listen to music in the car.  However, we had a blast singing Disney songs a cappella on the way to Sand Hollow.

Life without technology

When I returned back to that which I had grown to loathe, I checked my Facebook only to see several comments on my post about the fast.  One of them was from someone who had done the fast in the past, for the very same class.  He commented, "It's the worst thing ever!"  I could only wonder how much so many of us had become dependent on technology for our entertainment and convenience.  For myself, fortunately, I couldn't agree less with his comment.  I could live my life without any of those things, and probably be happier for it.  It was an interesting experience for sure, and you can bet your iPhone that I will do this again periodically in the future just to gain some added appreciation for nature and reverence for an even bigger social network that binds us all together, life.

Media Convergence - Music File Sharing

Mix Tapes/Cassette Tapes
Maybe one of the earliest forms of file sharing were cassette tapes, mixtapes as they are affectionately called by some. It has been said that personal mixtapes were, ""the most widely practiced American art form."

Previous to the use of cassette tapes, making personal pop mixes was difficult for the causal music listener, with no access to equipment capable of doing so. However, when cassette tapes and music recorders became more popular, requirements for getting music recordings were reduced to only blank cassette tapes and a recording device connected to a source of prerecorded music such as the radio.


Boombox
The first "Radiorecorder" was released in 1969 by Philips of the Netherlands, and was the first time that a radio broadcast could be recorded without the use of cables or microphones.

CDs
The jump to the digital age opened up a whole new ballgame and the advent of the recordable compact disk marked a new era of file sharing. Music was no longer confined to a single piece of hardware, but also existed digitally, meaning those files could now be shared and distributed.

Personal mixes became easier than ever because, not only could songs be downloaded to a PC and then burnt to a writable CD, but songs could also be uploaded to the internet and other types of software for distribution and pirating.

For a brief period of time, several record companies attempted to create CDs with copy protection. However, these CDs were not compatible with certain audio players and were eventually seen as violations to fair use copyright law.

view source

This jump eventually set into motion a chain events that led to music situation we live in today. First, according to some sources, it hurt the growth of CD sales. It caused loss of sales in music retail stores. Most notable is, some sources have stated that between 2004 and 2009 a total of $30 billion worth of songs were downloaded illegally (original article).

Brief History of Digital File Sharing
1970s - Floppy disk became the first instance of removable media.  Removable media becomes target of media efforts against sharing of intellectual property.
1980s - File sharing done by modem over landline telephone.
1990s - Basic ideas for filesharing established.  File compression technology improves, but is only available to general public toward the end of the decade. MP3.com is created.  Napster is created, which utilizes centralized structure for servers.
2000s - Gnutella is created as a decentralized sharing network.  Napster is shut down.  Various other file sharing services are launched such as Morpheus and Kazaa, and are subsequently modified or shut down.  Legal file sharing service, "iTunes" is launched.
2010s - BitTorrent protocol and clients become more stable.  Pirate Bay trial verdict was announced.  Megaupload shut down and internet hacktivist group Anonymous responds by attacking various organizations.

How does it work?
P2P - Users connect to a peer-to-peer network to search for shared files on the computers of other users connected to the network.  Larger files are usually broken up into smaller chunks obtained from multiple peers, which are then reassembled by the downloader.
Examples: Napster, Morpheus, BitTorrent

File Sync and Sharing Services - Special folders are created on each of the computers or mobile devices, and then are synchronized.  Files placed in these folders are viewable on both, or multiple computers.
Examples: Dropbox or Google Drive
(source)

A Case for File Sharing
Practicality:

• There are usually only a few songs on an album you like anyway
• It can be used as a publicity tool for bands
• Music listeners and artists stop thinking about music in terms of buyer/seller relationships
• Artistic integrity might not be at the top of producer's priority list
• Many songs would not have been bought even if P2P programs didn't exist at all
• One study suggests that there is no direct relationship between P2P file-sharing and CD purchases (in Canada). (source)

Legality:

• It's legal if artist allow their work to be shared -

"We encourage and promote the free exchange of our own music on the Internet using file sharing programs and P2P networks.  We consider this new opportunity to share our music and ideas with others, and for others to share our music and ideas with each other, to be good for us, good for society and, good for art." (Statement from band Negativland)

"But in the midst of the firestorm, countless other bands have been quietly benefiting from the increased exposure that P2P programs provided, and despite legal setbacks, filesharing has inevitably fallen into its natural role as the next big publicity tool." (original article)

To Be Continued 

New Device: Glass

When first watching the video “A Day Made of Glass” I was pretty blown away. This is the kind of stuff that we only see in the movies. I feel like I saw of some this similar technology in scenes from Iron Man and The Jetsons. Seriously, it’s the kind of technology that science fictions writers could only dream about. 

A Day Made of Glass 1

A Day Made of Glass 2

Now, this isn’t necessarily a device in and of itself, but almost a new way of viewing living.  It is a concept that is pretty revolutionary concept. Imagine a house, a store, an organization that has access to this technology. How would things be completely changed? How would it change advertising, medicine, and even movie nights with the family? Well, in a lot of ways perhaps. It would change the way that people would interact with the world and their surroundings.

Imagine connectivity on your mobile device and in your surroundings. Imagine further the integration of your device with your surroundings. Almost every surface becomes a possible screen, a possible way to gather information. Even in nature, the transparent nature of this glass opens up many possibilities and the ability to superimpose other images onto surroundings creating an immersive experience wherever you are.

Convergence
In responding to consumer values, this technology creates access points in almost every setting, home, work, stores, even in intimate places such as a bathroom. It is very useful in that information and connection can be achieved wherever you look. One thing that did occur to me, however, was that people who have lost the ability to see would be very disadvantaged if the world was “made of glass.”

Consumerism
In regards to consumerism, since the product is glass, it is very adaptable and can become whatever a user would desire it to be as far as color and appearance is concerned. Hearken back to the point in the second video where the little girls in the car completely change the layout of the dashboard to become a little more “fun” for them. The convenience of this product is astounding. As I have mentioned over and over, this literally makes everything a workable surface. Your device is everywhere and can integrate with many, many different surfaces.

Interactivity
Addressing interactivity, as I mentioned the glass can be made to accommodate all sorts of styles, although the styles are more digital than they are physical, meaning, industries that produce phone covers may go out of business unless the new style becomes something becomes something that is transparent and you can stick to your glass.

Regarding control, it appears that there is a great amount of control over your environment; although I don’t know what would happen if someone was to hack into the glass and project images or different programs. I think of hacktivists and the destruction that could be done as far as propaganda and safety is concerned. The security of this device is a bit questionable because at this point, literally, people could watch every move you make. They could follow you from your bedroom, to your bathroom, to work, to the store, and back home. For some people that might be a little disconcerting. If such were possible, there would need to be some serious firewalling and security measures taken to ensure that this is does not happen.

Technological Determinism
In terms of technological determinism, although I don’t necessarily believe that technology influences how the future plays out, this particular technology would do a number of things to change the world as we now experience it. First, as seen, there would be unlimited amounts of information being streamed for us to see. Weather, news, messages, there would be almost no escape. Second, there would unlimited connectivity. Wherever you go you could be connected, not just by text, but actual images. I think this would lead to further convergence, to where technology would become more and more invisible, meaning it would just be a part of our daily lives.

In agreeing with technological determinism it would completely shift the way that we humans think about being connected, not only to others, but also with our surroundings. Being in nature might actually be a scary thing for some people, because you wouldn’t be able to control your surroundings.

Market Paradigm Shifts
This technology/device would completely change the market. There would be less of a focus in developing physical innovations, as far as devices are concerned, and more of an influx of new and exciting ways to utilize this unlimited connectivity and unlimited interaction with environment. I think of the “Skyview” app that was shared in class, and try to imagine that type of technology, but happening in a classroom ceiling, happening in nature, or anywhere for that matter. We could even over lay past events literally where they happened and watch them play out.

Conclusion
I know I have raved about this technology, but there is no denying that its development would change the way that we interact with our environment and open up Pandora’s Box regarding new innovations, but also the severity of computer crimes. Privacy would be a thing of the past in a world made of glass.

On a more serious note, it would change corporate advertising and the focus of how to get people’s attention. Also, with the increased ability to connect with people and display capabilities medicine would change and even the way we communicate would be different.

So this would be my recommendation as far as new devices are concerned. I recommend looking into this market, because if this does happen the way that Corning has proposed it will, it will literally be a game changer in terms of connectivity and introduce a new screen for us to view information on. The new screen wouldn’t be limited to devices or things separate from your environment, the new screen would be the environment itself.

App Review: Sleep Cycle

I'll be honest.  I'm a bit of a "Productivity and Lifestyle" app junkie.  I have downloaded many, many apps that offer to make life a little easier to manage or motivate you to become better in some way.  Among the apps that I've look at are Everest, Day One, Epiclist, FitBit, Lose it!, Sunrise Calendar, OOHLALA, Lift, and many others.  Each of those apps brings to the table a different concept designed to help us become better people.

Although it is probably more qualified to be listed under the "Health" apps category, the idea behind Sleep Cycle definitely has the potential to develop a more productive lifestyle.  Why?  Because it deals with sleep patterns and waking up at the time that is literally best for your body.  If I were to sum this app review up, I would say this is an AWESOME APP.  Let's talk about what makes it awesome.

Sleep Cycle works by using the iPhone's built in accelerometer to monitor and track movement during the night in order to determine which sleep cycle you are in.  After one night you are able to identify your sleep quality for the night and the total time in bed.  Now, that by itself would be pretty awesome.

However, it does more!

As you start to log more nights of sleep in consistently, you the app starts to give you graphs of the different statistics such as:

Time in Bed

Sleep Quality

Went to Bed

Time in Bed Per Day of the Week

Sleep Quality Per Day of the Week

Sleep Notes

The Alarm

The alarm feature is one feature that the app really emphasizes.  Because the app is able to monitor sleep patterns, it is able to determine what the best time to wake up for the person using the app.  Personally, I typically feel a lot better when the app wakes me up because it feels more of a natural wake up.  The only problem is that the alarm is a little too soft to hear for some people.  

The app wakes you up in between two times of half hour increments, whichever time is most natural based on your sleep patterns.

Sustainability:
Sleep cycle has been out for several years now, the copyright being 2010.  Since then it has been featured various times with publications and media outlets such as CNN, Wired, The Guardian, The Wall Street Journal, BBC, The New York Times.  It has a five star rating for the current version with 2,308 ratings and a four and half star rating for all version with 63,581 ratings.  From what I've seen that is pretty impressive.  I predict that the app will continue to receive updates (the last being January of this year) and get better.  It already has a pretty loyal following, the few people that I know who have used it only say positive things about it.

Usability:
The app is pretty straightforward.  It asks you what time you want to wake up (as shown above) and all you need to do is place it on the side of your bed (typically under your covers) near where you sleep.  You do have to leave the phone plugged in to the charger all night, but it's probably not anything we don't do anyway.  The only problem I ran into was trying to find how to use the "notes" feature, which allows you to keep track of what you did right before going to bed, or even what you had done that day that might be relevant to your sleep quality.

Value:
The app does cost $0.99 to buy and download, but it is well worth the small price.  The actual site mentions that similar alarm clocks that can monitor the body's natural sleep cycles cost about $200.  Personally, I think it was a good investment for what it does, and it's something that I use almost everyday.

A few drawbacks that have been mentioned is:
- You have to keep it plugged in all night, or it will drain you battery
- You do have to bring it into your room, meaning possible disturbance from calls and texts
- The accelerometer picks up movements of everything, including bed partners and pets
- Sometimes the alarm will wake you up earlier than you had wanted to because of the 30 minute increments
(I found these concerns here)

Conclusion:
I have enjoyed this app very much, although sometimes I forget to use it.  However, the app doesn't punish you for missing days.  Understanding my sleep patterns has been interesting and it has helped me be more aware of what I might be able to do to get better sleep.  Overall, I feel that it has been a very good investment for how much it costs and for what it has the ability to do.

Assessment 1

How public opinion may have been influenced through social media and new devices -
This is an interesting topic to consider because for a good space of time, this was a hot topic on social media. I would say the role that social media has played in this whole debate is pretty significant, at least in the eyes of the public.

Personally, the first I even heard of the whole issue was when I had logged on to Facebook, as has become the daily routine, to check and see if anything was new. I kept seeing graphics, posts, and pictures of different sides of the issue. Mind you, the majority of my contacts fall under a few categories - conservative Mormons, Filipinos, and the occasional friend with liberal views. Personally, the reality that was created for me based on my social media involvement has been that what has happened has been a somewhat negative step, given that most of what had been posted was not very positive regarding the issue. Not discriminatory, but a little worried.

Delving into the issue a little deeper, I found a Facebook page with a fair amount of traffic, that was definitely in favor of marriage equality in Utah. I imagine, if you had liked that, there would be a steady amount of pro-marriage equality posts streaming down your Facebook feed. However, aside from the very obvious pages created either for or against, I think what was most prevalent were the articles that were being re-posted by some friends. The articles detailed what was happening, and if anything sped up the process of information dissemination.

Based on what we had discussed, depending on which side of the fence a person happens to fall on, you gain a really narrow view of the subject. Obviously, most of the people you're friends with will share a lot of your ideological views, therefore what they post will only fuel the fire, strengthening views you probably already have. It really has created an even wider gap between the two prevalent ideologies. Furthermore, it seemed, according the articles and different posts that I saw on my feed, that although there is a lot of negativity regarding the issue, the loudest voices were those who were pro-marriage equality. Even the pictures used for articles were of LGBT members, picketing, smiling, or just being generally happy. Even if I was just scrolling my Facebook feed, and didn't care to read the articles, it made everything seem like a very positive thing. That contrasted with the different "worried" posts was an interesting contrast.

What you think about technological determinism's role in this -
I supposed it could be argued that technological determinism's role in this issue has been the quick dissemination of information, and the ability to frame ideas and event in a specific way. Hearkening back to what I had talked about earlier, similar to the way the feeling of an article can be somewhat framed by pictures that are used to accompany it, the sharing of information, for or against an issue, can very much frame the way we see an issue. Similarly, given that Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Vine are all things that people use on a daily basis, what is being posted on those feeds could very much become the reality of the situation for someone. It is shaping the way that people view the reality of a situation because, as Twitter and Facebook have become, constant streams of information are being received and processed.

How social media have contributed to the push for action, either in efforts to petition for or against marriage equality in Utah, and to organize for civil protest -
Pointing again back to what I had said earlier, Facebook pages like the one I shared earlier and this one have played an interesting role in contributing to the push for action. Actually, just logging on to the Equality Utah page I found this little graphic:



The ability for people to send invites to events, to share about upcoming events, to let others see where they can rally together for their cause has been pretty big. I really think some of the images that were used to depict what rallies looked like, with people being happy, and all the signs, has been huge in giving people the courage to come forward and join. Additionally it gives the appearance that there are many people supporting the cause, whether that's really the case or not.

In conclusion -
Social media has played a really big role in the whole issue, with first of all providing somewhat of a narrow view of one side. There is a social filter that has been created as a result of social media, something that doesn't exist in newspapers or even online articles. These filters can providing feeling and perceptions of an issue that may or may not represent it's reality. Furthermore, social media has allowed for quick dissemination of information, and as mentioned, the ability to frame the reality of an event. Above all, however, social media has also become a means of rallying people behind a cause and portraying the cause as powerful and effective.