Extra Blog- Facebook

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010608F.shtml
Ari Melber's article About Facebook was extremely interesting and intriguing. I found many of the issues Ari brought up to be some of the most crucial concerns I have about Facebook. I'll be graduating in 3 weeks and will have a career so knowing that the information I post on Facebook may end up in my future boss' hands is frightening! One major topic Ari discusses is the idea of privacy and how teens post information on Facebook and then get mad that random people have access to that information. Here is my opinion: I post photos and comments about myself (not my address or phone # of course) because I want my friends to see it and other people that I choose to be able to see it. I have my privacy settings at the highest security and I don't accept friendships unless I know you. This is because I am trying to restrict who has access to my profile. Its not the fact that I don't want people seeing these pictures, because otherwise I could just erase them. Its the fact that I only want my friends to see them, no professors or employers.

I think this is a big issue that some people don't understand. They ask questions like "well why do you post the pictures if you don't want people seeing?" I already answered this question by stating that I want to choose who views them and I believe that I should have the right to know if Facebook is sending my information to other companies or allowing users I don't know to view my profile. Ari made a good point by saying that we are always under surveillance whether it is at the mall or ATM or even a grocery store. This is all very true but I don't walk around with my phone number written across my forehead. However, I agree with what Ari said in the fact that we are being tracked all the time, without permission. To track what I purchase at the grocery store is information I never agreed on giving. So what can we do about this? Not purchase food? Of course not; we just have to be careful and watch what information we give out. Same goes for Facebook. Teens need to set their privacy settings to restricted and only allow those whom they know to access their profiles. Then, teachers and employers can't view their profiles without consent.

Griefer Madness

http://www.microsoft.com/protect/family/activities/griefers.mspx
(again, link will be explained at the bottom)

Julian Dibbell's article was difficult for me to swallow. First of all, I enjoyed the overall article but I didn't agree with the theme. I am upset by these so-called "griefers" who enjoy making fun of and hurting people. This kind of mockery and bullying is incredibly immature in my opinion and I can't seem to grasp the concept or reason for doing it. I know Dibbell claims that these griefers cause other people grief for the mere fact that the people who get upset are taking the internet too seriously. WHATEVER! That is not a valid reason for causing harm/ grief upon others for fun. To me, it seems like these griefers expect people to take it seriously or they wouldn't do it in the first place. How can you justify what you're doing and making fun of when you are relying solely on that thing you're mocking? I just can't see why someone would pick on another person just to get a reaction out of them (you can compare this to school bullies who pick on the weaker kids just to upset them). Now Dibbell talks about how these griefers throw penises, or show disturbing images, at people in SecondLife and how it can sometimes crash your Sim. Crashing someone's Sim or showing graphic images for no reason other than to make them upset is so odd. These griefers claim to do it to make a point but they're only making this a bigger issue.
I relate this griefing to bullying and I think its so immature. When I was younger I used to get picked on and my mom would always tell me to just ignore the bullies and they'd go away (I always had a big mouth so ignoring them was never something I wanted to do). She told me this because she knew that bullies only wanted the attention and reaction out of you. This is the same thing with griefers. I don't take the internet seriously because there is a lot of stuff I know may not be true or just posted for fun, but when it comes to making fun of people, I don't agree with that. In this case, it does become serious. I found an article (link up above) in which the author wrote 10 tips for dealing with internet griefers and I thought it was funny that the #1 tip is to just ignore them (like my mom used to tell me). There are other options like change names or games. We kinda touched upon this in class but I think its unfair to have to change the game you're playing just because someone is ruining your fun. Screw them, they should have to go on sties that allow that stuff. This is a serious issue because there are tips on how to "deal" with these griefers. They are getting the reaction they wanted! I guess this is why they do it but, like I said earlier, it just seems mean and immature.

EXTRA BLOG

This blog is basically to rant and rave a bit. When I first signed up for this class I had a completely different perspective about online communities and virtual worlds. However, since taking this class my mind has been opened to a whole new world I didn't even know existed. I'm really excited I decided to take this class because I enjoy learning new things and especially about things I don't fully understand.
However, we have gotten into virtual worlds more in depth than I thought we would and I have discovered that I'm a bit shy about how I feel. I think the fact that we've been learning about the negative side (and obviously the positive side) of virtual worlds, I just can't seem to understand why people are apart of these online communities/worlds. I don't want to offend anyone but it is still hard for me to understand why and how someone would enjoy this. But, after Burcu got back from the convention this weekend, she seemed really happy and content about meeting up with her virtual friends which made me ask myself, "Am I missing out on something I've convinced myself to be so against?" After Burcu made a few comments my opinion kind of shifted once again. Now, I understand a little more why someone creates a friendship with someone online in a virtual world or on LambdaMOO or something and then wants/gets the opportunity to meet them in person. It just made me rethink why I'm so against these virtual worlds and I think I've come to the conclusion that I don't think I'm against them as much anymore. This is really exciting to me but disappointing that I've discovered this so late in the semester.
I know we're going to write a paper about what we liked about the class but I figured I could write about it a bit now. I think that in the future the students who take this class should be assigned to create an avatar on Second Life and instead of writing blogs they can participate in Second Life. This way they will understand what goes on in this world instead of just reading about it. The schedule would probably have to be changed around but I think this would be good for them and they can communicate with one another better (in this case, maybe this could take the place of Twitter). Anyway, I just wanted to rant about SecondLife and how I have changed my perception and am now more open about it. Class discussion will be different now :)

A Rape In Cyberspace

http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/1998/08/14219
(link explained below)

This article A Rape In Cyberspacce was awkward for me to read. I don't fully understand the need for virtual worlds as it is and then after reading about this rape in cyberspace it became clear to me: I think this is so weird. I really try to be open about this whole idea and although I don't personally use virtual worlds, I can't reject the fact that it is a big part of others' lives. After reading the description of what Mr. Bungle did to the characters in LambdaMOO I was really disturbed. I wasn't sure if something like this could ever happen in a virtual world, but clearly it did. The fact the this actually happened inside a virtual world, and not in real life, just makes it that much worse. No, obviously no one got physically hurt but there is an emotional side to rape that these characters experienced and will have to live with all their lives. Also, the fact that LambdaMOO is completely text- based disturbed me. Not only was it not physical, but it wasn't real, or was it? Rape in a virtual world is just as harmful as real life, to me. Such an action in text form would be terrible. You may not have the physical harm but you have such a graphic description spelled out right in front of you on your computer screen. The only thing I don't get is why didn't they log off? I realize that while you are participating in a virtual world, you cannot control what others say to you, in class for example, but if this were happening to me I would have told him to F*CK OFF and signed off. I guess my point here is that I don't think I would have let it happen to me since it wasn't in real life but who is to say that they would have control in a situation like this? I have never experienced anything like this since I don't participate in virtual worlds but I would hope it never happens.
I know Mr. Bungle got in trouble, or "toaded" as they called it but is that fair? Wouldn't someone who raped a woman in real life get arrested? This is an argument that has been debated for years and the article above talks about virtual courts. This article fits well with this article we read for class and I would hope that if a situation like this happens again, that character should be tracked and sent to jail- for real.

Identity in Virtual Worlds

http://www.virtualworldsnews.com/2008/03/most-online-wor.html
(I'll explain this link later in my blog)

Turkle wrote in her article Tinysex and Gender Trouble about identity in the virtual world. After our class discussion on Monday, I got to thinking about people's identities in virtual worlds and why some choose to be animals or someone of the opposite gender. All I could come up with is that it is a way for them to be someone that they are not without making any drastic change (like a sex change operation, for example).
In relation to gender-swapping, Turkle talks about this in her article and claims that "gender-swapping is an opportunity to explore conflicts raised by one's biological gender." This makes prefect sense to me because you would never know what it is like to be a guy (if you're a girl) unless you choose to gender-swap or get an operation of some sort. I know when I was in middle school, I talked on AIM all the time and when my friends weren't on or I was really bored, I would IM random people and pretend I was older or even a guy. This may sound strange but I did it because I got away with it and just made friends with people who thought I was really a guy, they had no reason to suspect otherwise. I did this for about a month and became good friends with these two guys until I accidentally made a comment about being a girl and got caught. But the point is, it made me experience something that I wouldn't normally feel in real life. In class, we talked about how Turkle states that a "fake" identity allows you to express unexplored facets that you are unable to manifest in real life. This is exactly what I was doing when I pretended to be a guy. The link above shows a study done in order to find how many gamers gender swap and they found that 70% of women gender swap and 54% of men do. It explains different reasons as to why they gender swap but they can all be grouped into the category of exploring facets that you can't in real life (being outgoing was an example from the study). In conclusion, Turkle made valid points about virtual identities that seem to make sense and I agree with doing it for exploration.

The Virtual Community

Rheingold's article The Virtual Community brought up a valid point that I had never thought of before. Rheingold talks about virtual communities in that they are used by some as a form of psychotherapy. He claims that many virtual community users spend hours upon hours pretending to be someone they're not which can be a way to get things off their chest or live someone else's life. Rheingold didn't go too much into detail about this as a form of psychotherapy but it made me think of the way I use Facebook. We discussed in class why some people use virtual communities and some freshmen stated that they used it before coming to IU to meet their future roommates or other people on their dorm floors. As a senior, I didn't know about Facebook until I got to IU and even then it wasn't as popular as it is now. To begin with, I was against Facebook because I didn't see the point in joining. However, over the years I have found that if I don't have anything else to do I get on Facebook and look at pictures of old friends, talk to recent friends or even rearrange my profile. It sounds kinda lame but, in a way, I use it as a form of psychotherapy. It makes me feel good to get online and communicate with friends of mine. Plus, looking at friends' pictures from our recent SB activities is always fun because you get to see where everyone went and how much fun they had. It is such a nice and relaxing (and convenient) way to share pictures and information to people that may go to a different school or live in a different state. Rheingold makes a good point that we use virtual communities this way and we may not even be aware of the ways in which we use this technology. I really hadn't ever thought of it in that way but after reading this article, it opened my eyes to a different way of thinking.
This, I also want to add, helps me appreciate and respect other people's taste and opinions of other virtual communities like Second Life. We discussed in class that people get on to talk to other friends and share problems with them. It seems odd to those of us who don't do that, but ask yourself this: is it really all that different than what I'm doing with Facebook? Yes, I've met these people in person, but some of my friends I met only once. If I meet someone at a party and they befriend me, does that count as really knowing them? For example, one guy met me at a party when I was visiting a friend at Purdue and I haven't seen him since. He has sent me a couple of messages and posts comments on my wall and on some pictures. As creepy as that sounds, we're actually pretty good 'virtual friends', just not 'personal interaction friends.' So, as I asked before, how different are Second Life and Facebook?

Andrew Keen

Andrew Keen's article The Cult of the Amateur is very interesting to me because I feel that I agree with him on some points but then disagree with him at the same time. I am constantly going back and forth about some of the issues he discusses. For instance, the clip of him on the Colbert Report we watched for class made him look a bit elitist but I kinda agree with a him (slighty). He claims that the internet is killing our culture because just about anyone who has the access to and knowledge of computers can post any type of "art" they want. I agree in that I wouldn't want to go online and see some average joe's artwork if I really wanted to be inspired or look at good art. However, this poses another problem in itself. Who is to say that this "amateur" art isn't good quality. Why couldn't someone want to look at this art or other information some average joe posted? Blogs are another exmaple of something anyone could post and write about their personal lives or opinions about an issue going on in the world today. My personal opinion wouldn't necessarily mean anything to some professor researching a topic I happen to write on in my own personal blog. In this example, Keen is making the statement that the internet is killing our culture because my (or someone else's) meaningless blog posts or artistic work is blasted all over the internet as if it isn't worth being there. At the same time, I kinda disagree with him because, like I said above, who is he to say that those blog posts aren't a mode of self expression and deserve to be there? He claims that the internet is for amateurs and amateurs don't actual creat great culture. How can he say something like that? It all goes back to personal taste. I agree with Colbert in that the green screen challenge is a type of art, even though it was created by amateurs. Now so called "stealing" a clip from the Colbert show and posting it on Youtube is a different issue at hand. I kinda agree with him on this but at the same time I don't think it is killing our culture, I think it is changing our culture. To prove my argument, I never watched the Colbert Report before, but after seeing clips from Youtube (and clips in class) I have a new found love for the show. I wouldn't have seen clips if not for Youtube (and this class of course).
This idea also relates to artists posting their artwork online and people stealing it for their own use. This poses a difficult problem when artists start losing money because everyone is stealing their work, so Keen says. Books can be an example of what Keen is talking about here. If an author has his/her book online and someone took a chunk of information out of it, then they wouldn't need to purchase the whole thing if they already got what they needed. Again, I agree with him but at the same time I think that it is convenient for me, as a college student, to search for an article online and not have to rent or purchase the entire book. So, again I'm not sure exactly how I feel about this article because he makes a good point but I think it would be better if he would make the statement that the internet is changing our culture, not killing it.