So I was sitting watching some friends playing Xbox 360 yesterday. For some reason the thought of N64 popped up in my head. I began comparing how much more advanced the Xbox 360 was compared to the N64. Major difference? Um yeah. But what about the SuperNintendo?! Holy cow they seem ancient compared to what we have now adays! When I got back to my room I saw a commercial about the Wii. I mean the Wii's controllers are something I never would have even dreamed of when I was a kid! This got me wondering in a new direction: What will the next game console be like?
We spoke in class a while ago about the "black box fallacy" in which we will have one black box that does everything for us. It will have movies, tv, games, music, and whatever else we could ever possibly want. I agree that this will eventually happen. However, that doesn't say what each of these features will be like. What will future games be like? Will it be full virtual realities? Will there be a move advanced Wii in which the controls are for your whole body? I mean the possibilities are endless. If anyone hears about new news regarding new gaming systems let me know! I'm beyond curious.
Recently I've spent a lot of time trying to procrastinate. I mean it is pretty much Week 10. The week when all our projects are pretty much due. For instance, this blog is totally trying to procrastinate my work on the actual project due for New Media! Anyways, the main point is that I've come across something I particularly enjoy in my time of procrastinating. That is, finding cartoon sites on the Internet. A few of my favorites are:
Now after viewing several of these I came to the conclusion that I should create one as well. I myself love to draw cartoons of these sorts. I like to think of myself as humorous as well. So wouldn't that be a great combination?! I guess this blog is more of a procrastination blog of my thoughts as you can see. I'll put a few pics of cartoons up as well, just for entertainment. Toodles!
This one made me think of some discussions we've had in class about the Internet making people less sociable or at least effecting the way we communicate. Haha!
This one just made me laugh. Also, it's another site that I really like their comics. HijiNKS ENSUE
When I heard about the newest version of Photoshop (CS5) I was pretty excited to say the least. I started seeing some videos about the new things this version would bring. I hate to say it, but they're making it too easy. I'm sure all those out there that spent time trying to practice and figure out photoshop techniques are facepalming so hard right now. CS5 makes pro-techniques obsolete with new tools. Some of these new tools are easy selecting, content aware fill, puppet warp, and so many more. A good list I found is at http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/photoshop/whatsnew/index.html?segment=photography.
The ones I really wanted to talk about is the content aware fill and puppet warp. Content aware makes it so that one can remove an object without and photoshop will fill the area left behind. Thus this destroys many techniques of touch up and using the clone tool. Why don't they just make it a little easier for those people just learning to manipulate pictures?! Others, like myself, have worked to learn special cheats and such to fix this type of problem!
The puppet warp tool especially blows my mind. It allows one to manipulate a selected object. An example is moving an arm if it looks awkward or whatnot. It's hard to really explain how it works. So look at this video instead! It also shows the content aware fill.
It's hard to say that I'm completely against all these improvements since I know I myself will probably be using them in the future. They would be incredibly useful. It just sort of is frustrating to know I've worked hard to learn how to get around these sort of problems and now there's a simple tool.
Any photoshoppers out there...I hope you get the chance so use CS5 soon! Toodles!
Politics. Something I dread to talk about. I think that’s why I’ve procrastinated writing on this topic for so long. I have opinions yes, but not ones strong enough I feel that I can voice. I guess I’m kind of a laid back person that isn’t interested in participating in debate. Therefore the topic of the influence of Internet on political movements and such kind of bore me…?
Where to begin…I guess it does make sense to me how social sites on the Internet are becoming very influential to different aspects of politics. What’s the reason for this? I think it’s because it’s so easily accessible to all (at least if you have access to a computer or phone that connects to the Internet). It allows those wanting to get together to connect and plan without too much effort. I mean how were demonstrations formed before Internet? Maybe putting up posters or ads? This doesn’t guarantee those interested will see them. I can’t think of any other sensible way to get people together besides maybe mass calling people. Putting information up on Facebook, Twitter, or other social networking sites lets those looking for something find it much easier.
However this has a drawback as well. If everyone can see it, then those that wish to stop such actions may take proper measures. The article on the demonstration in Egypt greatly shows this. I really feel this isn’t right! If they’re not trying to harm anyone let them protest! I probably have this mentality because I’m from America (freedom of speech and everything).
I guess in the end social networking sites are only going to become more and more important in forming dissents and such in countries such as Iran and Egypt. Unless a better system of censorship or something along those lines is created for them I don’t see any way of this stopping.
I hope I don’t sound too naïve in this post. Political dissent and demonstrations aren’t exactly my forte. I know there are probably tons her in the US as well, but I’ve never really investigated this in any way. Toodles.
This weekend was prom back at my old high school. Me, being the Facebook creeper that I am, decided I needed to check out some of my old friends' pictures to see everybody's dresses! It was great to get to see them all having fun in the pictures, but I noticed one horrible difference from when I had seen them last. A lot of them were orange. By this I'm not commenting that the lighting had changed their skin color or their make-up was a shade of orange. Instead I meant that they had tanned so much that they literally looked completely orange, resembling an oompa-loompa. Is this a new trend? It this what's in? It's hard to believe that back in the day it was considered more appealing for a woman to be pale than tan because it meant that she was more likely to have money and did not have to work outdoors. Nowadays I guess it's more appealing to have skin cancer and look leathery. I'm not being the person who is picking on people that use tanning beds. I use one every once and a while too! However, the big difference is that I am not orange. Please, someone needs to be telling not only the younger kids, but even some of the people in college...orange does not look trendy. It looks oompa-loompa-ish.
Walk into Rall, down the hallway, key in my door, walk into my room, turn on my computer, and check Facebook. That’s my constantly reoccurring steps to coming back to my room. It’s my ever day process! How could I, therefore, ever manage to go even a day without it? I hate knowing this because I would never want to be that dependent on something, but honestly it’s like the easiest way to keep in contact with people. I use Facebook mostly for leaving wall posts on friends from back home that I don’t really get to talk too much. Also it’s kinda fun to update my status with like funny quotes or things that happened in the day. I think if I tried going a day without it I’d eventually cave just because I like to keep up with other people’s statuses and see what they’re doing. That sounds sort of stalkerish, but I assure you it’s just reading the news feed and what not. This is really beneficial sometimes. For example, when I go all the way home to southern Illinois it’s great to check Facebook and see which of my friends from college are home too. Then we can make plans over Facebook to hang out. Writing this makes me realize how much easier it would be to just text the people…but I wanna say Facebook makes it so less awkward in a way.
Is Facebook affecting the way our generation communicates? That’s what this topic really makes me think about. I just talked in the last paragraph about texting and Facebooking my friends. Never about actually calling them. And thinking about it now I know I probably wouldn’t ever call my friends because I’m so set on the technology of online communicating. That’s so…SAD! I’m sure I’m not the only one out there that’s completely set with texting or Facebooking. Is this going to have a major effect on kids of the future? I already find it startling how young kids are getting cell phones. I didn’t get one til the 8th grade! Even then it was only for emergencies. I have cousins that are in like the 5th grade asking for one. They’re going to learn to text and stuff at an incredibly early age. What kind of social skills are they going to have in one-on-one communication then?
Facebook is unfortunately an essential part of my day that I don’t think I could be without. Realizing this now…it makes me wonder about the future of communication. Well I gotta go update my Facebook status about this! Toodles!
Seriously? Dumbest Generation? Who can even state that? We're really not dumb. If you show any of the "older generation" some of the newer high tech devices such as iPods, cellphones, tablets; we're usually the ones explaining it to them. Maybe we're not the same smart as the older generation would classify, but we're definitely NOT dumb. One of Mark Bauerlein arguments is that technology is a boon to higher education. Someone needs to explain this to me because as I see it, technology is providing us with more opportunities for higher education! Think of all the greater variety of materials that students can research thanks to the wide reach of the Internet! We can connect to other nations. This lets us find information worldwide. I guess I could see the argument that this makes us lazier. We don't have to leave the comfort of our dorm room to find any sources we need for information. Perhaps using an actual library is becoming outdated. We can find most articles online.
I think the greater thing that needs to be addressed is how the technology is used in the classroom. When professors assign readings on the computer, students do their normal thing and skim it. This is what makes us dumb? If a professor assigned a book reading I’m sure the students would do the same thing! Have students not always done that? Maybe this is just a sign of change and teachers need to adapt to this sort of new process. I know this is a far stretch and many would criticize this idea, but the world evolves. Can teaching not evolve as well? Technology could be an excellent tool if used properly. I brought up the point in class how at my high school students were more likely to participate when using the smartboards. Another student made a comment along the lines of, “Sort of like the chalkboards, eh?” I understand that we technically already have the ability to contribute in class, but using technology makes it so much more interesting! Plus, with things advancing as they do, who knows the future technologies that could be created to further the interactivity in classrooms. I know in the classes that are all lecture I’m more likely to day dream and not pay attention. Classes that are more interactive grab my attention more. Therefore I think the use of technology in classes at least actually improves the learning environment. That is…as long as the professors know how to use it.
Overall I completely disagree with Mark Bauerlein. My generation is not dumb. We’ve simply become a new type of “smart”. Toodles.
I’m trying to think back to the first time I used Google. I think the amount of times I’ve used it over the years has blurred my memory because for the life of me I can’t remember. Google has become such an essential part to my researching and browsing on the Internet, I can’t imagine what it would be without it. Is it a bad thing having a super power like it? I’m not entirely sure. It has its pros and cons.
When I check out other search engines, I question the credibility of their results. Have they been paid off to put certain sites at the top? At least with Google I’m a little more familiar with how their results are put together. Plus, it being such a well known site makes me feel a little more secure if I ever use it to research. One problem I can foresee with a giant company like Google is the change in future generations research patterns. I mean this sort of thing is already having an effect. When I have to look up sources for paper I can easily Google what I’m looking for. However, I was taught the conventional way of going to the library and researching too. I wonder if farther down the lines students won’t even know how to do this. What’s the point when you have something like Google that can bring the sources to you right on your computer without having to go?
Another problem that could occur is with practically no competition, Google monopolizes a lot of options. Small companies couldn’t even dream of competing with them. The closest they have to competition is Bing. Also we’re seeing Google branch out to other things besides just being a search engine. With such power it could practically put out a lot of companies in whatever it tries I think.
Overall, I think having such a dominant company isn’t such a great thing. Yeah it’s not going to exactly harm us, but it does limit us in options. If Google had competition, the two companies would probably try a lot harder to outdo each other. Thus creating even more spectacular options! Think of the possibilities. Toodles!
I sat down this afternoon to begin my homework reading for classes...opened up Firefox...hit my Facebook bookmark...and it went downhill from there. I've started to observe the habits of my roommate, floor mates, friends, and even myself. The reason so much procrastination happens is clearly all the entertainment sites that are out there. Looking at all my bookmarked sites right now; six of them are for schoolwork/life sites. The other fifteen of the total twenty-one are for sites to waste time and what not. Icanhascheezburger, mylifeisaverage, Raphsody...these are just a few of my many distracting bookmarks. This makes me wonder: how much time have I already wasted in my college time exploring these sites that won't help me succeed in life? I could have been getting better at actual useful talents. I almost want to experiment by trying to go a week without visiting any of these sites, but I know they have become a part of my everyday routine! I know I'm not the only one either. Someone out there should try it and let me know. How has the availability of these sites effected students? I'd like to know how college students were entertained before the Internet! I mean I realize there's always tv, movies, radio and others...but what about even before that? I guess my realization of today is how much the Internet not only has changed homework, research, and other scholarly pursuits, but also the way procrastination happens.
After reading over Rebecca Blood’s interview with blogger Jason Kottke, I was left with a sour taste in my mouth.I was not overly impressed with the site to say the least.Kottke’s blog, kottke.org, seems to me to be a rather plain and boring blog with links.Looking at many other blogs of today’s time, this seems to be a common theme.This is why I am unable to understand why Kottke’s is so successful.It was rated number 53 on Technorati (that was back in 2006. I checked when writing this blog and it was down to number118).After going to his site I found a plain format and small posts.Nothing out of the ordinary to make me particularly want to read it over other sites I have found with some of the same links and better writing.
Kottke mentions in the interview that he does not like writing.Why on earth would you become a blogger then?He was previously a graphic designer so I wonder why he got into blogging.I guess finding interesting links could be an entertaining hobby, but I could not see making a career out of it.Especially since he says he does not even think of writing more than four paragraphs anymore. I guess it is all in opinion on what someone thinks of a blog.I feel like there should be more written then just a few lines on a subject.Kottke is more content with just posting a couple phrases and a link or video. He does occasionally post topics to spur discussion. In the interview he speaks a lot about tweaking the site and its technical aspects. I wonder why he did not go into web design instead of blogging.
I did find it interesting to learn that he met his wife through blogging.Also, his comparison between his wife and his style was intriguing.He saw himself as being more popular involving his actual blog where as his wife, Meg Hourihan, has more public speaking and whatnot appeal.
The positive aspects I found of his blog were the wide range of topics, constant updating, and easy understanding of the layout of the site. I am not a fan of the single topic blogs.Whether they are gossip pages, political pages, or any other one track site; I am more interested to find a large variety of topics.Kottke does this in his blog.Also he updates the site multiple times a day so visitors can find new links throughout the day.I particularly like this because some of my favorite sites take days before new material is up.Lastly, I find his layout to be easy to maneuver through.Then again, it is somewhat difficult to make a blog difficult to navigate.
Well that just about wraps up my feelings about Kottke.I hate to be negative in any way, but I felt the site was in need of a critique!Until next topic…toodles.
