Good Game, Good Game…

This week marked the end of classes…until June, when they start up again:)  And while the last day of school is usually a happy time, I felt sad because I really enjoyed both of my courses.   I don’t think I was alone; the other Intro to the Digital Age (IDA!) folks seemed sad, too. 

But who can blame them?  For some, this class reinforced their passion for digital media.  For others, it introduced us to something completely new and completely cool.  Plus, at some point, a lot of us became friends.  And then there was Nicco, our professor, who made us want to come to class every week and who shared his toys.  The course would not have been the same with any other instructor.

So how do you end something that has come to mean so much to you?  You have a party, obviously.  And have a party we did!

Things started with a little Dance Dance Revolution.  DDR reminds me of that movie Big: users stand on big, square pads that have arrows and some other “buttons” drawn on them.  To DDR, they step on the buttons in time with the game.  As you can imagine, the dancing isn’t always graceful, but it’s really fun. 

Once we were warmed up properly, we Wiid a little.  We couldn’t help it; we were so excited!  Wii is a Nintendo game system, and it is awesome.   Insert a game disk, grab a controller, and suddenly you’re boxing, or playing tennis, or swinging cows around, Monty Python-style.  You will love it.  You will sweat.

In one game, you hold the controller different ways and then do funky stuff, like sweep, or fly, or swim like a shark.  I think that is what it had Nicco do when I took this photo:

After many baked goods and excellent good times, it was time to say goodbye.  And while some folks had to leave early, most stayed ’til the end for a class photo:

Oh, and here is a picture of Andrea and me; I think she’s reflecting on how much she’ll miss our class.

Now, summer begins.  For some in the class, that means catching up on sleep and errands and the gym.  For others, that means travel to some exotic destination.  And for Angela C., Chris, and Nicco, that means a wedding!  Congratulations and best wishes to them and their fiancees.

Just a note: if you’ve taken to reading Accidental Luddite and you like it, fear not!  I plan to keep it going.  And I really, really appreciate that you stop by from time to time.  Thank you!

So, what do you plan to do this summer?

Official Post 12 — 3-Dimensional Printing

Imagine working late on a critical project.  Let’s say you’re preparing for a press conference regarding a new condo community.  You’ve secured a venue, mailed invitations, and alerted the media.  But the courier responsible for delivering an artist’s rendering of the community never showed, and you know that you can’t have a press conference without this critical visual.   

No problem!  You call your friend who has a 3-D printer and, after meeting him at his office armed with the rendering saved on a thumb drive, print a new one.  To scale.  In color. 

This sounds like something out of science fiction, but 3-D printers, or rapid prototyping devices, are reality.  They’re already used by designers, architects, engineers, and even biomedical companies. 

So how does the magic happen?  It depends on the machine but, generally, a computer or CAD device sends a file to the printer.  Then, one inkjet shoots out a layer of glue-like stuff while another shoots out a layer of powdered metal, plastic, sand, or wood.  This process is repeated many times until a very real prototype emerges.  

And while these devices start at around $30,000 right now, Hewlett-Packard aims to sell one for home or office use that would retail for $1,000.  As each new device is released, it offers even more capabilities.  Someday, you might be able to print your medication, or a pizza, or your own clothes.   

Of course, there are issues to consider with 3-D printing, including the safety and authenticity of the items created.  If I printed medicine prescribed by my doctor, but the printer made the tiniest error in the formulation, there would be real consequences.  If someone had the right combination of materials and printed credible-looking currency, there would be real consequences.   

So what do you think – cool, or totally weird?

Official Post 11 — The Pentagon Papers

We seriously shocked our professor, Nicco, when we could not explain to him the importance of the Pentagon Papers.  Oh, we all knew that the Papers had something to do with Vietnam and the First Amendment, but that was about all the space our brains allowed for that lesson from AP History.  So Nicco suggested that we redeem ourselves by explaining the Pentagon Papers to others. 

The United States became involved with the Vietnam War in 1950, though we didn’t send large numbers of troops to Vietnam until the early 1960s.  By 1965, tens of thousands of troops occupied the region. 

In 1967, then-Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara commissioned a study called “United States-Vietnam Relations, 1945-1967: A Study Prepared by the Department of Defense.”  This classified document would become known as the Pentagon Papers.  Most damagingly, the Papers outlined the United States’ efforts, at President Lyndon Johnson’s direction, to escalate the war through skirmishes across Vietnam, despite public promises not to do so. 

In 1971, a government employee copied a portion of the papers with the help of a friend, then leaked that portion to The New York Times.  The Times printed stories related to the Papers, prompting President Richard Nixon and his administration to seek a court-ordered injunction against the paper.  When The Washington Post joined its sister paper in reporting the Pentagon Papers, the Post was added to a lawsuit, New York Times Co. v. U.S., which reached the Supreme Court. 

The government argued that the Pentagon Papers were classified and that their release jeopardized national security.  The Times and the Post argued that they were entitled under the First Amendment to publish the story.  Further, the papers asserted that the government wanted to block the Papers’ release, not out of concern for national security but, rather, to avoid political embarrassment. 

In a 6-3 decision, the Court ruled that the Times and the Post were entitled under the First Amendment to publish the Pentagon Papers.  However, the Court also ruled that, in the future, the government could block the publication of information if publication would bring “dire consequences.”  Therefore, while New York Times Co. v. U.S. was seen as a victory for the Times and the Post, it did not provide journalists with the unconditional freedom they hoped for. 

It is worth noting that, according to most historians, the Pentagon Papers did not pose a threat to National Security.  The U.S. officially exited Vietnam in 1973.

Why do you think the Pentagon Papers are relevant today?

“Official Post 10: Play Money”

They say you should do what you love.  Make your vacation your vocation and all of that.  So, imagine making six figures a year pursuing your hobby.  Now imagine that your hobby is selling…nothing.  And that people buy it from you like crazy! 

That happens every day in the world of massively multiplayer online role-playing games (MMORPGs or MMOs), as explained by Julian Dibbell in Play Money.  Dibbell should know, given that he made a small fortune playing a game called Ultima Online. Here’s how the gig works:  

1. Pick a game.  Popular MMOs include Ultima Online, Second Life, EverQuest and Dark Age of Camelot.
2. Create an avatar, or digital representation of yourself.
3. Develop a trade within the game, and earn virtual money at your online job.  You can finally start your career in blacksmithing!
4. As you pile up virtual money, buy things like castles, make things like weapons, and find stuff that other people might want.
5. Defend your things and kill off other characters if necessary.
6. Pay attention, because this is important: sell your stuff.  For real money.  On eBay, or over ICQ, or via e-mail.  Because the castles you build, weapons you make, and things you find are valuable to someone, and your virtual loot can make you some real-life money through transactions known as real-money trading.  And by some money, I mean lots.

OK, you are probably thinking that this sounds like “Dungeons and Dragons,” and that it’s crazy of people to sell things that don’t exist.  Maybe you’re right: while I read this book, all I could hear was Conan O’Brien’s “nerd voice” running through my head.  (If you watch him, you know what I’m talking about.) 

But maybe, just maybe, there is something to these MMOs.  According to Dibbell, “each [MMO] is a complex virtual economy, in which players…compete for scarce resources that in one way or another help them get ahead in the imaginary world of their choosing.  The resources vary widely…[and it is not] entirely clear what makes these things as desirable as they are, since the games themselves never really come to an end, never produce an ultimate winner or loser…But in this, of course, the games resemble nothing so much as real life…[as] players tend to reduce the hazy, intractable question of what it’s all about to a simpler, unspoken rule of thumb: He who logs out with the most toys wins” (Play Money, pg. 11). 

And people are amassing plenty of toys.  In fact, “worldwide, annual sales of virtual goods run to an estimated $880 million and growing” (Play Money, pg. 12).  Dibbell attributes this to “a growing willingness to recognize the collective act of make-believe required to establish monetary value” (Play Money, pg. 84). 

In the end, though, I don’t think people play these games for the money.  Like everything else we’ve studied this semester, I think people are drawn to online gaming for the social networking.  For example, Dibbell played Ultima Online out of “a desire not to fall to the bottom of the social food chain, a desire to rise through the ranks, to achieve and acquire as a way of marking our status within the massive money troop that is human civilization.  To own and not be owned” (Play Money, pg. 7).  The author did best at the game when he turned to more experienced players, relied on their expertise, and forged bonds with people he could trust.  Which, as we all learn, is how the real world works, too. 

This week’s Question: if you were to create an avatar of yourself, what would you be and what powers would you give yourself?

Official Post 9: The Long Tail, Part Two

Because people are creatures of habit, we get nervous about the future when we think it will change the way we do things.  But because people are also remarkably adaptive, we tend to adjust pretty well once the future comes and goes; we realize that whatever we are afraid of isn’t so bad after all.  

On first glance, the Long Tail theory sounds pretty scary: blockbuster hits will give way to an extended tail of niche markets.  Choice in regard to politics, literature, music, film, and product and service will widen exponentially, but at what cost to consumers who don’t know how to access these niches? 

To some, expanded choice and convenience are scary because they denote the loss of cultural cornerstones.  By banking online, we give up the friendly teller at our local branch.  By reading the news online, we give up Sunday mornings lingering over the paper.     

And of course, either of these activities requires the digital literacy needed to operate applicable technology.  So does using iTunes or bidding on eBay.  To people like my mom, who doesn’t use the computer, the Long Tail future is pretty scary.  While we can argue that she will just have to use the computer someday, we also have to understand the skills she’ll need and the experiences she’ll give up.   

Which leads me to reiterate that we won’t be better-served by technology if we become less-human because of it.  I have an iPod, and I appreciate that I buy music for it from lesser-known bands.  However, I’ll always prefer a live show to something I can download.  And I have enjoyed tremendously several niche films ordered through Netflix, but I don’t ever want to give up the shared experience of watching hit movies and joking over one-liners with friends on the way home. 

The good news is that I don’t have to.  According to Anderson, “Hits…are here to stay.  So are retail stores…and broadcast networks…It’s not just the instant-gratification convenience and tactile advantages of bricks and mortar [that people crave].  We’re also a gregarious species, and sometimes we like to do things together with other people.  There’s comfort in numbers, and shared experiences bring us closer” (The Long Tail, pg. 146).   

But what about the niches that have changed commerce and technology?  ”Hits may not dominate society and commerce as much as they did over the past century, but they still have unmatched impact.  And part of that is their ability to serve as a source of common culture around which more narrowly targeted markets can form.  Successful Long Tail aggregators need to have both hits and niches.  They need to span the full range of variety, from the broadest appeal to the narrowest, to be able to make the connections that can illuminate a path down the Long Tail that makes sense for everyone” (The Long Tail, pg. 148).   

As it turns out, by definition, the Long Tail model only works if it has a head (hits) and a tail (niches).  And while other cultural, technological, and business phenomena will emerge, people will adjust those trends to fit their needs and abilities.  The crazy thing, of course, is that they’ll be better off in the end for doing so. 

And now, this week’s Question: what cultural cornerstone do you refuse to give up to technology?

As Seen on (Blip.)TV…

If you’re in JHU480, you’ve at least read about blip.tv.  And even if you’re not in the class, you may have heard about this awesome site.  My friend Jeff is an expert on blip.tv as his production company, g14 productions, creates awesome short films and serial shows that are regularly featured under blip.tv’s “Don’t Miss” section. 

I asked Jeff to do a guest post and explain the magic behind original video content.  I’ll continue this topic with next week’s official post on the second half of The Long Tail.  For now, here’s Jeff….

“On Blip.tv, per Kathy’s request!

Kathy has asked me to talk about Blip.tv a little bit, so here goes. I referenced it in my previous post…

www.blip.tv is a content aggregator for original video content produced on the web. It differs from YouTube in that it does NOT allow people to repost content from “old” media TV shows or any republished materials that are copyrighted. In fact, the owners of Blip frequently send you-violated-copyright-haikus to offenders.

The reason I am so passionate about them is that all of the content that we produce at www.g14productions.com/blog is hosted off of Blip. Essentially, we post video to their site, and then it is seamlessly shown on our site as if it is directly there. Also, Blip.tv tracks all of our statistics so we know who is watching, where they are watching and how they are watching.

They are at the forefront of the “new” media frontier, trying to make sure that business is done ethically, and that they can connect advertisers with people producing original, compelling entertainment.

So, everybody should head on over to www.blip.tv, check out a bunch of their content, and learn to love them. Seriously, some of this stuff is a lot more original than anything you’ll see on the networks. Learn TO LOVE IT!”

Official Post 8: The Long Tail, Part One

Most of us who post to this blog are children of the 80s.  We have witnessed the advent of the Information Age and, while our parents may have seen it coming and our children will push its limits even farther, we have had a unique vantage on history.   

Maybe that is why we have taken naturally to the Long Tail, which Chris Anderson describes in his book by the same name.  The Long Tail is generally depicted by a graph that compares demand and supply; in the case of commercial markets, a small number of products appeal to many people, and these blockbusters cause an initial spike on the graph.  This spike is known as the head.  Many more products appeal to just a few people, and demand for these products extends the graph into a tail, low and long. 

According to Anderson, the era of big hits is on the decline and, in its place, niche markets will fill the void: 

There’s still demand for big cultural buckets, but they’re no longer the only market.  The hits now compete with an infinite number of niche markets, of any size.  And consumers are increasingly favoring the one with the most choice.  The era of one-size-fits-all is ending, and in its place is something new, a market of multitudes (The Long Tail, pg. 5). 

Of course, the Long Tail has many applications: in the music and movie industries, on store shelves, and among political candidates, to name a few.  But while the Long Tail means more choice for consumers, voters, etc., it only works if the market provides ample selection and the public seeks out options: 

Demand must follow…supply.  Otherwise, the Tail will whither.  Because the Tail is measured not just in available variety but in the people who gravitate toward it, the true shape of demand is revealed only when consumers are offered infinite choice.  It is the aggregate sales, use, or other participation of all those people in the newly available niches that turns the massive expansion of choice into an economic and cultural force.  The Long Tail starts with a million niches, but it isn’t meaningful until those niches are populated with people who want them (The Long Tail, pg. 53). 

In his article “What is Web 2.0?  Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software,” Tim O’Reilly claims applications that tease out value from the Long Tail will survive in the future, and applications that don’t will fall by the wayside.  According to O’Reilly, “You can visualize Web 2.0 as a set of principles and practices that tie together a veritable solar system of sites that demonstrate some or all of those principles, at a varying distance from that core” (“What is Web 2.0?,” pg. 2).  Moving forward, Google, blogs, wikis, and other technologies that build on themselves will lead innovation.  Technologies that remain rooted in their traditional application will fail. 

While it’s hard to argue with the desirability of choice, it’s worth playing devil’s advocate for a moment.  What will happen as:

• Fewer moviegoers watch more films? 

• Fewer listeners buy copies of more songs? 

• Fewer readers pay attention to more news outlets (legitimate and not)?

• The same number of voters support more candidates? 

Anderson claims that there is rich profit in the Long Tail, and that more people will reap that profit.  But as production companies, record labels, and publishers adapt, will their offerings suffer?  What will motivate those companies as they spend more money to create products but receive less profit?  As countless politicians flock to the campaign trail, who will they represent?

Human nature is driven by the bandwagon effect.  What will we root for when we have too many options to track? 

And now for the Question of the Week: From iTunes to NetFlix to the blogosphere, how do you take advantage of the Long Tail?

Official Post 7: Smart Mobs, Part Two

As the name of this blog suggests, I often find myself in the wake of new technology.  There is a Dilbert comic about people like me.  A man sits next to Dogbert in the park and says, “I’m a technology left-behind…I don’t know how to use a computer, cell phone, PDA, digital camera, iPod, or TiVo.”  Dogbert then helpfully adds, “I’d recommend a life of crime, but you aren’t qualified” (“Dilbert,” Scott Adams, August 30, 2006). 

Well, exactly.  So, you can imagine the confusion (and, by confusion, I mean abject horror) I experienced reading the second half of Howard Rheinhold’s book, Smart Mobs.  My concern is divided equally between two camps: technology is getting creepy, and people are becoming unbearable. 

First, creepy technology.  Rheinhold and the contemporaries he interviews obviously represent the brightest stars in research and development.  Together, these folks are on the cutting edge of tomorrow’s technologies.  But some of the technological advances mentioned (though not necessarily advocated) in the book include cyber surveillance and punishment, virtual reality, and global tracking of nearly everything. 

I know by now that, when I use my mobile phone, connect to the Internet, or have a conversation in a public place, my activity can be monitored.  But what will happen as technology makes it possible to monitor everything?  Or when the devices that I use blur the line between what is real and what is not?  Will these advances serve the public good, or will they divide those who have information and those who want information?  As Rheingold says, 

Who designs access to your devices, either to push information at you or to pull information from you?  Some of the answers will emerge from political processes, but many of them are sensitive to technical design decisions…[T]he designs that dominate early in the in the growth of a technology will affect power structures and social lives.  What control will you have over whose sensors and beacons can talk or listen to your device?  (Smart Mobs, pg. 96). 

To his credit, Rheingold mentions capabilities that advance technology but protect privacy, including virtual beacons that identify you but which do not attach physical coordinates to your identity.  However, I think watchdog groups such as the Center for Democracy and Technology and the International Association of Privacy Professionals will be very busy in the future as they work to promote both technological progress and individual privacy.  Second, unbearable people.  I truly believe that advances in digital technology will drive people apart.  You might be thinking, “But wait!  Last week, you wrote about the same book, and you said that smart mobs bring people together.  The Japanese kids with their cell phones!  The Norwegians with their digital communities!  They now seek each other out more than before, so how have they lost touch?” 

Excellent question, and thanks for asking.  In discussing the communication devices of the future, Rheingold mentions a young woman he met in a bar who had a virtual office contraption snaked around her head, covering one eye.  The young woman typed e-mails with one hand and held a drink with the other.  Yes, she was dressed like a digital pirate. 

Could such a device further productivity, knowledge, and power?  Sure.  Are we moving towards a culture in which people retreat farther and farther from human interaction, enabled by technology in their social ineptitude?  Yep, and I don’t think we’re better for it.    I looked at a photo recently from a corporate networking event with which I was familiar.  Three-quarters of the attendees were on their mobile phones and BlackBerries, avoiding the other attendees.   

This sort of anti-social behavior is spreading.  While American business was built on innovation, it was also built on relationships.  Yes, technology allows us to reach people in all corners of the world.  But what happens when we abandon personal connections for high-speed connections?    As Lisa mentioned in a recent post, communications lose much of their meaning when the message sender and the message recipient are not face to face.  In the future, we will be challenged as communicators to seek new and innovative channels that balance human interests with technological advances. 

And now, the Question of the Week: When reaching out to others electronically, how do you convey your meaning clearly? 

Official Post 6: Smart Mobs, Part I

People are, by nature, pack animals.  Maybe that is why we gravitate towards technologies that help us stay in touch with one another and collaborate, including the Internet, blogs, and cell phones. 

The Internet was created so that folks could share their ideas with one another.  Today, the Internet is used both for solitary pursuits and as a tool in bringing people together, as evidenced by the popularity of social networking sites.  Battelle reminds us that search has further honed this tool, allowing us to locate people and information in relatively little time.  And as Dan Gillmor points out, the Internet makes it possible to connect with others in ways pen pal programs never dreamed of.  For the first time, we can send news, videos, and even audio files to new friends — instantly! 

At the same time, blogs give people voices, allowing them to reach far-flung loved ones, neighbors, and strangers.  According to Doctorow, Scoble and Israel, blogs represent the future of social interaction and business outreach.  It isn’t unreasonable to surmise that blogs are the coffee klatches and over-the-fence conversations of the future. 

So what do this week’s readings by Raymond and Rheingold tell us about global connectivity?  Let’s first consider Raymond.   Raymond’s essay, “The Cathedral and The Bazaar,” describes the creation of open source software, which is created collaboratively and available to everyone.  Open source software is also generally free.  This is in stark contrast to software sold by, say, Microsoft, which views its products as proprietary and takes legal action against any entity that steps outside carefully controlled distribution channels.  Raymond compares the old way of programming and distribution to the building of a cathedral — craftsman work on the project independently and in a very specific order: stone masons lay the foundation, brick masons construct the walls, and painters decorate the blank spaces.  On the other hand, the development of open source software is similar to a bazaar: many merchants offer their wares at the same time and, although the market seems chaotic, things just come together.   

In describing the development of Linux, an open source operating system similar to that sold by Microsoft, Raymond says: Linus Torvalds’s style of development – release [new programming updates] early and often, delegate everything you can, be open to the point of promiscuity – came as a surprise.  No quiet, reverent cathedral-building here – rather, the Linux community seemed to resemble a great babbling bazaar of differing agendas and approaches…out of which a coherent and stable system could seemingly emerge.  (“The Cathedral and the Bazaar,” pg. 4)  But wait.  Although I understood Raymond’s words, I struggled to connect them with the writings of the authors mentioned above.  I’m not a programmer or a software development manager.  What was I supposed to take away?  Then I read Smart Mobs, and I got it. 

In fact, after reading just the first three chapters, everything we’ve read since the beginning of the semester formed a cohesive whole in my mind.  Rheingold defines a smart mob as: People who are able to act in concert even if they don’t know each other.  [They] cooperate in ways never before possible because they carry devices that possess both communication and computing capabilities. (Smart Mobs, pg. xii).  There are all kinds of smart mobs out there:  Japanese teenagers who use their mobile phones to create identities for themselves and reach out to their peers; young adults in northern Europe who create communities – literal and virtual – around mobile technology; and Americans who are more connected with their loved ones than ever before in light of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. 

Rheingold lumps software developers into smart mobs, too, because the software development process is increasingly characterized by collaboration…open source!  Open source programmers tackle difficult projects to solve their own needs, but they also do so to serve the public good and to connect with one another.  As it turns out, that’s what Raymond tried to tell me: It’s about the collaboration, Luddite!  And in the end, he’s right.  They’re all right.  People have always sought one another out for protection, collaboration, and companionship.  Even as times change, people don’t.  The Internet, blogs, and mobile phones will morph into new technologies, but people will just use what is available to them for the same purposes.  

This week’s Question: in Chapter One, Rheingold mentions a loyal dog from Japanese lore who accompanied his owner to the train station every day.  One day, the owner died, but his faithful pooch, Hachiko, waited for him at the train station for the rest of his days.  Today, there is a monument to Hachiko, and that is where many Japanese young people gather. What breed of dog was Hachiko?  Use your best Google skills!  I will award a prize to the first person who posts the correct answer.

Update: File This Under “Very Cool”

We have unconfirmed reports that Rena attended a gala on Wednesday at which Bill Gates was the guest of honor.  Did she get to meet him?  Not sure!  Rena, details please!