You Are Not Gadget: Part 1

At first I was dreading to read the book, "You Are Not a Gadget," by Jaron Lanier because I assumed it would be a boring technical book, that focuses on the ins and outs of the internet. Although, that may be enticing to some, for me the thought reading something like that made me want to fall asleep. However, after finally giving the book a chance and reading the first chapter, I must admit that I was really intrigued by what Lanier had to say.

A part from chapter 1 that stood out to me was when Lanier spoke about journalistic Stockholm syndrome. I found this part very interesting because I remember when the internet started to increase in popularity and everything from ordering food to reading novels can be read online; newspaper companies dreaded this new wave of digital media because it would hurt them economically. However, as Lanier points out, newspaper companies such as the New Yorks have been pushing for digital politics which will definitely hurt them and would be considered a smart idea. As a matter of fact this holds the potential to eliminate the newspaper industry entirely. Lanier's usage of the term Stockholm syndrome was definitely accurate because it should how naive the newspaper industry is behaving.

Another part from chapter 1 that stood out to me was when he spoke about the way technology changes people.  I found this part interesting because from the reading Lanier portrayed technology as having a positive effect on people, while I on the other hand believe that technology actually has a negative effect on people. I agree with Lanier when he said "different media designs stimulate different potentials in human," but not  for the reasons that he is inferring. Technology has made us dependent on it, for example we rely so much on our smart phones (BlackBerry's, iPhones, etc...) that we hardly use our brain to remember important phone numbers, besides 911. This is a perfect example of how technology has negatively changes us, from independent adults to dependent children.

Critique of Group Time Lines

The timelines that were presented in class on Tuesday were pretty good, I enjoyed all of them. I liked how the timelines were not the same, they had different structures, designs, even a variety of categories were presented. This was important because the presentations were not so redundant.


Group 1-PowerPoint Presentation
I loved how they had the dates in chronological order it made the presentation easy to follow. I also like the fact they placed the information into categories and presented both the negative and positive aspects of the internet. However, I must say that there was too much text on the slides, power points are used as a guide not a place to start a report. I also did not like the color of the text that was chosen, it conflicted with the background, they should have either used a lighter color (white) or a different background.


Group 2-Film Presentation (My Group)
I was impressed with the turn out of the clip. However, I feel that the clips could have been shortened to better line up with the voice-over, this would have made the way the film ended less awkward.

Group 3-Timeline Presentation
I liked the fact that this was not your typical boring timeline, it had a hint of modernity to it, which made the presentation enjoyable. The text, structure, and images (when available) all flowed very nicely and complimented each other. However, I felt that the presentation was a bit repetitive, I kinda lost interest when they continuously presented music sharing websites that were shut down.

Group 4-PowerPoint Presentation
First off I must say that I liked the fact that the power point was used as a guide and not as the substance of the presentation. This allowed for the presenters to showcase their knowledge on what they were talking about. I also like the fact that they did not have to much text on the power point, it looked well put together. However, just as group 1, their font color conflicted with the background which made the text hard to see at some parts.

Overall the presentations were good and I cannot wait to see what everyone has in store for their next presentation.

The Internet and Its Complexities: A Response to the Readings

The internet is like a large rubix cube, full of complexities that only certain individuals can unwind, within minutes. However, the internet also possess something that anyone can use to their disposal—knowledge. I am not about the knowledge one gains from googling historic information, instead the knowledge I of speak of is what one typically gains throughout their lifetime.  It is from the reading that I draw this conclusion, but to single out one in particular is extremely hard. The reason being is for the most part they all complement one another, filling a gap the other possessed.

The article, Recent Futures: TAZ, Wired and the Internet by Geert Lovink was one of the readings that stood out to me primarily because it opened my eyes to Cyberculture and its role in what the internet is today. I found it interesting how Lovink spoke about the how the internet shifted from a tech-savvy leisure for creativity to a big business. The motto that he used to describe what the internet has become:

“Catch the youngsters, squeeze the creativity out of them…and sell out as soon as you can”

really stuck out to me. This is because this greed to make money is what led to the web crash mentioned in another article Geert Lovink wrote, entitled After the Dotcom Crash: Recent Literature on the Internet Business and Society. In fact, companies have found ways to use the internet to manipulate people into buying their products by making their ads appear on every page you browse after leaving their website. From both articles it was made clear to me that the internet became nothing more than a ‘get rich quick’ system and as the internet expanded corruption and bankruptcy followed. However, it is from this disarray that the knowledge comes from because the crash of the internet led to people learning from their greed and how to be content with what they have.

Although, the internet was used by some in shady ways, the articles, History of the Internet and Its Flexible Future by Leonard Kleinrock and The Past and Future History of the Internet by Barry Leiner portrayed the internet in a different light. Kleinrock’s article touched on the internet as the reason for a change in our behavior and attitudes as it started to shape us into a more informational society. I agree with Kleinrock because many people today get a majority of their information from the internet, actually the internet has made it possible for social websites such as Facebook to become huge sources when it comes to gathering information. This only provides a glimpse of what the internet is capable of doing in fact the article by Leiner takes this even further and suggests that the internet can only get bigger and better, as its complexities are explored. I agree with Leiner because not only has the internet open doors for a new way to communicate around but it has also revolutionized the way we look at technology, take touch screens for example, without the internet this would not have been possible.

Overall the articles provided me with a glimpse as to what the internet really is; they did a great job at showing me the good, the bad, and the ugly as well as enabling me to explore my own feelings about the internet and the direction that is going today. As I stated before, the internet is full of complexities, but within all that complication is a great deal of knowledge that is just waited to be consumed and what is done with that knowledge is entirely up to you.