Tracy's COM 300 Blog

March 13th Fianl Posting

2006-03-12T22:44:00.000-08:00

The most important thing that I learned in this course that I think was very beneficial to me was simple site. Learning how to create a website is something that I had always wondering how it worked, and now I know how to do it myself. I think that it is one thing that will be very beneficial to my knowledge and is something that I could actually use in the real world. I wish we could have spent more time studying the overall blogging community. I find it very interesting and wish I would have gotten to spend a little more time exploring it. I know this is something that can also be done on my own time, but I wish I knew a little more about it. The topic that was least interesting to me was topics that were very technical. When we would talk about things that were very technical or over my head I found it hard to follow from time to time. I would know the general topic of what we were learning about, but I think sometime you need to really explain in elementary terms what exactly something are. Because people like me who don't know much about online technical terms sometimes have a hard time following it!

February 27th Posting

2006-02-22T21:27:00.000-08:00

How do you expect VoIP to impact cable and telephone networks (both are regulated infrastructure industries)

How do you expect VoIP to impact cable and telephone networks (both are regulated infrastructure industries)

Personally, I had no idea what VoIP was until tonight when I read this article. “Voice over Internet Protocol” takes analog signals and turns them into digital data, so people can “talk” over the internet. This is seen as an improvement because this is a way for people to place free long distance phone calls. I find this to be a very interesting new way of placing phone calls. I feel like this would be really useful from one country to another. Now that most people have cell phones we are able to place calls to and from anywhere in the US for no additional fee, it would only use our “minutes”. And with so many people changing phone plans to be on a network with most of their family or friends, the calls are free! But I guess if you didn’t have a very good cell phone plan, or did a lot of talking with others far away, this free alternative would be great!

I think that the VoIP will impact cable and telephone networks similarly to what has happened with print newspaper and online versions. Everyone use to purchase print newspaper, and now that it is available online, a lot of people use the internet as their main way to access news. I think that there will still be people who are very use to “land lines”, such as people who tend to be older, and those stuck in their ways who will not be willing to switch. But I think overall if enough people find out about VoIP it will become very heavily saturated by the masses, and people will start to use cable and telephone networks less, and eventually they could even become obsolete if everyone has this free alternative. I think this would take a very long time to actually happen, but it definitely could. Also, if phone companies see this coming they could be proactive and start to purchase similar sites and try to monopolize the market, and I bet they would begin to charge for this type of access, and again start making more money off of it.

Discussion Questions
1. Would it be fair to start charging a nominal fee to use the VoIP if it became bigger?
2. Would you actually use a VoIP, or is your cell phone your basic way of staying connected with your frineds and family?
3. Is sitting infront of your computer to use a VoIP something that discourages you from using it? If there is a way to use it on your cell phone would this be more functional for you?

February 22nd Posting

2006-02-16T21:36:00.000-08:00

What is the relationship between cyberspace as a public space and accessibility standards?

This article discusses the ideas of providing “internet access and voice service cheaply to rural and under-served communities.” There are many different ideas for services for people who can not afford to pay for expensive wireless. According to this article “universal access” will work if “several critical innovations are necessary”; First, new and low-cost technologies, especially terrestrial wireless infrastructure, secondly, micro and small enterprises that provide locally tailored value-added services, and lastly, supportive public policy. With regards to exactly how the internet works, I am not very informed on how it works so this reading was a little hard to get through.

It is really nice that cyberspace is a public place for everyone to use, but the accessibility standards are hard for some people to afford or access. Personally, I remember when my family used dial up to get onto the internet through AOL. When wireless and DSL became more well know I remember it being a big deal about getting the wireless card, hooking up with a network, etc. Also, at my sorority we have wireless throughout our entire house and our wireless is a fee that is included in our house bill. But, to actually access the internet you had to pay about $80 to get a wireless card to connect to it. It is hard because there has to be a way in which people can access the public space online, but I agree that there needs to be some sort of universal access that is affordable to all.

Discussion Questions
1. Can you think of a way that could keep costs low, and allow almost everyone to be able to tap into the public sphere?
2. Since the public sphere is a free place, is it necessary to place high dollar amounts on wireless connections?
3. Should we make everyone pay a tax or some sort of an "internet fee" and make access available to anyone and everone?

Extra Credit Blog Post

2006-02-10T00:21:00.000-08:00

I found the reading by Professor Gill to be very interesting. I think that way that she approached her research was great. She took a very neutral and unbiased stand point and really did a great job of comparing the two sites. Personally, I am not a big web person, and the majority of my time on the internet consists of emailing, shopping, and facebook, so I was very interested to see all the comparisons. I found it very interesting just how much things were different between the two sites, and how somethings that seem so simple were forgot from one site and done by the other. I think that it was cool to get an in-depth view and closer look at how the two presidential candidates websites were similar and more importantly how they were different, to see how they were viewed!

February 13th Posting

2006-02-09T23:35:00.000-08:00

How does internet technology impact politics? Do you agree with the premise of these authors?

In the first article about Joe Trippi, it is very evident that internet technology impacted politics. Trippi explained how he was “going to use the Internet to attract cash and sign up supporters” and that is exactly what he did. I don’t know if I would say that I necessarily agree with what Trippi did, because to be quite honest I am not into politics at all and really don’t know too much about all of it, but I will say that what he did worked to his advantage.

In the second article, they point out that as a whole the internet has increased its media content because of online versions of local and national papers. This is a way that online users can get a lot of their political information, and this doesn’t confine them to only getting the information that is being produced in the city they live in. One major point that they bring up is that we “should not assume that sheer use of the Internet as a news source automatically leads to increased political knowledge.” I think this statement is very true. I for instance think this quote really relates to my life. I use the internet from time to time to receive news, but for me personally politics isn’t something that I focus on, so I would say that I do not have increased political knowledge just because I use the internet as a news source. I think that by having news on the internet it becomes an easier way for people to receive information, but I really agree that just because it is there, does not mean that everyone is becoming more politically active and understanding all of the arguments.

Discussion Questions
1. In Democratic primaries, where turnout is extremely low, is the better-organized campaign usually the winner? Or does that turn people away?
2. What other tactics do you think would have helped Trippi keep a successful campaign? Was what he was already doing correct? Or are there other areas that need to be looked into?
3. If eventually everyone turns to online newspapers, where will the funding come from to pay writers and publishers if no one is purchasing print media anymore? Do you think it is possible for this to happen? Or will some people always look to print media over the internet?

February 6th Posting

2006-02-02T16:55:00.000-08:00

What are the implications (suggestion, conclusion) of blogging technology on established media?

In the reading “From Tom Paine to Blogs and Beyond” they talk about how journalism was never the same after September 11th. They begin by talking about the first amendment, and really focusing in on the aspect of freedom of speech. As I went through the reading it kind of brought me back to several other communications class I have taken here at UW. Specifically, when they talk about “yellow journalism”, the rise of the printing press, the rise of radio and internet and so on, I really remember a lot of these ideas being discussed in many courses.

After September 11th lot of people from New York were blogging to tell everyone about their individual experiences with the attacks. I think that blogging technology is not taking over established media, but I think it is becoming very important. People will always rely on established media because it is “credible”, but people love to hear real people, and their feelings. I think that blogging has blown up in the last five years and I think it will continue to grow. People are very interested in other peoples lives, and like on September 11th, it was a way for people to vent. People could explain how they were feeling, or respond to other people thoughts. I think it is great that there is a place for people to express their thoughts at, but the only downside is that there are people who disrespect that privilege. That is one thing that I am really worried about. Overall I think the effect that blogging will have on established media is one that allows the consumer to become involved and become one with the medium.

Discussion Questions:
1. According to the NPR article, "Podcasting gave NPR a new model for selling underwriting, and sharing the proceeds with stations", do you stand behind their new plan? Or is it just TOO much?
2. Thomas believes that "shorter content has been more popular, perhaps because people listening to podcasts are multitasking and don't have the attention for long-form content." Do you believe this is true, or would they have more success if they had more long podcasts?
3. When discussing the challenges that are to arise with podcasting, "anyone who sells advertising usually has to have metrics on the audience: who is listening, how often do they listen, what's the demographic of listeners. These remain a mystery for podcasts, because there is no current way to track who actually listens to podcasts." Can you think of any way that this could become possible? Or what other solutions would you have for NPR for them to still make money off of advertisers?

January 30th Posting

2006-01-28T16:09:00.000-08:00

Why should communication scholars study the open source software movement?

I believe that communication scholars should study the open source software movement because it is a very interesting concept, and it is very cutting edge. There are many things to note when looking at the open source software movement. In the first reading they refer to the free program as "GNU". One reasons stated in favor of the program is if "I like a program I must share it with other people who like it." If people find something they like, they initially want to show their friends/family and therefore want to share what they have with them. Another reason was that "software sellers want to divide the users and conquer them, making each user agree not to share with others." When looking at this from the software sellers point of view, they want to get the most people to purchase their product, not get it from their friends. Because of this reason, the seller will attach fees, licensing of copies, etc. but no one really ever follows these "rules" so it just makes sense to give it away for free. Well, unfortunately everyone doesn't see it that way.

There are many things that are seen as roadblocks for GNU. First, they point out that nobody will use the program if it is free because that means that it will not have a support team, because there will be no money to pay them. Secondly, advertising. A product like this would need to be advertised, but if there is no money from the program, there will be no money to advertise. Lastly, they argue that "don't programmers deserve a reward for their creativity?" All of these points that have been brought up are valid, but which side should we stand on?

So, I think it is very important to study this issue because it is very controversial.

Discussion Questions:
1. Do you think the open source software movement is something that will hinder society or help it?
2. Do you think there is a way for people to meet in the middle and come to a compromise that shows both sides?
3. If the free software movement does happen, how would companies advertise, pay for support, etc.?

January 23rd Posting

2006-01-22T13:28:00.000-08:00

How have these readings changed your view of the man-machine relationship?

Thinking back to a long time ago man made almost everything that he needed with his own two hands. Then, as machines came about men weren't needed as much because machines were taking over their jobs. So, my idea of the man-machine relationship is that man has become a lot more depended on machines for the production and necessities of life. Similarly, I think that these readings really haven't changed my views much, but have made me a lot more aware of how the internet works. I would say that the "machines" that are running our internet have completely eliminated "man" from the equation for the internet to run smoothly. So, I think that man is still EXTREMELY dependent on machines. When reading the second reading I was surprised bny how simple they made the internet sound. I never knew anything about "Internet Protocol" (IP) either. With every transmission it was interesting that all that happens is that the information is broken down into small "packets" and there is a "unified global addressing system" that sends things were they need to go. Next, the "Transmission Control Protocol" (TCP) ensures that the packets sent from one machine to another are received and assembled into the correct order. I was really interested to learn exactly how that happens because I really had no prior knowledge about how the internet works!

Discussion Questions:
1. KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) claims that the internet is "so simple", do you believe this claim?
2. Do you think it would be best to combine TCP & IP? Or do you think the way it is now works best?
3. What are the three reasons why IP is particularly powerful?

January 16th Posting

2006-01-16T19:43:00.000-08:00

Use these readings to explain how your life is affected by information (too much? Too little? Just enough?)

I think that my life is effected just enough by information. The focus of these articles was about the volume of information that people have to take in via the internet. They talk about how there is SO much information that it makes it difficult for people to even find what they are looking for online. I say that my life is effected just enough by information because I don’t think that it takes over my life, and I also am aware that it is present in my life. In regards to the information on the internet, I guess maybe I don’t use the internet enough to feel like I am being taken over by it. I use the internet mainly for checking/sending email, shopping, news, and for school. The times that I have felt overwhelmed by the information is when I do research for papers for classes. When looking into databases for information you can get thousands of results for a topic. It is in times like that that I become a little overwhelmed with all of this information. But, on an everyday level I am not doing extensive research and find that the uses for the internet I have do not make me feel like this information overload is really affecting me too much.

Extra Credit Blog Post

2006-01-08T22:28:00.000-08:00

In the reading's heading there were no instructions on what we were specifically suppose to post about regarding the extra credit reading so I am just going to give you some of my thoughts on it!

First off I was very surpised to find out that internet research was happening in 1967. Through out the reading the FCC does a very good job in explaining the steps that were taken to get the internet to where it is today. Prior to this class I have not taken an indepth look at the internet. I really only usually use the internet for e-mails, news, and online shopping. I don't really do too much with it, so to learn so much about how it came about and exactly how and why certain things work to make the internet so successful it really blew me away. I found this reading very useful and I learned a lot about aspects of the internet I had never thought about before.

January 9th Posting

2006-01-08T21:40:00.000-08:00

Two "Ah-ha's" from the readings
When going through the readings there are a couple things that caught my interest. In the first reading I was amazed by how accurate the portrayal of the camera was. He gave many ideas of what he thought the camera would become. He believed that the camera would have faster lenses, the size of the camera would be small, the pictures from the camera could be enlarged later in full color, and that the process could be dry and would be a very fast. It was just very interesting that so many years before the camera became what it is today, that he so accuratly had ideas of what it was going to become.
Secondly, in the second reading I found the information on the emergence of national radio networks to become a lot clearer to me. When NBC was founded in 1926 the network was created to provide the audience with an array of information for many different people. It soon became a place for advertisers to sell their products to the national audience. It was the merging of the networks and companies marketing national brand products that made broadcast radio the dominant communication and advertising medium in the United States.

How does Vannever Bush's 1945 description of "memex" compare with today's personal computers and internet?
Vannever Bush's description of "memex" has many resemplences to today's personal computers and internet. He explains that "memex" would be a device for individual use which is similar to a private file and library. This device would store books, records, and communications. He said that it would be made up of a desk, translucent screens, a keyboard, and sets of buttons and levers. So far, his ideas are show many resemblances to what a computer is today: the screen, the keyboard, the memory capacity, etc. To use certain books, the user types in a code and you can flip through the books at your own discression. This is very similar to research encyclopedias, data that individuals store on thier computers and the such. Vannever Bush's description although being done in 1945 had many thoughts that very close to what we have now in the present.

How do you envision the internet of 2045?
Trying to think of what the internet will be in 2045 is so hard to do simply because of the rate that technology is moving at. I think it definatly will become more advanced, but I am not sure in what ways. We already have access to live streams of video footage, music, webcams, etc. To me I feel like there is nothing else that can possibly be done, but I think that everything will just become more simple, faster, and smaller. But who knows, when looking at how fast technology is moving today, there could become something else, similar to the internet, that is even more useful, and if I knew what that was I would be making a lot of money!