November 27-29 Discussion (Cha-Ching)

<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } -->

There are many ways that a business works online in this day and age. There can be many reasons businesses have moved online. A few reasons could be convenience, cost issues, online businesses, or less overhead costs or in one of the examples profiting off online games. In many ways a business works the same way online that it does offline. There are still goals that are being made, meetings being held, and work to be done. It is just in this era you can do most of your work from a remote location which is why outsourcing is popular today. For example in the article that talks about Chinese gold farming this business is being held in China, but North American players are using the service. This has to do with that in North America a job like this would never be an actual job nor could it be based on American and Canadian laws. In China according to the article workers are paid .30 an hour and work 12 hours a day 7 days a week (Dibbell, 2007). In this case gold farming would not be a job in any other part of the world, due to low pay from workers, illegal wages, and illegal work hours a day. However, the internet brings this service and profits on it in some where in the world. In this day and age any part of the world can find something to profit off of online. In IBM's case when they discuss how Linden Labs set up their meetings and events online rather than in person it was a cost issue and it helped workers learn this new technology the company was moving towards. In IBM's case it was more a strategic business plan that I why they went to working online for cost reasons and to train their workers so the workers have another tool in their business arsenal for future use. In many ways the internet has made business expand globally and have made start up businesses and big traditional businesses get creative with how they utilize the internet as a tool to turn a profit and cut costs along with create new businesses.

Week 12: Making up for mistakes

So since I posted about the readings for this week last week I will post the response for last weeks reading for this week :P. This week or last week, however you want to phrase it we talked about online cultures and subcultures specifically in Second Life. The interesting thign about the articles were that each subculture has its own backing even if it can be viewed negatively. In the McCabe article it explores the online subculture of an eating disorder forum, but the catch is it supports eating disorders. The second article is an article that has an open online gay community that supports each other. The last wired article talks about griefers in second life. In my opinion all of these articles contradict each other, mostly the wired article in comparission with the first two. These online communities support each other no matter how odd it may be even if the community is supporting eating disorders. However, every subcommunity has its trouble makers which cause grief. In Second Life these people are called griefers. The question I ask is why when a community is helping each other out do you have trouble makers? The answer I came up with is even within these Second Life communities these griefers also have a subcommunity that allow them to share a common interest with other Second Life griefers. In my explorations of Second Life I have seen many communties, some support the club scene, some are big fanfiction fans such as Harry Potter world in Second Life. These communites all share a common interest which brings them together. I think that these new virtual communities are good to get people to bond with other people and also get help for something they may be embarassed about. Sometimes the subcommunities bond through negative things such as eating disorders or griefing and this is unfortunate, however this shows no matter what problem/hobby you have there will always be a community of people willing to share it with you.

Until 11: Gamification, Social Media, and The Human Response

In today's readings there was a lot of emphasis on social interaction through social gaming, fan websites for shows like Star Trek and human responses to what the media is creating for us. This is all creates a very interesting topic for today's discussion; that topic is gamification. Gamification is the idea of using game mechanics for non game situations. A lot of corporations are using this one company that made this big is called Zynga who makes games such as Farmville. These games take real world situations and everyday tasks and create them into a game that for some reason people enjoy. Now these games also come with social interactions and an achievement based rewards system that keeps users playing these games. Many researchers of this field see this trend of big companies moving towards gamifications and even in the future using this in actual real life situations such as purchasing a piece of clothing could give you 10 points or a badge. This is a bit excessive and more of a luddite interpretation on the idea of gamificatoin and social interaction via online gaming. However, there is a more optimistic side to it. For example we will take an excerpt from the article "Interactive Audiences" by Henry Jenkins which discusses how online communities have been shaping and creating more content from shows or video games that they enjoy. Jenkins states when quotting Nancy Baym, "A large group of fans can do what even the most committed single fan cannot: accumulate, retain, and continually recirculate unprecedented amounts of relevant information……. [Net list] participants collaboratively provide all with the resources to get more story from the material, enhancing many members' soap readings and pleasures" (Jenkins, 2006). This idea of collaboration online creates a richer environment for enthusists of many different things. This is not really gamification, but it falls under the idea of socializing online and creating other rewarding things based on original content. I see in the foreseeable future that we this is the way our media will be moving. We are moving toward a more social and weisure based lifestyle based on gamification and Web 2.0's ability to allow everyday people to interact and collaberate with developers.

Week of 10/25: The Group Project & Fun Times!

Today on the blog I will be talking about how my group did for the group build project. Since this week we are catching up on readings and we aren't required to discuss the readings on the blog post this week I figured I would talk about the group build project. The group build project actually turned out to be a lot of fun. The team I worked with was very nice and easy to work with and we cooperative very well. Initially I was concerned with how we would meet up in game and how it would work out, but it turned out really well. I think the reason for that is we were all there to have a good time. The plan of action was pretty much; what would look cool in here, and what did everyone want to build? We just build whatever we wanted and than matched up the textures with each others products. The project was to pretty much furnish a room in Second Life. We found a room and ported everyone there and got to building furniture, props, and various other cool things for the room. I myself built a couch and a bar area. The other members made a cool chair/couch, a disco ball sort of thing, abstract art, a rug, and some probs for the bar area such as cans and such. Overall I think it turned out to be a really good room. We incorperated everything we needed to have an overall good project and it didn't take that long. The group learned from each other and shared tips and pointers over the course of the project. I am very please with how the group I was in performed and I wouldn't mind grouping with them again. Hopefully I can add some pictures of the project when I get on my home desktop and take some screen shots. 

Unit 7 Online Culture

In any community there is culture. There has been culture in neighborhoods, clubs, committees, states, countries, etc… An online community is not any different from these traditional places where culture forms. Throughout the history of time people have been developing traditions, cultures, values, etc…through how they interact with people and where they grew up. For example in any local town there are certain traditions; whether it be having the annual 4th of July fair or the local holiday drive to raise awareness about kids in need. The same goes for places like Rutgers University; for example on third down at a football game you do the third down hand motion these are all traditional and cultural things in the offline community. The examples given are very different however they have one thing in common and that is that the people within these communities are bound by the same admiration for that community or are in the same social system usually. This is not any different in online communities. Yes, there is no physical contact, but if you play a game long enough with a group of people you will develop traditions and traits that are unique to that group or community; for example in the Sydell article ““virtual” virus sheds light on real world behavior” the players in  World of Warcraft were dying due to this virtual virus which was really a glitch in the system. This created an epidemic according to the article, “[B]ecause of the emotional connection game players have to their characters it can come pretty close. She says peoples' reactions to the plague in World of Warcraft were remarkably realistic.” (Sydell 2005). This shows the culture or community of values that this World of Warcraft community shares. The connection they formed is that the players all worked very hard to craft these characters, grind up to the highest level, and get the best gear. Now when the plague rolls around and characters are dying, yes it is just a game however the dreaded repair bill gets racked up especially if you keep dying. This creates the emotional connection within the community to share this value that “hey we have pride in these characters and we do not want to see them go down like this”. This creates the same type of connection and community might have when feeling prideful about a big win their team just had or the local holiday pageant a local town might have. In my opinion no matter where you are you can create a sense of community and shared values even in an online community. 

Week 5 Post

In the past human beings have had multiple identities depending on the situation they were in. A person could have a work identity, a friend identity; a family identity, etc… people shape how they want to be perceived depending on their situation. In the past 10 years or so technology has given us another way we can form another identity; this identity is an online identity. In today’s world we can put ourselves out on the internet as much as we want to. Anybody could be anyone if they choose to be; a person can have social media identities, gaming identities, etc… This has altered how people interact and has brought up taboo issues such as privacy, online relationship, and surveillance. For example in the article “Say Anything” by Nancy Nussbaum she talks about a 26 year old bartender named kitty who has a live journal that pretty much reveals a lot of stuff about her, such as very intimate photos, personal problems, etc… In this society we can put that out publicly if we choose on the internet, however there has to be some caution because everybody can see that. On the internet there is no privacy anyone can find information about you only so much can be private which tends to be the problem; people expose themselves to much. Than we have this idea of big business data mining and surveillance who is to say if that is good or bad. In some cases it is good when Google syncs your account to your phone that sort of surveillance/data proves to be helpful, but it can also be harmful if it gets into the wrong hands. Identities on social media sites can be whatever people choose, but these are the most dangerous in my opinion because you do not actually hide behind an avatar or surname. If you are on Facebook for example you will have your name out there and anything you say is you there is nothing to hide behind. A blog can reveal someone’s hobbies, or deepest secrets, twitter can be a way to vent problems and stress when someone has nobody to turn to, second life can be an escape from reality for some people. The internet and technology makes this possible whether people benefit from this or get in trouble for it depends on how smart they are online and that is what we have to really be careful about.

Unit 4: Virtual Contexts

In today’s society there is so much digitalization of content that we are seeing a boom in virtual societies; such as gaming environments, social environments, and business environments. In this week’s readings there was a focus on these three different types of virtual societies. In the first article by Lauren Bans “Same Shit, Different World” she talks about second life’s virtual environment and how the social interactions are often very sex based as well as the issues that come up when players cross certain boundaries within a game. The next article by Robert Bloomfield “Worlds for Study: Invitation” focuses on how these virtual worlds can be used in and be productive in an educational and business setting. Finally the last article titled “Play Between Worlds” by T.L. Taylor discusses how these virtual environments specifically ever quest in this article can also cross over into the real world for meet ups and also how people interact online through the game. I think that all of these articles have one main idea in common and that is the idea that no matter where you are or what you are playing people seek social interaction. The difference in these virtual environments in comparison to the real world is that there is anonymity to it where people are more gutsy about what they say or do for that matter. I believe what we are seeing now is that these games are becoming very interactive to the point where people do want to meet up outside of the game. In the Taylor article the main focus was an EverQuest convention where people from the game met and shared this common interest of EverQuest. However, there is a dark side to this as well in the Bans article there was a story about a marine who was having a love affair with someone online and it go to the point where he killed another man over it. In these worlds it is all about the context of the environment and within every game there are limitations. There is only so much you can do in Second Life, EverQuest and Worlds for Study. I think this is the reason why people are reaching out even more and it is leaking over into the real world. Also the context or appearance of an avatar might affect how someone interacts with that person. An attractive female gets a better reception than a male character most of the time. I think virtual environments are very interesting because they blend this virtual fake idea of video games with the very real idea of social interaction. When you blend these two things together you are going to get a very interesting mix of a person’s personality and this online persona that could explore a lot of things considered to be taboo elsewhere. On the otherhand these environments can also be about business and that is what Bloomfield highlights. These virtual environments have become cash cows for the companies that make the games and also the in game currency economy has become profitable offline with the conversion of virtual money to real money. The idea of a business going to a virtual environment is not far fetched in today’s world we see people holding virtual meetings for virtual teams in environments like Second Life or in house projects that the companies have built. Overall the idea that virtual worlds becoming a place that blends and blurs a lot of ideas is a very accurate one. 

September 11-13 Discussion

The idea of virtual worlds is a really exciting and almost sci-fi-eque idea. The ability to leave the real world in an instant to connect with millions of other people all over the world in a virtual environment does not seem real. In Baym’s Personal Connections article I think she makes some good points when talking about how digital media is changing the social norms of communication. In the opening pages of the chapter I think she really highlights the two sides of this argument beautifully. Baym talks about how there are skeptics who see this new communication as being shallow and belittling old traditional communication and in the other corner the adopters who believe that it gives a better opportunity and builds stronger communication connections. In Baym’s article represents a few questions that need to be explored. The first being the question of presence vs. absence of a physical self is the communication less intimate based off of the lack of physical being, however this could be argued by the mental vs physical being argument where as long as you are mentally stimulated by the conversation there should be no lack of intimacy or personal connections. The last idea that I found very interesting was how a person’s real personality and digital personality differ. I think this is a big player in this whole argument. As someone who does play video games there is a slightly different personality online just based off the idea of anonymity. I think that is really the issue the differing of personalities online versus in person. All the other arguments can be figured out as Baym says later over the history of our lifespan new technologies have scared people but eventually everyone gets used to it. The idea of differing personalities is a challenge which does come into play in these virtual environments that Joe Sanchez talks about. These social virtual worlds or gaming virtual worlds that Sanchez talks about is an exciting idea, but when you really want to connect with somebody who knows if that is really their personality. If this really is the way of communicating in the future or another way to meet people how will people in the digital divide fair? There is still a big digital divide issue where people will be left behind. This idea of a digital divide will in my opinion create two different groups that will be fine once the hype curve dies down. I think that the idea of communicating with people in real life and also through mobile phones will be in one division and the other side will be the virtual world’s people. I think the virtual worlds environments only attracts a certain type of person, most people will still go to a more traditional view of communicating. In my generation I see a lot of computer guys that will embrace social interaction via virtual worlds, but there are still a lot of people who do not like to do that based off of social stigma. I feel that social networking should and will eventually assimilate into a traditional mold of communicating given your identity is still intact. I believe this because of what Portwood talks about in her article about media refusal. There is this hype curve of social media right now where everyone is on it and they are “addicted” for lack of a better word; once this hype curve dies down it will properly assimilate into a hybrid of traditional communication and an added twist to it, but no way will it replace it completely it will make it more portable and mobile. The technology idea is the same a telephone and smart phone have the same premise just the smart phone builds upon that basic model. I feel digital communication does the same with traditional it is the same idea that builds upon the original idea without threatening the traditional. In my opinion communication is communication. It will rapidly evolve, but overall humans have a desire to interact with each other and while that is still a basic human need to feel a bond with a group or connection with others it really does not matter where the communication comes from. Everyone will adapt and everyone will find their niche.