Second Life

                          Hyper Reality and Avatar Gaming

_________________________________________________________________________________

Now as an avid gamer I'm quite familiar with on-line worlds and Avatar based gaming.

".. The shift from the real to the hyper real occurs when representation gives way to simulation" -- Mark Nunes, 1995

at the dawn of the computing age this man for-saw the future... and it was was made of polygons! ( textures used to render video games)

Many times in my life I have either been so bored  or so stressed that i have turned to one of the many on-line worlds that exist now and existed when i was younger.

I've always loved the idea of adventuring and as a White young boy in a western society in the 21st century their inst likely to be dragons invading Melbourne.

The idea behind avatar gaming is to simulate a real experience, to place yourself or some essence of yourself into an on-line avatar and have it experience worlds and scenarios that we physically could not hope to achieve.

This is delivered with a bombardment of information the experiences and feelings invoked on this virtual plane effective us emotionally in real life.

In an on-line world if something dies, or a friend leaves -- or your account gets banned, or something of any signification occurs  it effects the gamer as a person.
if something bad happens you feel angry -- I can't count the times were something frustrating has happend and i walk away from my computer and realise that I am suddenly filled with a sense of hatred, And I have no idea why or were it came from.

On the contrast accomplishing something in an online environment is as equally as satisfying   as accomplishing something in reality.

While theirs nothing wrong with a media devices inducing emotions some people are no equipped with the right mental attributes for these environments.
These people are those whom attach their self worth to that of their on-line avatar -- creating a symbioses  between the gamer and his avatar, sometimes to unhealthy and even lethal ends

Below are the top 10 Second-Life gaming related deaths

1. The boy jumped out of a 24-story window on December 27, 2004

http://www.tgdaily.com/business-and-law-features/21757-parents-blame-death-of-son-on-world-of-warcraft

2. Neglected child dies from suffocating

http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2005/6/21/547

3. Teenager who committed suicide because of “WoW Addiction”

http://www.networkliquidators.com/article-world-of-warcraft-could-it-be-killing-our-teens.asp

4. A young girl died after playing World of Warcraft for several consecutive days

http://www.joystiq.com/2005/11/04/wow-online-funeral-commemorates-death-of-young-gamer/

5. Lee collapsed to the floor after playing for 50 hours straight

http://au.gamespot.com/news/6132357.html?sid=6132357

6. A player killed a (real life) fellow player who had stolen his virtual sword.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4183340.stm

7. A 28-years-old man from Beijing

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Two-Fanatic-World-of-Warctaft-Gamers-Have-Died-Becouse-Of-WoW-11821.shtml

8. Death of a Man Unknown to Us

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Two-Fanatic-World-of-Warctaft-Gamers-Have-Died-Becouse-Of-WoW-11821.shtml

9. The 28-year-old father spent all his waking hours playing online

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/08/31/gaming_jail/

10. 13-year-old Tianjin boy

http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=69299&cat_id=585

now this may seem a silly notion to persons who  Haven't experienced an online environment --- but the characteristic's of friends and enemies  mirrors reality quite precisely.
-- While this may seem silly some of my longest standing friendship exist purely on virtual planes. I have core group of gaming companies who I interact with on a weekly basis whom I have never met or seen

I guess the point I am making is. while their are some extremes to hyper-reality and avatar based gaming the experiences and relationships you can forge from them can -- If handled correctly can form lasting friendships and fond memory

Forrest Welsh

Mobile Devices

"The mobile phone is primarily accepted as a body part or appendage"

-- Ingrid Richardson 2007

Disturbing times we live in this quote was from a 5 year old paper, interestingly this was the same year the first IPhone was released.

Gone are the days when there was any mystery in the world -- when I was a younger boy I used to worry that my mother had been in a car accident every time she went out. Now, as a 5 year old this is a scary thought. Now to me back then there was no way to prove that she hadn't died.

 I remember waiting outside the front gate for a glance of her car down our long road and the overwhelming relief that flowed coursed through me when I say our big blue car roll up the driveway.

Now days all I would have to do is spend 10 seconds texting her, or tweeting, or face booking, or calling or skyping or 1 of the many ways i can instantly contact her at any point from any location.

This brings me too a second quote

"Is the cell phone undermining the social order?" 

-- Hans Geser 2004

Well Hans you are spot on the money with this one. Again this quote is BEFORE the iPhone people were already noticing the social implications of texting alone.

Now with today’s technology we have access to every type of technological communication in the palm of our hands.

Now Hans Geser had a four pronged theory that suggested that Mobile phones were detrimental and in the following ways;

"Increasing the pervasiveness of primary particularistic social bonds"

Now Geser’s argument for this point is that while landline phone numbers are listed in directories and databases, mobile phone numbers are electively given to peers and family in in this way we narrow our social interactions too shield us from parts of society we do not wish to mingle with.

On this I disagree as when Geser was writing his paper mobile phones were exclusive to text and call based, nowadays our phones are open to a plethora of various open network social media interactions.

However  shielding of unwelcome social interactions is still a relevant angle, Sometimes people shield themselves from welcome social interactions or any social interactions at all, Some people have the uncanny ( and in my opinion annoying) ability to ruin any social interaction both virtual and personal by constantly accessing their smartphone and avoiding actual conversations.

"Reducing the need for time-based scheduling and coordination"

 So true the need for scheduled and personal interactions are long gone, while I am grateful to be able to contact my distant friends at a drop of a hat I do miss the expressiveness and intimacy of a friendship based on mutual interests and regular person to personal social interactions.

"Undermining institutional boundary controls and replacing location based with person based communicative systems"

This is another point I also disagree with.  Geser suggests that our previous model of technological communication prior to mobile phones was built on that idea that we communicated from a house or business place to another house or business place and never directly to an individual. While this can be annoying receiving a call at 6am while you’re laying in bed it can have the unseen benefit round the clock communication without disturbing other members of your house hold or workplace.

 

"Providing support for anachronistic pervasive roles"

Geser suggests for this point that we are contactable at any time, even if we are already engaged in a prior activity or event he also suggests that we can use mobile phones for monitoring other persons or loved ones.

While there are the benefits of safety and security, and relay of information in cases of emergency. This DOES NOT outweigh the negatives of the complete personal breakdown of social interactions

I can’t count how many times I have had to sit staring into space as someone I’m out to dinner/movies/coffee/train/ playing a board game/cards or any number of other social activities were my peer is texting or calling someone while I wait bored out of my mind and resenting ever moment of it.

To summaries I hate smartphones, I love instant communication but I don’t think society as a whole is or ever will be mature enough to manage or comprehend both personal and technological relationships without one affecting the other in a negative way.

 Gesers paper is avaible on google books.
 P. Glotz, S.Bertscht, C. Locke, 2005 Thumb Culture The meaing of Mobile Phones for society.

http://www.dynamicbusiness.com.au/news/motorists-accident-mobile-phone-1264.html


http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jan/01/mobile-phones-changed-society

The Politics of Social Media

Politicians using social media? at first glance someone could wonder at the purpose of such an undertaking




their have been many earlier attempts at utilizing social media for political election purposes -- 
a few brief examples are


John Edwards --  While this man was official the first ever person to announce his candidacy for US presidency via an on-line video, I think the fact that was was not successfully elected took away from the innovative step which he undertook --


Also while this was considered to be one of the first "person to person" addresses as Edwards was addressing his audience directly and not through a mainstream media source, I think that the fuck that it was released on his personal website and not through a 3rd party medium of YouTube or another similar video sharing site, really could have damage the credibility and authenticity of the address.


Mind you I think any video created for exclusive on-line purposes is a risky decision as the internet is a fickle minded machine and can be manipulated accordingly


i.e many videos go through forum based websites such as 4chan.org and Reddit.com now while these audience may not the intended target all it takes is a few persuasive individuals to find or suggest a flaw or problem with their video format and it could potentially be blacklist by a wide segment of an internet community(Note: on the flip side it could have potentionally positive effects)


These points aside 


 Im going to breifly examine to what i consider the start of mainstream poltical social media.

In 2007 Barrack Obama launched his presidential campaign - of which the general purpose is too gather support from potential voters, but his campaign team did one thing different they explore the use's of social networking sites as a basis to create buzz about the campaign and were even able to utilize Facebook to assist with donations towards the champaign. 
The now preisdient Obama was able to advance his campaign by reaching voters whom would otherwise would of been unaware of his political message"


An article on http://knowledge.insead.edu/contents/HowObamausedsocialnetworkingtowin090709.cfm (Scott Goodstein, 2010) qoutes;

"Since joining the Obama campaign in February 2007, Goodstein, who is the External Online Director for Obama For America, has helped attract nearly two million supporters on MySpace, about 6.5 million supporters on Facebook, and 1.7 million supporters on Twitter."


If these numbers are correct this is just over 10million supporters over social media networks considering the population of america this is somewhere between 3-4% of the total population




since the 2007- Barrack Obama campaign politicians utilizing social media sites such as Facebook had become and increasing trend.


It is almost essentially for an politician to have a Facebook page and a twitter page and any other form of social media page as these enables them to reach a younger audience and influence audiences who may not be of voting ages but will be in the near future

Youtube

                         Youtube, Produsers and World Making


I remember YouTube back in 2005 when internet based communities were only just incorporating into mainstream media sources, YouTube has defiantly played a role in societies transition from mass media outlets to a more online based information gathering process.

When YouTube was just starting out it was initially used primarily for brief comedic occurrences which  entertained and delighted millions worldwide.

As YouTube gained more and more recognition on a global level its evolved from having quite limited content up loaders to everyone with a camera uploading content ( Which i might add is mostly rubbish) .


To re-iterate this point lets take a look at the type ( and qaulity) of youtube "originals".
2006 -- content

As we can see the video style is simplistic and original and by most perceptions reasonably entertaining.
While there is nothing ground-breaking when we transition it into todays world, this video was considering one of the funniest and influential YouTube videos of all time (Forbes)
http://www.forbes.com/2007/04/30/youtube-videos-hits-ent-cx_jg_07networks_0430tube.html


Now I could compare this to any number of millions upon millions of unfunny, racist, stupid, pointless videos but I honestly couldn't bring myself to insert any of the numerous dull, mind numbing drivel I planned on using. -- to be short there is a lot of crap in 2012 in comparison to 2006 content.


Because of this suddenly influx of users youtube evolved from a source of entertianment to a produser based world making website

"World making"


the process of designing a fictional universe that will sustain franchise development, one that is sufficiently detailed to enable many different stories to emerge but coherent enough so that each story feels like it fits with the others" .<sup>-- Henry Jenkins


While this proccess is incredibly benifical to growth and recognition ( and profitable in youtubes case, sold for 1.65Billion)  The ProdUser cultural can become repetitive and bland as popular content is often recycyled over and over again in different forms  i.e</sup>

As stated by Dr Axel Bruns; Legal Frameworks such as the Creative Commons suite of license allow for this kind of re-use of content to be remixed and distorted into other forms of user content.
He also states that this opens up avenues  for creative work and publication beyond mainstream media industry, I disagree that it undermines the notion that artists are individual geniuses, I have the opposite opinion and think that this kind of re-use of work emphases the creative genius the individual and any re-cut however entertaining or funny is still just a re-use of a different individuals idea.


This is the problem with user-generated content there is no filter -- no quality control or inspectors anyone with a phone camera and a voice can record any absurd idea or thought and post it online for the world to see.

This creates an overwhemling array of social media based content which is hard to understand and enjoy.

aside from this the range and variety of possible content is astronomical and most of the time if you have the patience to filter through the garbage, there are many individuals out there with legitimate talent that have and will continue to upload interesting and entertaining ideas and videos  which make the process worth it.

Wikileaks

                                                                            WikiLeaks

Wikileaks is a website which specializes in the freedom and access to information that persons and governments would otherwise restrict. The website uses a secure drop box system in which "whistle blowers" (term used for person who divulge information that they have obtained about their company our organization)

Can safely deposit files onto a server without fear of being indentified or charged.

A quote on the types of content of information is as follows:

"Since it went online, three and a half years ago, the site has published an extensive catalogue of secret material, ranging from the Standard Operating Procedures at Camp Delta, in Guantanamo Bay, and the 'Climategate' e-mails from the University of East Anglia, in England, to the contents of Sarah Palin's private Yahoo account,"

The New Yorker's

 Raffi Khatchadourian

Over the years Wikileaks has been getting more and more attention from the American government as it claims many of the files that Wikileaks, hosts are illegal and are putting the security of the American people against terrorist and other groups that would potentially wish them harm.

With this in mind the public opinion of Wikileaks is shared as some believe that yes, while Wikileaks could rotationally damage information and secrecy it still holds an important role as independent source of information that the public deserves.

While others say that the site holds no purpose and is anti-patriotic and should be taken.

Which side of the fence are you?

Whenever wikileaks is brought up depending on what type of person you are and too a lesser extent the generation you belong too everyone seems to have an opinion what should happen to wikileaks.

Personally with a topic like this its is interesting to hear different perspectives of the issue as while everyone’s opinion is valid in its own regard, our westerns society is essentially founded on democracy and freedom of speech so even too a country like America whom holds its military secrets in high priority, the FIRST AMMENDMENT on their constitution is the right to free speech.

The hypocrisy of this aside many of those are against wikileaks will often bring up the safety of the individuals of whom some of the wikileaks cables concern could and would be comprised if the public were to obtain such information.

So lets quickly go over that again

Freedom of speech is ok.

But not ok if it can damage peoples reputations?

Don’t take my word on in though, wiki leaks is has extensive information involving thousands of governments and organizations.

And makes for fascinating reading, all I can say is that people should at least read some of the information on the site before holding and opinion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
http://leaksource.wordpress.com/2012/02/20/wikileaks-julian-assange-on-the-simpsons-500th-episode/
http://wikileaks.org/
http://www.jonas-kyratzes.net/2010/12/03/why-you-should-support-wikileaks/

EXTREMISM

                                                                   E-Extremists

Internet Extremism - the fine line between opinions and blind hatred.

There was always been extremist's from racism to political gain and everything in-between if there is a common perception of any form of idea,  An extreme perception accompanies that.

The lines defining extremism are blurry at best.

Defined as ;

One who advocates or resorts to measures beyond the norm, especially in politics

This begs to ask what the norm is? Does it differ from society to society? From culture to culture?

How can something that is pure perceptional be definitively explained.

Internet based extremism however is generally limited to a few major categories; Racism, Religious, Political.  (Roger 2007)

of which issue such as Anti-Abortion, staging government coups, Racial violence and other such topics can be openly and anonymously discussed on a global scale.

While these issue are not by any means new, the more recent availability of an internet based forum allows for a much broader and potentially  impressionable audience to find and read content that may otherwise be confined to a small town organization or individual.  (Roger 2007)

To examine internet extemism lets have a look at the current topic of euthnasia in europe.

Euthnasia is defined by most socities as an extreme solution to otherwise mangable issues, Howevever euthnasia has been illegal in most western socties until recently.

Following the lead of the netherlands many european countries have re-evaluted legalised euthnasia within their borders. While pro euthnasia supports may be considered extremist as sucidied is such a taboo topic. their is also much extremism opposing the change

for example

"Self-delusion is rampant in the euthanasia movement. Most proponents recognize that it is inherently dangerous to legalize killing. But they desperately want to believe that they can control the grim reaper. Thus, they continue to peddle the nonsense that "guidelines will protect against abuse" despite overwhelming empirical evidence to the contrary." - WESLEY J. SMITH

Personally i disagree with people like this as in my culture I was raised that life is a choice, while I can be objective when regarding these issues I think that the benefit of people ending their lives outweighs the potential abuse of people committing suicide due to depression as opposed to age or disability.

This french woman fought for the right to be euthanized, under medical supervision in the presence of her family. The french court decline and she was later found dead of a self induced drug overdose

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7322520.stm

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/euthanasia/eu0025.html

BBC NEWS, Euthanasia: a continent divided 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7322520.stm

Roger. D. Extremism on the net, 2007 http://s170032534.websitehome.co.uk/extremismonthenet.html

The Twittersphere

-Forrest Welsh

Tweeting; Interesting, or infuriating.

Tweeting has really become the "Cool" thing to do in the past few years, its grown from a innovative social networking tool to become a barrage of advertising, with the array of devices which users can utilize twitter it is not confining to individuals using a PC or a desktop.  The effect of this is users can tweet in the moment as event’s happen or thoughts occur, this mobility of the social media platform is what in my opinion makes it great for the spreading of to-the-point topics and ideas in a short amount of time.

A great example of how twitter can be utilized is when there is a crisis or natural disaster;
In 2010-11 there was extensive flooding in VIC,QLD,NSW  in which information of areas effected and peoples responses were recording among many things, but also on twitter.

The following year there was a study assessing how information over twitter was spread, and how online communities utilized, interestingly during the Queensland floods most of the information (tweets) was by the Labour and Liberal parties, and the QLD Police services.
This is a definitive examples that twitter has the ability to be a both informative and even potentially lifesaving tool in times of crisis.


Tweeting the business.
Time magazine suggests in 2010 that twitter will change the face of companies.
While I can see the potential for brand promotion, product promotion and market research, the lack of exposure for the individual message may be a persistent factor that while making the use of twitter beneficial it may never make it essential
Companies and individuals inventing spam tools and product placement strategies, or using consumers to advertising their products by offering rewards for people clicking on links.


While the purpose of twitter is indeed to be informative about everyday life, if it has no minor benefit, amusement or otherwise satirical purpose it just a hunk of useless information clogging up what could potentially be an otherwise interesting insight in the lives, or business of a person or organisations

For example
#someguyatwitter: Just had a great morning poop
VERSUS
#InfOrgansation; Working on cancer cure, pretty close


Why is twitter good?
-Instant information in times of Crisis
-Quick to the point messages
-Growing brands
-Creating awareness

Why its bad?
-Spam
-Sea of useless information
-Advertising

-Celebrity sensationalism

Seriously celebrates generally having nothing interesting to say. Who the hell cares who or what they had for breakfast.

It is almost as annoying as  people using twitter as their own personal diary, recording everything up and to obscure as their bowl movements.

-Forrest Welsh





http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/03/twitter-all-set-get-more-annoying

 http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1901188_1901207_1901196,00.html

Social Media Data Mining: A social network Analysis of tweets during the Australian 2010-2011 Floods.  France Cheong, RMIT and Christopher Cheong, RMIT.

http://www.pacis-net.org/file/2011/PACIS2011-036.pdf