Paranoid? This Won't Help (Extra)

In class we discussed the ways in which technology use keeps us constantly connected to large organizations, whether we like the association or not.  Cell phone companies have a detailed record of any conversational history.  Websites such as Google monitor our popular searches and accordingly rank information displayed.  ATM cash transactions and purchase receipts can be tracked across country.  The list goes on and on.  In the end,  its the government who can compile all these technological breadcrumbs and track anyone's trail regardless of the measures of secrecy they take. 

The question of escape from government surveillance prompted "Wired" magazine writer Evan Ratliff to try an experiment of his own.  In an article titled, "Gone Forever: What Does it Take to Really Disappear?" Ratliff first decribes the story that motivated him concerning a man named Matthew Sheppard.  Sheppard succeeded in faking his death and escaping from his family for a couple months, leaving misdirecting clues and convincing evidence behind him (Ratliff 5).  Yet after months hiding from the law he contacted his family to let them know he was alive and they carefully moved into a motel under an alias (5).  The family existed happily for a while but authorities were able to finally catch him despite his secrecy.  

"South Dakota-based federal agents pulled up an address for the family and contacted the landlord. “I rented to that guy,” he told them upon seeing Sheppard’s picture, “but his name is John Howard.” The alias led quickly to Howard’s very Sheppard-like rèsumè, still posted on Monster.com. Then, in a scene befitting Sheppard’s most paranoid fears, officers staked out the house, setting up in trees nearby, waiting for him to appear" (6). 

Although he took many precautions, Sheppard could not escape even the slightest of trails that was left behind.  After realizing what implications this story provided, Evan Ratliff decided to attempt his own escape.  He sent out a challenge in Wired announcing that he was officially going "off the grid" and that if anyone found him they would win $5,000 (6).  Participants were able to search from August until September to recieve the prize.  Sure enough, despite the drastic measures Ratliff took to hide, he was tracked down by the electronic records of receipts days before the deadline.  It just comes to show the basic, frightening fact that because of our electronic usage we are able to be constantly surveilled and captured if necessary.

   






http://www.wired.com/vanish/2009/08/gone-forever-what-does-it-take-to-really-disappear/2/

Remaining Anonymous (Extra)

I had never heard about the massive hacktivist group Anonymous until the other day in class.  We came to learn that these hacktivists hate censorship and want free-access to all information. As videos showing individuals in Guy-Fawkes masks dictate the groups agenda, the Anonymous initiative remains untouchable.  The group is composed of many, anonymous individuals working in unison toward a common goal; no apparent leader is present.  This way the blame cannot be put on any one individual.  That combined with the fact that what they are doing is nonviolent keeps Anonymous thriving and conjuring up more effective forms of hacktivism.

Hacktivism also is used to prevent any monopoly control of technology, something Anonymous definitely exhibits.  There have been videos by Anonymous where the group says it will make Facebook crash because it is growing too powerful, greedy, and commercialized.  One of these threatening takeovers was supposed to occur on November 5th, Guy Fawkes day, but as we know that date has passed and Facebook is still intact.  Recently, Facebook was attacked with spam on people's walls; the culprit was assumed to be Anonymous.  Pornographic and violent images were posted on user's accounts which people feared was the "Fawkes Virus" (Albanesius 1).  Yet an article by Chloe Albanesius states that the link to Anonymous is not credible.  The two threatening videos by Anonymous said that it would strike Facebook with a virus that "sends out malicious links and gains access to your account" but the takeover's stated deadline was never fulfilled (1).  The voiceover in the videos warned that "Anonymous would use the Fawkes Virus to tackle corruption and groups that oppose its organization. The video, however, did not discuss pornographic or violent images" (1).  One characteristic of Anonymous is that the group explicitly states what it is going to do.  The Facebook virus's goal was to completely destroy the website, not litter it with annoying, crude images. 

The popularity of Facebook is certainly a force to be reckoned with and Anonymous acknowledges that with a vengence.  As of now, the group is focusing on more critical movements such as Occupy Wall Street (2).  Once it aims it's complete focus on Facebook, the impact will be extremely severe.  Zuckerberg's be warned, Anonymous still has work to do.

Best Beware, "Smart Mobs" Are Everywhere

The next social revolution might be televised, but it will certainly be mobilized.  Society's current infatuation with cell phones and instant information continues to grow rapidly.  The work "Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution" by Howard Rheingold eerily predicts a massive technological shift that will impact all of society. Written in 2002, Rheingold explains that "smart mobs" of individuals will be the ones unknowingly facilitating the shift towards electronic dependence.

Rheingold states that smart mobs, "consist of people who are able to act in concert even if they don't know each other"(Rheingold 2).  These individuals carry mobile devices that connect them by telephone while at the same time providing them with information from various sources (2).  In addition, cheap microprocessors with the ability to communicate with one another inhabit an enormous amount of products and buildings (2).  Reasonable prices make these technologies accessible throughout the entire world.  Rheingold's prediction is that these technologies will develop until real-world objects and places combine with the vast power of the Internet (2).  In turn, this will transform mobile communication media into "remote-control" devices that impact the tangible world (3);  That one day we will be capable of and depend on daily interaction with the world through our phones. And this prediction is far from off.
 
Actually, all of Rheingold's predictions of what would occur in the next 8 years are shockingly accurate.  He talks about people using GPS, instant picture messaging, and organize business transactions on their phones (3).  Then this will lead to large amateur groups who are employing the new technology that old, established medias have not caught onto yet.  All of these new parties will cause competition and further the rapid growth of mobile technology. 

These predictions have been realized by the creation of smart phones such as the iPhone, Blackberry, or Android.  If one gets lost, they simply plug their destination into their phone producing a map.  Picture messaging allows friends to show each other what they are doing at any time. Even big business executives are constantly jabbering and fiddling with business exchanges.  10 years ago, the average consumer would have thought the availability of such devices to be near impossible.  Now, according to a recent survey conducted from July-September 2011, 87.4 million people in the U.S. alone own them (Rao 1).  These statistics were taken from the article, "As Smartphone Usage Increases, Android Gains U.S. Market Share" by Leena Rao.  As more apps and abilities become possible, certain companies like the Android have to improve their product in order to thrive. Rao's article shows proof of a competition between mobile phone companies along with the large profit that is generated by them.

With the emergence of these highly popular smartphones, Rheingold's idea of smart mobs can't be more real.  They are way more advanced than the basic phones he described which were only capable of making calls and sending text messages.  Current mobile phone technologies have grown to mingle with the capabilities of the Internet, and it will only get more advanced.  This is certainly wonderful in the many ways they make almost everything accessible at the drop of a hat; making life a whole lot easier.  Yet I warn, we must not become completely dependent on these devices or else societal values will wither away.

Goodbye Bullying, Hello Drama

Parents nowadays, though looking out for their child's best interests, cannot relate to much of the current adolescent terminology and as a result are unable to communicate with them effectively.  The term "drama" is a perfect example of this dissociation between the age groups.  When teens hear about drama, they automatically think of gossip and altercations between friends, enemies, etc.  When parents hear about drama, what often comes to mind is the idea of a TV show, movie, or play.  The term this older society is comfortable with using is "bullying."  Yet bullying and drama should not be confused because drama is something much deeper.  Bullying in its traditional sense is referring to the open, unrepentant act of forcibly stealing some one's possessions or inflicting harm on them (physically or emotionally through insults).  Drama is sneaky; it doesn't work in the open but rather bombards one's emotions in order to isolate and manipulate one's feelings.  Often, drama starts as a slight problem before snowballing over a period of time into something hurtful. 

In Dannah Boyd's article, "Bullying as True Drama," she says that teens use the term drama as a coping mechanism that "allows them to distance themselves from painful situations" (Boyd 2).  Dismissing hurtful conflicts as drama lets teens show that such concerns are petty and don't matter (2).  Students will not admit that they are being bullied in school because then that is admitting that they are weak and inhabit a lower social rung.  Bullying is often associated with childhood behavior and most teens would never want to damage their reputations.  Drama lets one feel that they are part of an important grand spectacle that only certain people are in on instead of realizing the truth behind their actions.  It is this hurtful reality that subtly continues until the person (or person's) targeted reach their breaking point.

The film that best exemplifies the act and impact of teen drama is the movie, "Mean Girls."  It demonstrates how fully drama can invade some one's life and impact their behavior for the worse.  The characters use sly, back-handed comments to insult and manipulate the others instead of employing full-on attacks.  The social hierarchy that drama depends on is shown during a lunchroom scene at the beginning of the film.  Boyd's "drama as a coping mechanism" is shown through the main characters' "burn book."  In this book, the popular group of girls create a book full of pictures of classmates and their corresponding insults.  This is how they justify their cruelty; because they aren't openly saying these things to people in school.  All this changes when the book is exposed and hatred floods the school.

It is important to note that the title of the film is, "Mean Girls" not "Mean Teens."  Female characters create all of the rumours and drama circulating around the school. The men are often the instigators of such drama but rarely get too involved.  I find this to be accurate in my social experiences yet not to the extent that this film shows.  We are all responsible for drama whether we like it or not.  If you don't admit it then you are part of the problem concerning us now: identifying the signs and consequences of drama before more are lost. Students must know the consequences of drama to correct poor social behaviors.  Cousenlors of older generations must update their definition of "bullying" in order to provide effective help.  Unless drama is recognized for what it truly is, more individuals will pointlessly fall victim to its wrath. 

"Don't Be Evil," Google

Where do I usually go when I need to research a topic for school?  Instead of the library, I seek out my Google search-bar and type in my subject.  What do I look to when I want more information about a certain writer or poet? Google guides me through a plethora of online encyclopedias and articles.  What about the recipe for a dinner to impress my new date?  Google's always an excellent wing man.  I've used Google at least 100 times in the last week alone, trying to locate information, music, videos, etc.  Just a moment ago, when I was trying to pull up this very website, I typed "blogger" on the google search-bar to bring forth the log in screen.  While habitually drinking from this fountain of knowledge called Google I ask myself, "How could any tool this helpful threaten me?"  As I've come to realize the threat is far more real than most would like to believe.

"Googlization" is a term coined by Siva Vaidhynathan, and it is both a gift and a curse.  What Vaidhynathan means by this is stated in an article: "Google puts previously unimaginable resources at our fingertips- huge libraries, archives, warehouses of government records, troves of goods, the comings and goings of whole swaths of humanity" (Vaidhynathan 2).  Today's society can easily access virtually anything they want using this search engine's easily-accessible, useful format.  With google-brand websites as popular as YouTube and Gmail, Google is proving to be one of the most influential online institutions.  As other google related sites' popularity increase, Google may very well become indistinguishable from the Web itself (3).  Googlization is definitely occurring, and it is not without a dark side.

Compared to other well developed and renowned institutions, Google is still in it's stage of infancy.  But what an influential infancy it is.  Once it grows to even a toddler, that Google will be much different from the Google we see now.  Who's to say how powerful it will become as an adolescent?  It is this power that Google already holds over us that I fear; the power that one day, every type of information and website will be sought out and monitored by Google.  This phenomenon is already scarily at play.  The Google browser is set up in a way that links caused by a search are ranked/ shown by popularity.  In this way, Google's biases are permitted entry into our subconscious minds.  Who is to stop Google from deciding what information the public is allowed to view?  No one; and that alone is a threat.

Google is dangerous, not due to a physical threat, but because society uses it constantly, recklessly, and faithfully while building dependence on it (4).  We are as desnsitized to the abilities of Google as we are to the modern car.  This was another invention that, though first seemingly innocuous, led to many unforseen consequences including the shaping of the modern world around it. 

If we as a society have developed a great dependence on Google, we have a critical addiction to cell phones; more importantly, smart phones.  Cell phones have made our world so much more connected yet simultaneously far more isolated.  By "connected", i'm referring to the ease at which people can contact each other.  It is the mobility aspect of the cell phone that makes the land-line phone obsolete. Yet this constant mobility, reflecting the frantic pace at which our daily lives progress, is what will isolate us in the end.  People are constantly on their smart phones any time of day texting, watching videos, playing a new game ("app"), etc.  As phone technologies are rapidly advancing, people are becoming addicted to the capabilities of their phones.  This will eventually result in the complete destruction of social interaction without a screen and keyboard.

Google and smart phones are related in the way that they are forcing our dependence on them.  The two are even combining with the capability of online internet via smart phones.  Sure it would be a much more difficult world without these innovations, yet it is reaching the point where our desensitization and reliance on them is hurting our culture.

Whatever the damage, i'm not going to end up throwing my smart phone away or cease using Google, so what am I suppossed to do?  There is no easy solution because we have already gone too far. The only thing we as a society can hope to prevent the dominance of Google is to recognize its influence over our daily lives.  Only then can we hope to set boundaries and rules to an autocratic institution. 

Don't Believe Their Hype!

Has your curiousity of a newfound artist ever prompted you to download their music on the internet?  I will bet money that anyone reading this has.  And I am just as certain that before seeing a movie, you've seen ads before it saying that online music downloading is stealing.  Images of violent robberies and hijackings equate the common music file sharer to an unrepentant criminal.  Do these advertisements' messages strike fear into its audience?  Slightly.  Does it accomplish it's goal to deter them from further music downloading?  Hardly at all.  Yet these threatening advertisements persist, not to protect the artists like they claim, but to protect the asses of giant recording corporations (and mind you, those are some LARGE behinds).  So I say download away!  As long as your not profitting off of someone else's work you're doing nothing to their career than providing them with sincere exposure.  The record industries are simply afraid of losing control over their artists when online music sharing is actually promoting their careers.

Professional musician Janis Ian sheds further light on this issue in an article that proclaims, "Online Music Sharing May Benefit Artists."  She begins with stating that, "The recording industry has objected to every new consumer recording technologies... but each new technology has ultimately helped artists by enabling more people to hear their work... The recording industry claims it is fighting online music to protect artists, but in reality it is fighting online music sharing in order to maintain its control over artists" (Ian 31).  A very bold statement, yet one I believe to be spot on.  People are always going to be able to share music no matter what and, in the end, it is those songs downloaded online that introduce artist and audience.  Who is gonna spend seventeen bucks on a cd of someone they've never heard? Maybe rich kids with their parents money but not the normal consumer.  Exposure such as this is gonna push audiences to see their favorite new artists in concert, or force talk shows to host the new talent.  This is where the big bucks are made.

If anyone knows about the big bucks behind this type of "free" music exposure, its the band Radiohead.  With seven albums and innovative achievements under their belt, the band cut ties with their original record label and independantly produced the album "In Rainbows."  They posted it on their website as an mp3 download and asked fans to pay whatever they felt necessary (the range being from $0.00 to $212.00; the final average being $2.26) (Pareles 2).  This was a drastic move by a major band; a highly strategic move that I completely respect.  In a New York Times article by Jon Pareles, lead singer Thom Yorke says, "The worst-case scenario would have been: Sign another deal, take a load of money, and then have the machinery waiting semi-patiently for you to deliver your product, which they can add to the list of products that make up the myth, la-la-la-la" (2).  Radiohead recognized its situation and refused to follow through with record label control.  They played off the label-threatening idea of music sharing (or in music industry terms, "piracy") and turned it into an amazing promotional feat for the band.


Taking Janis Ian's idea to heart, Radiohead ended up succeeding.  The $2.26 per customer average boosted the band's profit to far more than the record label would have given them while simultaneously boosting their public image.  Record labels be-damned, we can exist without you.  Bands such as Radiohead push people to strive for the purest form of enlightenment: the innate satisfaction of sharing creativity.

Beauty of "Boutique"

The PBS documentary, "Copyright Criminals" was extremely informative and interesting.  Though the music examples were outstanding, the part i enjoyed most was that the film neutrally approached the topic of music sampling without bias.  The was a great mix of sampling advocates along with music purists who viewed it as cheap theft.  I for one feel that proper music sampling can be used to create great new works.  Many influential hip-hop albums depended on countless samples to provide their rhythmic backbone.  These albums don't seem to be stealing another's work but rather pay homage and elaborate on other musician's past successes. 

They mention a Beastie Boys album called, "Paul's Boutique" and how it would be impossible to create today given the amount of sampling law restrictions.  Being one of my favorite hip hop albums, I went back to my room to listen to it after class.  The beats of this album are entirely crafted from samples!  I heard everything from the familiar screech of  the film "Psycho" to the "Funky Drummer" of Clyde Stubblefield.  Certainly the Beasties must have come into some trouble with their master art of sampling, so I decided to look up it's history.  Being their second album, The Beasties teamed up with famous sampling duo "The Dust Brothers" who produced it.  The Dust Brothers soon became known as sampling virtuosos and are heavily credited with introducing the style to hip hop.  In total, 105 songs were sampled on the album, including 24 individual samples on the last track alone.  Despite what many fans believe, the majority of samples were cleared before the album's release.  Yet the costs then were cheap and easy compared to the litigious face of the music industry today. 

"Boutique" was less commercially successful than the Beastie's debut album yet it's elaborate use of sampling and comical lyricism paved the way for subsequent hip hop artists.  Copyright laws are important in protecting creativity but had such laws existed in the late eighties, hip hop as we know it would be completely different.  The aspect of sampling is to the dj what the pen is to the poet; a crucial tool by which creativity can be expressed.  I believe in giving credit to the original artists whose samples are used in these songs because it is their original talent that led to the production of a new work of art. Yet when it truly comes down to it, can one person really own a sound?

Chasing the Purple Dragon

Let me start by saying that this was by far the most fun i've had with a school project while being at Lawrence.  Besides providing a fun way to interact with classmates, the Flickr project was also a smooth introduction to an innovative, online technology.  I had never heard of the website before yet found it relatively easy to use given the classroom readings and my own experience with photo-uploading sites like Facebook.  Also, it didn't hurt that dragon-slayer He Zhang was also a computer wizard!  He made the photoshop component of our stroy come to life and answered any questions i had while navigating Flickr.

Our group's story revolved around the mystery of student dissappearances on campus; the culprit being a massive, and unusually angry, dragon.  The first picture is of four friends walking along the bridge to drop their friend He off at the grill.  We were lucky enough to have a willing friend to take our group's picture. There was nothing too difficult about this picture as it was basically used to establish our stories' setting and characters.  The tags were simply, "friends" and all of our names.  The next photo was of a bike laying on the ground with it's owner mysteriously gone; creepy foreshadowing of the attack to come.  We lucked out with this one because none of us in the group owned a bike.  We found this blue one conveniently placed by the science hall and were quick to snap a photo. The tags were, appropriately, "bike" and "victim."  The next picture in the story is of an ominous dragon flying through the clouded moon.  This was a particularily difficult photo to take because the moon kept showing up poorly on our group's camera.  We played around with different focuses and filters until we got a decent image.  Then, He worked his photoshop magic to insert a dragon outline and enhance the moon's brightness.  The tags were, "dragon" and "moon."  The next picture is of three of us on the bridge; my crippled self being in the foreground of the shot suggests dragon abduction.  We just tagged our names in this photo.  The next shot is of me being pikced up by the dragon while the two others run away.  This was my favorite shot because my cast provided a handy prop.  I sat out of frame while holding the cast in the air as if the dragon had just grabbed me.  He tilted the camera to catch my cast and scooter; this canted angle also gave the photo a sense of disorienting action.  Again, we tagged our names while adding, "scooter" and "cast."  The subsequent photo is a photoshop-heavy one of He shooting a spell at the dragon who is perched on main hall.  We had to experiment with different angles and use of flash to achive a shot worthy of He's heroic stance.  Once working on the photoshop stage, we decided the dragon had to be purple given our teacher's twitter account.  We meticulously cropped the dragon and wand-beam until the photo looked convincing.  We chose to tag, "Lawrence," "wand," "dragon," "hero," and "He."  The last picture decribes the aftermath of the dragon attacks and praises He for his heroism.  We took a picture of the "Lawrentian" and proceeded to insert text boxes via powerpoint.  Our tags were, "dragon," "attack," "newspaper," and "Lawrentian."

Our group ran into a little speed-bump when we decided that our story should take place at night.  We had already taken pictures throughout the day on various phones and cameras yet the night time setting seemed way more conducive to our photoshop needs.  So we all went out together at night and in about an hour were able to retake the pictures we wanted.

I realized after the fact that the tags our group used could have been improved.  We should have used tags like, "cast" and "scooter" and omitted ones with our names because those tags will lead to nothing else on flickr.  A tag like "Lawrence," however, could lead to an amzing picture of our campus.  This "tagging" option is what makes flickr an amazing tool to access and share user-generated content. As Jennifer Mazarado states in her article, "these tags allow you to see other people's take on something that's familiar to you, which can be surprising and fascinating" (Mazarado 1).  One can simply click a "cast" tag and be comforted by countless photos of others with far worse injuries.  Flickr can be considered an informal photography school in the way that people can easily critique others work while recieving feedback on their own photos (1).  Many amateurs have made the difficult switch to proffessional due to the nature of the website and it is an inspiring thing to witness.  The case of the purple dragon has definitely opened my eyes to an amazing new technology.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68302494@N06/sets/72157627747755145/with/6239815340/

"Common Sense Revolts at the Idea"

Though at first we may be blind to it's impact, the vast medium of the internet has completely opened our eyes to new ideas and information in a way that is transforming our culture.  With websites such as youtube, reddit, and countless others, we are exposed to unlimited creativity.  Organizations, including one even as powerful as the current U.S. government, are frightened by the amount and content of information being freely posted on the internet.  Feeling threatened, these massively influential parties then attempt to intervene with the elusivity of cyberspace.  In Lawrence Lessig's book "Free Culture," he attempts to point out a "war" that is raging on between "piracy" and "property" (Lessig 13).  The two sides consist of those trying to maintain control over their work or property, be it physical or intellectual, and those who threaten that control.  He argues that this battle, to which most of society remains blissfully ignorant, will ultimately corrupt and horribly change the fundamental laws American culture rests on (13).

Lessig admits that although the technical changes made possible by the invention of the internet are outstanding, the impact it has made on our current culture should be given much more attention.  He disscusses two forms of culture: "commercial," being the part of culture that exists to be produced and sold, and "noncommercial," that being all remaining aspects of culture (7-8).  For example, a woman publishing poetry would be contibuting to commercial culture while an old man telling stories to kids would create noncommercial culture.  Lessig goes on to describe the change this noncommercial culture has overgone, "At the beginning... the law was never directly concerned with the creation or spread of this form of culture, and it left this culture 'free'... left alone by the law... the focus was on commercial creativity" (8).  The laws to protect artists left all the other forms of noncommercial culture (telling stories, making tapes, etc.) unregulated.  Yet now with the introduction of the internet, the "divide between the free and the controlled has now been erased" (8).

This erasure has shaped us into what Lessig coins a "permission culture" (8).  He means that in order to contribute to and/or critique the culture around us, we must first ask permission to do so.  This so-called  "permission" is usually granted to most of society, yet "it is not granted to the critical or the independent" (10). Organizations have now placed laws in order to stifle the critical, independent thinkers that threaten them, in turn, creating a form of nobility that is completely foreign to our fundamental culture.  Justified as a way to protect commercial creativity, it is not a protectionism employed to defend artists but rather certain forms of business (8-9).  Lessig's greatest worry is that if the battle between organizations, particularily the governemnt, and "free" thinkers  goes unchecked, there will be major damage to our society's rich tradition and culture (11).

Lessig is strongly against the actions of internet "pirates", yet feels that laws against them rid society of an integral component: the protection of creators from state control as listed by the 1st Amendment.  When the government feels threatened, it attempts to silence the independent parties who challenge them.  Currently, this struggle for control is perfectly displayed by the existence of the controversial site "Wikileaks".  The anonymous contributors behind it hacked into top-secret government documents/ reports and exposed them to the public.  A recent New York Times article (aptly named Wikileaks) describes the site's purpose and controversiality.  Fareed Khan begins,

"The once-fringe Web site, which aims to bring to light secret information about governments and corporations, was founded in 2006 by Julian Assange, an Australian activist and journalist... Wikileaks made its initial reputation by publishing material as diverse as documents about toxic dumping in Africa, protocols from Guantánamo Bay, e-mail messages from Sarah Palin's personal account and 9/11 pager messages" (Khan 1).

By publishing it's own material on dozens of servers around the globe, Wikileaks has grown more and more elusive and controversial.  It has remained untouchable from any government control due to the legal loop-holes the creators have discovered and thrived on.  The increase in information being posted on the site has threatened the order of the U.S. government by eluding it's dominion and defacing it's public image through the posting of disturbing, clandestine information.  Currently, the British government is involved in a legal battle with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange due to criminal allegations unaffiliated with the site (2).   Khan writes, "With Mr. Assange's arrest, the authorities he has reveled in provoking will have a new degree of control over his movements, though not necessarily over WikiLeaks" (2).  Although the government may now have influence over one of the site's key players, Wikileaks still remains.

This case of Wikileaks is an example of Lessig's ongoing battle of  property v.s. piracy.  Lessig describes the mentality of the government that Wikileaks is attacking when he declares that, "From the beginning, government and government agencies have been subject to capture.  They are more likely captured when a powerful interest is threatened by either a legal or technical change.  That powerful interest too often exerts its influence within the government to get the government to protect it" (Lessig 6). The "powerful interest" here is the government's control of secret information which the legal/technical change of Wikileaks has made public.  In a way, Wikileaks supports the idea that we have not yet fallen into Lessig's nightmare; that there is still some divide between freedom of speech and government interference in cyberspace.  The site has provided a change in how society can view startling information.   To maintain our culture's freedom, we must not allow those most threatened by these changes to use their power to change the law or the fundamental values of society.  If we let the government use their power to silence sites such as Wikileaks, we are damaging our culture and effectively adding fuel to the fire of ignorance.

Should we as society sit passively while laws inhibit our freedom and sweep information under the government's rug? In the words of Justice Douglas, "common sense revolts at the idea" (3).

Back to Rummy....

The failed, yet prideful, glam-rock star "Rummy McAnus"  immediately felt that "ppchute1" might be difficult to get along with when he first responded with, "Good good just chillin. what about you dog?".  "Dog" is a phrase commonly used by rappers or hip-hop enthusiasts; a group of people that Rummy tends to get into altercations with due to his flamboyant clothing style.  When he announced that his night so far consisted of drinking Jack Daniels and listening to David Bowie, ppchute1 responded with, "David Bowie is fucking lame dog.  Lil wyte and Freddie Gibbs is where its at".  Rummy became infuriated and in his anger tried to type a message that possessed the same gravity of his emotions.  During this time, ppchute1 messaged again, "Why do you like Bowie?".  Rummy realized that he simply didn't know the greatness of the icon and hoped he could convince him of it. "DAVID BOWIE IS GOD!!! I played in a band inspired by his essence.... (etc.)," Rummy responded passionately.  ppchute1 didn't seem too eager to argue and asked about what band at which Rummy further explained his "stardom" during the late 80's.  The mood immediately changed when ppchute1 messaged, "Do you like to work out? I'd like to show you my guns sometime?".  Used to being hit on often by gay men, though not sure if this was an attempt at a pass or not, Rummy typed, "I stay slim so i can get into my leather pants.  I appreciate a righteous bod".  And with that, the first night of messaging ceased.

The subsequent conversations were of little significance: small talk of poor- connection issues, nothing substantial for creating a new friendship.  ppchute1 went on to exalt Freddie Gibbs (music far from Rummy's taste) and eventually asked the question, "Hey so whats your name?".  "I have no name except Rummy man," the confused rocker answered. "Sorry i didn't answer earlier, i've been binging with my white girl for days".  And here the conversations abruptly ended. For the most part, Rummy found the bar to be a better catalyst for meeting people.

As you can probably tell, I had fun creating the brand new, totally anonymous persona of Rummy.  He possessed many traits of my personality taken to the extreme and a lifestyle that I felt was quite comical. Upon receiving the assignment, I realized that the method of students randomly selecting their partners was flawed because each would end up getting two chat buddies.  This wasn't much of an issue, however, because I felt that then there would be more room to further develop my persona.  I never ended up getting in touch with my other partner because "she" (the name implies) never was online to respond to my messages.  I began to see that the main flaw in the assignment was entirely student-based. The sheer anonymity of the assignment denied the use of cell phones between partners so no certain time could be agreed on to chat. It seemed that students failed to take the initiative and check their AIM accounts frequently.  The last problem i hoped would not occur was when my partner asked what my real name was, which would have negated the whole purpose.  I suppose its a good thing that our conversations ended after that, but i really would have enjoyed going deeper into the life of Rummy.  

From MUDs to Warcraft: Application to the Real World

The article "Aspects of Self" by Sherry Turkle discusses how online personas effect one's focus on identity and how online chat-rooms or games can lead to the emergence of certain traits within oneself.  She dwells mostly on the existence of MUDs or Multi-User Dungeons and their controversial effecst on the individual. The article begins with saying, "When we step through the screen, we reconstruct our identities on the other side of the looking glass"(Turkle 177).   She is referring to the way in which virtual realms enable one to recreate themselves in their own self image.  Some view this online- existence a means of escape and isolation whereas others see it as a facet by which they can openly express their true selves and gain self confidence.  By creating an online persona, one is able to select favorable traits while testing new ones out simultaneously.

Turkle lists a variety of individuals who all responded differently to life through MUDs.  For some it was therapeutic and positive whereas others were eventually led into distress and depression.  Through the example of Gordon, an introverted, self-loathing college student, Turkle demonstrates the therapeutic aspect of MUDs.  Unable to communicate efficiently with others in the real life situations, Gordon found comfort in creating characters or "avatars" and interacting anonymously online.  He viewed each character as a "clean slate" who possessed traits he was trying to develop himself (190).  Through these various avatars, Gordon felt a heightened sense of self and learned to draw from bits and pieces of these multiple personalities.  He eventually was able to meet a woman on a MUD and the virtual relationship turned into a real life marriage.
Turkle's example of a man named Stewart is the opposite of Gordon's successful story.  Stewart, also an introverted college student, was a student who used, "MUDs to have an experience he could not possibly in RL"(192).  Strickly a "hack/slash" or adventure style MUD player, Stewart constantly remaind online so that he could simply talk to people (193).  He enjoyed the authority and freedom his status as a "wizard" provided, allowing him to gain recognition and converse with others.  Stewart retreated further and further into his virtual life until that was his only means of fulfillment and interaction.  Although he felt pride in going on virtual dates and throwing online parties, Stewart remained locked in his virtual, ideal self.  MUDs can either provide help in the real world or retreat from it.

MUDs now begin to seem quite archaic after the advancement of online technologies, especially the aspect of role-playing adventure games.  The current online sensation "World of Warcraft" takes the concept of MUDs to a whole new level.  In this virtual realm, individuals can communicate to each others while playing out all of their secret urges and fantasies often unacceptable in the real world.  An article issued by "Wired" magazine titled You Play World of Warcraft? You're Hired! plays with the idea that online gaming can produce desirable leadership traits within individuals.  The article brings up the case of Stephan Gillet who, while being a leading contender for a top job at Yahoo!, was also an avid "WOW" player.  His position as a top "guild master" provided him a, "safe platform for trial and error. The chance of failure is high, but the cost is low and the lessons learned are immediate" (Brown 1).  In a simulated environment, failure only leads to knowledge.  To become a successful guild-master, one must immerse oneself in a whole variety of leadership traits such as, "attracting, evaluating, and recruiting new members; creating apprenticeship programs; orchestrating group strategy; and adjudicating disputes"(2).   He learned to apply his learned learned leadership skills to real world situations and in turn become the senior director of engineering operations at Yahoo! (2).


From the two articles, it is evident that skills acquired through online interaction can either lead to success in the real world or be used to further the shroud one's identity.  In the case of Gordon and Stephan, online personas developed traits within themselves that they positively applied to their own lives. In the case of Stewart, however, virtual reality became the only reality that suited him which in turn pushed him further into depression.  It is the predisposed psychological state of these individuals that impacts and decides whether or not online existence is a positive or negative learning tool.  

The Brief Existence of Rummy

When I received the instructions to create an alternate persona and interact anonymously with classmates on AIM I must admit i had my skepticisms.  However, the atypical concept of the project intrigued me as something interesting and fun.  I feel there is an innate sense of intrigue that comes with creating something completely in your own fashion, especially an imaginary person.  So I decided to create someone virtually opposite from myself yet with exaggerated traits/ interests i possess.  Thus, "Rummy McAnus" came to be.  I have an enormous and eclectic taste for music so naturally i wanted him to be a musician.  Rummy was originally going to be a famous rock star yet i felt it was more human for him to be a has-been musician instead.  I really thought i could play the part of an old, glam-band guitarist still trying to live the dream in this current day.  I envisioned all his indulgent hobbies, way of dress, the exotic pets he illegally owned, and his love for David Bowie.  Soon i was on AIM and ready to chat with my unknown partner.
This is where the first flaws in the project outline came into being.  The partner i received in class never logged onto AIM or messaged me.  Luckily,  PPChute1 messaged me soon after we began the assignment.  We had a good yet pretty brief conversation for the first day.  There was an immediate sense of conflict when his characters very "gangsta" persona (liking rap music, guns, typing in slang) insulted David Bowie, Rummy's basic model for life.  We continued arguing about music then signed off.  I was excited to continue having conversations between these completely divergent characters.  Yet soon after, I found that the conversations became more brief and even dull despite any efforts i had to engage him.  Then no one signed on again after Saturday even though I was checked into AIM on my phone constantly.   Rummy sadly fell into a coma never to be revived.
Although the AIM project didn't totally play out like it was intended, the concept and lesson and teachings behind it were great.  I feel reading Sherry Turkle's "Identity in the Age of Internet" related very well to this assignment and from the reading i realized my own motivations for creating Rummy.  Though Turkle is mainly addressing MUDs and online gaming platforms, her message about identity greatly applies.  She writes, "We are dwellers on the threshold of the real and the virtual, unsure of our footing, inventing ourselves as we go along... the self is constructed and the rules of social interaction are built, not received" (Turkle 10).  There were no rules for either partner so each was free to do and say whatever they liked.  It provided freedom and a separation from social restrictions.  And her point about the ability to create a new identity was realized when i created Rummy into a musician.  Even though i love music, i play no instruments.  Rummy provided a way to experience the thoughts of a musician and imagine a different way of life.