Final Reflections

What is the most important thing you learned in this course? Why?

I have been waiting a long, long time to take this COM 300 course and I am very fortunate that I love to learn about anything pertaining to technology and media. I cannot provide a most important thing that I learned from this class, because I do not think anything was unimportant. However, as I stated in my Society assignment, I found the topic of blogging to be the most intriguing. What this course did do though was reinforce the fact that technology is ubiquitous and innovative. We are constantly modifying the media & technology we already have to make life “easier” and “better” for us as consumers of information. The byproduct of this, as we have learned in class, shows that these changes can result in drastic impacts on politics, community, and communication. Yet throughout the years, time has proven to show that old technologies and media still prevail as dominant forms in modern society.

What would you like to have had more time to study? Why?

The topic I wish we could have expanded on during the quarter was the implications of blogging on media. Prior to taking the course, I did not see blogging as more than a way to keep a personal journal or diary online. I was particularly surprised at the profound effects it potentially has especially on politics. We mainly focused on blogging’s implications on politics, so I think would have been interesting to expand the spectrum onto topics such as business and culture.

What topic was the least interesting to you? Why?

There was not anything that I particularly found uninteresting, but what I found most confusing was the issue of open source software movement. I think this lost my interest due to the fact that it was a very complex topic to understand. I was quite confused with the readings and it was especially difficult because this was the topic I had to investigate for the discussion leader assignment. I think the reason why it was difficult to understand the open source software movement was because it seemed like there was a fine line to distinguish what was deemed acceptable and not acceptable with copyrights, what’s considered “free”, sharing and so on.

The Impacts of VoIP on Cable & Telephone Networks

This week’s reading discusses the evolving voice over internet protocol, which is a fairly new method in turning analog audio into digital data. In telephony this is a major breakthrough as it has several benefits over the traditional telephone. The most remarkable aspect of this new method is the capability of making free phone calls, local or long distance. The difference between the traditional phone and VoIP is how the audio is transmitted; there is circuit switching and packet switching. Traditional methods use circuit switching which keeps the line open continuously sending noise and silence while you are making a phone call. That method is very inefficient in comparison to packet switching, which keeps the line open only when noise is made, keeping the data size down to a minimal.

There are several advantages and convenience features of the VoIP method, such as caller ID, waiting, transfer, filtering options, but more importantly the hurdles that are attached to the method still restrain it from becoming a universally adopted method. Where traditional phone do not need a constant power source, VoIP methods do require it. The risk of this is losing an important communications source, such as during an earthquake or massive storm. Since VoIP do not use regular phone numbers and rather use IP addresses to make calls, it is not possible to call 911 in times of emergency. There is yet a way to associate geographic locations with IP addresses in times of an emergency. Distortion and transmission errors are inevitable in the quality of the method, but developers are still in the process of encountering these flaws.

Some companies have already adopted this method and have started services using this VoIP method. However, I think that the hurdles by far outweigh the advantages to make this a consistent method to use today. Yet I see a positive future for the VoIP, once developers can find ways to get around the disadvantages. In terms of the cable and telephone networks, I’m not certain that a huge change will take place. Many individuals do not like changes in technology, especially when they are content with what they already have. Thought it’s a definitely a technological advancement, it is difficult to say how far people will adopt it in the future. I personally don’t find myself making phone calls sitting at the computer, thus I couldn’t say that I would adopt this method. I am constantly making phone calls with my cellular device, which I rarely use when I am sitting at a computer. It has been ages since I have used a landline telephone to make a phone call, thus for people like me I don’t see this new method being a necessity yet.

Discussion Questions:

1. Though restricted to making calls from computer to computer, would you adopt this method if you could make phone calls to actual telephone devices?

2. We don’t hear about our landline phones or cell phones getting hacked as often as we experience our computers getting hacked. Do you think this weaker security will drive people away, or will the free aspect make them forget about those risks?

3. What would be your number one incentive to switching over to VoIP methods? Why that among other incentives?

Cyberspace as a Public Space & Accessibility Standards

The reading for this week discusses the implications of wireless internet technology and its introduction in the developing world. Wireless networking has been a growing trend in cyberspace as today’s moving society shows a need to be mobile and connected at all times. The article discusses how the adoption of this technology can lead to profitable, affordable, and sustainable markets in both poor and rural places. The issue however is the question of labeling it as a means of universal access. Best describes how if this is adopted, cheap Internet access can be provided in rural and under-served communities. Almost anybody can access the internet these days, as long as you have a computer to use it. The notion of the Internet as a public space is slightly altered when we merge it with WLAN technology. Though wireless allows for the same access, it limits those who access it or want to access it.

Wireless allows for more people to access the Internet under lower costs. Thus in rural areas this set up would be an excellent solution for affordable access. However, an issue is that anybody with an 802.11a/b band supporting computer can access the internet from an unsecured access point. Thus, it is possible for unwanted users to take advantage of free Internet access. There seems to be action taken towards this issue, as seen in the Universal Access Provider License, but only a few countries have adopted the idea.

In modern urban areas, cyberspace might as well be labeled as public space. Anybody can walk into a library, hop onto the computer and access the Internet for free. Once wireless is introduced, it can either do the same in a different manner, and it can also restrict its accessibility. Wireless offers free access for unwanted users, also promoting possible threats to security. Wireless also offers restricted access, limiting its users under agreed upon licenses. In developing countries with little access to the Internet, wireless technology would offer the best solution for the cheapest cost. Regardless however, cheap internet is only great if you can afford computers to access it.

Discussion Questions:

1. With such efforts to “connect” rural areas as Best described in the article, do you think someday we will eventually conquer the digital divide?

2. What kind of reactions would this result in on behalf of those living those rural areas?

3. WLAN is considered less secure in comparison to LAN. With all of the benefits of WLAN technology, do you think that weaker security is a big issue in the impression of its users?

Extra-Credit: "The Race of the Websites 2004"

In Kathy’s article, ”The Race of the Websites 2004,” she discusses the pros and cons of Bush and Kerry’s websites during the 2004 election. This article was really interesting to me as I learned how each candidate had different views in going about their layouts. Overall, to me it seemed that Kerry had a more user-friendly layout even though it consisted of an annoying splash screen in the beginning. I am particularly happy that I never bothered to look at Bush’s website during the election because clutter is a huge pet peeve of mine while surfing the web. Simplicity is what I favor. It was also interesting to see that Bush’s website was created without consideration of his main supporters mostly under limited bandwidth. Kerry’s site loaded a good 40% faster than Bush’s under a 28.8 connection, which honestly can feel like a decade of difference. Overall, it is evident that both candidates made their websites aiming for some goals with respect to its audience. I personally expected something better from Bush’s site, especially after seeing that excerpt image in Kathy’s article where the Bush/Cheney logo was cut off in the left hand frame. That’s a big no no! Otherwise, very interesting points were made in Kathy’s article, it was an enjoyable reading.

Internet Technology & Politics

I particularly enjoyed reading about Trippi and his clever techniques to tweak the system. I’m not sure I necessarily agree with some of the stunts he pulled back in the day, but I do have to give him credit for effectively utilizing the internet in the recent Dean campaign. It is evident that internet technology has enabled the way people learn about politics and as demonstrated, how politicians organize their campaign runs. Politicians are more easily able to communicate with the voters through use of the internet, connecting them in such a method that never existed before. Trippi’s ability to gather guaranteed votes and raise an enormous amount of campaign money in such little time was phenomenal. The internet has drastically altered the senses of time, cost and effort for politicians.

In the second article, the author performed a research study of the role of the internet in national news and local news. It seems pretty straight forward that many of us use the internet for news, but the study clearly demonstrates that the internet’s influence is constantly growing towards receiving any information in general. With other original sources of news media placing their own version of news online, such as newspapers and TV news, the internet has allowed a convenient one-stop station to get all of your news. I agree with the author and believe people are relying more on the internet these days to receive their news information. Lastly, even though authenticity may become an issue with this interactive media source, people entirely make up their own decision on how to gather their information.

Discussion Questions

1. With the growing trend of the internet as a news source, will the matter of authenticity ever become an big enough issue to discourage internet use for news?

2. We’ve seen the advantages of using the internet towards political campaigns. What are some of its disadvantages other than the digital divide?

3. With the unexpected success of Trippi’s internet-based campaign, do you predict that more political parties will adopt this method in the future? Why or why not?

Implications of Blogging Technology on Established Media

Blogging technology has been an impressively fast-growing trend in the online world today. It really displays our continuing need for information and desire to voice out our thoughts and opinions. Though the power and influence that blogging is capable of is quite remarkable, I'm not certain that it's necessarily a huge threat to established media. Blogging is just another transition from one media to the next, with some improvements and some downsides. The blogging community has allowed for a much more diverse media, allowing everyday people to have their own "digital printing press" and voice out their opinions on a variety of subjects. Communication is thus more openly shared and more powerful as the entire community takes on this practice. Regardless, there is an issue of credibility as there's no definite way to ensure the credibility of blogs. There are no restrictions as to who can blog and who can not, thus the level of trust is not necessarily on par with our more trusted forms of news.

Discussion Questions

1. What kind of audiences are targeted with the use of Podcasts? Why not just stick with the regular radio?

2. How is credibility determined towards blogs? Do you think blogs will ever gain the credentials to be a threat towards other media?

3. As of now, it is not yet possible to determine if people who have downloaded a Podcast actually listen to it. If this information is attainable in the future, what are some of its implications on other established media?

Extra-Credit: "Social Software and Politics of Groups"

Today, social software floods the internet. There’s no doubt about that. “Social Software and Politics of Groups” talks about the history of social software and its impacts on society today. The current issue that it mentioned is the excess of misuse and spam. Facebook for example restricts copying and pasting privileges of e-mail addresses within the profiles. Rather than the e-mail address being displayed as text, it is actually an image of the e-mail address. The addresses are still attainable, but the extra energy to type the address manually does the trick. It is interesting to see what kind of ideas they come up with. While several social softwares are making efforts to control this, the effects can only be slowed down.

Open Source Software Movement

Communication scholars should study the open software movement because for one, it is happening and will continue to do so, and also the implications it has for everyone are supposedly beneficial. Stallman states that software sellers who put a price on their products are eventually dividing users and conquering them. The idea of placing copyrights and licenses on these products to make more money disappoints many programmers. By sharing and being more open, it creates a doorway to better and more open communication with one another. Programmers with the dedication to come together and compile great software, even under reduced monetary incentive, for the sake of sharing good system software for free, shows the happiness they can achieve that money cannot replace. If this were to prosper, it would harm the businesses that demonstrate commercialization of software (the runner who gets into a fist fight), which is why competition even exists.

Discussion Questions

1. How do you think the first superpower will react if they notice how strong the second superpower is becoming? How far do you think our traditional freedoms will let us go with the Internet before the government takes action?

2. Do you think the open software movement can realistically bring an end or an agreement with major commercialized corporations such as Microsoft?

3. If GNU is considered to be an ideal system, more so than Unix, and is written by tech savvy programmers to their personal specifications, how will this affect the open source software movement if the audience is not so tech savvy themselves?

Man-Machine Relationship

It is evident that in today's society humans rely on machines and technology to get through each day of their lives. The relationship between man and machine in my opinion is co-dependent. Though it may seem that there is more weight towards humans being dependent on machines, I don't see a cooperative relationship between these two unless they complement one another equally. Towards the end of the "Being Analog" reading, there was a chart that clearly presented a machine-centered point of view versus a human-centered point of view towards each other. Simply, humans have reasoning and are flexible, and machines are textbook, and consistent. All of which are important in everyday decision making. I feel that if humans become too dependent on machines in the future, the imbalance of interaction will eventually lead to a negative reversing trend.

3 Discussion Questions... that I forgot to post earlier!! (>_<)

1. It has been a consistent project for companies like Sony to build a robot that can mimic human behavior. However, if in the future they become successful and make a robot that is 99.9% accurate to that of human beings (physically, emotionally, mentally, etc.), do you think that a human-like robot would necessarily be a beneficial thing for humans? If they are designed to be nearly identical to humans, wouldn't it be possible for robots to create evil intentions and turn against humans?

2. In Japan, the man-machine relationship is much more adopted than in America. However, it is more a convenience factor as Japanese society is very rushed and time is sparse. The relationship actually works in sheer cooperation due to their lifestyle. Whereas in America, the pace is not as pushed and our lifestyles are far less stressful. So in America, what could possibly be the impact of adopting more of a man-machine relationship where it does not necessarily conform with our lifestyles as much as Japanese society demonstrates?

3. In the Zuckerman and McLaughlin reading, there is an example of how Andrew's laptop requests a new IP address when connecting to an Ethernet hub. His laptop is assigned a different IP address through the gateway machine that is visible to the outside world, but his laptop still maintains his original IP address. Does that mean there are security reasons in assigning multiple IPs to Andrew's laptop?