Farmers Use Web Forums to their Advantage

Going along with our discussion regarding online communities, I came across an interesting article on CNN, which you can access here http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/02/12/online.farmers.ap/index.html. The article talks about how an increasing number of farmers are using forums to help them increase productivity and run a more successful farm. Apparently, as of 2005, 51% of farms have Internet access even though 2/3 of them use a dial-up modem. So it would seem that they are not using the most advanced technology available (DSL, Cable, fiber-optics), but they are still using the Internet to help advance their professions. This story is another testament to the good that can come out of forums in that sense that these farming forums have saved many farmers across America money, time, and embarrassment.

When used correctly (not abused or rife with spam/flame wars for example), forums provide a venue where people from all different places can benefit and where all can become more prosperous. I do wonder, however, what this will do to farming competition and how it will affect consumers. Not all people would like to see their competition becoming more prosperous than them so it will be interesting to see how this turns out. All in all, though, it is a good thing when online communities are used for beneficial means.

Social Networking Goes Mobile

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse, it happens. I'm of course referring to the fact that now, according to this CNN Technology article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/BUSINESS/02/14/barcelona.boulden2/index.html
technology executives in Barcelona are developing social networking sites designed specifically for mobile phones. As if social networking isn't already big enough. Seriously, is it so bad that people can't even wait before they get back to a computer before they check their profile? Social networking online is already doing a great job of usurping precious time from people, so do we really need the ability to access social networking from our phones now too? As enticing as this sounds, I would think that this wouldn't become too popular because I imagine when using a phone for such a thing there would be some limitations and sacrifices to be made (cell phones don't have easy to type on computer keyboards). Ah, I remember the days when a phone was used to actually call other people. I just hope that in the wake of all these new additions and advancements that they don't forget to program in the calling feature into the phone, but I wouldn't worry too much about this because after all, it seems to be becoming obsolete.

Fox Shows on MySpace

FOX has recently launched a new advertising campaign via MySpace (both under the ownership of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.) in order to keep interest in the fall lineup of its shows. The fear is that during March Madness and other televised events, interest in shows like 24 and Prison Break will wane and they will lose viewers. To combat this problem, FOX has launched this site http://www.myspace.com/fox on which people can watch full HD-streamed episodes of their favorite shows with the simple, painfree download of the FOX Full Throttle Player. This is just another example of how powerful the Internet is becoming in regards to advertising and its potential. If you were to miss an episode of 24, for example, you would be able to watch it at any time online. People might argue that TIVO does the same thing, but the difference is that this is free. Now since I'm a little weary of "free" stuff because rarely is there not a catch, I wonder if the full throttle player comes with some sort of adware or spyware or if this is just an honest attempt to advertise for the shows. I realize that the shows are free to watch, but I'd like to remind you that in order to watch the show someone has to have purchased that TV, that antenna or cable, and also these shows usually come out on season DVD's. So I would think that the ability to watch the episodes online would decrease future DVD sales as well as increase the show's popularity.

A Completely Uncensored Internet?

In her book Virtually Obscene, Amy E. White makes the case for an unregulated Internet using pornography as a specific example in the wider argument of Internet censorship. She claims, among other things, that censorship defies the Constitution and breaks the 1st Amendment right for people to post and view such material. She believes that pornography on the Internet does not corrupt children and even makes the argument that it can be educational and therefore should be viewed as a positive thing. White lays blame on the parents of children who view inappropriate material because, as she notes in her book, that "computers do not connect to the Internet themselves" and the underage child had to have a computer plus Internet access to view the material so it's not like it was so easy to get a hold of. These are her main arguments and she feels strongly about her position, whether you agree with her or not is a different story.

Video Game Censorship in Germany

I came across an interesting article on Wired.com (http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,72619-0.html?tw=wn_culture_5), which talks about how Germany's troubled history is still affecting the country today in the form of video game censorship. The article describes "Germany's dilemma [as] how to reconcile its determination to apply the lessons of the past to educating and protecting its youth, while remaining a free and open society as set down in its version of the U.S. Constitution." Germany's sensitivity to violence and the perpetuation of violence in different mediums has led it to prevent the sale of games like Counter-Strike unless the blood and gore features are disabled. Do you think this video game censoring is the right thing to do to adequately protect society or is Germany just being extremely sensitive to violence at all costs? It's interesting to compare this with video games in the United States and the relatively wide range of games available on the market (although the argument for censorship in the U.S. certainly can be made as well). This kind of government intervention or influence also plays an important role in issues of online anonymity as well, in the sense that companies can subpoena ISP's to release names of people using the service if they are suspected of offenses like music or software pirating. Does this somewhat erode the idea of online anonymity in some cases or is it justified to limit a person's online anonymity in certain cases?

“Internet Purification”

This post is inspired by the vow made by Chinese Communist Party chief Hu Jintao to “purify” the Internet. For more details, you can view the original news story from Reuters here http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/internet/01/24/china.internet.hu.reut/index.html. This outlandish claim by Jintao stumbles onto another very important issue regarding technology and this issue is the feasibility and legality of Internet “purification,” or in other words, censorship. Is it even technically possible for a government to censor material on the Internet? Won’t the information that was censored keep reappearing in different places? How could it be possible for anybody to successfully track information to all the vast corners and far reaches of the Web? Besides, even if it were possible, it would open up Pandora’s box. There is no regulatory committee that can oversee this process. The Internet would become entangled in a web of lawsuits and quarrels, which would eventually cause the demise of the Internet. Certain information is not always going to be favorable to everybody and if the entity that is offended can bring about its removal, then suffice it to say that there will not be very much information out there on the Internet.

To better put this into context, I am going to refer to a case study from the Georgetown Institute for the Study of Diplomacy entitled “Globalization: France, Nazis, and the Internet.” Unfortunately, copyright laws prevent me from posting the original article up online but another article from this website talks about basically the same ideas http://www.probe.org/current-issues/current-issues/globalization-and-the-internet.html. The Georgetown article basically describes the motives of the French government and its attempts to force Yahoo! to block the sale of Nazi propaganda to French users even from Yahoo!’s American website address. The main thing to note about this article is that it discusses the same thing that Jintao is proposing: censoring information on the Internet for whatever reason. Yahoo! did end up removing the listings, but its representatives said it was not because France demanded it, but because it was the right thing to do. If mass censorship was implemented on the Internet how could any information out there survive?

Johnny Mnemonic and The Air-Ship

Even though the Johnny Mnemonic “cyber-punk” short story was a little hard to get through, partly because of the dolphin addicted to smack and all the technical terms, it still brought up some interesting points. The same goes for the much less convoluted story, The Air-Ship. I know we covered a lot of the themes and implications in class, but I just wanted to quickly highlight or underscore a few important points. On page 59 of Johnny Mnemonic Johnny says, “I’d spent most of my life as a blind receptacle to be filled with other people’s knowledge and then drained, spouting synthetic languages I’d never understand.” This quote paints a very eerie picture of the future in which the definition of human thought as we know it now would no longer apply. If this special courier ability (hard drive in the brain) was a reality, then a person could have information in their heads without actually “knowing” it. As the story details, this poses very serious risks to humanity. In short, the second story (way ahead of its time) is really a commentary or cautionary tale about human dependency on technology and what could happen if we become too reliant on it. Can you imagine where we would be without all the technology we depend on today (alarm clocks, cell phones, and computers to name a few)?