Business turns facebook pink!

There is a new application on facebook that allows you to turn you display picture pink. This is quite innovative as in actual face it is an advertisement for a Canadian mobile network called 'Telus' which has the slogan 'the future is friendly'.

Every time someone turns their profile pink, they will donate $1 to the purchase of innovative breast cancer in your local community. However, as this company is based in Canada, the money will be going there and not New Zealand. It is still a good cause though and an interesting ad campaign that has got at least 51,870 people's attention already.

They also are "committed to being an environmental leader and strive to continuously improve our approach." This is a good thing. From just browsing their website you can see they are trying to be more environmentally friendly and encouraging others to do so. Incentives for customers to save trees and paper include turning off their mailed paper bill. This enters customers of Telus in the draw to win $1000 if they do so before the 26th of September 2010.
It is nice to see a company that is actually doing its utmost to reduce, reuse and recycle.

Would you pay for the content you consume on the internet?

Paying for what you see, read and do on the internet, good or bad idea? The current model of basically free access to any content on the internet has definitely impacted on companies such as News Corp, where newspaper earnings have declined at astronomical rates, as a business practice it seems that pay per view for the internet is not only necessary but imminent. Whether it works remains to be seen, personally i believe these corporations have an uphill battle ahead of them as getting users to pay for content that was once free will be pretty difficult and it is shown with the drop in visitors to the times website once they made it pay for access as reported in this article: “Murdoch’s Times Web Visits Drop to One Third as Paywall Starts”.

Another issue that would need to be overcome is the sheer volume of content that is available on the internet. So what would you pay for? Is it worth paying for what is available on the internet right now? Most i have talked to (and by that i mean my flatmates and friends) say they would pay for Facebook but not twitter or bebo. They wouldn't pay for content such as YouTube, newspaper articles, but if they had to they would pay if the content was better quality, and could only be found on the internet to start with.

Another issue that would need to be addressed is the sheer volume of content that is available on the internet, somewhere along the way users are going to find what they need for free, with every website that is locked down by pay only access hundreds more will most likely pop up with free access. It seems that until a suitable business model is found that benefits not only the corporations who want to make money but also takes into account internet users, paying for content on the internet is going to be a difficult issue to solve!

The Twittersphere!

The blog seems to revolve around the heavier, negative ideas surrounding new media forms, so I thought I’d spend a blog to talk about Twitter! Personally, I think it’s great. The microblogging service allows users to 140 character long ‘updates’ which show up on the timelines of that user’s followers.

In terms of privacy, there’s only so much information you can share about yourself on you Twitter profile, so unless you post something really ridiculous like “Going to the forest tonight at 1am, by myself”, you’re pretty safe.

Twitter allows for average everyday people (that’s us, guys) to follow celebrities and high profile characters. It has kind of bridged the gap between the somebodies and the nobodies, allowing anyone to communicate with anyone.

Even news networks and journalists have joined in on the fun. 3 News (@3NewsNZ) has their own Twitter feed, through which latest headlines can be posted. This service provides followers with the ability to access news as it happens.

What I especially like about Twitter is that no matter how many people I follow, I can never run through my timeline or Tweet myself for more than ten minutes, if that. There is very little room for addiction. Sure, there are some extreme cases and some people will Tweet their live instead of actually talking. But in reality, Twitter is just a forum for short updates and links to external sources.

The only real debate against Twitter would be that people who have it for personal use are more or less wasting their time throwing these updates into cyberspace,or the Twittersphere, where no one else will really care about them.


I say, don’t hate. Twitter is a wonderful example of a new media form which allows for the expression and performance of self identity (in a 140 character limit medium) (and I blatantly just incorporated one of the essay questions into my blog).

Apparently video games can save the world...

I was listening to an episode of the Guardian's Tech Weekly podcast last night and the final item was an interview with a games designer, Jane McGonigal, who seems to believe genuinely that the key to "saving the planet" lies with video games. I'm personally very averse to her whole perspective: it creeps me out, actually. But she is getting a lot of exposure, including a slot earlier this year on the TED Talk circuit. Whether you watch the video or listen to the last part of the podcast, I'd be really interested to hear your views on all this... especially if you can give me some reasons to tone down my cynicism and distaste for the views expressed by McGonigal!

In new media we trust?

So, its starting to look like news as we know it will soon be a thing of the past. It's evolving, adapting to new technology and giving you hundreds more ways to interact with what used to just be a few newspaper pages dumped on your driveway in the morning. Cool, ay?

Well, it would be, except for tiny things like censorship, discrimination and just a few minor laws that protect your rights and keep news outlets in check. Seems like we have begun to use outlets such as Twitter, Facebook and phone apps to keep up to date with news, but the laws which make traditional news outlets the reasonably trusted sources they are today haven't quite been able to keep up.

Just this week, Twitter experienced a 'security exploit', Facebook saw fit to cripple several high profile protest pages and T-Mobile were sued for blocking a mobile service allowing users to locate the nearest medical marijuana dispensary because they 'did not approve.'

The fact is, if these media outlets are going to act as our new trusted news sources, they should be subject to the same rights, responsibilities and laws that traditional news outlets have to deal with. Admittedly, some old school news agencies have flirted with the boundaries of the law before, but at the end of the day, the laws are there, the enforcement bodies are there, and you can't plant a virus in National Geographic.

When it comes to censorship and new media, Apple take the cake and as Steve Jobs is now the 'New King of Technology' its clear that if we don't get some new media laws up and running soon, notions of media as a watchdog, or the trusted fourth estate may pass us by.

News: it's pretty far-fetched.

Nohing beats ending a day's television watching with Nightline. The presenters are babes, the stories are quirky and the show prepares you for a fully informed sleep.

What could be better, but waking up from that fully informed sleep to empty your mind of all that information which is useless in the morning, and starting the process of filling it up with news all over again?

Not only are there more sources for news than ever before, the term 'news' itself is broader, and less easy to define than it once was.

Do you still think of a newspaper or broadcast when you think about news? Or do you picture your Twitter feed with Diplo's call for comiserations because nobody will look him in the eye with his new Zef haircut?

'News' refers to information exchanges that inform and update others about recent happenings. This definition, then, includes basically anything anyone ever says on the Internet. It's the job of the user to then filter out what 'news' is important to the individual (hello, SouljaBoy/Fabolous coke-fuelled rage, and Kanye discovering the joy of drunken Tweeting) and what is just tedious (Diddy, I'm looking at you) space-filler.

Where did this out of control desire to make news come from? Why did the News Makers not simply translate online and dominate the space as well as newsprint? It all looked so organised back in '81. Now everyone wants everybody to know everything about themselves, and likewise, we seem to want to know a fair amount about each other too.

News is realtime and includes the photos and cartoons 1981's two-hour-ten-dollar version didn't, but I believe that Presenter when she says it's all a bit far-fetched; a bit ridiculous reading it all from a screen. But that might be because she's a total babe, so I'm biased.

iDose; a digital drug

I recently found an article on the New Zealand Herald website which to me symbolised how technology has been taken to new levels and how we are living in a cyborg society. The article was called 'iDose: Teens using Youtube to get high.' The article discusses how teenagers are now using Youtube and other music sites to get an ecstasy like high. This emphasises how technology is everywhere in our lives and could be causing problems for young people.

This particular technology could lead to drug like addictions, and the fact that you have to pay for these trips, it could have the potential to be as harmful as real drugs such as ecstasy and alcohol. I thought that this related to what we discussed in lecture three on cyborgs, where we talked about how technologies are getting closer to our bodies such as earphones are getting smaller. Using technology is the perfect example of this.

iDose users can be linked into what we discussed about Mundane Cyborgs, where people are not meaning to make technology apart of their bodies and their everyday life but all of their everyday rituals are making it hard not to. Including a digital drug into everyday life would be very easy to do without knowing it.

Keeping the knowledge in your pocket

“Anyone seen using a phone, will be disqualified from the quiz!”…. “I’m serious, put your phone away as you won’t win if you’re seen using it!”

The Irish quizmaster at yesterday’s Pub Quiz had to repeat this in various forms, with an increased swearing-frequency as his annoyance grew significantly in between, music and picture rounds. Just shows how Smartphones have really managed to seep into the smallest and most simple pleasures of life. No doubt they have changed social interactions, the way business people do what they do and the frequency at which we check our e-mail, but this? Really? A good old pub quiz, where people get to shine because for some reason they stored some random piece of knowledge some while back that, besides a pub quiz, they were never going to put to good use.

Looks like general knowledge stored in the deepest darkest corners of our brain has been replaced with the all-knowing Internet stored in our pocket. Though this might not be all that bad, in this particular case it spoils the fun. There’ll be time to prove your friend wrong about who won the 1998 World Cup or settle the argument with your dad about when Elvis died, by looking it up online. But just for this bit of simple social interaction just come down to the pub and do everyone there and yourself a favour: “Turn your f+&*”’=% phone off!!!”

Privacy.

I was a late comer to Facebook, eventually enticed to it earlier this year after my friends insisted how great it was. I was hesitant though. As Bebo had left me not too fond on social networking sites.

It is quite frightening, the lack of security Bebo had, when you consider it now. The amount of spammy web cam comments people would get, or the ridiculous, creepy friend requests - it was really no place for young, naive teens. So when I was getting used to Facebook, it was quite pleasing to find the options available for my privacy. No longer is there only the simple option between 'private profile' or 'public profile' as was with Bebo. Facebook provides an entire section dedicated to privacy. With choices of what you want to share, and with whom.

But Facebook still has its hidden faults. Like, the times where it alters its privacy settings, or changes something. Only to not immediately inform its users. Several times I have only been warned of security changes through peoples status' that point it out. In the meantime my profile had been exposed a certain way without my knowing it.

I am quite concerned with privacy, I ensure my profile is well protected and am always surprised at the amount of information I can gather and stalk of someone that I am not even friends with. And the countless stories we have seen on the news related to hacked Facebook accounts or stories of young teens deciding to meet their online 'friends' (that they thought they knew) Privacy really should be more important that ever before.

The New Method Of Online Dating

Websites such as "Adult Friend Finder" and "Plenty of Fish" are online dating websites that account for a large quantity of the internet’s filth. Now I'm not pointing the finger at the unfortunate people that use this site to potentially find a life partner or friends. I am however, pointing the middle finger to all the members of these sites that use profanity and disgusting images to promote themselves. Furthermore these websites aren't there for you to fall in love and live happily ever after, they are there to make an easy US$35.00 a month at your personal expense. I am not a member myself but by looking at the homepage, these websites are essentially the Facebooks of sex!

But now.... There is a new way, it’s free, and its sitting right in front of our 500million+ noses everyday, sometimes two or three times a day...Yes, it's Facebook.

As we all know, Facebook is a revolution of the internet world, that has touched each little arrogant and voyeuristic part in our hearts. However these hearts are being put to use with a number of people meeting or rekindling the flames with intimate loved ones because of Facebook. If you think about it, for starting new relationships or mending old ones, Facebook is a flawless vehicle. This is because, for the most part, a new potential partner's tastes, hobbies, views and social standards are there in black and white for you to observe and strategize.

A Facebook profile is an up to date time capsule of a person's existence. By logging in and clicking on that person's profile you are essentially digging up the last year or so of pop culture, fads, important information, and, ofcourse a little bit of dirt. What I am trying to say is that aspiring new Romeos no longer have to recite a monologue of their love, for their love. Now, they can just surprise Juliet with Lady Gaga tickets!

Because of the exposure that Facebook profiles have, people who are trying to win the hearts of their love interests can use the personal information and 'likes' to their advantage. Gifts, dates and special occasions can now all be accounted for to a potential partner's tastes. There will be no more awkward silences and no more "I hate it when a guy is too into himself".

This all seems positive, however is this method of dating and forming an intimate common bond with someone fake? Or are people's personal information being used against them?

Is this leading to a 'love' icon to click next to a person’s name...

Brick phone = I'm a brick?

I was reading news reports recently and found an item about how our phones say something about the person we are. The use of such 'research' in the news lately makes me highly sceptical about its validity but hey maybe this can be applied to some of us. I don't mean the findings that this study had such as Sony Ericsson users have a certain love for fast food and the average income of Samsung owners being $34,000. It could be the little things like idea of the Blackberry reflecting the busy nature of their owner's lives, be it work or school life. Or take for instance my friend who loves having a 'brick' (basic, old, damage-resistant) phone because it's easier to txt on. Oh and the whole 'If I drop it, it won't matter since it only costs $79.95' part. In general he appreciates the simpler things in life.


In this day and age does our technology really reflect who we are? I guess in a way it can be a signifier of our status, monetary wealth and taste preference but it can also be a false representation. Gone, in my opinion, are the days when all we needed from a phone was the simple function it provided - to keep in contact via texting and voice calls. Now we 'have to' have the internet connectable, music playing, 3G/4G, iPhone that can do so much more then just txt and call, who calls people anyway? (Unless they want to take advantage of BestMate1000). It can not only reflect our own character but the growing consumer society that we live in. As we grow unhappy with the plain phone we've had since we were 15 years old, the latest Nokia becomes that much more attractive since it has better camera quality and can store music in it. It can be exciting to 'upgrade' but it can also bring up many anxieties, I actually feel sorry for parents of teenage children now days.

a Robot, addicted to blogging?!

ASIMO which is a humanoid robot created by Honda is the most famous robot in the world. Now, do you know a robot which keeps blogging?

The robot’s name is “ApriAlpha” created by Toshiba in 2003. He is designed as home appliance with software called blogalpha that make it possible to control the robot through blog server.

How does he work?
-Set up the blog that can be only accessed by a family
-Write a comment what the family want him to do
-Blogalpha is always checking the blog. If there is a task to do, then command him through wireless LAN.

For example, if you write “what is my puppy doing?” as a comment, he goes to the place where your puppy is and take a photo, then upload the photo on the blog. You can check your puppy wherever you are through the computer or mobile phone!

Aprialpha does not do anything until he gets a comment on his blog. He is like a person who is addicted to blogging?!

Robots we have today exceed what we can do. But human behaviour is the inspiration for machine design as we learnt cyborg theory before. Now, the robot also keeps blog.

How to steal your own identity...

So I decided to try an experiment out on some friends that I live with to see how easy it would be to steal them... from me.



By creating a new email address and then a Facebook account, nicking my profile picture with a clever "Save image as" and remembering how to spell my own name. Voila! I had a new, apparently identical Facebook profile, except that it had no information about "me" except for a name, birthday and profile pic. So now it was time to test it out.



I invited 20 friends that I live with and see often, added a little not saying "Hey, I got hacked so created a new profile. *Myname*", and sent the request be my new friends online... 80% accepted immediately, another 6 added me and only 2 asked me about it before daring to accept (I feigned ignorance about the new profile, so they did not accept me). All of them live in the same building as me to make sure it would be easy for them to check if I actually started a new profile. Through these 22 new friends I gathered 66 useful pieces of information:



* 24 email addresses
* 5 Skype addresses
* 7 Home addresses
* 7 Cellphone numbers
* 1 Home number
* 15 Birthdays
and one blood type... A-


Interestingly there were 11 males and 11 females who accepted, of them I got 33 useful bits of personal information from each sex. So it does not matter online whether you are male or female, we both share about the same amount (Yes I realize that 22 is not large enough to make any real conclusions!).

This experiment has shown me how easy it is to steal your own online identity and I can only assume it is just as easy to steal any profile you like and become them online. So, next time you get a friend request don't just assume your talking to the right person... It could be me.

Liquid Mountaineering

According to this recentish set of viral videos now you too can walk on water, just like Jesus!.



Its called liquid mountaineering, basically, as these videos try to convince you walking on water is easy as gaining the right speed and angle. Even though this seems extremely impossible the people behind the videos stick to their word that this is legit. Now there are multiple videos of other people from around the world, apparently not associated with the original video, taking part in the sport.

They even give a reason behind why it works. “The sport is all about running on water. Science tells us that with the right angle and speed anything can bounce off the surface of water for some time before it sinks…The things necessary for liquid mountaineering are; good quality rubber running shoes, preferably winter season, a cold lake, and a good entry point to the lake. All you have to do is start running towards the bank of the lake and keep running with top speed placing every step at such an angle that instead of thumping on water with the whole foot at once, the foot should skim the surface from the heel to the toes”

Although now looking back on it I can tell it may not be that real (I’m assuming it’s the product of the shoe company HI-TEC which all the ‘athletes’ are wearing) at first I was unsure about its credibility. This is a fantastic way for small companies with little money to make a big splash with advertisement. The budget for each video is not that much as materials needed would be little. This video even showed up on ESPN . That’s instant free nation wide advertisement, without the big budget.