Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2004 June
2004 March
2004 February
2004 January
2003 October
2003 September
2003 August
2003 July
My Links
Jill Walker's blog- media/game theory
New Zealand Blogs
MediaChannel.org
Torill Mortensen's blog- "thinking with my fingers"- MUDS/Games?Media
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
|
| Asynchronous vs Synchronous |
| 09.30.03 (8:59 pm) [edit] |
I find it very interesting the differences I have observed in our classes online communication. When we communicate via the blog (asynchronous) it is rather formal and more to do with our research and knowledge. The blog has been used as a journalism tool rather than a diary of personal events as most blogs I have read on tBlog. In contrast the real time (synchronous) communication of the MUSH makes us communicate very differently. For those who weren’t there on the 29th of September the characters online communicated very differently. There were a lot of obscene gestures and nothing very educational going on. There is a very different environment created when communicating in real time, the space becomes a very social place where short messages are exchanged which makes it harder to communicate educationally with many people talking at once and they don’t want to wait for a huge paragraph to read. The asynchronous environment has allowed us to communicate educationally as we get the time to write and prepare an entry without interruption from others. What are other people’s observations?
Ruben
|
|
|
| |
| Rebranded Media Theory |
| 09.28.03 (8:19 pm) [edit] |
As our blog has grown and developed over the last few months, we here at media theory felt it was time that our apperance reflected our new found confidence and attitude. So we splashed out with our tbucks and purchased this great new header. But that wasn't all, next we felt the need to change the colours of our great blog.
We feel that we have achived our aims, the rebranding of the blog meets the everchanging needs of our target demographic and the needs of our investors and board. And as a result we have a viabrent exciting new Media theory blog!
lots a love,
The Media Theory Team.
sorry that it's so damn ugly : )
|
|
|
| |
| speak to the people |
| 09.28.03 (6:26 pm) [edit] |
Look to your left, no, on the screen dummy, yeah below the menu items, see the thing that says RSS 1.0? ever wondered what that's all about? well i’m gonna tell you...presuming you haven’t already fallen asleep.
RSS is an acronym for Rich Site Summary or Really Simple Syndication depending on who you ask. In short it allows users to easily receive the headlines from any news service that they wish via a desktop application (see images below). Why not just go to the CNN web site if you want to read the latest headlines? well using an RSS aware program or ‘news aggregators ‘ as they are called allows you to quickly and easily check the headline you are interested without the need to load several web sites. You can also set how often you want your program to check for the latest feeds. And the use of RSS is not limited to news site, blogs are often have RSS feed hence the ‘RSS 1.0’ button on this page. So I can check if anyone has added a post to this blog by just checking the small programme running in the dock.
RSS uses a mixture of HTML and XML, our blogs code looks like this (for you geeks) which the aggregator then renders as usable information, some allow you to read the first few lines of the story/blog while others only display the headline/title.
So what's this got to do with us and media theory? well A. J .Liebling once wrote ‘Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one’ The web and technology circumvent this and allow anyone to publish and have their voice heard. What RSS allows is for the listeners of that voice to easily know when you have something to say, weather its worth hearing is up to you.
This article has some more in-depth information about RSS, its uses and applications.
[image]desi402_790614096.jpg[/image]
This shows the recent titles from our blog in a news aggregator. The one pictured is called Mulle Newz, it runs withn the OS X dock. Other news and blogs sources can also be seen. Clicking on a headline loads the full story within a browser.
[dave]
|
|
|
| |
| 14.Fuzzy TV? |
| 09.28.03 (4:24 pm) [edit] |
Its strange after having nearly completed this 402 paper that little things in the media I would have never given a second thought to suddenly make me think of this paper and topics raised. Yesterday I saw an advert on TV for a sports news program that started off with the camera zooming in on an old TV playing static and narration that went along the lines of “if there was no media want would you be doing”. I thought it was quite amusing that the ad portrayed the media as being the only form of broadcasting on TV and that the ad suggested we would be stuck in the past without them through the use of the old TV and dim dungy room. Then I thought without media we probably wouldn’t have advanced so far as a race. Media lets us know what’s happening locally, nationally and internationally causing us to purchase things, letting us decide on who runs the country, it lets businesses know the trends, I would even say it has a hand in how quickly technology is advancing.
This brings me to a question Dave asked yesterday about the media needing us and vice versa. It is the same idea that humans need machines and machines need humans yet this is looking at humans needing humans. As much as some of us dislike some forms of media we require it to satisfy our own knowledge and if we lived in a “there” utopian world would there be media? What do others think about the media needing us and vice versa?
Ruben
|
|
|
| |
| disemBODYment |
| 09.28.03 (4:41 am) [edit] |
Last weeks readings talked about the similarities and differences between communities on and offline citing the major difference as the loss of a physical proximity and its replacement with the sharing of commonalities.
They talk of extending the mind, reinforcing disembodied relations and removing embodied hierarchical structures (all this pg.647, M. Willson), which indeed they do to a certain extent. Although it occurred to me whilst watching the 'there.com' promo that virtual communities are increasingly re-presenting a utopian world of the embodied, simulating physical actions in order to communicate and like other forms of popular culture (telly, cinema..etc.) Contributing to the hierarchical structures of the physical (embodied) world.
As technology advances the virtual communities of the gaming world and there.com utilise bigger better graphic representations to construct their worlds. The user/audience rely on an imagery based on a physical reality to negotiate the community. The disembodied are given bodies – having a body (aka. an avatar) is a requirement for participating in graphically based virtual worlds like ‘there.com’ and ‘Habbo Hotel’. Not only that, emphasis is put on the body you become – with a range of options provided you are forced to make a decision about the way you look and what you wear.
It seems like the notion of the abstract electronic community is becoming less abstract and more constructed. While on early forms of virtual community like LambdaMOO each user is able to imagine what the space looks like and so each experience is different, the participants of 'there.com' communicate in an already defined visual space.
It got me thinking though are all MOO’s constructed around ‘Rooms’? Obviously I have not done a lot of MOO research. So in my limited experience of ‘MUSHing’ it seems that no matter how abstract cyberspace declares to be it is not hard to find elements of the physical world it claims to transgress.
(alice)
|
|
|
| |
| sorry guys too tired to not ramble... |
| 09.28.03 (4:06 am) [edit] |
Having tired of shooting people I thought it was about time to join the real world. Rather than the usual night at school I went home early on Saturday night and watched the last half of 'Snakeskin' on the telly, the debut feature film by NZ director Gillian Ashurst.
Being a geeky film student I've listened to Gillian talk about her film at a couple of otago uni screen fests. The film follows one girls (her name co-incidentally is alice) journey as she strives to live like they do in the movies - in particular the American road movie. Basically the film comments on NZ's position in relation to the US and the consequences of US popular cultures potential to influence (eg. the movies).
At one of the screen fest talks Gillian explained how while looking for locations for shooting she came across a lost Japanese tourist who was reliving a road movie from NZ popular culture. He was travelling the length of NZ in a yellow mini because he'd seen 'Goodbye Pork Pie' (NZ’s infamous road movie) and wanted to do NZ like the movies! And so at the end of 'Snakeskin' alice is picked up by a Japanese tourist in a yellow mini whilst hitching on the west coast because she has lost pretty much everything (car, boyfriend, money, innocence) in her search for 'a little bit of America'.
I thought it interesting that a film about a kiwi girl form chch recreating an American popular myth in NZ should include reference to a tourist recreating part of NZ popular culture in NZ.
As Tom has suggested the 'American way' is an integral part of NZ culture, probably because it’s far cheaper to buy 100hrs of US programming than make 1hr of our own (or some tragic number like that).
However, the Japanese tourist and his 'Pork Pie' remake is an example of how cross-cultural flows go both ways. And I would suggest that the reference to the tourist in 'Snakeskin' shows that the way others perceive NZ becomes how we perceive ourselves.
What I'm trying to say is that firstly, we kiwi's are not simply just 'lurkers' amongst a hegemonic US culture, our own unique culture has the potential to speak for itself. And secondly, to quote Mitra:
"...that communities require interaction and involve people remains constant."
This is also true of NZ culture; our interaction (eg. sharing of cultural products) with other nations is equally as influential in the construction of our community as directly 'borrowing' from the US.
(alice)
|
|
|
| |
| our robotic 'mind children' are sharpening their knives |
| 09.27.03 (10:20 pm) [edit] |
"by performing better than humanly possible, the robots will displace humans from essential roles. Rather quickly, they could displace us from existence. I'm not as alarmed as many by the latter possibility, since I consider these future machines our progeny, "mind children" built in our image and likeness, ourselves in more potent form". Robot,
Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind by Hans Moravec, oxford uni press http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm/book98/
------------------------- ------------------------- ----------------------
Moravec is not worried by our extinction by the robots, which he believes is almost inevitable. We ultimately won't be able to compete with them for rescources. He considers robots to be our "mind children". It reminds me of the old guy who dies prematurely in pain, having spent much more time and money on his "precious" (LOTR) car than his miserable "meat" body.
Machines, language and the internet love us the same way an AIDS virus loves an African child. We have a growing consciousness of what is befalling us- global warming, robots, nanotec, GE. BUT we are entranced. We stand paralysed by the oncoming lights. We are in the middle of the road with only our giant self-satisfied grin between us and the coming 'rapture'.
Extrapolating Moores Law out to 20035 gives us computing power one million times what we have today. Our robot "children" will be breeding like rabbits. (marc)
|
|
|
| |
| Colonise thy self |
| 09.27.03 (6:25 am) [edit] |
Marc thinks he's Barbie, Dave’s wondering if he's all 'there' and Alice wasn't sure to start with but is quite enjoying shooting people now. If this is colonisation, I'm quite enjoying the resulting discourse. But I think the term and method of ‘colonisation’ in relation to the web is open to debate.
:arrow:
Over the last few decades (though innocently to start with) I’ve lived through an ongoing US invasion of the world. Armed with a mind numbing proliferation of weapons of mass entertainment-media, the culture crushing soldiers of Americas fortune, have names like ‘Friends’, ‘Malcolm in the Middle’, ‘Will and Grace’, ‘The Sopranos’ and these are only recent champions of a long line of heroes. Who can forget 'Dallas', 'Dynasty', 'The Brady Bunch', 'Superman despite how forgettable they are...
:arrow:
A magnificent current example is ‘The West Wing’ a drama based around the daily goings on in the White House. I have to admit that this dramas slick dialogue and incumbent, fast talking, competence-oozing beautiful people continued to sucked me right in until recent events, despite the blatant, and now ludicrous irony of its existence in the current international climate.
:arrow:
The US film and music machines are equally prolific and so synchronised in their strategic global encroachment that I have trouble believing it could possibly be entirely planned or controlled anymore… Ahhh capitalism. Hot dawg, all you have to do is stick it in ‘drive’.
:arrow:
Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure that the US powers that be, would (and are probably trying to) colonise the world via the wide web, if it’s at all possible. But here’s the rub: do they really have to? I think our perceived ‘colonisation’ was well established before we started jumping into this new space to work, play and chat. We’re doing a pretty fair job of maintaining the colony even while we question its existence. I would suggest that like it or not, the ‘American way’ is now an integral part of our own Kiwi culture and therefore will certainly play a part in any new community we create or join.
:arrow: [T]
|
|
|
| |
| I am a Barbie Girl living in a (Claus) Barbie World |
| 09.26.03 (11:16 pm) [edit] |
Dave is right. We are being colonised. Our locus is shifting from Mountain, River, Jungle, Desert, Plain (places) to 'non-place' (cyberspace), where we mingle in the millions. More souls join our 'community' everyday. The people who are flocking to non-place are the suck cess full- the docile (Foucault)- the normal- the tame. Maybe cyberspace is the"Heaven" fortold in the Bible. A perfect world http://www.t0.or.at/0ntext/wa... for the the faithfull and devout. The Cathedral of the Digital God.
“Many people regard “trance” as a sign of madness, just as they presume that “madmen” must be easy to hypnotise. The truth is that if madmen were capable of being under “social control” they never would have revealed the behavior that categorized them as insane. It’s a tautology to say that normal people are the most suggestible, since it’s because they’re the most suggestible that they’re the most normal!” 'Impro' by Keith Johnstone p178
The dogs and shepherd are herding us into the holding pens. The trucks are arriving to take us away- probably to some idyllic 'Barbie World'.
(marc)
|
|
|
| |
| faded blue jeans, white top... |
| 09.25.03 (5:26 pm) [edit] |
I was thinking as I walked home yesterday about our discussion in class about the Internet as Colonisation and how we were all laughing at the avatars on there.com. It struck me as I headed along castle street that all the second years sitting outside their flats in the sun drinking where in some ways not that far removed from the comical scenes on ‘there’. The setting was in some ways a student utopia - sun, beer, friends, community. I couldn’t quite see the speech bubbles and none of the skateboards floated but the clothes, haircuts and actions I witnessed were all fairly interchangeable. When they had logged onto life that morning they had the same options in a pop up window with which to dress their real life avatars. This kind of situation is restricted not to this particular group, it seems that this is a part of all modern human life. We all seem to follow the same basic coding.
Which brings me to the idea of the internet as colonisation:
“...Globalisation of the internet may be a form of colonisation, or at least a manifestation of America’s cultural expansionism” (Barwell and Bowles, p.704)
Are we in our real lives so accepting of ‘America’s cultural expansionism’ that we don’t question it on the internet. Perhaps the internet and online communities may offer a different, maybe even better path. In areas that are not currently as influenced by American culture as we are, the internet may mean the final death knell for unique cultures around the world.
[dave]
|
|
|
| |
| Electric Sunglasses... |
| 09.24.03 (2:43 pm) [edit] |
A sentence in my last post delivered me into another tangent of thought, so if the first line looks familiar, this is probably why…
:arrow:
The physicality of computer gaming is limited to a relatively shallow visual, audio and intellectual experience. Interestingly I think the first two elements limit the last one, when you consider the atmospheric detail that can be created in one descriptive paragraph in our MUD. Visuals and sound frame, and I would argue, constrain our experience. It’s like reading a book – associating with a character etc… and in the first few seconds of the ensuing film by the same name, inevitably thinking ‘Harry just doesn’t sound right…’
:arrow:
Online again, I think a MUD is a far more complete 'virtual reality' experience than practically anything technology has produced. Even the dream-speak with which entrepreneurial geeks waxed lyrical whilst wearing ridiculous looking electric sunglasses, falls far short of the mark. Words tap into and feed our imagination - the virtual engine that still leaves all in it's wake... [T] :arrow: :?:
|
|
|
| |
| greater control... |
| 09.24.03 (6:47 am) [edit] |
At first I was a little hesitant at running aroung in darkened corridors on a sunny monday afternoon, shooting people, running into people, running into walls...etc...etc. but after the first game I found I actually quite enjoyed the experience.
I have little to absolutely no interest in computer shoot-em-up's but it seems its different when I have more control over what I am doing. In a physical environment against real people I can see, not only is it more natural but I think the fact that its more 'real' than for example a simulated jungle its easier to get more competitive. Even though the environment was dark and unfamiliar (sorta like a new interface) I actually tried to understand it rather than just ignore it as I would a computer game interface.
I still found the video introduction piece kinda funny though, maybe its just me but it didn't do much in the way of psyching me up. Playing Laser Strike, I wasn't really in game mode, well not 'computer game mode' I wasn't even aware you could shot a target until I finally made out what my laser pack was trying to tell me "don't forget you're mission" - I think I missed the mission.
The experience most reminded me off being in some sort of space movie than space game - but then that could be because I've never been in a space game. So my prosthetic memory flashed back with scenes from Dr. Who fighting the darlicks.
(alice)
|
|
|
| |
| facts made by media |
| 09.24.03 (4:32 am) [edit] |
When I read an article about the murder of the foreign minister of Sweden, Anne Lindh, I remembered what Caro told us about the step-father of the little new zealand girl (who was killed as we now know).
The police in sweden published a photo of a man who was seen. This man was as well captured - and suddenly the indications made by the public decreased dramatically. Just because the TV-stations published that a man was captured, it seems everybody believed the murder was captured and did not find it necessary anymore to give indications to the police.
This week the man had to be released because the indication was not strong enough - and the police is now looking for another person (an article).
without media nobody would have known that Anna Lind was captured and nobody would have given indications. But this works as well in the other direction. ....
Lars
|
|
|
| |
| shooting games |
| 09.24.03 (4:21 am) [edit] |
It was good to compare the shooter computer game and the real shooter game. But I found the result suprising - at least for myself.
First: I was surprised that I was able to win both computer-sessions. This was probably the third and forth time in my life that I played a first person shooter .. and I had the feeling I was more often killed then I could shoot somebody else .. but it seems the others were even worse.
Secondly: I was overemployed (does this word makes sense in this context ? ) with the real game. The information were too much. The game was too fast for me, to many people to look for .. I was just no able to keep up ..
Thirdly: the scenery was in both settings quite unrealistics. These grey walls .. these laser guns .. (I am happy, that it was unrealistic - I do not want to experience a realistic shooting game !) - made me feeling like a game - and so I assumed the first time, that I have (like in computer games) the possibility to be shoot several times before dying. This was sadly not the case.
But I had much more a team-game and a social experience in laser-strike. Because you saw the "real" face, you could speak with each other, you could make jokes, you ran together, you "evaluated" the game, you could use your whole body (for example show with the hands where you go and where your teammember has to go) .. so in the end - I liked laser strike more.
Lars
|
|
|
| |
| 'make my sandwich' |
| 09.23.03 (10:02 pm) [edit] |
Well, I wasn't there for this class... More's the pitty, it sounded like a goody - I could have used famous shoot-em-up verbal threatage, like 'look-out buddy, I got me a can o' whoop-ass' and used my Clint Eastwood squinting-eye imitation which I'm sure is as chilling as it is effectively visually obstructive to me... But alas, I was in Wellington, not thinking of you guys at all.
:arrow:
However, I have played a couple of games of paint-ball, which had quite an impact at the time and they were quite different in terms of experience, to any screen derived shoot-em-up I have ever played. I attribute these differences to interfacing and experience.
:arrow:
The physicality of computer gaming is limited to a relatively shallow visual, audio and intellectual experience. We engage these games with the comforting knowledge that we will be physically able to go and make ourselves a sandwich afterwards. You could say the same thing about Laser-Strike and Paint Ball, except that the reality of the physical environment, for me anyway, means that I’m far more likely to have experienced the ‘game’ in a far deeper way. More fear, more excitement and more joy shooting Dave – paintballs leave bruises, let me tell you.
:arrow:
So, not to be under-estimated are our physical senses and their role in dictating response to the ‘real world’ environment we find ourselves shooting people in. Unlike screen/keyboard remoteness, the interface is immediate, and our responses and actions in the real environment are guided by (in most of our cases) 20 odd years of practice in movement and dexterity. (yes yes, some of us have more experience than others...) Who can say that about computer gaming? I suspect none of us here would say ‘yes’ to that but there will some out there that could, and more and more who will in the future, whose emotional and intellectual integration with games and online experiences will be more complete. There associated physical responses more acute. [T]
:arrow:
|
|
|
| |
| bang bang you're dead. |
| 09.23.03 (6:00 pm) [edit] |
Ruben says he’s in the same mindset for both the virtual and physical games. I found that while I enjoyed both, my mind set was different for the two. I think that the interface restrictions were why I didn’t mentally get into Unreal Tournament as much as I did with Laser Strike. Sure I got into Unreal Tournament, I was yelling and being a dick and all that, and I thoroughly enjoyed blowing Katie away. But being physically removed from the action and the inability to control every aspect of my behavior and movement with the precision that I could in real life meant that Unreal Tournament still seemed a game. I know Laser Strike was too (don’t tell Ruben that, he’ll get upset) but the physical nature meant that I got into it more mentally. My fear of getting shot was greater, I was more paranoid, shooting people was more rewarding…I never thought I would write those words and it hurt running into walls and people a great deal more.
I can only imagine how real it is in war, for those on the ground anyway. It’s not something I want to experience anytime soon.
I guess Ruben is just a geek.
[dave]
|
|
|
| |
| Our games session |
| 09.23.03 (1:30 am) [edit] |
The interface of computer games verse the real world… I found with our last game workshop that there wasn’t much difference in the way I played Unreal Tournament to the way I played Laser Strike/Force, contrary to what I heard from the others that played both games. I found I was still in the same mind set in the physical GAME as I was in the computer game. In 1st person shooter I tend to be on the run with quick stops to gauge where I am, this was the same for Laser Strike. Though I have more control of how I want to move in the physical game vs the restrictions of the computer game, I still found I played in very similar styles for both. They both are in the end just games and though you may not wish to get shot and try hard not to, you have to realise that you will be shot so you should just go out to shoot more people than having more people shoot you.
Maybe I would have found the interface of laser strike to be different if I hadn’t played Unreal T just before it. I found the physical game more enjoyable because of the greater control I had over the game play. With computer games you rely on your reactions and skills from mind to hands, you require a lot of coordination to flick the buttons quickly where as with laser strike you are in a “natural” environment and are only restricted to your range of biomechanical skills. What do others in the class think?
Ruben
|
|
|
| |
| A brief look at the history of Adventure games |
| 09.22.03 (8:41 pm) [edit] |
A brief look at the history of Adventure games.
The game genre Adventure has an interesting past and will perhaps have an even more interesting future. Adventure games can’t really been seen as dead; for, are we not living a huge adventure?
The Adventure game player has to be pensive, persistent and logical in his thinking as with one who wishes to succeed in reality. The revealing, unfolding nature of Adventure games seems to entice many players.
Back in 1976, Adventure games took off when William Crowther tried to create a game out of his passion for deep cave exploration. Later, Don Woods took the idea a little further and extended it with elements from Lord of the Rings giving the genre deeper fantasy. The programme soon spread into the younger, more dynamic hands of Stanford programming students. The students sought to produce more advanced Adventure games; however, it wasn’t until much later in 1984 that Sierra Online first implemented graphics; the player was no longer left to imagination only, two-dimensional illustrations accompanied the communication between the game and the gamer. In 1999, digitalised film took Adventure gamers completely by surprise; movie and sound immersed the player even further into the deep waters… adventure game relationships began to form.
Myst and Tomb Raider are great examples of the speed of Adventure game development. We are waiting for more.
Adventure games could move into interactive simulation using virtual reality… the possibility for dual worlds is easy to envisage. The adventure game world and the real world in coexistence.
http://www.game-research.com/adventure.asp" title="http://www.game-research.com/adventure.asp" target="_blank"http://www.game-research.com/...
Tamara
23-09-03
:wink:
|
|
|
| |
| Diversity of Gamers |
| 09.17.03 (2:49 pm) [edit] |
Tuesday, September 16, 2003 I found an article in ‘The Press, Christchurch’, which discussed a study done on Americans who play computer games. The latest data released by the Entertainment Software Association shows 17% of gamers are over 50, 26% percent is made up of women aged 18+, which is more than the gaming population of boys ages 6 to 17(21%). Men aged 18+ make up the largest group at 38%. Girls between 6 and 17 make up 12%. Then average age of players is 29 years. The average time spent gaming is 6.5 hours a week.
I was stunned at the percent of gamers over the age of 50. It is obvious that computer games are becoming more desirable as a form of entertainment for all ages now. Is it because of the graphical capabilities of games, the storylines, the marketing, the 50 yr olds were about 30 when the first big games were available so it maybe a generational thing or is it something else? I wonder if these stats are the mean across all nations. In another ten years will we see more and more elderly players pushing the average up as nearly all the 30 yr olds who make up the average age today will still be playing in ten years.
Ruben
|
|
|
| |
| our sexual relationship with machines |
| 09.16.03 (5:19 pm) [edit] |
“Man becomes the sex organ of the machine world, (as the bee of the plant world), enabling it to fecundate and to evolve ever new forms. The machine-world reciprocates man's love by expediting his wishes and desires, namely by providing him with wealth.” M. McLuhan
Have we become sex slaves to “the machines”? Seemingly, we will willingly perform any indignity on ourselves or our fellow creatures, no matter how destuctive or perverse in return for the “wealth” doled out by our machine lovers/masters. We have exterminated most of the larger life-forms on earth!
A huge transport ship arrived in Port Chalmers yesterday and unloaded hundreds of cars, trucks and wheeled machinery. It is a quiet, relentless invasion of our territory, our physical bodies. Perhaps they come as a Trojan Horse?
Driving into Uni this morning I realized that I was inside a machine, my car. We spend more and more time inside of machines. In the last 100 years machines have now begun to physically enter our bodies, our orifices. Stelarc revels in it.
Is our sexual relationship with machines pure and profound, or is it driven purely by lust and money? Will machines stay with us, or dump us when they don’t need us (like the Terminator films)? Are we together as equal partners or as host/parasite? In the event of a divorce, who gets the kids?
(marc the machine slut)
|
|
|
| |
| metaculture/metamedia/metalanguage |
| 09.10.03 (1:34 am) [edit] |
Narcissus was a young man who was cursed by the Goddess Echo to fall in love with his own reflection. He stared at his own image in a pool of water and starved to death.
“Humanity has taken back control of the TV. We are starring ourselves in reality TV- reflecting back images of ourselves to our hungry, Narcissistic minds.” S. Spielberg.
Prof Davis spoke about "metacoverage" of the American presidential campaign. The TV news reporters were covering the TV news reporters. They were talking about themselves. Talking about talking is "metadiscourse". Thinking about thinking is "metacognition". Fiction about fiction is "metafiction". Critical thought about critical thought must be meta-critique. The Bird of Paradise flies up its own asshole.
Lev Manovitch says our lives seems as if they are interesting and varied yet we are being reduced to "monitor, mouse, browser, search engine, cut, paste, copy, delete and find". The Whorf-Sapir hypothesis states that our language/code becomes our perception itself. Our language is a form of Mind Control. The language about language (meta-language) is increasingly the computer/internet. This is becoming the Big Mind/Boss- the meta-media, the meta-culture- the eternal now- the insatiable hunger for the reflection.
(metamarc)
|
|
|
| |
| Sci-fi vs CSI |
| 09.08.03 (11:12 pm) [edit] |
In response to Alice’s question on “why is sci-fi so popular with people involved with computers, I think that sci-fi creates a vision of what the future could be like and in most cases its based around computer technology. I myself probably would rather watch sci-fi programs over other themes (apart from sport) because I prefer to look at what could happen to what has happened. Sci-fi uses lots of theoretical technology that appeals to people who are into computers, the themes usually contain a lot of action and aliens, which most computer gamers would find appealing. Special effects also boost the Sci-fi phenomenon as computer enthusiasts find this intriguing. I think it helps if you do something in a specific field that sways what you would prefer to watch for example I have two flat mates who do Law and they like those Cop programs like CSI etc but are not into Sci-fi at all where as I find it hard to watch CSI etc. I presume Sci-fi is directed at computer enthusiasts because of the amount of computer generated material contained sci-fi that they are able to relate to.
Ruben
|
|
|
| |
| sci-fi and computers |
| 09.08.03 (4:33 am) [edit] |
I found this quote/excerpt on a site talking about the purpose of MOOs The Purpose of MOOs
"Why is sci-fi so popular with people involved with computers and why are people interested in sci-fi so computer oriented? Perhaps there is a type of personality that makes a person gravitate toward both computers and sci-fi. Such a person might be a visionary, look towards the future, be technically oriented. Perhaps the reason for the link between sci-fi and computers is the cognitive style of the individual, the way that such a person makes mental connections between things. Such a person might be working in cutting edge (future) technology, such as computers, and would thus be very future oriented, and thus would find the futuristic aspects of sci-fi appealing."
I started thinking wondering if there is such a direct similarity between those who like sci-fi and those who like computers...?
Given that the term 'Cyberspace' comes from the sci-fi genre it would make sense if the two connected. Though I wonder whether a person 'working in cutting edge (future) technology' would infact 'find the futuristic aspects of sci-fi appealing'? I would tend to think they would find the (mostly) dystopic presentations of our future in a technological world slightly offensive?
For the die-hard fans of (both) perhaps the appeal is more to do with a sense of control. Whilst both cyberspace and sci-fi both produce quite surrealist environments - strange yet familiar - there always seems to be present a sense of control - either of the user or of the human characters (at least at some stage). The ability to create and control our own place/space (no matter the outcome), our own technological dream - is perhaps what is so appealing about computers and sci-fi. Especially opposed to the unpredictability of natural 'real' world - both cyberspace and sci-fi offer control as a type of escapism.
(alice)
|
|
|
| |
| matrix ping pong |
| 09.07.03 (10:17 pm) [edit] |
before the movies there was the theatre....
matrix ping pong
|
|
|
| |
| Technology in Sport |
| 09.05.03 (4:05 pm) [edit] |
Last night I watched a rugby league game where the video referee had to make a decision on a try. The problem arises in that even with technology to help get decisions correct in professional sports it is not always conclusive. Last night for example I didn’t think it was a try, one of my flat mates thought it was and the other kept changing his mind as he saw different camera angles. It ended up being no try but it could have gone either way. This happens often when it comes down to a human decision on what they perceive is happening through the technology and quite often this leads to arguments over bad judgement. Also in most of our major sports there are rules to state the referee can only go to the video for certain incidents, this is crap cause we have the technology so it should be used other wise it should be taken out of the game. It is my view that technology influences sport to much and that referees now get paid enough to make their own decision on the field and if they get it wrong then so be it cause it is human nature to be wrong at times.
Ruben
|
|
|
| |
| ha. |
| 09.04.03 (1:10 am) [edit] |
this place is way cool,
i'm staying here, screw you all.
[dave]
|
|
|
| |
|
|
