Jadimauro’s Weblog

Essentially I liked what the article about wikinomics had to say, I think that they are right in many of their statements about the fact that if people do not act quickly there will soon be an enormous gap between those who can function in the world and society and those who can not. Here’s a quote that I really enjoyed that describe the idea that many will be left behind, “Harness the new collaboration or perish.” I think that wikinomics has the right mind set and because it concentrates on wealth and knowledge. These are two things that I don’t think previously would have always gone together well or at all. The general idea is that by collaborating you will be able to expand knowledge and also create greater profits.

Another idea that I really enjoyed in this reading was the fact that they talked about how wikinomics is essentially an “ode to the power of “the masses”….” It is essentially a consumer driven world and with motivated and innovated people getting involved there might actually be change in the world. I feel like the general consensus before the connectivity of the world was that how can I make a change or how can one person make a change. But I think the idea is still the same one person can make change but one person involved with a whole other network of people attempting to make change, can.

I do agree with the other side on some points Lanier talked about the “anonymous tide of mediocrity” and I do agree that it is hard to distinguish individuals and the really informative and ingenious ideas might possibly get lost somewhere. But I think that is one consequence that will just have to be accepted and the ideas will speak for themselves. I also think that this idea that they have throughout this chapter about making governments more open is such a utopian idea that it will never happen. I think that the idea that it will make more governments more accountable is completely off base. This could be the cynic in me but I think that the one thing that will not change throughout this great change in society is government. Like Nelson last week I feel like this Utopian idea of people taking the bull by the horns and having initiative to make change might be off base. It’s a really nice idea to think that people really are motivated but I think that they might be a little bit off with that idea.

I feel like the hardest things for businesses in this new world will be to walk a thin line between giving away just enough of your secrets without totally giving away your business. I think that to some this can be scary but I think this quote sums it up pretty well “One thing that has not changed is that winning organizations (and societies) will be those that tap the torrent of human knowledge and translate it into new and useful applications.”

With the wealth of networks it also talks about humans being inherently motivated beings. Then it says “most opportunities to make things …..were constrained by the physical capital requirements of making them.” With this statement I began to think that my skepticism about the individual being motivated might be a condition that was learned because prior to this age maybe we couldn’t create things of value so what was the point of being motivated. And I understand that this is a new world and maybe we can get back to being motivated individuals but I think that many people are still in the mindset that they can’t make things of value and I think that is something that will take many years to change.

The internet democratizing the world is interesting and takes it almost a step further than wikinomics. “The agenda thus can be rooted in the life and experience of individual participants in society…” I think this brings a focus back on to the individual, which I think this is where everything is leading. Society has become so about the masses today and it is somewhat stifling to the individual if the internet really does what this book is suggesting then I think more attention on the individual. Which I think will help people become more motivated because it will be important to what individuals have to say.

Sociable Media brings up a good point that although some of the things like email that we use to communicate now were not necessarily designed for what we use them for now we inherently need to communicate with one another and will find whatever means necessary to do so. Our desire for communication has been made so much easier through all of this.

I think that if you bring all of these thoughts together you might get a big mess but they all lead to the fact that the world is changing wether it be through the way we communicate, the way businesses are run, or the way our government is run. I think that the most important thing is that to continue to be a part of this world wide society we have to be willing to adapt and we have to be willing to change along with the technology. We have to keep ourselves constantly updated on new technology and not allow ourselves to be too settled on one type of technology or one way of doing things. The world is going through a radical change and I think that we definitely need to ride this wave of change and I think businesses and individuals that miss the wave will drown.

After absorbing all three articles I feel as though although we may think we have reached the full level of convergence we are not there yet. In the article “Introduction: Worship at the Alter of Convergence” this quote stood out for me “…that convergence culture represents a shift in the ways we think about our relations to media…..but that the skills that we acquire through play may have implications for how we learn, work, participate, in the political process, and connect with other people around the world.” This speaks to that fact that we may not realize our media is in a state of convergence but slowly everything is coming together. The article later discusses that we are in a position of transition and “convergence describes the process by which we will sort through those options.” I had never previously thought of convergence in this way but this article helped to put a new light on it for me and helped me to see that in the future convergence will be much greater. I’m excited to see convergence expand in the coming years. I don’t think that convergence will ever really stop I mean there is something that will always be converged into something else I think that is what we do as a society. I mean I think that if we stop converging then we have discovered everything that we can and we no longer need to do anything for ourselves. I think that we are only at the tip of the iceberg with technology.

I think that convergence comes with usability and under the influence of the consumers, which is what the other two articles discuss. “From Computer Lib/Dream Machines” discusses many things but I think what I took from this article is that even back in the seventies they realized that things must be visually appealing but at the same time being usable and present the information. I think that this is the dilemma that every website and designer faces today. How do you make the site visually appealing to draw the user in but at the same time how do you easily present the necessary information. One thing that I noticed in this article was that when he was talking about schools and how they are not working and designed properly. It was basically saying that by creating little boxes for subjects it inhibits students. I wonder if this author would have been able to see that in some ways websites have become so formulaic that they might have lost something. I mean when you look at websites they all have very similar designs and they all usually follow the same setup. I wonder if by doing that we in the same way might have lost a little bit of our creativity on the web, just as in schools our creativity is stunted by putting things in boxes. I don’t know just a thought let me know if that makes sense to anyone but myself.

The article “From Soft Architecture Machines” refers to that fact that design, will be dictated by the user. I think that in many ways the web has become a sort of home away from home for many people and I think that we are spending so much time on the internet that we want things the way we like them. I mean if you look at things like Myspace.com and facebook.com you can design your page. You can put pictures up, wall-paper, videos, music, and it all represents you. In this article it says that everyone can design their own home but not necessarily a building. I think that same is for the web everyone can design their own page, myspace, etc. but not everyone can design something that is completely functional for a company. So I am taking that metaphor a bit more literally in this sense and I think it works.

Ok so I was just looking around seeing what mashups there were just kind of exploring and then i saw this one that was maps of Ireland and there were ones that had scenery and different castles. So I thought this might be my be my favorite because I have been to Ireland a few times to visit my cousins and I have done the touristy things but next time I go back for a visit I will have different things to see which will be nice.

So I’m using bloglines, I like bloglines/news, I also signed up for “The digital Art Community”, I signed up for Reuters: Sports News for my love of sports, and the university of southhampton news which deals with some technology. I also signed up for cnn.com, I figured that it would keep me well informed of the news of the day. I also signed up for fifa.com because I love soccer and I want to keep updated on women’s world cup which just started today.

Netwar is an interesting term and topic. This is a new term for me and my take on it is that it is something that it can be either good or bad but it is a way that groups or organizations use technology to attempt to make change or in the case of the bad, disruption. Netwar is a term that suggests that the wars of the future will be fought by using technology. I agree with this statement and the prime example that is used throughout most of the paper is Al-Qaeda. I think that concentrating on ways that the United States can protect itself is one of the most important advancements of the future and as far as I know we are not there yet. I was surprised to know that the NGO and their fight on landmines was considered part of netwar.
A statement that I thought was very interesting was “But something of a social divide may emerge between the United States and Europe over whether the response to the attack on America should be decided by a “war or a “law enforcement” paradigm.” Quickly I went to look at the date that this was written, Oct. 2001, so I think that this was dead on there is obviously a divide. But I was thinking that maybe the article was suggesting in a way that we could go to war, not knowing the future disaster that the war on terror would be, or we could fight on their level, although I think that would be difficult. But I think that if the article was written later it might have suggested that would be an option.
I was curious that they talk about groups that are not part of state and whose technology is not as advanced but what if Netwar was fought between major advanced powers. I just think that the war would be something that would be futuristic like things that we think of in sci-fi movies. The future wars would not be fought on the battle field but through computer programs. Like if for example if the powers that fought in WWII were to somehow fight again the war would most likely be completely different from the wars that we think of, yes i do think that there still would be troops but I think that whoever is able to break through computer systems would be the victor. I always imagine that our society would revert back to uncivilized nation, I guess that’s a little bit of the sci-fi geek in me, sort of like “Mad Max”.

So today I went to my aunt’s house for dinner and I was hanging out with my little cousin and watching TV. She’s in 6th grade and we were watching this show called icarly. According to my little cousin its this “new show and it is so funny”. So the basic plot is this girl(Carly) and her friend have this webcast and they are always concentrating on how they can get more viewers and how to make their show better. Its very simple, its for kids but what I found really interesting is that they show part of their webcast and the TV show focuses more on the behind the scenes but the disney channel has the webcast on the icarly site. So while we were watching the show my cousin was showing me the webcasts. I thought that this was a great way to combine TV and web and a great way to keep kids interacting and involved with the show.

After reading the articles I would first and foremost like to say that these men have incredible vision. I read these articles and then I looked at the date I was really impressed with their thoughts and how close they were especially Licklidder. It is true that we are completely dependent upon technology. Without my cell phone I feel lost and for about a month I was without a computer (It was not fun). I still was able to check my email at work but because I was not constantly on Myspace or AIM I was completely out of the loop with my friends. They would ask me if I knew this about a certain person and if I got the invite for the party and I felt completely lost. I think that these men were great visionaries but I wonder if they took time and could see that with all of this technology that keeps us so in touch with one another we have really lost something; which is personal contact with one another. The world is so impersonal today and with the ever growing relationship of symbiosis between humans and computers (Licklidder) I wonder how much further the loss of human contact will be. I know for me I have tried to avoid being caught up in the technology like my friends who are obsessed with Myspace because I feel like for many people it takes over there lives. And I think that it is interesting that we all lead lives through our technology. And we all have little communities. I think that sometimes I wish we could all take a step back and realize that there is so much to do and experience in the world that we can not experience sitting in front of a computer all day. Don’t get me wrong I think it is great but sometimes I wonder if it has gone too far? And I’m interested to see how much further it will go.

My name is Jennifer DiMauro. I was born in Connecticut and lived here until I went to college at Pace University in New York. After I graduated from Pace Univeristy in ‘06 I lived for a year in New York where I did some freelance work on music videos. I also worked on TV pilot and worked in a post production house working as an assistant edior for food network shows like “Paula’s Home Cooking”, “Paula’s Party”, and “Road Tasted”. It was a fun year and I realized that for me to get ahead I should go back to school.
So I moved back to Connecticut, to my hometown, and I’m living with my parents again. Its interesting to say the least, I mean after living on your own for a year and then moving home, its a big adjustment. But it saves me money so that I can afford Quinnipiac which is great. I’m only 23 so I don’t think I’m too old to be living with my parents. I’m not really sure what I exactly want to do after I get my masters but hopefully this program will really help me.
Recently I have been on an adventure kick with my friends. In July we all went skydiving which was a lot of fun and at the end of September we are going whitewater rafting. I can’t wait!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!