Digital Aesthetics

Okay this article. I don't understand what's going on. I just...I can't even really describe why it didn't make any sense to me. Maybe it's just a very abstract idea. I'll probably get a better grasp of it in class, like usual. But that was the first reading in a while that completely lost me. :(

Digital Politics

I don't like politics, and so naturally I don't like politics on the internet.

The two pages with results on the best Liberal and Conservative blogs only had ~17,000 votes, so it doesn't seem like it was probably a very...accurate representation of blogs on the internet. But I wouldn't know, since I stay very far away from blogs that are political. They're just annoying :(

I suppose it's a good thing for the people who do like politics that things like YouChoose '08 exists. If I was interested at all, I would probably be appreciative of all the videos there are to see these politicians in action, and hear what they have to say.

Digital Broadcasting!

Streaming media is something I really try to avoid. It depends on having a reliable ISP (something I do not have), a better-than-decent download speed (something I only get occasionally), and probably the desire to do it - something I do not have because of these first two.

I've already spoken about my dislike of sites like YouTube. The only reason I don't like them is because they tell me how well my internet is working at a certain time. Sometimes videos download instantly, othertimes they just sit there, doing nothing. It's very frustrating.

Streaming audio is also something I really don't do, because I own most of the music I want to listen to - and because "buffering" is annoying to wait for.

I have yet to take advantage of corporate websites that host episodes of their shows for everyone to watch. This is probably because the shows that are available are shows I don't know about, or want to watch.

So, yep. In the words of a wise character, "...and that's all I have to say about that".

Multivariant Narratives: tl;dr

My first experience with Multivariant Narratives was the series "Goosebumps" by R.L. Stine. Man, those were the good days. "Choose Your Own Adventure"-type books seemed to be popular for at least a decade, but I haven't heard much about them since.

The brilliant idea I had for this response, though, was that MVNs are also kind of the point of RPGs and MMORPGs - but more for MMORPGs. The course of action in these games is strictly determined by its players. There is no end to the game, and the whole point is to explore around for yourself and interact with other characters. What makes games like these is unique in the way that every single player has a different experience of the game. What happens for one person may or may not happen for another.

Second Life would also be considered a MVN, because like an MMORPG, users have a very different experience with the simulator. The difference, though, is that Second Life is not a game like World of Warcraft or its sister games. I would venture to say they are essentially the same thing, only one is a game and one not.

Back to writing my Shakespeare paper :( (I wish I could take Intro to Shake with Prof. Gants!)

PS - Will you leave a comment this time? :D


[rant] PPS - For the people in our class (and since I am 99% sure none of you read this, I have no problems saying this): DON'T COME TO CLASS IF YOU'RE JUST GOING TO SIT ON THE COMPUTER THE WHOLE TIME. SOME PEOPLE LIKE TO PAY ATTENTION AND IT'S HARD TO HEAR OVER ALL THE TAP TAP TAPPING OF THE KEYBOARDS. Just don't come. [/end rant]

Digital Video!!

I think Digital Video will be a continuation of the Digital Media class, which I enjoyed. Only I'm not sure if I'd like to see "Freaks" again...

YouTube blew up, fast. As in "got really popular really quickly". And I guess I can understand why. The immediate availability of being able to view personal video, as well as pretty much any kind of video was a pretty big step for the internets. But now that YouTube is a few years old, it's lost it's appeal - at least to me - because of the spammers, the stupid videos friends keep linking me to, and so forth.

So I'll be using this post as my platform - STOP LINKING ME TO YOUTUBE. I probably won't click on it. And if I do, it's probably just to see what it's called, and then I won't watch it. Sorry friends, but that's how much I hate YouTube.



See you in class ;)

http://torrentfreak.com/canadian-police-tolerates-piracy-071110/

Canadian Police Tolerates Piracy For Personal Use

Written by Ernesto on November 11, 2007

The Canadian police announced that it will stop targeting people who download copyrighted material for personal use. Their priority will be to focus on organized crime and copyright theft that affects the health and safety of consumers instead of the cash flow of large corporations.

Around the same time that the CRIA successfully took Demonoid offline, the Canadian police made clear that Demonoid’s users don’t have to worry about getting caught, at least not in Canada.

According to the Canadian police it is impossible to track down everyone who downloads music or movies off the Internet. The police simply does not have the time nor the resources to go after filesharers.

“Piracy for personal use is no longer targeted,” Noël St-Hilaire, head of copyright theft investigations of the Canadian police, said in an interview with Le Devoir. “It is too easy to copy these days and we do not know how to stop it,” he added.

St-Hilaire explained that they rather focus on crimes that actually hurt consumers such as copyright violations related to medicine and electrical appliances.

A wise decision, especially since we now know that filesharing has absolutely no impact on music sales. On the contrary, a recent study found that the more music people download on P2P-networks, the more CDs they buy.

Digital Film

"• The overwhelming majority of feature films are under copyright.

• Copyright has (in its original form) limits:

– Published before 1923, the work is in the Public Domain (PD).

– Works created after January 1, 1978, are copyrighted for the life of the author (in film, often considered the Studio) plus 70 years.

– Works published from 1923 to 1963: copyright holds for 28 years, renewable up to 67 years. There are other variations, but these are the most pertinent."

Also, I've never heard of having a database for one particular movie. That's weird.

That was the most interesting part of the read for today. In other news, I can't think because its 28 DEGREES OUTSIDE AND THAT'S REALLY COLD.

This was my day today.

Electronic Editing

I don't believe proper appreciation is given to those who edit texts electronically. At least for myself, I take what I view online for granted. Viewing texts online is a great resource, for any number of reasons, but it's easy to forget how much work it took for these to become available.

Does Wikipedia count as scholarly...electronic...editing?