upcybernomads

Cyberdwende's Couple Photo Competition Finalists

noreply@blogger.com (ALDRIN.SORIANO) — Thu, 07 Apr 2011 04:51:00 +0000

Voting ends on April 14, 12 noon.

Oooops! Careful.

noreply@blogger.com (Eah) — Mon, 04 Apr 2011 08:16:00 +0000

In the advent of Facebook and other Social Networking Sites, much personal information are being shared online. Young and adult, the rich and the poor,almost every people with an access to the Internet has his/her own website and/or SNS accounts.

Not everyone are aware of the risks and consequences of this profile sharing as not only personal information are being shared but also preferences which is then being used by companies for advertising.

The ease of access to the web for Info-sharing and data gathering is so intense that it's consequences are sometimes overlooked.

This video mash-up, basically, calls the attention of Internet users to be on guard of their information. The video also shows some of the consequences of sharing data and information.

The Internet is not an only-all-good-things-for-you entity. The Internet also poses some horrors detrimental to the user's privacy and personality.

As we control the information we share online for the sake of our safety and the protection of our rights, how much of ourselves are we showing online? Is it still us or our true selves are well-hidden or, maybe, disguised? Where are we in this issue of privacy and internet personality?

I believe that Internet censorship and information ownership on the web will remain vague and gravely blurry for many years to come. We can not entirely own our information and lock it safely once posted online. In the Internet, there's no such thing as absolute ownership of information. Everything is being shared, intentionally or not. As the supposedly "owner", and as ahuman being with highly capacitated mind and wisdom, it is upon us to control what we have and to control what we're getting.

The internet is a tool for the "advancement" of human living. We must not allow the Internet to govern the way we live, virtually or in reality.

Sources:

Photos:

"Privacy" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeB1HHUCl8c&feature= related

Videos:

"Privacy Online" by Sarah Mohammed; AP Productions http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Mwx_zdcTCo&feature= related
"Privacy and Social Networks" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7gWEgHeXcA&feature= related
"Online Privacy: Is My Information Safe?"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja_SrXtIq3Q&feature=related
"Online Privacy Secrets Exposed:What Google Isn't Telling Us" by Dino Vidovic http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8Sx4XfNmOM-

Opting for a freer culture

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 13:56:00 +0000

by Marjohara Tucay

The discussion on copyright, I believe, not only stems from the encroachment of our ability to create and use past works for such. The issue on copyright is a systemic dilemma, a chronic crisis brought about by the reigning capitalist order.

As capitalist continue to devise means to earn more profit by making products out of everything and promoting a consumerist culture that lavishes on the concept of "private property," the concept of the "communal" has continually been effaced. Our consumerist selves revel on ownership and has forgotten how in the beginning there is no "private" to speak of, as everyone owns everything.

Along with the encroachment of capitalism and the hegemony of consumerist culture, the concept of "intellectual property" -- the ownership of ideas has also taken hold. And yes, copyright laws stem from that idea.

We must remember, that copyright laws, as being essentially a product of global capitalism, will inevitably suffer the crisis of this system -- the downward spiral of profit-earning -- monopoly. In the very near future, not only would capital be in the hands of those in the highest echelons of society, but so will ideas, so will creative output. In time, the global market will devise wilier ways to prohibit us to even create, as they would claim ownership on everything.

Thus we should struggle for a free culture -- a climate of sharing under the ideology that no one owns anything as everyone owns everything. There should be no restrictions in the use of past works. Build upon them! Be inspired by them! This, I believe, would usher in a new Renaissance Age, one where everyone will be empowered to create and to share.

If we opt for a free culture, we are hurtling ourselves onto a great wall that is global capitalism. But through our collective efforts, we can make this happen.

(The music bed is a combination of the songs "On the Floor" by Jennifer Lopez; "Stereo Love" by Edward Maya; "Love Generation" by Bob Sinclair; and "What I Am" by Will.I.Am. Inspired by the book "Free Culture" by Lawrence Lessig and "Postmodernism: The Cultural Critique of Late Capitalism by Fredric Jameson.)

All videos used in this work were taken from YouTube and is viewable in the following links:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWxqSEMXWuw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5ShMZ0Xy2Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4H_Zoh7G5A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0NSeysrDYw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyVzjoj96vs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58dYsywoQzE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOP2V_np2c0

Downlod. Edit. Upload.

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Wed, 30 Mar 2011 04:00:00 +0000

Download, tanggalin ang konteksto.

Edit, ibahin ang konsepto.

Upload, iba na ang konteksto.

That’s what I did (or tried to do) with my video mash-up.

Actually this video was my project in an editing class last semester (yeah, please disregard the inconsistencies in quality and lighting, my professor already said his piece about that). This is a musical interpretation of Toplader’s Dancing in the Moonlight. I used nine different videos to create this mash-up. My aim was to show fight scenes not as brutal act but orchestrated performance in the form of dancing. As what Marybeth Peters said in Remix, what I did is “taking something that was and turning it to something it wasn’t.” Download, edit, upload. Many people are doing this online, not only me or Girltalk.

Download, tanggalin ang konteksto.

“Culture emerges from constant interaction and negotiation between people.” This interaction happens online through sharing of ideas and creative content. Interaction in the internet starts with clicking on the links and discourse happens not only in the chat room but in modifying other people’s works as well. Most of the time, our mindset is that the author is dead; we make our personal interpretations of texts or creative products we see online.

Downloading gives us a sense of ownership or right to a property. Then we will have control over it. We can reconstruct what we have downloaded by influencing it with our personal experiences. We adapt it to our daily lives. For example, we download photos of beautiful beaches in the Philippines from a Flicker account of a tourist. We then make one of the photos our desktop wallpaper. Thus, in a way we remove the original context of the material and make it a part of our daily lives. The context is no longer the happy memories of a vacation but an inspiration or a dream summer destination. The context is no longer that of the uploader’s but it has become our own.

Edit, ibahin ang konsepto.

Robbins (1995) supposed “virtual world may be seen as constituting a protective container within all wishes are gratified.” In the virtual or online world, we can be the producer/director/writer/editor of our ‘own’ productions. This is particularly true with who Henry Jenkins calls “textual poachers”—the fans. According to Jenkins, “Fans actively assert their mastery over the mass-produced texts which provide the raw materials for their own cultural productions and the basis for their social interactions”(1992). They ‘edit’ the materials available online (most of the times files they share) and create their own world out of it. Subsequently it becomes the “cultural product” of the fandom. That is why they have fanvids, fancams, fanzines, fanart, fanfics, etc.

Atton is right when he said “we are seeing an erasing of the boundaries between amateur and professional creative practices.” A lot of editing softwares are accessible online. Most of it is user-friendly. Anyone now can do magic with images without the guidance of an expert. Going back to the example I gave, anyone can create a collage of the photos and make it their wallpaper. Anyone can produce a video presentation of his/her dream vacation from the downloaded photos.

Upload, iba na ang konteksto.

Atton (2004) argues that “the creative work is developed socially—through collaborative creation, circulation, commentary and consumption. The Internet has facilitated collaborative creation to a great degree.” This is the idea behind ProdUser. Content online became a collaboration: “social authorship is concerned with the creative collisions between the author as a contemporary creator, as a historical component within cultural production and previous authors; all combine in the field of cultural production.”

Again, my example about the photo-collage, we can upload and make it our profile picture in social networking sites. That way, we have changed the context of the photos. Of course there would be a lot more examples better than what I have given but my point here is that in the process of downloading, editing, and uploading we make creative contents our own.

Download, edit, upload. We do it everyday.

Downloading happens when we create a mental image of other people's works and store it in our memories. For example, when we look at a painting in a museum and remember how it looks like, how we felt, and what we experienced while staring at it. By subjecting other people's creation on the context of our own experience, we are downloading and editing their work. Uploading happens when we write a reaction paper or a blog post about the trip to the museum including out encounter with the painting.

Download, edit, upload is a routine we do in our daily lives. The question now is, is it bad?

Based on the copyright laws, yes. But as far as Lawrence Lessig is concerned, it is not bad. Culture is crafted when ideas are created and recreated. It works like a cycle.

We should (re)live in a free culture where it is filled with property but the property is not be feudal. We make the past the foundation of the future but we must not allow the past to control the future.

References:

Atton, C. (2004). An Alternative Internet: Radical Media, Politics and Creativity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press

Jenkins, H. (1992). Textual Poachers: Television Fans & Participatory Culture. London: Routledge, p.23-24.

Lessig, L. (2004). Free Culture. New York: The Penguin Press.

Robbins, K. (1995) “Cyberspace and the World We Live.” In Cyberspace, Cyberbodies Cyberpunk: Cultures of the Technological Embodiment, edited by Featherstone, M. and Burrows, R. London: Sage, p. 143.

RiP: A Remix Manifesto.

Chryl

NO COPYRIGHT: We're born this way

noreply@blogger.com (ALDRIN.SORIANO) — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:56:00 +0000

One of the most interesting topics I learned in my Internet-related classes Broadcast Communication 148 (Interactive Broadcasting) and Communication 150 (Internet and New Media Culture) is about Copyright or the Intellectual Property Rights of an author or producer of a creative product.

Copyright or the economic right of the author to reproduce copies of his/ her work is a prohibition to one’s creativity to reproduce or to create a derivative to the author’s work or ideas. It is a big issue nowadays especially that the Darknet (Biddle and colleagues, 2002) or file-sharing websites and other applications are now available on the Internet which gives an easy way for the audiences to just download the files online instead of buying the album in music stores.

I believe that no matter how strict the policies on copyright, the Internet still continues to serve as an avenue to express and to liberalize one’s self. Thanks to the Creative Commons for reserving not the entire right of the author and that only some can be protected by the law.

This video challenges any copyright that the videos used herein have and also on the song Born This Way by Lady Gaga.

YOUR AVATAR: SHOW ME THE REAL YOU

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 08:11:00 +0000

Video by Jalyssa May Caccam

Title: YOUR AVATAR: SHOW ME THE REALY YOU

I acknowledge that this video wouldn’t be possible without the videos and pictures I used

(Please see list of sources)

Thank you for the people who allowed me to use their Facebook profile pictures (Comm150 Classmates and Friends) J

This video talks about the effects of the Internet and how it changed the way we interact, build relationship and the way of living. This also summarizes the things I learned from the course.

Song: Born this way by Lady Gaga

Sources:

http://th06.deviantart.net/fs29/300W/f/2008/176/e/6/hello__i__m_vain__by_baxxx.jpg

http://complicatedbella.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/vain-me.jpg

http://static.technorati.com/11/02/21/27479/facebook.jpg

http://jeremy.zawodny.com/i/facebook-profile.jpg

http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/images/2007/10/29/bg_facebook.png

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alba-Jessica/304045381665

http://www.facebook.com/ProfileMakerApp

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Katty-Perry/53611502951

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Anne-Curtis/38270334750?ref=ts

http://www.facebook.com/BabyVAH

http://www.facebook.com/aldrin.soriano

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1551975942

http://www.facebook.com/faithrecile

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1013416032

http://www.facebook.com/jaralucero

http://www.facebook.com/jeybiii

http://www.facebook.com/kath.gabaon

http://www.facebook.com/marijoejoe

http://www.facebook.com/marjoharamon

http://www.facebook.com/marji.manlunas

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=731938850

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1194751442

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000310955409

http://www.facebook.com/alvingalvez?ref=ts

http://www.facebook.com/joan.caccam?ref=ts

http://www.facebook.com/jcaccam?ref=ts

http://www.facebook.com/madalynlej23?ref=ts

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1402515133&ref=ts

http://www.facebook.com/japholcaccam?ref=ts

http://www.facebook.com/TikiResort

www.facebook.com/cityofwonder

www.apps.facebook.com/supertycoons

http://www.ebay.ph/

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFHIUVeyklPcdLfm0wN519xLbwik5fVYCeWDdhcmSYSMoOi1OlG9UOXD8BEty50I0dPScHQsNdhFG2SnPenNjEJuH3N1BjEY59N_bN9QcpVdfX0bFYfShHcfOQX5M_yjBGO_jtOgAUh36a/s1600/Who+You+Are+Is+What+You+Do_BeatnikPublishing.jpg

http://media.cnbc.com/i/CNBC/Sections/CNBC_TV/CNBC_US/Shows/Suze_Orman/Slide_Show/Top_10_Money_Tips/Top_10_Money_Tips_Slide06.jpg

FB Friendship

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 07:45:00 +0000

Took off from one of my favorite discussions in class, friendships in Facebook!
We discussed how friendship is being redefined by this online social network.
I went through a little bit of observation, and saw a parallelism however, on how friends interact in real life and how friends interact in Facebook. What do you guys think? :)

F.Recile

LL & CC: Lawrence Lessig and Creative Commons

noreply@blogger.com (Margie Manlunas) — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 17:33:00 +0000

A Mash-up by Margie Manlunas (non-profit, school requirement)

CREATIVE COMMONS

Spread the word.

Thank you to the owners of the videos used:

Prof. Lawrence Lessig Explains Creative Commons Licensing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWxyx5iYdvI

Lawrence Lessig: "Don't Mess This Up, California." Pass ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZy13Hw3RvU

Lessig Remix

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFdcPc-4Ris

A Shared Culture

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DKm96Ftfko

LADY GAGA - Born This Way (Cover)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG0wi1m-89o

2010 Again (Mashup of 36 Billboard hits from 2010) - DJ McFLY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uhs-Yd7VZk

What is Creative Commons? Wanna Work Together RG Remix

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BESbnMJg9M

All Creative Work Is Derivative

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcvd5JZkUXY

Larry Lessig: How creativity is being strangled by the law (TED)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q25-S7jzgs

Music: Phoenix - Lisztomania (Inspired from Lessig's video in TED)

Thank you very much LL!

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 16:42:00 +0000

Who Are You Online?

A mash up of on online identities inspired by Aleks Krostoski's "Cult of Me".

I believe that we all create new identities online while still managing to stay real.

Enjoy! No copyright infringement intended. The videos are from various television series.

An Erratic Mind

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 16:00:00 +0000

So...

The first plan I had for this was to make a video blog (featuring none other than my awesomeness *sarcasm*) about the pros and cons of the Internet, which IMO is one of the central themes of the class we had. It was gonna be substantial, yes, but still, it lacked the uniqueness that I wanted my last entry to be.

Then an idea struck me.

Since this course concentrated on the internet as a media platform, what if I use that, and then take the inverse of the subject, inject my own opinion, put in random comments yada yada....

IN SHORT (because when I start blabbering on I won't be able to stop without anybody stopping me at all and OH COME ON.) while others are writing and doing mash-ups about their InternEducation (wow, cool term!) through this class, I'll be talking about my experiences prior to the internet--specifically, something like "How to not use the Internet".

You might be thinking, "hah, this guy's crazy. In this age? Not using the internet? Yeah. Hands down, borderline crazy." but hey, to each his own, alright? Besides, look where this guy's crazy idea of connecting computers to share files got us. Now, what do you have? Basically an anything-at-your-fingertips-and-everything-at-your-disposal culture.

It's really not hard to imagine life without the Internet (hey, I lived a few years of my *early* life without it, and my parents more, and I surely don't see anything wrong with that) but if I were to decide, I'd be able to

enumerate three different ways on how not to use the internet. Haha. Read on.

Is it hard to live without this? Hardly.

1. You keep on posting status updates and commenting on others' statuses and you HARDLY know everyone in your "friends" list and yet you act like you do. Go out and spend time with them! Actual, 'physical' time!

I know, I shouldn't generalize. Some more "friendly" people know everyone in their friends list. Heck, perhaps they've met everyone there personally at least once in their lives, and for some that's enough to say that they're friends with that person. Still, it's definitely better to be able to interact on a more personal level with your friends--that is, unless you hold a grudge against your friends or they you.

I'll present one case in my life as an example. When the IRC clients came out (I think the IRC stood for Internet Relay Chat)(and after a quick search was verified--see the 'ease' I'm talking about?!) it was a matter of going into a virtual 'room' and, when you feel comfortable and/or arrogant, you choose someone in the room, double-click their name to bring up the PM (private message) window, and then ask their "asl" (age, sex, location)--after which you'd have struck a conversation--and a friend. I remember back then Friendster was almost new, and that most of the IRC people had them so we were also able to 'see' each other.

I also met one of my chatmates through EB's (eyeballs), although that was because one of she was actually going to our High School as a freshman. Withholding elaboration, we managed to have a decent friendship, but still, nothing beats being friends with someone through physical interactions.

On the other hand, there are some who start forming relationships (friendship and more) solely through the web. Well, yeah, sometimes it works, sometimes people actually get married after meeting through the internet (although I have yet to verify all those stories in that page, I do know that there have been a few news items about the subject here and there) but there are also cases where people manage to pretend about a lot of things about them, because it is easy to do that with Social Networking Sites and nobody to verify each and every person's profile--what they claim to be and not to be.
One such issue that comes to mind is the movie (documentary, actually) called Catfish. Since the movie tagline is "Don't let anyone tell you what it is", I won't be telling you what it is until you have watched it. Javascript doesn't work in individual blogposts, and I was planning on making a toggle-able box that you guys can choose to not toggle on so as to not have the movie spoiled for you, so instead I will make the text real small. Good luck not getting spoiled. Lol.

Catfish is a reality/documentary-type movie about Nev Schulman a NY-based photographer, and a little girl named Abby from Michigan, who contacted Nev through Facebook to ask for permission to paint his pictures. All goes well, Nev gets to talk to Angela, who is Abby's mom, Megan, who is apparently Abby's half-sister, Nev receives paintings of Angela's portraits, song covers that somehow sound exactly like some covers found on the internet, and as suspicions arise more and more, Nev gets informed of an art exhibit where Abby's paintings will be featured in a place that has been untouched for the best part of a decade. Suspicious, and also because of Megan's somehow unmatching stories, Nev decides to go with his brother Ariel and his friend Henry (the filmmakers behind the docu) to Michigan, much to the surprise of a very different-looking Angela, an indifferent Abby, and a non-existing Megan.

Later on, Angela finally spills, telling Nev she orchestrated everything including Abby's "paintings" (which are actually hers), Megan, Abby, and Angela's Facebook pages (which are actually just accounts she set up, complete with fake photos except for Abby's), the songs and covers available online that Angela sends to Nev as "Megan's" recordings and the phones she uses for Angela and "Megan".
So, this case is another testament that contributes to the Internet's vagueness--people do fake these things, with none the wiser.

So, like I said, it's still a lot more authentic to interact with people in person. Sure, there are identity frauds and such, but at least you know (read: see) who you are talking to, most of the time.

2. WoW man, DotA great game! You play a lot and you think you're so good but hey physical finesse, have you forgotten about it? Oh my how bulging your belly is!

Let me ask you, how much games do you play on your computers? Consoles? Handheld game thingamajigs? How many more games do you know of that you haven't played yet? How many of these games are online-enabled games?

Thing is, almost every game nowadays has this online component where players from different parts of the globe (or friends in Barangay Silangan) can play with each other, go on 'journeys' together and KS (killsteal) monsters from other players. Hell, in World of Warcraft, they can even have intercourse! (I won't embed the video, for the sake of censorship)

I mean, seriously, how long has it been since you guys last played patintero or two-base or luksong baka? Is it much more fulfilling to frag a foreign player than to tag a friend out of patintero?

Is it more fun to raid an enemy'scamp with your 'online buddies' than to surprise someone playing hide and seek with you? Well, fine, if there are some of you that say yes to these, then whatever, everyone is entitled to their own opinion anyway. In whatever case, I'd still stick to my argument that physical games are the way to go, at least for people younger than me.

Meet the CyBerKada.

That's the thing--just because technology has gone up to a point where toddlers already have handheld games, does it necessarily mean that kids have to grow fat and not go out anymore? Heck, I even remember when we were young, we used to go out at about 4pm (we were about 12 kids in our village street) and play these weird but fun games until about 6pm, and then go home and then play videogames for about an hour or so. Way back, it was the video game that gets the back seat. Now? Not so sure.

Another thing, these online (or video, more generally) games have also brought forth a new era of filmmaking. You guys familiar with machinima? Apparently, people started doing 'films' using 3D games. Here's an example:

I know, traditional cinema still has a lot of life in it, but seriously, do you guys think it will still be as tough as it is, what with all the emerging online video-making and movie-making industry? They are mostly amateurs, granted, but really, is it that far off? Already there are a plethora of YouTube movies that, well, are still substandard probably, but already show potential in terms of concepts.
3. Don't be lazy. Go search for things you need in your library, in your books, notes, whatever! Articles in there are much longer and substantial than sources on the internet!
I realize that the internet is home to a lot of writings on just about anything. I won't pretend to not know that you guys know that already. This is pretty much what I meant when I said that we now have so much on our fingertips.
Then there's the issue of books
being replaced by the internet itself. While this might not seem such a far-off thought, it can't be ignored that still, books are an essential medium with which we can get information from. Nevermind how people rip off novels and produce (replicate, actually) ebooks through their copies--there are still more to books than just the occasional sparkling vampire or the dynamic demigod, and we all know it. Even with the advent of the Kindle, I'm inclined to believe that it will take more than technology to undermine fine print.

So, there. Even if there's definitely a big advancement to technology, there's still a way to go back to basics--basic is best, after all.

Even with how things have been with I.T. advancements in general, the most fail-safe way to 'know' is, of course, to go old-school. After all, advanced technology is the first to go when things like this happen.

Jb Aquino

Sources

http://seanseo.com/business/internet-marketing-education/

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,986354,00.html

http://chutinan17.blogspot.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Relay_Chat

http://www.cyberlove101.com/gotmarried.htm

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1584016/fullcredits#cast

http://www.geek.com/articles/games/world-of-warcraft-might-go-free-to-play-sometime-in-the-future-according-to-lead-designer-2010072/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Osf3wbjzUeM

http://internetwithoutphoneline.com/

http://www.4axioms.net/

http://www.amazon.com/Kindle-Wireless-Reader-3G-Wifi-Graphite/dp/B002FQJT3Q

http://www.ehow.com/how_2100154_survive-post-nuclear-apocalyptic-future.html

You wanna know what I think?

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 15:54:00 +0000

In reaction to Lawrence Lessig's book Free Culture and of some videos of him delivering a lecture, I made this mash-up basically to point out how I value creativity and the right of the people, especially the youth, to express their understanding of what culture is and what it has to offer.

A mash-up created for the course Comm 150 under Prof. Data Canlas

Submitted by: Gelly Queyquep

All videos (except the author's reactions) were from youtube.com

OBB and CBB created by Jacqueline Antonio

(Pardon me for the low video quality. I had to convert it to mp4 so that the site could accommodate the size of my video.)

No copyright infringement intended

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 14:11:00 +0000

Privacy: At Risk
Comm 150: Mash-up
Videos collected and compiled by Jara Lucero
(*Videos cited at the end)
Songs used:
1901 by Phoenix
Love Like A Sunset by Phoenix

Where are we heading?

noreply@blogger.com (Roll Jervis Manahan) — Mon, 28 Mar 2011 03:17:00 +0000

Ang video na ito ay isang paglalagom ng aking mga natutunan sa kursong Komunikasyon150 o and Introduksyon sa Internet at sa Kultura ng Bagong Media. Ito na rin ang huling akademikong pangangailangan upang opisyal kong matapos ang Comm150.

Karamihan ng mga nilalaman ng mash-up na ito ay ang mga pangunahing bagay na aking natutunan sa pag-aaral ng Internet o ng New Media sa kabuuan. Ang ilan rin ay binigyang inspirasyon sa akin ni Prop. Flaudette May Datuin ng Departamento ng Aralin sa Sining nang siya ay nagbigay reaksyon sa aming papel noong nakaraang Kritika: Isang Colloquium ng mga Mag-aaral ng Brodkasting.

Tunay nga na binabago na ng Internet ang pag-aaral ng media at aking mapangahas na sasabihing kinakailangan na rin ng mga bagong teorya ng akademya sa pag-aaral nito. Sabi nga ni Prop. Datuin, sina Althusser at ang iba mang mga theorists 'are so 20th century'. Sa mabilis nga na pag-advance ng teknolohiya ay kinakailangan nating sabayan ang pagbabagong dulot nito.

Hindi ko naman sinasabing obsolete na ang paggamit kina Marx, Barthes, Bentham, o sino pa man. Ang punto lang na nais kong iparating ay dapat na tayong gumamit ng mga bagong literatura, mga bagong akda ng mga makabagong theorists tulad nina Jenkins, Lessig, o ni Krotoski sa mga aralin na pang-media.

At dahil nga napakabilis na ng pagbabago ng ating lipunan dulot ng Internet, masarap isipin kung saan nga ba tayo patungo. We are in the age of shifting paradigms, a moving landscape, and a changing humanity.

Lubos ang aking pasasalamat kay Prop. Data Canlas sa pagbubukas ng isang bagong perspektiba sa akin at sa mga mag-aaral ng kursong ito. Natutuwa rin ako maging bahagi ng kauna-unahang batch ng Comm150. Nawa'y magpatuloy pa ang ating pag-aaral, pananaliksik, at pagkritika sa Internet and New Media Culture.

P.S.

1. Walang mabigat na dahilan kung bakit isinulat ko ang blog na ito sa Filipino, siguro'y trip trip lang talaga.

2. Pagpasensyahan na ang napaka-amateur na editing ng video.

Sources:

The internet and Abigael De Jesus for the songs.

The internet and Google Images for the photos.

Prof. Data Canlas' lectures and reading list. :)

Just The Way You Are and "A Crazy Little Called Love" Mash-up

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Sun, 27 Mar 2011 11:30:00 +0000

This is a Mash-Up of Bruno Mars' Just The Way You Are Music Video and film "A Crazy Little Thing Called Love".

A Crazy Little Thing Called Love is a romantic-comedy Thai film directed by Putthiphong Promsakha na Sakon Nakhon and Wasin that became very popular among Asian countries. The story is all about an ordinary highschool girl that has a big crush on a hearthrob senior at school. This girl tries her best to improve herself. She improves her physical looks to make the guy see her existence. However the guy seems not to pay any attention to her.

Since I'm really a fan of this movie, I created this mash-up to reverse the story. :)

Sources:
http://www.facebook.com/ACRAZYLITTLETHINGCALLEDLOVE
http://www.facebook.com/crazythingcalledlove#!/crazythingcalledlove?sk=info
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjhCEhWiKXk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lonRfy7Iiu8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a14stuQD6hc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmukUK4XrOk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tfhw7_Quj_g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZbODYaDnf4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4Bi0AivbZA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_JbPhdCszk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0WIKvGW_aI&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaLw1geB7rc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91jRApNton0&feature=related

Produced by: Kath Gabaon

If the Cap Fits

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Sun, 27 Mar 2011 10:46:00 +0000

I wonder what Berners-Lee has to say about this. Ladies and guys, AT&T has just announced that they will implement a 150GB monthly bandwidth cap on its regular DSL users (250GB for premium U-verse accounts). A bandwidth cap is simply a limit on your Internet usage. The more common type of bandwidth cap is a download quota. Once you go past it, you get charged extra (as in AT&T’s case: $10 for every additional 50GB) or your friendly ISP throttles or blocks your access to the Net (Thanks, COMCAST!). Advocates of network neutrality are against such practices, upholding the principles of a free and unregulated Web. In the other corner, ISP’s argue that the caps must be implemented because of network congestion and the ever increasing amount of data flowing through cyberspace. Biases aside, both are very valid reasons. This issue (or non-issue) deserves attention, not because of its immediate effects, but of its implications.

Inarguably fashionable though!

To be completely fair to the ISP’s, 150 GB is really big. A moderate Internet user like me wouldn’t even be able to go beyond 20 GB in a month. It’s quite obvious then that the cap wasn’t meant for us modest Internet users. The ISP’s impose caps to regulate their “abusive customers” who downstream and upstream massive amounts of data. AT&T estimates that these users comprise a whopping 2% of their total subscribers. 2%. Two-percent. TWO PERCENT.

Capacity limits and congestion are the two main reasons for bandwidth caps. With these caps in place, AT&T can “take” bandwidth “freed” up from their “abusive customers” and give it to another person. It’s the concept of fair-use, forcibly applied. It does make some sense but again, these abusive customers make up TWO FREAKING PERCENT of their total subscribers. Why not just spend some of the 8 billion dollars they earned last year to accommodate these high-usage customers? If only the top two percent of users will feel the cap, why not just charge them extra instead of capping everyone else? Why cap the regular customers when it really wouldn’t make much difference to them in the first place?

The public might cry “corporate greed!” but would the cap really rake in much more profit in the short run? Again 98% won’t feel it and I think the bandwidth hoarding 2% would start monitoring their usage. This leads me to speculate only on the true intentions behind bandwidth caps.

We should first consider the people immediately affected by the cap. Internet based businesses that require lots of downstreaming should watch out. Services like Netflix will be most hard hit. An HD movie is worth 3.5 GB of data. Also, with the increasing quality and size of movie formats, Netflix and similar companies would feel the cap’s grip the most. Their customers would then budget their Internet use as though it were currency. It wouldn’t seem very fair to put successful and ingenious businesses like Netflix at a disadvantage. Both the business and the consumers lose because of the regulation of the medium that, inherently, is supposed to be “free”. Ryan Singel, of Wired, wrote “When ISPs force their customers to watch the meter, experimentation, innovation and business will suffer,” Turner said.

Now, let’s look at the potential reasons behind the cap. The most logical and most probably cause is profit. Again, in the short run, it wouldn’t really be profitable because 150 GB is way too big for regular customers to max out but think about the future where a gigabyte will just receive the passive treatment of a megabyte today. A scarier thought is what if they’re just testing the waters with a 150 GB cap? What if they lower it down to 100 GB and argue that no one feels it anyway? And then lower it some more? By putting on too large a cap, it might be a strategy of desensitizing the public from its effects. It may seem a bit too pessimistic but with these caps almost pointlessly put in place, what else would we think?

When you go over the limit, you have to pay extra, $10 for every 50 GB above the limit to be exact. COMCAST has its cap at 250 GB but instead of charging you extra, they throttle your connection- a bit annoying but much less dickish and more attune to the excuse of fair use than charging you extra.

*tagadish*

The NTC recently scrapped bandwidth caps on broadband in an MO draft. They said they’d rather focus on policies that will let ISP’s provide better service to their customers which a network neutralist would call the right thing to do. Globe has an 800 MB per day cap on their ironically named Unlisurf service. ISP’s blame network congestion (no surprise there) and cite Fair Use for their implementation of caps.

In the Philippines, BayanTel DSL already has a 100 GB bandwidth cap for its residential subscribers. According to pro-bandwidth caps people on BayanTel’s forums, the cap makes sure that residential users don’t abuse their Internet connections. Abusive users affect those in their area with their bandwidth hoarding by using these residential connections for Internet cafes or illegal downloading. It’s difficult to argue with these points of contention because, really, the Philippines is hardly a disciplined country when it comes to these things (though no empirical data is available to prove this point). But is the lack of discipline a valid enough reason to impose limits on everyone’s Internet use? ISP’s and intellectual property protectors say yes but in the online arena, traditional arguments are deemed invalid by Internet freedom fighters who stand by the creed of Network Neutrality. Here’s an article that gives a nice and short insight on local bandwidth caps.

Honestly, bandwidth caps aren’t that bad, at least not any time soon but they will always be contended because of the threat they pose on Internet freedom. The problematic aspect of this argument though is that the Internet can never be entirely separated from the offline world. Your access to the Web is limited to what your locality can provide. These limitations and realities, may it be cultural, technical or physical, hampers the concept of absolute freedom on the Web. For any mutually beneficial conclusion when it comes to conflicts of Internet freedom, advocates of network neutrality should get down from their high horses and the corporations should learn to talk with their hands outside their pockets. Otherwise, we’d just be wasting a lot of time.

-Wacky

Sources:

(Blogger), Cocoy. "Why NTC’s draft memorandum order on Broadband Cap is wrong." The Philippine Online Chronicles. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <http://www.thepoc.net/commentaries/10713-why-ntcs-draft-memorandum-order-on-broadband-cap-is-wrong.html>.

"Bandwidth caps explained, NTC endorsed | YugaTech | Philippines, Technology News & Reviews." YugaTech Philippines. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <http://www.yugatech.com/blog/the-internet/bandwidth-caps-explained-ntc-endorsed/>.

Fenlon, Wesley. "What AT&T's New Bandwidth Cap Means for You." Tested. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <www.tested.com/forums/pc-and-mac/5/what-atts-new-broadband-bandwidth-caps-mean-for-you/6694/>.

"MINIMUM SPEED OF BROADBAND CONNECTIONS." MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <portal.ntc.gov.ph:9081/wps/_mc/MC2011/MO_minimum_speed_12jan11draft.html>.

Roettgers, Janko. "AT&T’s New Bandwidth Cap Is Bad News for Netflix: Online Video News." GigaOM“ Technology News, Analysis and Trends . N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <http://gigaom.com/video/att-bandwidth-cap-netflix/>.

Singel, Ryan. "AT&T Puts Broadband Users on Monthly Allowance | Epicenter | Wired.com." Wired.com . N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/03/att-dsl-cap/>.

Taylor, Keaton. "AT&T to Impose Caps on Home Internet." BestTechie. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <http://www.besttechie.net/2011/03/15/att-impose-caps-home-internet/>.

"Telecoms regulation: Put a cap on it." The Economist. The Economist, n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2011/03/telecoms_regulation>.

Tofel, Kevin C.. "AT&T Shuts Down the Mobile Broadband Buffet by Ending Flat-rate Mobile Plans: Mobile Technology News." GigaOM“ Technology News, Analysis and Trends . N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <http://gigaom.com/mobile/att-shuts-down-the-mobile-broadband-buffet/>.

"is Policy on internet bandwidth usage now applicable." bayanFORUM. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Mar. 2011. <www.bayan.com.ph/forum/yaf_postst5492_is-Policy-on-internet-bandwidth-usage--now-applicable.aspx>.

It’s not “It”; It’s “Us”

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Thu, 24 Feb 2011 06:16:00 +0000

The expansion of the Internet has brought us new wonders and at the same time, new horrors. The acquirement of new technology and access to a vast amount of information on the web seem so wonderful but thinking about these things closely reveals terrors that somehow make us doubt the web.

            Virtual revolution episodes 3 and 4, the Cost of Free and HomoInterneticus , have made me think of the activities I have been doing on the Internet. A lot of people around me had been using the Internet for various purposes and I did not see any harm this has done to them so I used to think that I could use this technology as long as I want, in whatever way that I fancy. That was before I became aware of the consequences of putting and extracting information from the web.

            In this generation, i see a lot of my friends connected on Social Networking Sites from Friendster to Facebook. Signing up in these sites, and any other sites that asks for memberships, requires the user to enter personal information that identifies them as a person. I am aware that the information required is so crucial that it can be used against me by the administrator of the site but I put it in anyway. Other SNS users are not even hesitant to enter whatever information is asked from them. Even there is a "Terms of Agreement" that one must read and check before signing up on a particular site, it is usually ignored. I, myself, just ignore every "Terms of Agreement" because I am too lazy to read the small characters and long document when all I just want is to gain access to the site and to the information and services that I need from the website.

            Stephen Fry said that the reward we get from the internet is so great that whatever the risk is, we try to contain it. I think there is a cathartic feeling in being able to express one's self online that whatever the risk is, people do not mind at all. However, people not minding the risk and people not aware of the risks are two different cases that I think deserve to be looked at.

            The internet is so free and I think there is no way of controlling and regulating it in the near future. A lot of people have access to the web and a lot of information has been stored already. Differences among government policies in different nations also affect the regulation and policing over the internet. If we cannot change the way things go in the internet, then I think, change should first be directed to us, the people who use the web and contribute greatly on its expansion. We should find a way to inform the people of the consequences of our online activities. We should understand what really happens to the information we exchange online. The vast number of adolescents who usually go online or go to internet cafes to access the web may not be fully aware of these consequences.

Dr. Krotoski posed a question whether the internet enriches or distorts humanity. Maybe I am just a real humanist and I believe that humans are on top of anything, most especially technology. I do not fully subscribe to Marshal McLuhan’s Technological Determinism. Technology can shape our culture only if we let it. The way we interact and communicate changes through time because of the emergence of new technologies but being the creators of this technology, having a higher faculty of thinking than the machines, we should know better up to what extent we can let these technologies shape the way we think, speak and act. If the technology is capable of “shaping” us, then, we too, must be able to reshape the technology and this digital revolution so as to save our humanity.

Maybe we should focus our vision not on what this digital era is doing to us, rather, we should focus our vision to what we are doing in this generation, what we are doing to this phenomena, what we are doing because of this evolution, and what we should do today and on the coming years of human existence as we continue to co-exist with these technology and inter-connectivity.

Sources:

Virtual Revolution episode 3 The Cost of Free

Virtual Revolution episode 4 Homo-Interneticus

Technological Determinism at http://www.allsands.com/Misc2/technologicalde_ubp_gn.htm

http://news.cnet.com/i/tim/2011/01/19/child.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/77/197704394_46c3cc1b19.jpg

http://www.worldofstock.com/slides/CON3004.jpg

Pancakes

noreply@blogger.com (Margie Manlunas) — Mon, 07 Feb 2011 10:12:00 +0000

I grew up with the Internet. I saw how it gained media attention and eventually, media scrutiny. Looking back, I was always passive when using the Internet. I never really thought about what’s going on behind the free space. I never really cared until that time I realized I was using it more than I had to— getting hitched with social-networking sites and I started to rely on Google more than anything in the world.

Episode 3, The Cost of Free, expounded my knowledge on how Internet providers gain profit. I knew advertising was the answer but I never really knew the whole story. It didn’t come to my mind what happens after that. I was only seeing Adam’s finger in the puzzle that is The Creation. Little did I know, there’s so much more to it than I thought there is. All this time, I had been oblivious of the consequences when using the Internet.

I consider myself lucky enough to be part of the transition stage— from the oblivious Internet users to the soon-to-be-well-informed produsers. This now is the turning point of a new Internet age. From the classic html-based websites to the Java-applications that is popping anywhere. I’m glad this transition is happening. But this has got to happen rapidly.

I didn’t know that individual persons using a particular computer could be traced—where a particular user lives, what he does for a living or how many kids one has. However, it’s not just those. It can also track every webpage you have been (and will be) visiting. This makes me think of a project—classifying personality-types based on the websites he/she visits. But wait, somebody else is already doing that! They use these kinds of information and package them in a way presentable to advertisers. The next thing you know, there’s already a stress-relieving vacation package ad smiling at your next Facebook log-in. For every sign up page which requires your name and other personal things, you are gradually decreasing your privacy level. Thinking of the countless social-network sites, fan pages, blog sites and other Internet sign-ups, I think I might just gave up my privacy to the millions of anonymous users out there. Quite creepy.

The World Wide Web is changing the way we live. From the old-school family TV-time comes the new family time which composes of all the family members in one room facing a laptop and typing all the way into cyberspace. This happens in real life. It happened to my family. It reshapes friendships. It reshapes our approach to school. It reshaped almost everything. Everything is reachable. Everything is Google-able. This posts serious setbacks on our social and personal lives. More and more people spend more time on the Internet than spending time with real people hanging out in the offline world. Everyone is unknowingly becoming more impersonal by the day. We have let many people (especially corporations) invade our privacy without us knowing.

It reshapes learning. The Internet generation has been touted as the pancake generation. We have been labeled as the generation who no longer look into and know by heart one area of Interest but we are the people who spread ourselves too thinly in to various fields of interest. That is a reason why Einsteins, Shakespeares and Hemingways do not exist in today’s technological age.

Our students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach. I seriously think that Internet studies should be offered starting in the primary level education until tertiary levels (there should even be specialized courses too). I have cousins as young as 6 who can already surf through cartoonnetwork.com without parental help. Internet users are becoming younger and younger. This means that the people “sold” by Internet providers are becoming younger and younger, more naïve every year. We should start incorporating Internet studies into the educational system NOW This way, the people exploited using the Internet should decrease to zero. The solution here is not limiting Internet. The Internet isn’t the Internet if there are boundaries. The essence will be lost if that happens. The Internet should not be ceased otherwise—chaos. The World Wide Web should not have boundaries. You don’t burn the whole house in order to roast the pig. The answer here is proper usage and knowledge. Where to start but at the educational systems we already have? Controlling and regulating the Internet is also not the answer. A more complex issue arises—who will control and regulate it? The government? I don’t think so. (Think: Marcos era). So. Let’s. Get. Moving. Everyone should know the real face(s) of the Internet. This way, people are allowed to think for themselves and start acting themselves and start spreading the same message we are trying to communicate. Let the ripple effect continue. Pay it forward.

I have sources!

http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf

http://www.wisegeek.com/who-are-pancake-people.htm

http://www.google.com.ph/imglanding?q=facebook+is+creepy&um=1&hl=tl&tbs=isch:1&tbnid=QQqumEx21bJ3VM:&imgrefurl=http://www.shoeboxblog.com/%253Fp%253D17306&imgurl=http://www.shoeboxblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/facebook-tip.jpg&ei=tcdPTb7_BM7Bce_W9PsF&zoom=1&w=886&h=880&iact=hc&oei=psdPTerZIY3YuAOfxoTjDw&esq=2&page=2&tbnh=175&tbnw=176&start=26&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:8,s:26&biw=1279&bih=680

False Panic: Is the Internet something we should really be afraid of?

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 22:38:00 +0000

It’s just so hyped up right now because it’s something new. It’s something new that’s starting to infect the whole world. As with anything new, people are normally critical, doubtful, scared, curious. About what it can bring and what it can do. We’re just excited. In particular, I think people who have lived most of their lives in a none-digital world before are the ones who have more cynicism for the Internet. But for kids born in the digital age, the so called ‘digital natives’, this is all normal and alright. What the might and fright old people feel about the Internet is something not so big for these kids. Maybe we’re just building something up. Maybe we’re just imagining a monster, when there is really none.

I believe the Internet is something good, and is something that brings more good than bad. I think the doubts about the Internet are from extremist views, and furthermore, are still might be’s as of now. It’s like Stephen Fry’s analogy of the Internet and the car. When the car was new, everyone was terrified with how people die while using it. But cars are still present today.

Analogy

How about the world where there was no television yet. People got their information in more difficult and in slower means. Entertainment on the other hand was obtained infrequently, often in vaudeville shows, or in comics, or in panoramas. When television came in, information was more easily available. Information and entertainment started to be quickly disseminated and broadcasted. I’m sure people had lots of feelings of threat and worry over what the television might bring to people, and true enough there were, and up to an extent there still are; like the TV as becoming the idiot box of teenagers instead of an information medium, the proliferation of junk in TV as they say, the poor regulation of values and morals in television, leading to assumptions that TV has a tendency to corrupt minds, teens spending more time watching TV instead of reading books, making them dumber. I myself experienced this assumption by my parents and relatives. I was a voracious television consumer of cartoons and Disney characters, and later on HBO movies.

But look at how television came out to be now. Is there still anyone scared of those assumptions made out of television? Television has become so normal in our lives already that we aren’t so scared of its implications anymore, partly because maybe over the years, time has proved that television doesn’t make people’s lives abnormal. It’s true that there are good and bad sides of it, and the good thing is that people always grow smart enough to sort out the junk from the valuable. And in the long run, television has helped humanity vastly. It has helped us more than it has hurt us. I believe the same is true with the Internet.

Now television is already regulated in different ways to solve most of the problems about content. I think it’s just a matter of time until the Internet too will be encountering balancing actions to uphold more of what is good above what is bad about the intricacies of the medium.

Depth

More use of the Internet doesn’t mean that the way people think has less depth now. For me, you cannot generalize the effects of the Internet. The effects of the web differ with the differences in people; differences in demographics, social status, educational attainment, age, attitude per se, and web literacy. I believe how the Internet affects individuals are relative to these factors, and to a whole lot more others. In my opinion, there are people who have more depth in their stands and realizations of particular topics because of the Internet. Since the Internet gives people the power to access, almost all parts of a topic, and all related and relevant sides to it, it even helps people make better and more in-depth judgments. Again this is true only to some people, but refutes the negative generalization about how the web affects how we think.

Acceptance

We shouldn’t be scared with the changes the Internet brings. Humanity, life, is that way. People change. Life changes. Culture changes. The change the Internet brings is the same kind of thing television brought before, it’s just a different object now. Like television, the Internet is just a new medium for communication, not to mention that it’s better, faster, more interactive and more accommodating of all formats. People communicated differently before there was television, and we’ve evolved to communicate the way we are now, after it. We wouldn’t have developed this way without the television, radio, telephone, and all the other technological innovations that seemed bizarre then but has lead to so much development now.

Things are naturally progressive. From weak one becomes stronger, from dim one becomes smarter, from foolish one becomes wiser, from slow one becomes faster. We shouldn’t be surprised that the world is heading the faster way. I believe in a world that is faster. When we have reached the fastest, well, maybe things will revert back to being slow. Like how broadcasting developed into narrowcasting, and maybe will revert back to broadcasting again. But, we just have to accept that this is the kind of change we’re having now. So what if this is the change we’re heading to. Are we going stop it? No. We can’t even stop it. We just have to accept it, and maybe learn to use it effectively and more positively than negatively. Regulate it? Yes maybe. But we can’t stop the Internet and the changes it brings. We just have to be ready for it and open to what it can bring.

Sources:
The Virtual Revolution Episodes 3 & 4
Palfrey, John, G., Born Digital, New York: Basic Books, 2008.

Faith

The Cost of Free

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 05:59:00 +0000

The Virtual Revolution Episode 3 is all about how the web destroys the myth of free internet services. It illustrates how commerce has come to dominate virtually all aspects of web provision, allied to their increasingly sophisticated tactics to gather data/information on all web-users.

"The Product Online is not the content, the Product online is YOU"- ~~Douglass Rushkoff.~~

The World Wide Web’s evolution brought great impact to our society. It allows free access to information and gives us the benefit to be easily connected with people around the world. It also offers us free access to media unlike television and print whereas we need to pay in order to get access with.

As I watched the episode 3 of the Virtual Revolution, I got confused with what was really the cost of this free access . Is the cost of logging in our social networking sites, higher than the cost we pay for watching a movie inside a movie house? or is it even higher than the cost we pay for buying a television set?...

The question that confused me a lot was: Is free access to the Internet really for free?

After I watched the third episode of the Virtual Revolution, I came up with a conclusion that in the web, Nothing is free.

The internet serves as medium for online business, and we as web consumers are their primary target. Lots of companies around the world are investing on the web to place their products online.

Facebook is one example. As we know, this social networking site is designed to serve as a vehicle for the free flow of information. It serves as the extension of our physical life. It mirrors who we are in the real world to the cyber world. We put our personal profile, our likes and interest, thoughts in mind in this site. Its features also allows us to share information more efficiently. But then again, we must be aware of its downside. What we put in our account are automatically owned by the Web. Meaning, the photos and blogs that we posted, and the videos that we uploaded are all properties of World Wide Web.

In the episode 3 of the Virtual Revolution it says that our thought and desires expressed on the web are traced, tracked and traded in pursuit of profit. It is very alarming because most of the web users are unaware of this. The web is like a panopticon whereas we are all under surveillance. Here, the prisons are positioned around a tower, whereas they are being watched and guarded by authorities. The concept of the design is to allow an observer to observe prisoners without the incarcerated being able to tell whether they are being watched.

In the context of the web, we are alike with those prisons that are being observed without being noticed. The web has the power to trace us and access our personal information. As what Doughlass Rushkoff says “The Product Online is not the content, the product online is you” explains that we, the users of the web are the product of the Online World. How we interact with the applications fed in the internet gives hint to big companies investing their business online of what our interests are. The data from our account is used to target us with advertising catered to our tastes. They then think for strategies to use to promote their products in a subtle way for us to consume without being noticed. These strategies can be seen among various websites wherein all online advertisements are being posted in almost every page.

According to Alex Krotoski, our online life is a trade. We pay for a free web with the currency of information of who we are as a user.

We are all consumers of the World Wide Web. Meaning, we are all under its power and surveillance. But then again, it's up to us whether we resist or not. At this point, the most powerful resistance that we could do is to be responsible and critical of what to put online.

Sources:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B37wW9CGWyY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5ShMZ0Xy2Q

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=2208601394

Posted by: Kath Gabaon

Issues of the Web and the Homo Interneticus' Web experience

noreply@blogger.com (ALDRIN.SORIANO) — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 07:42:00 +0000

Photo available here.

No copyright infringement nor plagiarism intended.

Used here non-commercially, for academic purposes only.

The Web has offered us a lot of things. We get to meet and socialize with our friends and to our relatives even beyond local or national boundaries; we get to shop even if we are inside our home or in offices; we get to be informed and updated about current events even if we don’t get it from traditional media; and we get to earn degrees even if we do not go to schools or universities to attend hours of lectures. These innovations are not new in the world of the digital natives[1]. These have now been embedded in our culture.

These phenomena have been part of us already because we grew up with the Web; however there are still a lot of issues and limitations that are associated with it, as presented in the third and fourth episodes of the Virtual Revolution.

The first issue is the way we share information. True enough that the Web has opened an avenue to democratize information to everyone who needs it. Personally, the Web has been vital especially to my academics because of it, I can easily access all the information that I needed in a very little span of time and in just a simple click I get all the data I need for a class. But this has its own disadvantage to me because I do not get all the pertinent information that is essential for my course. The result of my Web behaviour examination maybe true about my being a Web Ostrich which is a fast searcher but does not get accurate results[2]. Another reason maybe because of the internet’s wide range of choices for a searcher, it leaves him at lost with all the available data on the Web.

The second issue that the Web has as shown in the documentary is that it does not leave a borderline between our public and personal self anymore.

There are a lot of things that people do on the web which are very, very intimate. In a way, you know what somebody’s browsing on the Web, you’ll find out whether somebody is gay and wondering about coming-out, looking other people’s stories… These are all kinds of very, very sensitive things that people do on the web.[3]

I agree with Sir Tim Berners Lee with his point that we do a lot of things on the web that are very sensitive and very intimate. I believe that it is truly an intrusion to one’s privacy if other people will know your actions within the internet especially if it is unsolicited and worse, the person who uses the web does not have any idea that he is being monitored by somebody. I interviewed some of my friends about their reactions and insights if they were being monitored or surveillance is running while they are surfing the Web, and the result of the interview was against the surveillance. My friend Dane, whose face really turned into awe as I told her about it, said that she cannot believe it. She only thought that Dilnet, the internet provider inside the University of the Philippines Diliman campus, was the only one who can monitor the sites that the students can visit. And that she cannot believe that even at her own personal house, she is still monitored by someone. “Akala ko Dilnet lang ang may kakayahang i-check and mga websites that we visit. I really can’t believe this.Are you really sure, baka naman mali lang source mo,” Dane added during the interview.

“In return for a Free Web, our privacy has become a commodity. We are economic units in what has become the new commercial frontier,” said Dr. Aleks Krotoski. I could believe that this is the real happening or the real business on the Web. The documentary said that it is a way for some companies on the Web to determine the needs and to have a clear psychographics of their market and audience. Dr. Krotoski demonstrated in the show how Google scans every message of an individual and how it gives recommendations to you for you to click. And by clicking it, Google earns. According to Dr. Krotoski, that since we are not spending for the services of Google, they need to earn back and through advertising, they earn a relatively very high amount of cash and that it is the cost of free services we get from it.

Knowing this from the documentary, I could not believe how I was betrayed by the Web, or by the people behind this phenomenon! All this time I thought my actions on the web are surveillance-free and that I can search about anything and watch almost anything online! What about the things I posted on my blogs?! What about my personal details?! What about my personal photos that should only be kept offline?! I think the most dangerous piece of information that could be traded about me is that my dad owns a lot of guns and weapons of various calibres. These photos were uploaded in one of my accounts in SNSs. Now we are in danger especially if this information is traded to our enemies or to people who are against my dad.

If I am Google and be able to have this tactic, and for me as a form of revenge for getting this data about me, I will trade the information or even the sites being visited by the Unites States of America President Barack Obama. And that I will trade that information to the country who wanted to have a insight on how to take over the current stature of USA as the most powerful country in the world.

Another issue presented to us by the documentary The Virtual Revolution is the Web’s power to reshape humanity. The very rampant way on how the Web reshapes humanity is the devaluation of friendship. As Dr. Aleks Krotoski said in the show that Facebook gives friendship a lesser value and importance than what it used to have when it was not yet created. I think this is true. On this date, I have 2,116 friends in Facebook, and the quarter of it I personally do not know. I do not send as much messages on the Facebook walls of my really close friends, but of classmates and acquaintances yes. Maybe this also agrees with what the author of Here Comes Everybody said that no one has really friends that can reach up to thousands.

Another fact that was stated in the documentary is that the Web makes us immortal. On one side this is an advantage for us especially to those whose research relies on archives. It is also an avenue to know our roots by this feature, we are free to look at photos that our relatives in the past.

Once it’s on the Web, it is almost impossible to erase. All our interactions on the Web from our Facebook and Twitter status updates, to news that we share with family and friends, to gossip that’s spread about us, will be on line for ever. The web effectively makes us immortal. The upside is that we can live on. There are thousands of dead people who are still receiving updates and even being poked on Facebook. But the downside is that young people, who are growing up in public by living so much of their lives on the web, will have to face living with all their youthful indiscretions that can be accessed by anyone.[4]

I agree with Dr. Krotoski’s point that it makes us immortal however that it also has disadvantages especially if your credibility and personality is at stake. Blogging, uploading photos and videos, and posting almost anything on your Facebook wall, and tweeting almost every other second maybe a normal activity to do especially in our age today. But do we realize what the implications might lead to when our children and grandchildren saw and read these posts? I do not think so. Maybe we are not informed about this, and we cannot do anything with these posts anymore because according to Professor Nigel Shadbolt of University of Southampton, these remains as our digital fingerprint which is as much as valuable as our genetic fingerprint.[5]

With these issues, I believe there is a strong need for us to guide and educate our children properly on their internet usage especially those who just use the Web for granted. However, I believe that we should not limit the Web because the real essence or the real purpose of the internet which is to provide unlimited information and data will be diminished. My suggestion will be to just properly educate the users and the ones who guide these users for them to know the advantages and disadvantages of using the Web and that if we have a high level of internet literacy, we then can have no problem with whatever panics it might cause.

[1] John Palfrey and Urs Gasser. Born Digital: Understanding the First Generation of Digital Natives. (Basic Books; 2008)

[2] Web Behaviour Test by BBC. Read my results at http://upcybernomads.blogspot.com/2011/01/when-my-offline-self-meets-my-online.html.

[3] Tim Berners Lee in episode 3 of The Virtual Revolution

[4] Dr. Aleks Krotoski in the 3^rd Episode of The Virtual Revolution

[5] Interviewed on the 3^rd Episode of The Virtual Revolution

What's IT gonna be?

noreply@blogger.com (Anonymous) — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 03:16:00 +0000

Information technology has really gone through a big change for the twenty years it allegedly existed. That's roughly a year after I was born. Perhaps if the internet was a human being, he/she'd be a tall, physically able person who also has the brains to go with the brawn.

Basically, what I thought of about the internet before was that it was a huge network of information--nothing more. It would supply information to people

who seek them, give people the chance to share their own information to other people, whether academically or otherwise. Now, not only does the web inform--it empowers.

What the "Digital Natives" have yet to realize (and perhaps some of the older generations, too) is that these massive volumes of information can actually empower them in a way that their generation, and possibly future generations, would have the ability of being even better than us. People can easily self-educate--they can learn things of interest but originally not in their "line of work", or, more appropriately, outside the classroom.

I can personally attest to this. I have been an engineering student for almost three years before I became a broadcast major. My interests shifted, but still I was inclined to be tech-savvy. I stuck to my hobbies--tinkering with anything that has to do with technology. I was looking up news about it. Basically I knew a lot when it comes to technology and that's why they call me the 'tech guru' and they ask me for advice every time they need their laptops repaired or softwares installed. In this way, the internet has made it easier for me to pursue one of my hobbies while I study another of them altogether. Internet has made it easy for me to have multiple interests and gratified my need for information regarding them.

Of course, if I can easily access information that can help me and my friends, the internet also makes it easy for shady people to access shady information. I won't put up links here, lest it risk the integrity and security of the blog and its contributors, but I know for a fact that a lot of how-to's are available in the net, positive or any degree otherwise. Even with the ease of tracking the internet and its users provide, there's little to no regulation in terms of what information is available, not to mention lack of legislation in most of even the internet-heavy countries out there.

In this regard, we digital natives (I've considered myself part of it even if I'm a year or so off the mark) have an even bigger responsibility of screening what information we put--and take from--the web. This is, of course, common sense, but we also have the added responsibility of educating those that do lack this sense. As those educated with the internet and all its nuances and social implications, ideally we should know what things we have to educate the generation with.

I know that the whole internet-is-dumbing-us-down thing has a certain truth to it. It does--only if we let it do that. At the end of the day, it's still just a technology, and it's always going to be something we can use for our own. It's not completely an entity that controls how we live. It only will if we let it.

References:

http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/cens3.html

http://www.lazyenvironmentalist.com/blog/radio-episodes/what-color-is-your-internet-powerful-green-solutions/

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Sat, 05 Feb 2011 03:02:00 +0000

Image source: http://www.googlygooeys.com/post/1114755743

Posted by: Jara Lucero

There's Internet...What now?

noreply@blogger.com (UP.CYBERNOMADS) — Fri, 04 Feb 2011 15:09:00 +0000

The two episodes of Virtual Revolution really scared me, its like one strong point after the other but what really scares me is that I experienced some of the things discussed like for example the personal things I share with my family members abroad through sending an email or a private message and the things like where do I live, who are my siblings, parents, what school I go to, basic information that they use to promote advertisers. I find it selfish really, it’s not supposed to be the motive of the Internet but people changed it to something that’s more profit centered.

Even the concept of privacy is alarming, just when you thought that you are all one browsing the net and getting all the information you want and need, the thing is there is someone tracking and studying your behavior through the activities you do online.

I think the most dangerous thing that you share online is the accumulative data they get through your online activities, they track what are your likes and dislikes, where do you hang out, who are your friends and the alarming part is your share all this things without you knowing its repercussions in the future. For now you may think that its okay nobody really care about what you post online, but secretly you are being a victim of a company or someone who controls the web. I think that people will be informed of this and what its effect may be in the future, people will start thinking twice before they post and share something online. People seems like they don’t care for now because they don’t know about this all they see is the rewards not the risks. The face of the web is so alluring that you just think its all good, its free, its easy to use and its limitless but what we don’t see is ourselves our being sold without us knowing. I think this is stealing, and stealing is bad. After watching the 2 episodes, how I wished that their will be a existing website who will actually protect my activities online and protect my right to privacy, like the Attention Trust.org, for sure I’ll sign up on their services.

This is really redefining who we are, the children now they are so dependent on the Internet that they relate to people differently. We don’t like being judge in real life, but basically after watching virtual revolution it made me think all my activities online the Internet uses that to be the basis on who I am, what I can be in the future. I learned that if you resist your true nature you turn out to be the worst version of you so if the younger generation don’t learn the basic rules on how to relate to people and how to be a human being, face to face no mediums in between such as the internet, they will turn out to be something they are not. I think I noticed about the generation now is they are boxed up with who they are on their Facebook page and it was mentioned on episode 3 or Virtual Revolution that we are limited on books we read, type of music we like and all the other shallow stuff. I believe we lack the “doing” part. We just press the “like” button about a campaign online and we think that it’s actually us being part of the campaign. The web is creating a generation who they know their true selves, weak, dependent and shallow. I believe in the saying that you are what you do, so if this generation is just dependent on the web and limited what it can offer then we should be really alarmed.

Kids from two to 11 years of age are spending 63 percent more time online than they did five years ago, says a report released Monday from Nielsen Online. Children in that age range were online an average of 11 hours in May 2009 versus just 7 hours in May 2004.

Over the past five years, the total number of kids surfing the Net has shot up 18 percent to 16 million, says the report, while the overall Internet population has risen only 10 percent. The younger set now represents 9.5 percent of the online community.

Over all im not giving up just yet, I think that we can still revolutionized and evolve from this state. Ultimately as the consumer we can still be in control we just have to be aware and conscious and be responsible in utilizing the web.

sources:

The virtual revolution episode 3 and 4

hellcenter.wordpress.com

engtech.wordpress.com

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10797_3-10281882-235.html

- Jalyssa May Caccam

Unregulated Free VS Progressive Sages

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Fri, 04 Feb 2011 14:34:00 +0000

Perhaps the main thing that connects these two episodes of virtual revolution (The Cost of Free and Homo Interneticus) is that while episode 4 tackles how internet has turned us into somehow different beings adapting to a distinct set of characteristics which makes us see this new medium as all-powerful as it defies social, cultural and intellectual limitations and how we become blinded by this extraordinary power, Episode 3 features not only the Internet’s vast powers but also its being “free”. But as these two episodes revealed and eventually deconstructed these false notions we are blinded about, they both did not seem to expound or suggest any form of solution to the harm posed by this booming and relatively new capitalist chamber. As the episodes have provided, this medium is definitely not an escape route from reality which most people are hesitant to face and it most certainly is NOT free. It is, as Dr. Aleks Krotoski have put it, “a highly-targeted advertising.”

Each day, most people are not hesitant to share photos, videos, documentations and information about their personal lives and principles. Some do not care whoever sees or accesses the information they share while others religiously trust the privacy policies which assures the full confidentiality and efficacy of these settings. It is very apparent that we, as digital natives, consider this medium as a new form of self-expression and an opportunity for identity reconstruction. But while we provide and share anything which could be as petty as broadcasting that you’ve just farted or as serious as someone you love just died, the odds are about the same that somehow, somewhere, someone is earning money out of it – out of you. And just as some wee bit of digital natives are informed of this, an enormous majority, or disappointingly for some, do not care at all. I for one, honestly do not care at all until I have watched the Virtual Revolution series and became aware of how I am used not just one of all other people as commodities but as a single, unique type of commodity that is being sold online. For almost eight years now, I have been part of this multicultural cyberspace and what I would consider as the most dangerous thing I have put into risk is not just a single information but my whole being and most importantly the privacy I thought I had.

The younger generations who are considered to be the helpless victims of this medium are predicted to be self-involved in the future that their notion of social connection and relationship is highly dependent on the web. As the saying by Charles Wadsworth goes, “by the time a man realizes that maybe his father was right, he usually has a son who thinks he's wrong.” Not all of us will have to be wrong if someone, just one single person, will point out what should be right. The Internet is a vast medium that offers an enormous amount of opportunity for us and that opportunity will not be utilized until we actually realize it. The young people should not be deprived of this medium for it is undoubtedly a good form for them to express themselves. But what we, older, more informed and educated people must realize is that putting this medium into progressive and scholarly use is what could make it more useful and beneficial for all of us. Let us not wait for the time that different generations would blame each other for not being able to watch over the next. I’m not one to note every single step toward this goal but what I know for sure is that we first need to realize and accept that the web does not exist to be a medium of the unregulated free but should be a medium of the progressive sages.

In an interview by Dr. Krotoski with Stephen Fry regarding social media, he stressed the point that if we compare a teenager who lived during the time where the Internet was non-existent and a teenager who is part of the “generation web” there is not much difference. In fact, the one belonging to the generation web would “know more, understand more, is more socially confident, more aware of the rest of the world and more adept to research.” He pointed out that the very existence of the web opened opportunities for this certain generation to explore the world and learn more. And putting to context his assumption about the generation web, it clearly promotes the enforcement of the proper use of the web. Stephen Fry also compared the advent of the web to that of the automobile and the mobile phones where in conclusion he said: “there's a risk-reward ratio here and for us the reward is so great that whatever the risk is, we try to contain it and understand it at best but what we don't do is say the risk is too great.” Thus, pointing out that whatever the downsides, harms, and risks the Internet exposes us all in, these are overpowered by the rewarding feel we get from it.

Sources:

http://www.google.com.ph/imglanding?q=homo+interneticus&um=1&hl=tl&sa=X&biw=1366&bih=631&tbs=isch:1&tbnid=gItKceF66aHDIM:&imgrefurl=http://e-marketingresearch.blogspot.com/&imgurl=https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQAzWalUfC16XppuuN4nmxAbA2KPoJjw2epUJAWf2iumdXEk3FTqvFSGQgunV6v4-B-K5IDxYcq1gOjVL_VTLBo0pvOfIQsDn3db8bjRDK-UNoiC49yfYYax3iMNDJuClc1sGBRAl763fs/s400/joke_five_fingers_mouse.jpg&ei=rwlMTdDDNY2ougPf6MXXDw&zoom=1&w=350&h=362

http://www.google.com.ph/imglanding?q=homo+interneticus&um=1&hl=tl&sa=X&tbs=isch:1&tbnid=8-m5O5jhyk4ZfM:&imgrefurl=http://digitalworld3.blogspot.com/&imgurl=https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgJHyxzqkgez802MEcJkYB9CpogUI732nuDqgeAWWUJINVZ5h_cG1a18oxiTyKkpBd-hqfVXVTflpcvbOUPB8tPNG84VngznV7ZXgPb2zrQZv8opqk_tH56GaJ4N5W1IQNj1kDIQK3Hd0Fm/s1600/internet-kids-logo.jpg&ei=DQpMTfuXOpOfcdjQ4OcL&zoom=1&w=578&h=534&iact=hc&oei=_glMTar9J4u4vQOHlPHvDw&esq=4&page=3&tbnh=149&tbnw=161&start=34&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:34&biw=1366&bih=631

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j39bcYlDHYM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X97BnVa1go0&feature=related

http://www.google.com.ph/imglanding?q=google+dollars&um=1&hl=tl&biw=1366&bih=631&tbs=isch:1&tbnid=0kTs0L0WwP9CfM:&imgrefurl=http://www.flickr.com/photos/pforret/135334844/&imgurl=http://farm1.static.flickr.com/47/135334844_7aa10a682c.jpg&ei=8ApMTcD5NYWWvAORzMHVDw&zoom=1&w=500&h=346

Virtual (R)evolution.

noreply@blogger.com (Roll Jervis Manahan) — Fri, 04 Feb 2011 06:02:00 +0000

by Roll Jervis Manahan

This blog contains the author's insights and reactions in the third and fourth episodes of Dr. Aleks Krotoski's BBC documentary series - The Virtual Revolution.

Part I. Virtual Revolution 3: The Cost of Free.

The internet machinery is working its wonders. It’s more commercial than we think. The Virtual Revolution 3: The Cost of Free unravelled one of the biggest mysteries of the Web – its actual money-making schemes.

Prior to seeing the documentary, most of us thought that the advertising platform of the internet is just the same with the traditional media radio and television. Advertisers would place spots in the websites that they want to, just as advertisers buy airtime from selected broadcast networks. However, advertising in the internet penetrates more deeply into us, the ‘power’ is reversed and the net users become the products. The money-making scheme in the Internet reminds me of Jeremy Bentham’s concept of the Panopticon. To whom does the power actually belong? Is it to its users who are empowered to send emails for free, watch videos for free, access articles for free, et al? Or is it to the ‘owners’ and Internet gods who can access and manipulate the most private of our information? In Bentham’s concept, the prison is structured in such a way that a ‘higher being’ oversees all prisoners. Everyone is being seen by that higher being. We aren’t sure if there is actually a higher being.

It’s basically a give-and-take situation. As a form of payment for all the services we get without paying any cost, Google, for instance, gets to see our deepest secrets in our emails. In a micro level, in my case for instance, I don’t think that this has negative effects and implications in my internet usage and in my life in general. If the internet opens lots of opportunities and possibilities for us, then, this might be a small price to pay.

Part II. Virtual Revolution 4: Homo Interneticus

The internet, for us, netizens, has been both an alternate world and a parallel universe. In the previous episodes of the same documentary series, Dr. Aleks Krotoski pointed out that there were 1.9 billion internet users in the world, where 500 million of them are active in Facebook. If Facebook alone was a country, then it will be the third most populated country in the planet.

Dr. Aleks Krotoski, in the documentary, also said how the Web has developed a culture of its own. The Internet has developed its own set of morals and ethics. The late Dr. Walter J. Ong postulated that our mentality as people has changed with the advent of the internet. The ancient times were an oral culture. The birth of Johann’s Gutenberg’s printing press revolutionized the world and the oral culture almost died, giving birth to our new breed of printed literature. Now, another paradigm is in the move as the Internet changes the mentality of the people virtually. E-books will be our new form of literature.

Following the trail of internet happenings, soon, internet will not just be a part of the real world, but rather evolve to be a world in itself. It will be inhabited by a certain species of humans Homo Interneticus, who resembles the anatomical structure of a man, but has the senses of an ‘internet man’ (for the sake of convenience, let’s call them avatars). Today’s digital natives will be the ancestors of these avatars.

Michael Goldhaber said in a study that in the internet world, the idea of space collapses. Geography ceases to be a barrier in people’s interaction. We’re just as close to our neighbor next door to our relatives in the US as both of them are just a PM away. Homo Interneticus thus, do not have the sense of distance.

History is in the making. We cannot alter the changes in the world. As UP Department of History professor Dedina Lapar said in her lecture, the world is constantly adapting in the changing times. In a macro view of history, the evolution from the Australopithecus to the modern day man was a scientific and natural process, in such a way that the evolution of the Homo Sapiens to Homo Interneticus is a natural process. Internet is ultimately changing the world more than we might know it. We must not be alarmed for it is a natural change and development we must all welcome. Who knows, the creation of virtual restaurants and farms, as well as online role playing games are a precursor to the rise of the actual virtual world. In a few years, our lives might be fully grounded on the internet and we’ll transform from Homo Sapiens to Homo Interneticus. People change, it’s a fact of life.

In that case, Charles Darwin might have to revise his theory of the evolution of man.

Conclusion

The Internet is continually redefining our friendships, our lifestyles, our culture, our senses, and our view of the world. It has opened up a new world that we are currently co-habiting and enjoying. We are empowered to use the Internet for free, however, we had a price to pay.

In history, civilizations wax and wane. Assyrians and Phoenicians grew and lost. Egyptians rose and were defeated. Today is the blossoming of a new tribe, a tribe of Homo Interneticus. The Virtual Revolution, and the Virtual Evolution, is here.

_________________________________________________________

Sources:

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEggjcrxO34VbXOIa72-vR4-NrhEb91hYHXiqrPp7c41ZcElETd8euazpBHQCEi2Sl3RHPs5ueybWtEtwRLhOFCfXH_JX_GilfwiwM7C9cs7KuFxfk89-RYNJtWJM0Q-HMt9yxBVyDcQYjM/s1600/Evolution+of+man.jpg

http://131.193.153.231/www/issues/issue9_6/goldhaber/index.html

http://www.facebook.com/press/info.php?statistics