The Virtual Revolution

Photo Credits

Of course everyone knows about the advancements that the internet and the World Wide Web has brought us as a society, in “The VirtualRevolution: Episode 1” they thoroughly explained some of these advancements. The one thing that stood out the most to me in the episode was the money aspect. During the episode I started to think about what the internet and the World Wide Web would be today if Bill Gates didn’t decide to sell his software and transform the internet into a competitive business and a way to make money. Before Gates, everyone just gave away their software for everyone to use because they wanted everyone that used the internet to be equal. Even the inventor of the World Wide Web Tim Berners just gave it to society and allowed anyone to use his free way to connect anyone. Since Gates was the first person to sell his software, computers and the internet soon became a monopoly that he was in charge of. Until other developers could catch up to him and his idea to sell the things needed to run a computer effectively. 

This idea got me to think: what would happen if Bill Gates never thought that he would make money of selling his Microsoft software? What would happen if everything about software and the internet were free. Would we have the same advancements in the internet? Would we have the competition between Apple and Microsoft that we have today?

VALS Survey

           After taking the VALS survey I actually realized things about myself that i never really paid attention to before. The results that I received from the survey were Innovators and Experiencers. When looking at the Innovator type that I got, I saw a lot of things in the description that actually do represent me. Things like images being important to me, but only because I like to express myself. I am also always looking to challenge myself, and love problem solving both of which are properties of an innovator. Now onto the experiencer results, this one was actually pretty accurate as well. As an experiencer it states that I become enthusiastic about new things, and opportunities, which is very true. I am always excited to try new things, but what really got me attention was it said something to an extent of that i find outlets for my energy through "exercise, sports, outdoor recreation, and social activities. This was actually spot on. Considering my major is sports communication, I love sports and activities that involve exercise, especially ones with a social component.
            I felt over all that the results from the survey were an absolute representation of myself and my characteristics as a whole. As a consumer i feel like this survey does appeal to people considering a lot of the explanation is about having "cool" or nice things. This can effect what people think they need to have or buy. If they are told that they should have nice and fancy things then any person would want them more, it is just a part of nature.
            Taking this survey was actually really fun and definitely interesting. I especially enjoyed the limited questions needed to find out my results, which were so accurate. I am very glad that i got the opportunity to take this survey.

Assignment #2: Copyright.

                How do I feel about copyrighting? Obviously everyone knows that it is wrong and illegal, but that doesn’t change the fact that people do it all the time. Actually most of the time people don’t even realize that they are doing it. Every time you quote music lyrics on an Instagram post, or making a picture and putting a funny quote on it to get 1,000 retweets. Seems harmless right?

                When you look at it though is that any different from when you’re trying to writing a five page paper and running short so you do the easy “copy and paste” of a paragraph or two. You turn it in and hope that your teacher doesn’t notice. That is stealing, stealing someone’s hard work and playing it off as your own. That is against the law, as it should be. Since the Copyright Act was put in place in 1976, which gives exclusive rights to the author for what the right or create until 70 years after their death.

                To some people this Copyright Act is thought to hinder creativity and slows advancement in society. The act may be a little old, but nonetheless it is still in place and needs to be followed. Any author has the right to their work and no one else should, the author should get the profits and compliments of their own work. The only time that others should be able to use work that is not their own is when the get permission from the actual author. This is where copyleft comes in, which is where someone gets permission to use a piece of work that is not their own and are legally bound to the author and cannot change the work without the permission of the author.

                When someone is creating a funny picture for twitter I do not think that they think they are doing any harm. I do not think it is necessary a bad thing that people do this, but it is wrong. I don’t think that things as simple as pictures should cause problems, and I don’t think that people will stop making things like these. It is just a part of culture and society now.

                There is an extent of copyright that should never be acceptable. When you are ripping someone’s work off, there should be actions taken to make sure that copyrighting to big extents no longer happens. But I do not think that little things like pictures should cause a big ruckus if they are not used to extent and to promote another individual. Copyright laws are in place to help authors, whether people like it or not they are essential to society. 

Assignment #1: Violence

There is no doubt that violence in the media has increased over the years. Now a days, it seems like every time you turn on the television you see some sort of violence. It doesn't have to be extreme, like death, but there is plenty of examples of less extreme fighting or yelling. There is really no escape from it. Now does this violence affect us in a negative way? Obviously violence has always been around even before the expanded reach of media, people just couldn't see or hear about it always. I think that one of the biggest presenters of violence is actually the news media. Without the news, people wouldn't know about all the violence in the world at the touch of a remote. This is what makes people paranoid about violence in the world. It’s not that people have become increasingly more violent over the years, it is just that we hear about every act of violence and it becomes more noticeable. However, more violence in the media isn't always a negative thing, the violence in the media makes people more aware of things that can and do happen. Although it may make people more paranoid, that can in return make people more careful, which surveys have shown can decrease violent acts. Why is there more violence on television? George Gerber who has been studying violence in the media for decades says that it isn't just what the people want in the media, but it is also much cheaper for companies to make. If you think about it, if you have a show or movie that is going global it is a lot easier to translate violence because it doesn't change from country to country. If you look at comedies, a person in the United States does not find the same line as funny as someone in China might. Language is hard to translate, but actions need no translation. All in all, I don’t really think that violence has increased like most people think. I believe violence is just more noticeable and easier to find out about with this new age media, where you can find any news, anywhere using the minicomputer that you keep in your pocket at all times. Watching a violent act on media doesn't make people want to go out and commit that act of violence, it only makes them aware, perhaps cautions them against it, and for some reason entertains them at the same time.