A Field Trip Into Second Life

In the latest New Communication Technologies tutorial we were meant to take a field trip into a virtual world. At the beginning of the year in that extremely long break between high school and university, I created a Second Life account which I used for approximately two days. The following is based not on the classes "Field Trip" but from what I experienced with my avatar, Tally Trafalgar.

Presuming that you are a user of MSN, or other IM programs (or have used it before, or at least know about it)...
Besides the obvious differences (such as ActiveWorlds is 3D and MSN isn't, etc) what are the qualitative differences between the regular IM program and a 3D environment?

• What is different about the kinds of socialising that happens in these spaces? Does the 3D aspect make much difference?
  

In other words, are there things that are possible in one space that are not possible in the other? Could you think of where this sort of application might lead us?

There are many qualitative differences between using IM and 3D worlds. From my experiences I believe that using IM such as MSN which I use, is better. I used MSN before I created a Second Life account and I still use it now. Everything in Second Life is a mystery, you do not know who the people are that you communicate with, you do not know their name and you do not know where you are. Its all make believe and personally, even though I used it, I think it is pretty sad. For someone who has many friends on MSN, I believe that it is unnecessary to experince virtual worlds. It may be more qualitative to experience a virtual world if perhaps you didn't have a "first life". It may be an oppurtunity for one to do something time consuming or it may be their own way of socialising. MSN is much safer and is a better expereince. You able to decide who is and is not in your world of MSN, by blocking or deleting people. You are able to talk to your friends and overall it is a much better way of socialising.

There is a major difference with the socialising aspect of virtual worlds and IM. As mentioned above, when you are socialising with IM you are commonly socialising with people that you know and that you want to have talking to you. In a virtual world the socialising experience is completely different. You are meeting new people which may for some be exciting but often it is just stupid and pointless.

So are there things in one space that are not available in another? Yes. On MSN you cannot meet new people, unless you are really dumb and add people that you don't know or accpet adds that you do not know. In virtual worlds, you are able to do this and of course the 3D aspect is a different way of socialising.

So where is this application going to lead us? Who knows! Virtual Worlds will probably keep growing and become even more pointless and ridiculous.

Evaluating Wikipedia:

The two articles on Wikipedia which I am going to use for this task are about my favourite TV series "Gossip Girl" and my favourite Hollywood celebrity "Victoria Beckham".


The Gossip Girl article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossip_Girl_%28TV_series%29):
* Is this an accurate article?
Yes this article is accurate, it has the correct dates and names. Its references are from official sites such as the CW website which is the station for the show. The season synopsis is also valid along with character information.
* Does it cover all the basic facts that you'd need to understand this topic?
Yes. As mentioned above it has a season synopsis, information on the main characters and other information such as ratings.
* Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines for useful articles?
Yes as the article is not subjective, the images are acceptable and the information is all regularly updated to the latest episode.
* Is this article fair and balanced, or is it biased towards a particular side or argument?
Yes this article is fair and balanced, its is not biased as it is objective.

Finally - What changes would you make to this article to improve it and make it useful for the wider wikipedia community?
I do not believe many changes need to be made, perhaps have information on the individual episodes and update the characters as new characters enter the show.

The Victoria Beckham article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_beckham):
* Is this an accurate article?
Yes this is a n accurate article, in provides correct dates such as the date of birth, the facts are correct such as the names of Victoria's parents and her song names.
* Does it cover all the basic facts that you'd need to understand this topic?
Yes. There is a wide range of information on all of her careers, including her career as a Spice Girl, her career as an actress, a designer and an author. Along with this there are some other facts about her personal life.
* Does this article follow the wikipedia guidelines for useful articles?
Yes for the same reason as the Gossip Girl article.
* Is this article fair and balanced, or is it biased towards a particular side or argument?
Yes this article is fair. It is not biased as it is completely full of facts.

Finally - What changes would you make to this article to improve it and make it useful for the wider wikipedia community?
I believe that no changes are necessary.

Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction"

How do the ideas from Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" apply to contemporary digital media?

When reading Walter Benjamin's, "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" the main idea which is portrayed to the reader is the idea of "aura" of art suggesting that when a piece of artwork is reproduced, the aura is lost. This relates highly to contemporary digital media as one is exposed to art which has lost its aura on a daily basis. Whether someone is reading a magazine, driving past billboards on the way to work or reading their daily newspaper, they are viewing art which has been reproduced with contemporary digital media technologies. It can almost be said that EVERY advert seen has in someone been constructed and the viewer is not seeing the original picture. With many programs such as photo shop, it is extremely easy to edit a picture and make it look however the artist wants. It is fair to say that Walter Benjamin's theories still apply today.

To the left is a picture of Victoria and David Beckham when they graced the cover of W magazine. This is a piece of art, a photographer took the picture, chose the way they were sitting and the themes, however this has lost its aura due to the airbrushing of the couples skin to make them look flawless.


There was a time when "Art" was made by artists who were skilled professionals. Now that anyone with a computer can create things digitally (music, images, videos, etc), what does that mean for "art"?

As mentioned above, these days computer programs such as photo shop are available to anyone. Anything can be created digitally in the modern day, so the main question is, what does this mean for art? Art will still be art. Photography still has artistic value (see the caption next to the picture of the Beckhams), paintings still have an original lying around somewhere and video still has some kind of artistic sense however one may suggest that no matter what these pieces of art can be reproduced and therefore what this means for art is that the original copy will probably be worth a hell of a lot of money.


Is a photoshopped image "authentic"?

There are different situations where one may say that a photoshopped image is and is not authentic. A photoshopped image could be considered authentic if the point of the art was to use photoshop, for example my friend did a year 12 assessment task where she took photographs then used photoshop to turn these photographs into comic strips. I believe photoshopped images are not authentic when they are used to alter an appearance and then present the appearance as a reality.




Do digital "things" have an "aura" (in Benjamin's terms)?

Yes digital things have an aura in Benjamins terms as no matter what it is all a type of "art" and that sense of losing an "aura" is still experienced viewing this type of art.

Search Engines

How do search engines rank the stuff they find on the internet?
When one types in a particular word or sentence, this word or sentence is run through the search engine. Firstly the search engine will list the findings that best match the word or sentence. Next, the often search for this word or sentence on the website and search how close to the top of the page it is written as this is more likely to make it relevant. Also search engines look at how many times these words are repeated on a web page, this is known as their frequency.

Who, or what, makes one page (that you might get in your search results) more useful than another one, so that it is put at the top of your search results?
As mentioned above, it is more useful if it is close matching to what is searched and this will then make it more relelvant. If one is very broad in their search, the chances of finding what they are looking for quickly, are limited. The more precise they are in their search allows the search engine to better find what they are looking for and then this is listed at the top of the page on the search engine.

What are some of your favourite search engines? Why do you like one more than others?
At my high school, the school website had a page full of links to different search engines. When you were in year 7, you were lucky enough to be given a nice lesson on how to use search engines and it was then that I was introduced to my favourite, Google. 6 years later, it is my homepage and it is so frequently used by me. If i need to look up a word, i know i can just type "define:____" into google and google can get me a list of definitions. Google is simple to use and it is popular. Who wouldn't want to use Google? Not to mention when they change the famous "Google" sign to be in theme with the latest holiday.

I also love to use Wikipedia. Even though university seems to be dead against it, I still love it. It is kept up to date and always has further links if you want to find more information. It also has information on pretty much ANYTHING whether it be a day of the week or the latest single.