Earlier this year we talked a lot about copyright laws and pirates music. Publishers and labels have tried to stop illegal downloading of music because they feel they are losing out on a lot of money and view illegal downloading as a form of stealing. I do not agree with their views, but putting that aside, it seems that the publishers and labels have found a way to get some of their money back. The answer to their solution is iTunes Match.
In this article, the author speaks about his views on this new product. iTunes Match cost $25 a year and it allows you to store music not downloaded off the iTunes store in the iCloud. iTunes Match will also giv you a higher quality song if one is available. As one person on twitter mentioned, if you record a song on a radio, iTunes Match can match that song for you. But where is this money going? The rumors going around are that publishers will get 12% and labels will get 58% of all revenue generated by iTunes Match. The idea here is that if I go and download a new album for $20, and then get iTunes Match. 70% of that purchase is going to the label and publisher. So now,people who down illegal music and use iTunes Match are not getting music for free any more.
While it is not clear how big iTunes Match will be, I just downloaded it yesterday. I use it because 90% of library is either downloaded illegally or off CDs borrowed from friends. I now have access to 9000 songs on my iPhone and iPad. It will be interesting to see how this turns out in the future for people with libraries full of illegally downloaded music.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Saturday, November 19, 2011
Extra Blog: Jailbreaking
This week in class we talked a lot about hackers and hacker ethics. One of the ideas we learned was how hackers used have more ethics in the 60's compared to the 90's and today. While we learned about their ethics, I could help of thinking about the jailbreaking community that I follow today and how they are still following such ethics.
Before I start on how the jailbreaking community works, I should explain what jailbreaking is. Jailbreaking is exploiting a flaw in an iPhone to allow people to install applications not approved by apple. In a sense, they are breaking the iPhone out of the jail of Apple's restrictions. Just as the hackers in the 60's wanted information and secrets to be shared, these jailbreakers want the iPhone to be free.
Jailbreakers, however, have a lot of ethics and rules to follow. First and foremost, they took apple to court and made jailbreaking legal. Some people in the media have said jailbreaking is only to install applications from the app store for free. Jailbreakers, as a community, do not support this. They refuse to release any jailbreaking software that breaks any copyright laws. They demand that any jailbreaking software must be free. These rules and ethics are very similar to the hacker ethics in the 60's.
The point I am trying to make by explaining this is that there are still hacker communities today that have ethics and do not use their skills just to break the law or get what they want. I only follow the jailbreaking community, but I hope there are more communities like this out there.
Before I start on how the jailbreaking community works, I should explain what jailbreaking is. Jailbreaking is exploiting a flaw in an iPhone to allow people to install applications not approved by apple. In a sense, they are breaking the iPhone out of the jail of Apple's restrictions. Just as the hackers in the 60's wanted information and secrets to be shared, these jailbreakers want the iPhone to be free.
Jailbreakers, however, have a lot of ethics and rules to follow. First and foremost, they took apple to court and made jailbreaking legal. Some people in the media have said jailbreaking is only to install applications from the app store for free. Jailbreakers, as a community, do not support this. They refuse to release any jailbreaking software that breaks any copyright laws. They demand that any jailbreaking software must be free. These rules and ethics are very similar to the hacker ethics in the 60's.
The point I am trying to make by explaining this is that there are still hacker communities today that have ethics and do not use their skills just to break the law or get what they want. I only follow the jailbreaking community, but I hope there are more communities like this out there.
Thursday, November 17, 2011
Blog Rewrite Week 9 (Cyber)Bullying
Bullying, and now Cyber-bullying is a very important topic especially when it comes to kids. This week in class we looked at both. Kids have always bullied each other, but with the emergence of cyber-bullying, bullies can now reach their victims at home instead of at school. Cyber-bullying can come in many forms, but a common form is posting a video of something embarrassing on the web (YouTube).
South park dedicated an entire episode to cyber-bullying when Cartman started missing school and spent his time playing with dolls have said dolls tell him that he was cool and wasn't fat. Kyle and Kenny filmed Cartman doing this and sent it into America's funniest home videos. They did not tell Cartman they were doing this, and when Cartman found out he nearly exploded in anger. Cartman's anger was his way of dealing with the bullying, but other kids might have different reactions. There have been suicides attributed to Cyber-bullying.
The point I am trying to make is that we can't stop all bullying, it will always happen. But bullying happens outside the home, generally at school. Kids are meant to view their homes as a place where they are safe, and Cyber-bullying takes that away because as long as there is internet they can be bullied. I think its important that parents continue to make the home a safe place for their children and protect them from cyber-bullying.
South park dedicated an entire episode to cyber-bullying when Cartman started missing school and spent his time playing with dolls have said dolls tell him that he was cool and wasn't fat. Kyle and Kenny filmed Cartman doing this and sent it into America's funniest home videos. They did not tell Cartman they were doing this, and when Cartman found out he nearly exploded in anger. Cartman's anger was his way of dealing with the bullying, but other kids might have different reactions. There have been suicides attributed to Cyber-bullying.
The point I am trying to make is that we can't stop all bullying, it will always happen. But bullying happens outside the home, generally at school. Kids are meant to view their homes as a place where they are safe, and Cyber-bullying takes that away because as long as there is internet they can be bullied. I think its important that parents continue to make the home a safe place for their children and protect them from cyber-bullying.
Week 3 Rewrite (Participatory Culture)
Participatory culture is something that is growing throughout the Media, and can be clearly seen and understood through interactions between TV companies and their audiences. Participatory culture is an aspect of what Jenkins calls convergence culture; “Where old and new media collide, where grassroots and corporate media intersect, where the power of the media producer and the power of the media consumer interact in unpredictable ways” (Jenkins 2). Participatory culture stems from the media producer and the media consumer interacting in ways we have never seen before.
A clear example of Participatory culture can be seen in how audiences reacted to LOST, a popular show that lasted six seasons. Lost was full of mystery and different questions were asked in each episode. In an attempt to answer these questions many people created websites and blogs dedicated to LOST. People wrote about what happened in previous episodes as well as creating stories for what would happen in the next episode. Some of these stories continue today despite LOST having finished the series.
Participatory Culture has grown even more since LOST, and it will probably continue to grow. It will be interesting to see how the relationships between producers and consumers continue to change. It is important to remember, as consumers, that we have the power to chose what we consume.
A clear example of Participatory culture can be seen in how audiences reacted to LOST, a popular show that lasted six seasons. Lost was full of mystery and different questions were asked in each episode. In an attempt to answer these questions many people created websites and blogs dedicated to LOST. People wrote about what happened in previous episodes as well as creating stories for what would happen in the next episode. Some of these stories continue today despite LOST having finished the series.
Participatory Culture has grown even more since LOST, and it will probably continue to grow. It will be interesting to see how the relationships between producers and consumers continue to change. It is important to remember, as consumers, that we have the power to chose what we consume.
Monday, November 14, 2011
Smart Mobs
This week in class we discussed smart mobs. Smart mobs are people coming together and performing an action. They generally come together quickly through the use of social networks such as facebook or twiiter. Others simply use the messaging service on a phone. These mobs come together to form an action generally to protest something. As technology gets more and more advanced these mobs will grow.
A good example of this happened in 2003 where "flash mobs" (which are the same as smart mobs really) gather to do a type of performance art. The mob had a mailing list to notify people where to meet and when they did they would perform very strange acts such as admiring furniture in a store and then calling someone and talking about it without using the letter o. These flash mobs spread quickly throughout the world but also have died out since then. Still, other such mobs still exist today. Another example is the occupy wallstreet movement that has swept the nation. This is a more recent example, but it is still basically the same thing. In many major cities around the world people started to participate in the occupy wallstreet protest. It was unclear what the point of these protests where as the views differed from person to person, but the action still happened thanks to twitter and facebook.
The point I am trying to make is that smart mobs have been around for a while, but they are also growing. The occupy wallstreet protest is huge is the US, while the flash mobs performances also spread throughout the world. Even the rebels in Egypt and other middle eastern countries are a type of smart mobs as they used twitter and their phones to communicate where to meet and what to do. Smart mobs have been growing over the past few years and will only continue to grow as technology becomes more accessible to people.
A good example of this happened in 2003 where "flash mobs" (which are the same as smart mobs really) gather to do a type of performance art. The mob had a mailing list to notify people where to meet and when they did they would perform very strange acts such as admiring furniture in a store and then calling someone and talking about it without using the letter o. These flash mobs spread quickly throughout the world but also have died out since then. Still, other such mobs still exist today. Another example is the occupy wallstreet movement that has swept the nation. This is a more recent example, but it is still basically the same thing. In many major cities around the world people started to participate in the occupy wallstreet protest. It was unclear what the point of these protests where as the views differed from person to person, but the action still happened thanks to twitter and facebook.
The point I am trying to make is that smart mobs have been around for a while, but they are also growing. The occupy wallstreet protest is huge is the US, while the flash mobs performances also spread throughout the world. Even the rebels in Egypt and other middle eastern countries are a type of smart mobs as they used twitter and their phones to communicate where to meet and what to do. Smart mobs have been growing over the past few years and will only continue to grow as technology becomes more accessible to people.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Is Google Evil?
This week in Digital Cultures, we looked closely at Google, and how its effected what people know about us. Our teacher said that she wanted to scare us to the point where we think about what we search on the internet, but I was not scared. The question of this blog post is in the title; is Google evil?
In the articles from the book, Googlization of Everything, the author talked about how Google stores everything we search and every website we visit. Google uses this information to help to predict what we are going to search the next time we use Google Search, but it also uses this information to provide adds for us. Google does not sell this information to other companies, but agrees to put up another companies add if we search something that relates to that add in some way. The author also spoke about the privacy settings Google has a default, which is no privacy at all. He also warns us that if google defaulted and was bought out, they would warn us, but probably not give us a chance to delete all the data Google has collected on us.
I don't fully understand why we should be so scared that information about what we like is held by a corporation like Google. So what if they know I search about nerdy stuff or shoes or what clothes I wear? That kind of stuff only means that I won't be so pissed off the advertising I see around the internet instead of seeing advertising that doesn't mean anything to me. And yes, for some people, who maybe look up porn a lot or something like that might not want that shown, but thats who they are. These corporations are not likely to hold this information over us, like we have heard of the porn industry doing. This is because this information is really just for advertising, and that is how these corporations make money. So whats the worse that could happen? Good advertising.. thats very scary...
My point is that we should not be too afraid of what information we share with google. The information we give to Google is not overly secret anyway, and I am sure if any close friends already know the kind of stuff you would search on Google.
In the articles from the book, Googlization of Everything, the author talked about how Google stores everything we search and every website we visit. Google uses this information to help to predict what we are going to search the next time we use Google Search, but it also uses this information to provide adds for us. Google does not sell this information to other companies, but agrees to put up another companies add if we search something that relates to that add in some way. The author also spoke about the privacy settings Google has a default, which is no privacy at all. He also warns us that if google defaulted and was bought out, they would warn us, but probably not give us a chance to delete all the data Google has collected on us.
I don't fully understand why we should be so scared that information about what we like is held by a corporation like Google. So what if they know I search about nerdy stuff or shoes or what clothes I wear? That kind of stuff only means that I won't be so pissed off the advertising I see around the internet instead of seeing advertising that doesn't mean anything to me. And yes, for some people, who maybe look up porn a lot or something like that might not want that shown, but thats who they are. These corporations are not likely to hold this information over us, like we have heard of the porn industry doing. This is because this information is really just for advertising, and that is how these corporations make money. So whats the worse that could happen? Good advertising.. thats very scary...
My point is that we should not be too afraid of what information we share with google. The information we give to Google is not overly secret anyway, and I am sure if any close friends already know the kind of stuff you would search on Google.
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Pirates and Piracy (oh my!)
This week in Digital Cultures we focused on Pirates and Piracy of music and movies. Many of the articles we read argued that piracy was wrong because it is a form of stealing. In this blog, I want to focus on piracy of movies, as it is something I have done before and will do again.
In an article by Jack Valenti, we are told that only one out of ten movies make money (after all the money spent to make the movie) in the movie theatre, and the only way they can make that money is by consumers buying them as CDs. When I read this statement from Valenti, I laughed.. a lot. Of those ten movies, which is the one that I am going to download? The one that made all that money in the movie theatre. The other movies are most likely B rated movies or simply bad movies that people do not want to watch. Plus I wonder, just as we learned with the music industry, where that money is actually going. Producers and actors are contracted for movies, so who is getting that money? Probably just the film industry, and if you ask me they already have enough money as it is.
Another interesting point I realized is that none of the articles we read mentioned iTunes, which makes me think they were written before iTunes became popular. iTunes as completely changed the way people go about getting their music and DVDs. I am much more willing to pay $3 to rent a movie on itunes than pay $40 to buy it. iTunes has given people a cheap way to get good quality music off the internet without doing something illegal.
The point I am trying to make here is that because of iTunes there are a lot less people illegally downloading music off the internet. The only downside is that iTunes does not provide high quality movies. I can go onto piratebay.com and get Avatar in full HD for free, while iTunes provides it in 460p HD, which is the lowest quality HD possible. What I usually do is rent a movie off iTunes, and if I like it enough that I want it, I will download it illegally. So I am still supporting the creators of the movie but I also get a copy for myself in a higher quality that would probably cost about $60 in DVD form.
Piracy is not a form of stealing, it is a way to share the content that we enjoy and we want others to enjoy as well.
In an article by Jack Valenti, we are told that only one out of ten movies make money (after all the money spent to make the movie) in the movie theatre, and the only way they can make that money is by consumers buying them as CDs. When I read this statement from Valenti, I laughed.. a lot. Of those ten movies, which is the one that I am going to download? The one that made all that money in the movie theatre. The other movies are most likely B rated movies or simply bad movies that people do not want to watch. Plus I wonder, just as we learned with the music industry, where that money is actually going. Producers and actors are contracted for movies, so who is getting that money? Probably just the film industry, and if you ask me they already have enough money as it is.
Another interesting point I realized is that none of the articles we read mentioned iTunes, which makes me think they were written before iTunes became popular. iTunes as completely changed the way people go about getting their music and DVDs. I am much more willing to pay $3 to rent a movie on itunes than pay $40 to buy it. iTunes has given people a cheap way to get good quality music off the internet without doing something illegal.
The point I am trying to make here is that because of iTunes there are a lot less people illegally downloading music off the internet. The only downside is that iTunes does not provide high quality movies. I can go onto piratebay.com and get Avatar in full HD for free, while iTunes provides it in 460p HD, which is the lowest quality HD possible. What I usually do is rent a movie off iTunes, and if I like it enough that I want it, I will download it illegally. So I am still supporting the creators of the movie but I also get a copy for myself in a higher quality that would probably cost about $60 in DVD form.
Piracy is not a form of stealing, it is a way to share the content that we enjoy and we want others to enjoy as well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)