travelogue2
All Good Things Must Come to an END!!!
Over the last few weeks I have devoted much of my time to Scrabulous and its greater social community. As I have stated in previous blogs the biggest issue with Scrabulous today is its copyright laws. This is where companies such as Mattel and Hasboro are looking to shut the game down due to trademark and copyright infringement laws. In an article I came across the other day, Google’s copyright counsel Bill Patry shed some light on the issue
Copyright in games extends only to the graphic elements and textual explanations, not to the way the game is played.
Or put another way, the expression of the Scrabble rules or the design of the Scrabble board may be protected by copyright, but the implementation of those rules in the Scrabulous game is not.
Scrabulous allows multiple games at once, it allows players to finish games over a period of time and not in one session, these differences are something that cannot be achieved in Hasboro’s traditional Scrabble. In that sense Scrabulous is a transformative interpretation of the game, or as i previously said re appropriated of Scrabble.
Reformat the Planet
First off, sorry for the late post. It’s been a hell of a week.
Anyway, in searching for information about the chiptune scene, I came upon this trailer for an upcoming documentary entitled Reformat the Planet. It basically documents the ideologies and experiences of chiptune artists and fans. There’s plenty of little catchphrases within the trailer that hint at what I considered to be the crux of the movement – the nostalgia factor of hearing all of these old sounds placed within a new context. People in the trailer also made mention of using the technologies, but not really as I would describe it. One guy says, “It’s not reappropriating art, it’s celebrating the things about it that work”. The term “reappropriating” seems, in my experience, to be a term used by software pirates and hackers to legitimize their actions, so maybe the chiptune artists are trying to distance themselves from that. I’m not sure if Nintendo could sweep in and claim copyright on the soundboards of the GameBoy and Famicom, but I doubt they would anyway.
Also, I had no idea that the artists were actually mashing on their GameBoys on stage, since I’ve been too lazy to get out to a show since I’ve gotten in to the music. That’s awesome, in a really, really nerdy kind of way.
quick iPhone update/conclusion
Just a quick update:
Apple has released the SDK which will allow developers to create sanctioned applications for the iPhone. Notable additions to the phone is fully corporate infrastructure support,(look out Blackberry, you are a beast of the past now) a centralized (and Apple gate-kept and controlled) “App Store,” and a ton of beautiful and innovative tools to create these applications, not to mention a robust user interface library to make iPhone applications look just like the ones Apple makes. Sadly, not all applications will be allowed, you have to pay a (small) fee to become a developer, and only one 3rd party application can be running at a single time. Other than that, this is an extremely mature set of software tools, and I am sure we will all be hearing about it much more in the coming months.
And for sure, the hacking community will continue 
Web Series Created To Be Picked Up
The above video embodies not only one of the main directions of web series, but a large function of Internet sites like Youtube. Zero Punctuation is a series of video game reviews done by Ben “Yahtzee” Croshaw. After developing a rather large audience on YouTube, he was hired to produce his web series in August of 2007 by The Escapist, an online magazine covering video games, gamers, the gaming industry, and gaming culture. Since the addition of Ben “Yahtzee” Croshaw’s Zero Punctuation, a four hundred percent increase in the Escapist’s traffic has been reported. I can personally say that even I find the series very amusing despite the fact that I am not a huge video game player. I found the episode on Guitar Hero particularly hilarious:
Zero Punctuation provides an example where a user content generated site functioned as an avenue in which a normal, talented person was successfully able to showcase his work in hopes of being noticed by larger, already established media outlet. Additionally, it demonstrates the mutually beneficial effects that sites like YouTube are having on existing media establishments, such as The Escapist, that are looking to revamp and improve their content.
Furthermore, unlike the example mentioned in my earlier post (We Need Girlfriends), which is an online web series that has recently been picked up by CBS, there is no plan for Zero Punctuation to enter the realm of television. In this case we see an already web-based series remaining on the same platform, only within a different space. Based simply on the fact that the structure of the Zero Punctuation series and the experience of consuming the content remains the same from its original to new space, it seems that the transition from watching it on YouTube to watching it on The Escapist will be very simple, hence the aforementioned growth in traffic to The Escapist.
I raise this point about the difference in first consuming content on one platform and then moving it to be consumed through another due to the recent failure of a web series known as 
Two film and television producers, Edward Zwick and Marshall Herskovitz, created the series about a group twenty-something artists, who are coming of age in the digital generation.
Watch from 00:30-01:50
As described in the video above, although Quarterlife was initially made for the Internet, NBC acquired the rights to air the series on broadcast television in early 2008. After the episodes were broadcast via MySpace, as well as on Herskovitz and Zwick’s own independent social networking site, quarterlife, NBC announced that Quarterlife would premiere on Tuesday, February 26th, 2008, with the show moving to Sunday nights immediately afterwards. However, the show generated dismal ratings for its first episode – it attracted only 3.1 million viewers – the worst in-season performance in the 10 p.m. hour by an NBC show in at least 17 years. Consequently, after the airing of only a single episode, NBC later announced that the series was canceled.
Not only does this deal with the issue of atmosphere in relation to how an audience will most enjoy content, but whether there will be room for success in web series that have been picked up by television networks. Whereas Zero Punctuation was successful on YouTube as well as on The Escapist (two websites), Quarterlife did not do incredibly well on the web, and certainly did not perform well on television. This simply proves that while the Internet has undeniably opened up the ability to be noticed and picked up, it does not mean success of that content is inevitable in its new environment.
Egor’s Traveler’s Log II v.3: South Park’s Timmy/Jimmy et al
Riffing off the commentary/discussion generated from my previous posts, I wanted to extend the discussion/exploration on the Timmy character in South Park, as it relates/compares to traditional media images of the disabled; and what impact (if any) has new media had on the discussion. The main argument seems to center on whether or not (unapologetic) images of the disabled further the cause for inclusion, or just further victimization of the disabled. In other words, is it cool to laugh along with Timmy, or are we just still laughing at Timmy in the end.
To highlight my point, I chose a seminal episodes of South Park that touches this theme. In “Cripple Fight,” a battle between Timmy, whose in a wheelchair, and the new Jimmy character, with arm braces & a speech impediment, erupts after Timmy refuses to participate in Jimmy’s stand-up (ironic) routine as part of the protest of Big Gay Al’s ouster from the Mountain Scouts, South Park’s version of the Boy Scouts (still with me?). To say the least, the fight sequence is both funny and disturbing, in the best tradition of South Park.
However, if we want to explore whether these images just perpetuate stereotypes and victimization of the disabled, or whether they provide a liberating autonomous seldom-heard voice to this population, new media provides a platform where this discussion can take place.
Reading the comment logs on several sites featuring the Cripple Fight video, I was surprised to find the lack of protest of these depictions. From what I read, comments were positive about the characters and the show in general. So much for political correctness. Also, I thought the best argument for inclusion of disabled characters as a source/symbol for empowerment came from a couple of blogs from disabled viewers themselves:
The Angry Gimp writes:
I love Timmy so much – hilarious! Cripple Fight is my all-time favorite South Park.
I went to a seminar at my college once about disabilities, and the speakers showed the episode, talking about how “awful” Timmy was. As a wheelchair user, I stuck up loudly for Timmy and explained why I thought he was awesome. I think I changed some minds that day.
“Jimmy”, the handi-capable kid, is also hilarious. He really represents to me of the kind of person people want to see as an ideal crip – making the most of his disability in the sappiest way possible.
And Timmargh.net says:
“My online persona is based on Timmy as I am also a crip named Tim”
These statements seem to confirm the belief that “Timmy was even more popular among [the] disabled than [the] nondisabled…” as deconstructed in the article, “KRAZY KRIPPLES: South Park & Disability” from New Mobility: The Magazine for Wheelchair Users.
In the end, the argument whether or not the inclusion of unapologetic images of the disabled further their victimization or empower this population may never be settled, but new media makes it possible for the inclusion of all voices in this debate (including those closest to it).
-egor
Real Hero?
Continuing on my previous post on exploring the game America’s Army and the way the experiences the players have in the game transfer to their real life I came upon an interesting news article:
- “AMERICA’S ARMY MEDIC TRAINING HELPS SAVE A LIFEâ€
 This article describes how a player of the game was a first responder to a car crash and used the combat medic training he received playing the game to evaluate and treat the victims of the car crash. I found this video on youtube which shows the news report and interview of the man Paxton Galvanek, who credited the game America’s Army for the help he was able to give the victims of the crash.Â
 The Project Director of America’s Army, Colonel Casey Wardynski said, “Because of the training he received in America’s Army’s virtual classroom, Mr. Galvanek had mastered the basics of first aid and had the confidence to take appropriate action when others might do nothing. He took the initiative to assess the situation, prioritize actions and apply the correct procedures. Paxton is a true hero. We are pleased to have played a role in providing the lifesaving training that he employed so successfully at the scene.”Â
- This article and video were very interesting to me because they portrayed the way the media/US Army can present things to promote the army as well as the game. The comments about the video described this controversy about how Paxton Galvanek responded to the crash. One person wrote, “When I was at CLS school at AIT they told us NOT TO USE our CLS training at a crash scene!It came down to liability on our part. Basically they said, “If you use this and screw up or hurt someone, you could be liable and they could sue you.”
To me this shows both the advantage and the danger of the ‘medical training’ the players get in the virtual classroom of America’s Army. The advantage is that Paxton was able to apply his knowledge and help, but what if he instead made the situation worse? He did not experience real life training, but he transferred what he learned in the virtual world to a real life situation. I think that this is what the US Army presumably desired from the game – the players become embedded in the environment to the point where they transfer their virtual experience to reality and try to join the US Army. Â
- I think it is interesting that a person can feel he learned as much from a virtual classroom as he would in real life and can take the virtual abilities he has online and apply them in the real world. It makes me wonder if this way of learning will replace the importance of training in real life and allow people to assume roles they have no training or abilities for outside of the virtual world.
What is a Cluebot?
If you read my last concluding post, I discovered a little thing called a Cluebot when I attempted to spam on a south park wikipedia article. Just wanted to quickly describe what a cluebot is and how it helps prevent spam.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CLUEBOT
In relevence to my spamming attempt, this is what basically happened:
“Scoring system
For pages which have had a lot of text added in the last change, the bot will score the additions based on this list, and then score the removals on the inverse of that list. If the overall score is greater than -100, the bot sees the edit as constructive and does nothing, if it scores less than -100, the bot sees it as destructive, reports it and possibly reverts it.”
If you click “this list,” you will reach a page of code that contains a bunch of vulgar words that each have a set amount of points. If the score is more than 100 points, the cluebot will automatically revert the page (within a second). It’s way more complicated that what I am saying here. The page is basically a new language for only the cluebot to understand.
The cluebot, also, has the ability to report open proxies found on vandalizing IP addresses.
If a page has been vandalized more than 30 times in 48 hours, it will request an admin, who also has the option of turning the cluebot in case it malfunctions.
I tried to find a video of a similar example of something like this occuring, but here’s an article instead about Steven Colbert and the Elephant incident:
(his account named stevencolbert was banned from using Wikipedia since)
Just thought this was interesting, if you go to the elephant article today and look at its history you will also notice that people are still vandalizing it thanks to Steven Colbert.
My Journey Through Video Chatting
I began my voyage as a means to look deeper into video chatting and how it ultimately can influence or have an emotional impact on our relationships. Through the past couple weeks I have explored different portals and outlets for people to stay ‘connected’ and talk amongst family and friends all around the world. As we plow forward into the closing decade of the new millenum the name of the game has not changed- communication is what drives this global market. More and more we are becoming a globalized, miniature world and why not reap its benifts! In order to determine how video chatting really can be emotionally charged I went ahead and asked my cousin a few questions about its appeal and advantages. When I asked my cousin shai what he thought about video chatting and its advantages- he said this: “I think it is great it keeps us in touch like we never have before, for example you and I. I think it is at a middle place where it can pick up and be big or just follow along all the other technologies in the industry.” (Although I put him in quotes I tried my best to get it word for word, + he is not American.)
I then asked my parents who are not the most computer savvy folks what they thought of video chat as a means to keep in touch. Basically, the whole idea freaked them out – they did not like the idea of people in their ‘bedrooms.’ Which is a point worth mentioning, when we video chat it is usually in a personal space of some sort, such as a bedroom or house- it can often feel intrusive when people just pop up on your screen. I read an article about a company based here in America called OoVoo that is built on the idea of video chatting as a means to increase relationships and keep in touch.
I am constantly video chatting with friends and family and I find it very appeasing. To play the devils advocate a bit, one can argue that video chat can lead to less physical interaction- or that it devalues face-to face interactions and could, potentially, threaten that how we see one another in the flesh. Although this is a bit far fetched I have heard the claim. There are hundreds of sights and services aimed at encouraging video chatting- but for now it seems instant messaging is the preferred method.
Jobx, is a new company offering clips of candidates for possible employers. just another example of how this technology is being used abroad.
My Night with Anonymous
My attempts to get to know Anonymous met with difficulty, but some small success.
Wikipedia… Free?
In my research I’ve hypothesized that it would be possible for people to potentially make money off of wikipedia by posting their own links as resources for an article. Of course, after growing use of admins controlling the content on wikipedia and of course the use of nofollow links has done a noticeable job of preventing this. After listening to several opinions I could gather some many believe that reputable sources (link) should be noted on pages since people do a job of posting them. After the nofollow link, many people were enraged that they couldn’t follow the link they wished to “promote” perhaps. This leaves the question, why do or why would people post on wikipedia? Was it because they could post their links for pageranks?
Since the idea of Wikipedia is to have a free source for everyone, then its user would understand they shouldn’t advertise their link. However, since it’s a free source, shouldn’t the people have the right to do so as they please? But then would there be a limit to how much garbage would be found in Wikipedia?
This, of course, will always remain one of few reasons why Wikipedia cannot be used as a source in a college essay.
Using that argument however, shouldn’t ALL links used in Wikipedia use nofollow? It may be impossible for all users to comply and of course admins to cover all ground and of course adding a “Did you forget to nofollow?” might violate the meaning of wikipedia.
In the case of people getting paid to contribute “accurate” information on wikipedia, yes there is evidence that shows that companies are willing to pay to defend something they believe in.
A new article I ran into about a German government agency funding accurate articles brings up the issue of experts getting paid to, well, basically deal with other Wikipedians and also sums up the argument in an interesting paradox:
“Try to make Wikipedia 100% perfect, and you’ll need to remove the “edit†button… a point at which the system becomes very far from perfect, very soon.”
I would suggest that in order to post anything on Wikipedia, you have to have an account, and if you spam, your name will be banned and if your ip address continues to spam with new names, then an IP address could be suspended for the time to prevent spam. This process is only implemented partially. You don’t need a username to edit on most articles, however for certain articles that are subject to abuse because of its editing history (say it’s info on a upcoming movie), you do need a name. I have experimented with this by purposely spamming an article….
Here’s the evidence of my erasing approximately 1/3 of the south park article and replacing it with “poop shit”
Of course, my user page got a nice little message that claimed my post was an act of vandalism and something called “Cluebot” automatically reverted it.
Sounds like Wikipedia has some new tricks up their sleeve.
I will have to do some further research on Cluebots I suppose.
