- Mobile phones will be the way we connect to the Internet.
- Social tolerance will not grow as a result of the Web 2.0; in fact, these technologies may expand hate, bigotry, and intolerance.
- There will be advanced touch, talk, and typing options. A "thought-based" interface may be on the horizon too.
- IP law and copyright issues will remain problematic.
- There will be no distinction between personal and professional time.
- It is unlikely that a "next-gen" Internet system will be developed.
- Will more transparency make the world a better place? The results are mixed.
- More than half of the respondents think that virtual worlds will impact a large number of individuals, which means that a little less than half disagree. However, the consensus among the respondents is that virtual and augmented reality user interfaces will have to become more intuitive for there to be wide-spread adoption of these technologies.
Showing posts with label Internet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Internet. Show all posts
Monday, December 15, 2008
The Future's Not Ours to See, Or Is It?
The folks at the Pew Internet and American Life project, with help from Janna Quitney Anderson, Elon University, have examined what the Internet might look like in the future. In this December 14, 2008 report, the authors outline the results from a survey of more than 1,000 Internet specialists, critics, and analysts. Based on the responses, the following picture of what the Internet might look like in 2020 emerged:
Friday, November 14, 2008
Games, Other Media Forms, and Convergence
Games and other forms of media are converging. Sara de Freitas and Mark Griffiths (2008) review the literature on this trend to examine the ways games are converging with other media. These authors divide their discussion into three sections:
Next, the authors note the convergence that's taking place between computer gaming and the Internet. This has trend has its roots in the early text-based worlds of MUDs and MOOs. In terms of educational possibilities associated with this movement, de Freitas and Griffiths claim that educational studies of digital games are in the nascent stages.
The final convergence category described by the authors is games and mobile devices, including mobile augmented reality (MAR). Mobile technologies are very popular, and some institutions are using mobile phones in particular to distribute course content. Further, work on technologies that will enable individuals to access virtual world such as Second Life via a mobile phone are underway. Based on this, it is likely that educators will soon be experimenting with the combination of course content delivery in SL via a mobile phone.
What do all three of these convergence trends have in common? According to de Freitas and her colleague, they place greater emphasis on the learner, provide more opportunities for horizontal learning (e.g., peer-to-peer learning per Wenger, 1998), and enable more social interaction among learners. This notion of learners as the producers of content (and not merely consumers) contradicts the thoughts of Jakob Nielsen (1993) who stated that users are not designers.
The study of games for educational purposes is relatively new. And, I would argue that even less work has been done to investigate the meaning of this convergence in terms of teaching and learning. This article by de Freitas and Griffiths provides a glimpse into this area of research that will hopefully expand rapidly, so educators will be able to take advantage of the possibilities associated with these blended virtual environments.
- Gaming and cinema;
- Gaming and the Internet; and
- Gaming and mobile devices.
Next, the authors note the convergence that's taking place between computer gaming and the Internet. This has trend has its roots in the early text-based worlds of MUDs and MOOs. In terms of educational possibilities associated with this movement, de Freitas and Griffiths claim that educational studies of digital games are in the nascent stages.
The final convergence category described by the authors is games and mobile devices, including mobile augmented reality (MAR). Mobile technologies are very popular, and some institutions are using mobile phones in particular to distribute course content. Further, work on technologies that will enable individuals to access virtual world such as Second Life via a mobile phone are underway. Based on this, it is likely that educators will soon be experimenting with the combination of course content delivery in SL via a mobile phone.
What do all three of these convergence trends have in common? According to de Freitas and her colleague, they place greater emphasis on the learner, provide more opportunities for horizontal learning (e.g., peer-to-peer learning per Wenger, 1998), and enable more social interaction among learners. This notion of learners as the producers of content (and not merely consumers) contradicts the thoughts of Jakob Nielsen (1993) who stated that users are not designers.
The study of games for educational purposes is relatively new. And, I would argue that even less work has been done to investigate the meaning of this convergence in terms of teaching and learning. This article by de Freitas and Griffiths provides a glimpse into this area of research that will hopefully expand rapidly, so educators will be able to take advantage of the possibilities associated with these blended virtual environments.
Friday, October 24, 2008
Genevieve Bell
Genevieve Bell, an anthropologist at Intel, spoke on campus this afternoon. While I was initially reluctant to brave the elements, I am so glad I decided to attend. Bell's talk was one of the best I've heard since I arrived more than 3 years ago. While not the speech Bell gave today, this clip does give you an idea of what her presentations are like.
In her talk - "The next internet revolution is already happening!" - Bell used an ethnographic lens to examine what the Internet might look like in 10-20 years from now. She began by noting that the internet is not just about technology: it a social product; it is ideas; it is a set of forces. In other words, the internet comes with cultural baggage wrapped around it. And now, the internet, according to Bell, is fragmenting into a series of technologies.
Bell outlined six different signs that the next internet revolution is currently underway. First, the internet is not just in laptops and desktop computers. Its is "feral" and on the move. It is in mobile devices such as cell phones. It is also in televisions, game consoles, etc. Bell argues that this move to a feral internet changes people's behavior. For example, people don't surf on an iPhone; instead they locate very targeted information. Further, Bell pointed out that not all individuals use the internet in real time. They may drive 150k to access it at McDonald's. They may tell a relative what to say in a message, and the relative goes to an internet cafe to compose and send the message. This relative then prints any received messages to read to the relative the next a.m.
Second on Bell's list is the end of the "anglosphere"; there are more languages appearing on the internet, and Bell contends that this trend will increase. Also, Bell suggests that a lot of information is hidden in plain sight. It is no longer about what is being said that's important; rather what is not said. Thus, Bell argues that language on the web is not just a translation problem.
Next on the list is infrastructure and the range of upload and download speeds. This will look different in different cultures. Bell believes that internet behavior and the way people participate online will change depending on these speeds. Moreover, the costs associated with participation is likely to increase not decrease, and in Bell's mind, the concept of a free and open internet is unrealistic.
Fourth is regulation of the internet. Many countries are connecting good citizenship with technology use. Korea's U-Society is one example. Bell says that this is a new frontier for government activity and agendas; each one is different from the other.
Number five on Bell's list was related to porn, trolls, and social regulations. According to Bell, everyone lies on the internet, and she points to the Cornell study on online data as one piece of evidence to support this claim. She continues by noting that crafting ourselves online is an art.
And finally, the sixth item are socio-technical concerns. Bell refers to the internet as a form of aggressive self-presentation. We worry about what other people think about us, which impacts what we post online. Also, Bell notes that what we worry about has moved away from discussions about privacy, trust, and security. "Creepy" as in your Mom is in the house with you all the time creepy is the latest term used rather than privacy violations. Today, we worry about authenticity, ownership of information, digital literacy (e.g., Is the internet making us stupid? Is the internet destroying our language? Is the internet making us homogeneous?), and the identity of "Big Brother."
So, what does Bell foresee in the future? She believes that there will not be a single web - there will be no single use and no single trajectory. Bell mentioned that a really interesting group of people to study are the non-internet users and ex-internet users. Why do they choose not to have the internet? Another area for future examination are the ways in which people are beginning to resist technology. Some of Bell's interviewees remarked that they intentionally book vacations to areas where they cannot get a signal to connect to the internet. Maybe that's why I like being out on the XC - no internet, no phones, no computers, just me and Mother Nature.
In her talk - "The next internet revolution is already happening!" - Bell used an ethnographic lens to examine what the Internet might look like in 10-20 years from now. She began by noting that the internet is not just about technology: it a social product; it is ideas; it is a set of forces. In other words, the internet comes with cultural baggage wrapped around it. And now, the internet, according to Bell, is fragmenting into a series of technologies.
Bell outlined six different signs that the next internet revolution is currently underway. First, the internet is not just in laptops and desktop computers. Its is "feral" and on the move. It is in mobile devices such as cell phones. It is also in televisions, game consoles, etc. Bell argues that this move to a feral internet changes people's behavior. For example, people don't surf on an iPhone; instead they locate very targeted information. Further, Bell pointed out that not all individuals use the internet in real time. They may drive 150k to access it at McDonald's. They may tell a relative what to say in a message, and the relative goes to an internet cafe to compose and send the message. This relative then prints any received messages to read to the relative the next a.m.
Second on Bell's list is the end of the "anglosphere"; there are more languages appearing on the internet, and Bell contends that this trend will increase. Also, Bell suggests that a lot of information is hidden in plain sight. It is no longer about what is being said that's important; rather what is not said. Thus, Bell argues that language on the web is not just a translation problem.
Next on the list is infrastructure and the range of upload and download speeds. This will look different in different cultures. Bell believes that internet behavior and the way people participate online will change depending on these speeds. Moreover, the costs associated with participation is likely to increase not decrease, and in Bell's mind, the concept of a free and open internet is unrealistic.
Fourth is regulation of the internet. Many countries are connecting good citizenship with technology use. Korea's U-Society is one example. Bell says that this is a new frontier for government activity and agendas; each one is different from the other.
Number five on Bell's list was related to porn, trolls, and social regulations. According to Bell, everyone lies on the internet, and she points to the Cornell study on online data as one piece of evidence to support this claim. She continues by noting that crafting ourselves online is an art.
And finally, the sixth item are socio-technical concerns. Bell refers to the internet as a form of aggressive self-presentation. We worry about what other people think about us, which impacts what we post online. Also, Bell notes that what we worry about has moved away from discussions about privacy, trust, and security. "Creepy" as in your Mom is in the house with you all the time creepy is the latest term used rather than privacy violations. Today, we worry about authenticity, ownership of information, digital literacy (e.g., Is the internet making us stupid? Is the internet destroying our language? Is the internet making us homogeneous?), and the identity of "Big Brother."
So, what does Bell foresee in the future? She believes that there will not be a single web - there will be no single use and no single trajectory. Bell mentioned that a really interesting group of people to study are the non-internet users and ex-internet users. Why do they choose not to have the internet? Another area for future examination are the ways in which people are beginning to resist technology. Some of Bell's interviewees remarked that they intentionally book vacations to areas where they cannot get a signal to connect to the internet. Maybe that's why I like being out on the XC - no internet, no phones, no computers, just me and Mother Nature.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Jeff Jarvis and Digital Media
In this piece, Jeff Jarvis, a journalism professor at the City University of New York, addresses people's fears and complaints about the Internet (e.g., it's full of junk, it's inaccurate, people online are rude, etc.) and claims, "The internet is life. Life is messy. Get used to it"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
