thenickmurrayblog

[thenickmurrayblog]

  Breaking Glass

  You  are valuable to Google as long as you give them a return on their investment. Their tools and services are in place to earn more profits. Not to empower or protect you.

  In his blog, Bret McLeod writes that, "Google Glass empowers" people and the ideas of "power, freedom, and control" and "It allows for the freedom of imagination." (McLeod)

But whose "power, freedom, and control" are we talking about here?

  The United States Government has the right to acquire your digital information without the protections and freedoms granted to you in our constitution. And Google has somehow gotten you to "Agree" to that.

  Patriot Glass

  In early 2001, more than a dozen privacy bills were passed by congress to address privacy concerns on the web. Then, as Rebecca MacKinnon explains in Consent of the Networked,  9/11 brought about the Patriot Act, which "allows the FBI to obtain" digital information "without a court order." (MacKinnon)

  The Third Party Doctrine

  As John Villasenor points out in his article What You Need to Know About the Third Party Doctrine, "In its 1979 decision in Smith v. Maryland, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the government, observing that “this Court consistently has held that a person has no legitimate expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turns over to third parties.'"(Villasenor)

  This decision makes your information up for grabs if you share it with a third party, such as Google.

How does Google fit into this betrayal of the 4th Amendment?

  Remember that "Privacy Policy" you "Agreed" to when you clicked "I Agree", before using Gmail or Google? Somewhere, deep in the fine print (which of course you read, right?), Google covered their ass.

  Their policy said that you agreed to Google not only sharing information they acquire about you with third parties, but that you agree that they may share your it with government and law enforcement.

  Just as they were taking part in the slow death of your rights, companies like Google lobbied in congress for some protection of their own.

  MacKinnon writes that "the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Amendments Act, gives US companies immunity from being sued by their customers when they comply with the blatantly illegal government surveillance requests" (MacKinnon).

When threatened by the government to divulge your personal information, Google not only has no incentive to refuse, you have no legal recourse against them.

  Google asked congress for more rights, while stripping you of yours.

Glass Terms

By agreeing to the terms of Google, you have given up your rights. By using Google Glass, you invite third party companies, i.e. advertisers, and government surveillance, into all aspects of your life. They see what you see. They go where you go.

  By agreeing to Google Glass you have, in effect, forgone all expectation of privacy, giving up your "power, freedom, and control."

Works Cited

MacKinnon, Rebecca. Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom. New York: Basic Books, 2012. Print.

McLeod, Bret. “Imagination Glass - The Prospective Future Through The Eyes of Google.” Bret McLeod UMD. Tumblr.com. N. p., 14 May 2014.

Villasenor, John. “What You Need to Know About the Third-Party Doctrine.” The Atlantic 30 Dec. 2013.

Google Glass is the world’s next sign of the future. Wearing it on your head grants you an augmented reality-like simulation. The device connects with your mobile device, and has its own apps.

Josh Lowensohn, tech writer from The Verge, wrote about the public release of Google Glass....

[thenickmurrayblog]

Glass Invasion

Hello Google Glass, Goodbye Privacy

Glass is just the next step of marketing and advertising jumping out of our computers and into our faces.

Google Glass is only in the beginning stages of, but as Josh Lowensohn writes in his article, Google Glass Now on Sale to All in US, but still in Beta, "Google's offered a development platform on top of Glass to build tools that might make more sense in front of your eyeballs than on a smartphone screen." (Lowensohn)

What tools make more sense to advertisers to be in front of your eyeballs? You'll tell them.

Lowensohn's article makes mention of an augmented reality app for golfers and a real-time translation app. But not all of us are golfers or in international business. Not to worry, simply put the Glass on and walk around town. Google will absorb everything you see. They will know everything you look at. And they will create advertisements designed for you, based on their observations of what you look at and do.

Eventually, your activity will be directed by Google's advertisers. After all, as Robert McChesney writes in Digital Disconnect, advertising has become "the most sophisticated system of applied propaganda in the world." (McChesney)

Digital World

In the documentary Terms and Conditions May Apply, the opening sequence has presents two scenarios, one labeled "Real World," in which a man goes to a clinic to get an itch on his foot checked out and in the elevator to, he texts his significant other about dinner plans.

In the next scenario, labeled "Digital World," the same man goes to the same clinic for the same problem, and is confronted right away, and throughout the experience, with advertisements. In the clinic's waiting room, doctors jump in front of him boasting discounted rates and a natural medicine alternative jumps out as well and offers herbs and prayer. In the elevator the man receives the text about dinner. The elevator is suddenly illuminated from all sides with glowing ads for dinner and coupons for food items. Down the hall, the advertisements continue and people jump out from behind doors to bombard the man with products as he runs away.

Digital Invasion

This scenario in the film is not far off from the digital world we engage in on the internet. But what if the "Real World" was never disengaged from the "Digital World"? What if everything we do is absorbed, calculated, and quantified to deliver products and steer us toward buying them. Or Worse?

The documentary mentioned above also reveals some terrifying real life consequences of the invasion of digital technology and information sharing in people's lives. The film explains that one man stormed into a Target store, fuming about the coupons for baby products and pregnancy tests that were being mailed from the store to his teenage daughter. After some very personal conversations, the daughter revealed that, based on her purchases, the store knew that she was in fact pregnant before her own father did.

Another real life scenario from the film describes how a man's family vacation was ruined after, despite having good credit history and a prior credit limit of $10,000, his limit was suddenly cut down to around $3,800. The credit card company responded to his complaints in a letter, explaining that due to the poor repayment history of other people that shopped at the same establishments as the man, he was deemed a risk and his credit lowered.

The film also explained that many people's insurance premiums were raised by assessing risk in the same manner.

Google Glass Hero

Imagine walking down the street, wearing Glass. A man drives up in a flashy new car. You check the plates, and the price, so does Google. An ad pops up for cars for sale.

The man gets out of his car and  you notice his suit. Google tells you exactly what he is wearing and where you can buy similar suits.

You scan the man's face. So does Google. Google has done a facial recognition and alerted the authorities that the man you've spotted is wanted for bank fraud and the police are now on their way.

You observe and take video from Glass as you sip your coffee. You are a hero.

Google Glass Criminal

Imagine  the same scenario as before. This time you get out of your flashy car and your face is scanned by a man across the street.

The man walks over and says "Hey, Stan!"

You turn and try to remember the man, but can't place him.

"Hey, buddy." The man says. "I went to So and So high school and picked up your son earlier. Why don't you get in the car and we'll go withdraw all $11, 913 from your checking or I'll kill your family at your house in So and So address."

Cool apps and fast mobile searching, with the addition of some all in one information sharing company that sold your personal information, has enabled a criminal to bend you to his will in a few seconds.

Works Cited

Hoback, Cullen. Terms & Conditions May Apply. Hyrax Films, Topiary Productions, 2013. Netflix.

Lowensohn, Josh. “Google Glass Now on Sale to All in US, but Still in Beta.” The Verge 13 May 2014.

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York: Penguin Press, 2010. Print.

[thenickmurrayblog]

No Neutrality: Picking Sides in the Battle for Free Internet

Net Neutrality is the basis of freedom of choice on the internet.

A free internet, means access to any and all types of forums and services. It is one where every platform possible is open for public discourse to enable social change. It is the net's version of a Bill of Rights. It protects internet users' right to free speech and free press. It does not cater to government or corporations.

  Two Sides of Net Neutrality

  Opponents

  Aside from corporations, that would stand to profit from a non-neutral net, by charging big players like Netflix for preferred access to users, or by passing the costs on to us, some opposed see it as a way of government meddling with the free market (MacKinnon).

  Opponents suggest that regulation would not be in the best interest of citizens "who are deprived of new products and services...thanks to regulations that inevitable fail to anticipate how technology will evolve" (MacKinnon, 120).

  Proponents

  The idea of no interference with the fee market is absurd coming from anyone who would agree with the idea of central banking. The idea that competition sparks innovation is valid, but the lack of some laws to protect the people is dangerous. The argument at hand is more in line with consumer protection, or civil rights, than with the free market.

  In her book, Consent of the Networked, Rebecca MacKinnon writes that "proponents...believe it is a prerequisite for Internet freedom, and ultimately as important as the First Amendment" (MacKinnon, 120).

  The Reason for Neutrality on the Web

  The use of the net and digital media provide a platforms for one  voice to gather momentum and build a larger group, in order to speak out against an injustice and make it right.

  In her blog, Digital Media Revolution, Allison Hanna tells the story of how a woman named Stacy Stafford used the site change.org to start a petition after her "disabled son lost school funding from Glasgow City Council." At first Stafford tried to speak directly to the City Council, "but their disregard made her feel powerless..." After she got over 7,000 signatures, her son's funding was restored (Hanna).

  Stafford's move to the digital media site change.org was only possible because she and thousands of others had access to the site. If the site featured language that a controlling government or corporation deemed inappropriate, or if the site simply did not gain enough traffic or refused to pay the fees of the service provider, the petition would not have happened and Stafford's son would be out of funding for school.

  Net neutrality itself could be the subject of censorship. On May 1, 2014, the actor Mark Ruffalo posted this simple tweet; "Keep Net Neutrality Alive," with a link to a petition that is sent to the Chairman of the FCC, demanding net neutrality laws.

  In a different place, or if the service provider decided to block his tweet, it would be gone. No link. No action.

  Netizens of the World

  MacKinnon writes that "sovereign powers...that are failing to protect and respect our rights... are unlikely to change" unless we as a people force them to change (MacKinnon).

  In a global society, which is what the net has created, we are all citizens with the equal right to demand and force change upon our governments.

Just as with any revolution, the digital revolution is dependent upon active citizenship. Certainly in the United States we must recognize the responsibility to hold our governments and ourselves accountable. It is embedded in our Constitution.

                              Demand Change. Demand Freedom. Demand Net Neutrality.

Works Cited

Hanna, Allison. “Digital Media Revolution.” Internet Communications & Culture. Tumblr.com. N. p., 17 Apr. 2014.

MacKinnon, Rebecca. Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom. New York: Basic Books, 2012. Print.

Ruffalo, Mark. “Keep Net Neutrality Alive.”@MarkRuffalo. Twitter. N. p., 5-1 May. 2014.

[thenickmurrayblog]

Warrant Wars

  In her blog, katyiskelly writes that searching a cell phone is as "unjustified as searching a car or a purse. "(katyiskelly) .

  Glove box is locked? So What?

Unfortunately searching a car without a warrant is perfectly legal under the "motor vehicle exception rule" as long as the officer has reasonable cause to believe that there is evidence inside the vehicle. This exception goes back to Carrol v. United States, a Supreme Court case in 1925.

Part of the reasoning behind the exception is that a lower expectation of privacy exists in driving a car on public roads, part of it has to do with what the law calls exigency, the urgency caused by the inherent mobility of the car. By the time the warrant arrives the evidence or the car may be on the move.

  Probable Cause

  Probable Cause is basically the reasonable amount of suspicion that will lead a cautious person to believe that the facts are true; that a crime was already or about to be committed and that evidence was on the suspect.

Terry v. Ohio in 1968 was another case that gave a little wiggle room to officers conducting a search. This case established the much controversial "stop and frisk". In this case the court found that an officer may stop and search a person with reasonable suspicion that the suspect is armed and presently dangerous, and that they have committed, or are about to commit a crime.

However in terms of cell phones, although there could clearly be some evidence related to a crime, searching the contents of the phone should still require a warrant, clearly defining the criteria of the search.

  Works Cited

Kaitlyn, Kelly. “Unreasonable Searching of Cells: Push for Warrantless Searching.” katyiskelly.     tumblr.com. N. p., 4–14 Apr. 2014.

As of yesterday, the Justice Department fights for the right to warrantlessly search suspect’s cells on the spot. The feds wish to obtain data quickly and efficiently, serving as a means to incriminate suspects. Andy Greenberg writes, “rather than risk letting the suspect or his associates...

[thenickmurrayblog]

Cell Carriers Sell Out: How Corporations help Oppressive Governments

Big Brother is Watching...Everywhere

  Governments around the world use their power to quiet dissent or just spy on their citizens "for their own safety".

  Even in the U.S. it would be dumb not to assume that all your phone calls, texts, twitter posts and emails are seen by Big Brother, or at least an automated system, set to catch key words. This has thrown a speed bump in the way of social activists in countries like China or Iran.

  As author Rebecca MacKinnon points out in her book Consent of the Networked, it is "how governments manage these technologies" that will determine "whether activists...succeed...to bring about change (MacKinnon)."

  No Phone, No Camera, No Recourse--Tough shit

  MacKinnon also points out that, due to mobile deals like Nokia-Siemens selling tracking technology to Iran, some activists find it too dangerous to carry their cell phones with them to some types of meetings or events.

  They leave their phones at home. In this age of camera phones, this leaves some activists and citizen journalists without the ability to record images of state brutality or to shoot out a last minute SOS type twitter message.

  Abuse of this kind by governments proves troublesome, even for less subversive active citizens. MacKinnon also writes that it is a "common tactic to restrict mobile phone service". This proves critical in instances like Iran's 2009 presidential election, where "text messaging...went down roughly nine hours before" the election took place in order to "prevent activists from carrying out...monitoring via text messaging" (MacKinnon).

Government monitoring all our calls and texts is an invasion of our privacy. Government manipulating our cell service to prevent activism is shady as helll.

When mobile companies like Nokia sell off our privacy to governments for a quick buck, its damn bad business.

MacKinnon, Rebecca. Consent of the Networked: The Worldwide Struggle for Internet Freedom.           New York: Basic Books, 2012. Print.

[thenickmurrayblog]

Poe Hates Shakespeare: The importance of personal taste

  As Bret McLeod points out in his blog, and Author Clay Shirky writes in his book Cognitive Surplus, Edgar Allen Poe did supposedly say, “The enormous multiplication of books… [throws] in the reader’s way piles of lumber in which he must painfully grope for the scraps of useful lumber. (Shirky)”

Shirky also aptly writes in his book that Poe was right; mass publication of materials did "diminish average quality — how could it not (Shirky)?”

Something that Shriky neglected to mention, and that Poe would disagree with, is that the idea of quality, in relation to literature, is subjective. If this were not the case, there would not be a Twilight series. There most likely would not be Harry Potter. Our shelves would be filled with classics. Nothing else would make the cut.

Poe would do away with Shakespeare's sonnets if they drummed on longer than a hundred lines; the point at which Poe believed the cutoff to perfection.

Fact Check

  It is the responsibility of the reader to dispel or revel in one piece of writing or the other. However, when it comes to facts there might be less room for subjective opinions. Unless the material is published in an open forum, like the websites such as Wikipedia, where it is common knowledge that anyone can post something and label it as fact.

Sometimes the fact that something is inaccurate or even morally wrong may prompt a greater reaction than merely factual data.

In his book Shirky also remarks on Martin Luther's revolt against the Catholic church in reaction to Gutenberg's Indulgences (Shirky).

Sometimes a false or inaccurate statement in publication may prompt a greater correction than a true statement or record. Sometimes lies birth greater truths.

  Works Cited

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York: Penguin Press, 2010. Print.

Knowledge is everywhere. The Internet houses tons of false information. Average people cause this. The publish button many have access to causes this.

It’s not all inaccurate

It’s impossible to say that all information spread by “nobodies” can be considered false. There are even websites,...

[thenickmurrayblog]

Group On! Individuals and the Cohesive Unit

Apart Together

Human beings are tied to each other. We are also bound to express ourselves as individuals. This dichotomy is what makes social media a prime platform for social change.

In his book, Cognitive Surplus, Clay Shirky claims that social media is an effort to derive personal value from activity that takes up some of our free time.

Shirky also writes about a psychotherapist named Wilfred Bion that engaged in group therapy during WWII (163). In the course of his work, Bion sought to answer whether "groups of people are...aggregations of individuals or...a cohesive unit"(163).

Bion found that we are both. We are by nature individuals and we "enter deep bonds...that transcend our individual intellects"(163).

  Group On

Bion and Shirky point out the "accident" which is just starting to be discovered among the masses; social media, while not designed as such, is the power of unity that humanity has lacked in our efforts at social change.

By stating our unique opinions, which gather communal following, we can create social change.

A single voice, speaking out in protest, is seldom heard. A group of shouting voices render some public notice. This group gains momentum until it is a thunderous roar that cannot be ignored.

The group broken down, shows the beauty of humans. We are all individuals, with a unique perspective on a host of issues...yet sometimes, on certain issues, we come together, to form a single "cohesive unit".

  Works cited

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York: Penguin Press, 2010. Print.

[thenickmurrayblog]

Civic Soldiers: War for Social Change

Civic Tweetivism

Activism is not just for Birkenstock clad, weed smoking, tree hugging hippies. A new era of tech-savvy, civic minded folks can now join the fight for free and without sacrificing everything, using social media like Twitter.

  "The dramatically reduced cost of public address," writes Clay Shirky, author of Digital Disconnect, "and the dramatically increased size of the population wired together, means that we can now turn massive aggregations of small contributions into things of lasting value" (Shirky 161).

This is a call to arms for all internet users, specifically those that tweet.

Act Now...(Before it's too late)

Olivia Gauvin writes in her blog that "Surveillance of internet activity threatens democracy and human rights" (Gauvin).

Why not use the same tool that seeks to repress our freedom to express it? Social media sites like twitter are not just masturbatory havens set up for selfies. They have potential as platforms for major social change.

Effects of social change vary with users. Skilled warriors shoot straight.

Ruffalo (A Skilled Social Warrior)

On April 3, 2014 actor Mark Ruffalo tweeted "100% clean energy is possible! Create jobs, save lives and $Click your state and share with your governor. #climate..." (Ruffalo). The last part of the tweet is a link to the solutionsproject.org website.

Solutions project has established a 100% renewable energy plan, specific to each state.

Mark is a founding member of the group that also includes a scientist, a banker and a filmmaker who decided that simply having an opinion was not enough. They decided to form a community and then take civic action.

Part of forming community and taking action involves posting attractive and concise tweets.

Reclaim Value (Be Ad and Be Mad)

Shannon Jordan warns in her blog that "We are becoming the product. We are molded and made to want what companies tell us to want" (Jordan).

This can either be seen as a warning about our submission to the powers that be, or a call to reclaim what was intended as a realm of unlimited possibilities through our increasing connection with each other.

  Power to the People

On March 27, 2014, author, professor and activist Cornell West tweeted "Democracy is the attempt to curtail the arbitrary use of power" (West).

West understands that the power really lies with people. Corporations use social media to subjugate and subdue us, but those brave social warriors use those same platforms to liberate us.

If we are the product of social media, then we are also the marketers. We can change the product at any time.

If we are consuming ourselves, lets consume something that inspires action. If others consume our product as well, give them something of value. Something that can change their perspective and possibly their actions.

The enemy does not sleep. The enemy is greed and corruption.

The stakes are our lives, our rights, our futures, and our planet.

  Works Cited

Gauvin, Olivia. “INTERNET SURVEILLANCE, CAPITALISM COMMODIFY HUMAN RIGHTS.” The Absentminded Philosopher. Tumblr.com. N. p., 31 Mar. 2014.

Jordan, Shannon. “Technology Blues: The Psych of Social Media Marketing.”Shannon Jordan. Tumblr.com. N. p., 10 Apr. 2014.

Ruffalo, Mark. “100% Clean Energy Is Possible! Create Jobs, Save Lives and $Click Your State and Share with Your Governor. #climate http://clim.at/hD .” @MarkRuffalo. Twitter.com. N. p., 3 Apr. 2014.

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York: Penguin Press, 2010. Print.

West, Cornell. “Democracy Is the Attempt to Curtail the Arbitrary Use of Power.” @Cornell West. Twitter.com. N. p., 27 Mar. 2014.

[thenickmurrayblog]

Deep Learning or Deep Yearning

  The problem with the argument about college students using technology is not about student's ability to think deeply, the problem is that it exposes the desire to learn and think deeply, or not.

The ability to spend hours in a library, rummaging through catalogues, in order to find old books, then read those books, has not disappeared. Believe it or not, libraries still exist. The issue is that technology has made gathering knowledge easier and more efficient.

The time spent pondering a thought or claim and then digging deeper through reading is, and always has been, up to the one digging.

  Wikipedia Teacher

  Student's often use Wikipedia to gather information or seek answers when writing a paper. The problem isn't with the tool, the problem is with the desire to find the easiest answer, regardless of credibility. The problem is when research stops at Wikipedia.

In Cognitive Surplus, Clay Shirky makes a very interesting point. While he concedes that you wouldn't want your brain surgeon to have learned brain surgery from Wikipedia, you also "wouldn't want a brain surgeon who learned everything he knew from Encyclopedia Britannica either" (Shirky).

The problem is not with the tool to acquire knowledge, the problem is with the lack of cumulative knowledge and degree of knowledge from sticking with only one source. The problem is with the desire to acquire a deeper knowledge.

When utilized fully, technology is an invaluable tool, one that has increased our "cognitive surplus".

  Got Class?

  Wikipedia can be seen as a group discussion in class.

If a peer adds their comments to the class discussion, I can assume that they have a limited knowledge on the subject. Should I disregard their comments altogether? Their comments add to my wealth of knowledge, which is then up to me to research further.

Wikipedia is the comment from the kid sitting next to you in class. They are usually a good student.

  Works Cited

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus: Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York: Penguin Press, 2010. Print.

For most students, toggling between social media sites, Wikipedia entries, and homework assignments is normal. But students rely on the Internet too much. The Internet distracts students and prevents deep learning.

Quick Information doesn’t build wisdom

In “Digital Distractions a Problem for...

[thenickmurrayblog]

Motive Trigger

  Triggerstreet.com

  Triggerstreet.com, is a creation of Kevin Spacey, which enables professional and amateur writers and film makers to help each other to get published, to get their films made, or just to engage with other artists.

The website offers a community that leads into the kind of public value that Author Clay Shirky writes about in his book, Cognitive Surplus.

  Create Community

  On Triggerstreet.com, members submit their work and get feedback in return.

  Membership is free. However, in order to submit work, members must first:

Read and review a few pieces by other members.

  The website hosts contests.

Winners usually receive some publication or movie deal!

Public Trigger

Work produced by members may gets attention and praise from amateurs or professionals in the entertainment and publishing industries.

Some are made into films or published!

  The public then comments on work.

Outsiders become another layer of connective tissue, strengthening that artist’s ability.

Artists bring their knowledge back to the table and share  what works with other members.

  Motive

  It pays to be a member of a group, creatively or financially!

  Regardless of motive, members help each other. They become invested in helping each other achieve their best work.

    Works Cited

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York: Penguin Press, 2010. Print.

[thenickmurrayblog]

Personal Value

In his blog cohenmax93 writes that "Television provides a crucial diving board for people to use to establish a link of common interest."

This is absolutely true. But attempt for a moment to quantify the value you receive from the television program itself, and from the connection you made because of it. Now consider Professor Clay Shirky's comment; "Increases in personal satisfaction...are not all that's at stake" (172).

Is it possible that the kind of value derived from communal value, or public value, or civic value is more impactful in life, even your own life, than simple personal value?

Civic Value

Could it be possible that participation in something that goes beyond personal satisfaction, that is in fact an act of selflessness, designed to make a specific change in society, actually ends up delivering greater personal satisfaction as well?

Consider all the people your mind can conjure that have devoted themselves to actively pursuing changes in society, that benefit the whole, even at the peril of self satisfaction. Do any of these people bring to mind an image of someone devoid of value? Someone without satisfaction?

Indulge and Engage

There is a balance to struck in life. Absolutely, kick your shoes off and relax to a nice stiff glass of How I Met Your Mother. You work hard and deserve a bit of down time. However, the amount of time spent indulging is what Shriky seems to emphasize in his book, Cognitive Surplus.

Shirky writes that "Americans watch roughly two hundred billion hours of TV every year" (10). Imagine what kind of change, what kind of value, could have come from just some of those hours. Ever say, "I'd love to, but I just don't have the time"?  I know I have.

  Works Cited

Cohen, Max. “As Seen on TV.”cohenmax93. N. p., 2 Apr. 2014.

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York:            Penguin Press, 2010. Print.

“One source of television’s negative effects has been the reduction in the amount of human contact…” (Shirky, 7)

Clay Shirky, author of Cognitive Surplus is overblowing the negative effects of television. Television is an escape much like books or movies, and it gives people a base on which they...

[thenickmurrayblog]

Tweet Responsibly

Tweet Responsibly. Blog Consciously. Make Facebook Face Facts.

Use twitter to engage in society to make it better. Tweet for change. Not just for fun.

 In his book Cognitive Surplus, Clay Shirky writes that "with personal sharing, most or all of the value goes to the participants...attempts at civic sharing are specifically designed to generate real change in the society..."(173).

There are any number of uses for social media sites like Twitter and Facebook and Tumblr.

There is also, in my humble opinion, a profound shift in the amount of attention, follows, retweets, reblogs, and out-right arguments, (or debates) that take place once these tools for connectivity become an outlet for motivating change within your community.

Celeb Power

I have a few friends that are working actors, musicians and artists, that I follow. I also follow some well known speakers, authors and folks in that realm. Some of my friends are straight up Twitter activists. They recognize the potential of sites like Twitter for bringing attention to important issues.

Mark Ruffalo Tweets:

"The Revolution will be Solarized!

http://Www.thesolutiinsproject.org  http://reneweconomy.com.au/2014/citigroup-says-the-age-of-renewables-has-begun-69852 …"

and

" Renewable energy from rivers and lakes cld replace gas in homes http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/exclusive-renewable-energy-from-rivers-and-lakes-could-replace-gas-in-homes-9210277.html … Don't believe em when they say there's no other way."

Anyone can ACT(ivism)

You don't need to be a celebrity to make a difference. Search for someone that is tweeting something you believe in and retweet it. Do this often! You can build a community of people moving in the same direction. Enough people moving equals a movement. A movement that takes over is a revolution.

Create change through your use of social media. You can still enjoy cat pictures too.

Works cited

Ruffalo, Mark. “The Revolution Will Be Solarized!”@MarkRuffalo. Twitter. N. p., 5–3 Apr. 2014.

---. “Wind Industry’s New Technologies Are Helping It Compete on Price.”@MarkRuffalo. Twitter. N. p., 56–23 Mar. 2014.

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York: Penguin Press, 2010. Print.

[thenickmurrayblog]

"The obvious question many have right now is 'What’s a social media company going to do with virtual reality?' (Hawes-Defrias)"

  The answer is in Robert McChesney's Digital Disconnect. McChesney writes that "Monopolies are even more likely in the online world...the value of a network increases in proportion to the square of connections" (132).

  In or Out?

In the section above, McChesney is referring to Metcalfe's Law. The ability to create a sense of inclusion or exclusion is what draws in users to networking sites like Facebook.

The sure sign of success for new sites like Oculus Rift is the presence of an app on Facebook. Facebook knows that virtual reality, augmented reality, is the next step in online connection. Oculus Rift is the up and comer on this front. If the Rift proceeds with vigor and produces something worth contributing to the next generation Facebook, the social media giant has the ability and motive to help them advance and gain market share together. If their technology lags behind another up and comer, Facebook will drown out the Rift. It will be as if they never existed.

  End Game

So, what does Facebook want with VR? They want to create a digital haven that enables (disables) you to stay indoors and online, twenty-four hours a day. They want a world where your friends, co-workers, acquaintances are merely virtual avatars of themselves. You could live, work, socialize, consume, and never leave your home, or their  website via VR goggles, headset, or cranial plug-in. Oculus Rift is just one dog in the race. Facebook has graduated from k-9 to the owner of the track.

McChesney, Robert W. Digital Disconnect How Capitalism Is Turning The              Internet Against Democracy. New York: The New Press, 2013. Print.

The Oculus Rift is a virtual reality platform, invented mostly for video gaming that was founded via Kickstarter. However, Facebook now owns this platform. The obvious question many have right now is “What’s a social media company going to do with virtual reality?” As journalist Vincent...

[thenickmurrayblog]

Shared Surplus

Shared Surplus

No Drone. No more couch potato. No more wasting away, simply consuming a modified advertisement for what we should buy, be, say, or want. We now have the ability to focus our surplus of time and creativity into a creative outlet. We can be an active participant in the use of our free time like never before.

In his book, Cognitive Surplus, writer and professor of Interactive Communications Clay Shirky touts with glee the glory of being so connected through the web. We are, as Shirky points out, a very social species. But is are more outlets for free time going be better for us than television?

"Friends"

Shirky points out that "people turn to favored programs when they are feeling lonely, and that they feel less lonely when they are viewing those programs" (7).

What is so wrong with this use of time? And what is so different with this use of time than spending several hours on Facebook. Are those Facebook friends real friends? Or are they digital versions of people we meet? Are they not slightly more real versions of the "imaginary friends" Shirky says we seek from our favorite television programs?

What if someone likes spending time watching Friends more than they like spending time with friends?

Oh...Creativity

Yes, the invention of Ushahidi that Shirky describes is indeed impressive. And collaboration on such sites in order to affect social change is not to be diminished. However, we cannot have a cheap printing press and an elite writing class. We cannot have shared reporting without pictures of cats.

Shirky, Clay. Cognitive Surplus Creativity and Generosity in a Connected Age. New York: Penguin Press, 2010. Print.

[thenickmurrayblog]

McChesney’s Digital Disconnect paints a grim future for the world. As he states, “The tremendous promise of the digital revolution has been compromised by capitalist appropriation and development of the Internet” (p. 97). What he means is, instead of the Internet being a place of freedom, it is...

[thenickmurrayblog]

Freedom of choice is dead. Technology dictates our decisions. Mass media killed conscious will. Choices we make are controlled by network giants. We are silently stalked and robbed of our data. Our lives are tracked and used to monitor and persuade our thoughts.

Social networks sustain...

[thenickmurrayblog]

Kill Poverty: Killing Capitalism Through Techno Revolution

The techno revolution giving birth to global change has already begun. The end of extreme poverty and inequality is possible.

War

Robert McChesney is a professor of Communications and author. In his book Digital Disconnect, he writes that such a "movement will take flight only if it is designed to replace really existing capitalism" (220).

He's right. This is a war.

Capitalism versus Democracy/Progress

Technology is the secret weapon.

  Techno Revolution

Cohenmax93 posts on tumblr.com:

" McChesney depicts the Internet as a failure for not meeting the ideals it was built to achieve. The Internet has achieved some of these ideals though it’s just that we can’t expect the Internet to fix the world on its own. At some point we need to chip in to make a difference."

Jeffrey Sachs would agree.

Jeffrey Sachs is an economist, UN advisor, and author. In a recent lecture in Vienna he had a simple graph. The graph showed a 1 billion fold increase in the ability to gather, store, and share knowledge and information.

We can produce technology that affects real change

Policy stands in the way of progress

  The Visible Hand

McChesney explains that the current system guards against recent protests, the "rampant inequality, corporate domination of the economy and politics, a death like embrace of austerity". It is a system which reinforces stagnant policy and wages wars to protect the status quo (220).

In his book The End of Poverty, Sachs discusses investing in Sustainable Development in rich and poor nations in order to:

  •           Protect against climate change

•           End extreme poverty

Sachs claims in his speech, the super increase in wealth for some results in extreme poverty for others. The scale is tipping.

  Global Spread

Sachs wants global investment that is at odds with capitalist ideals.

Capitalism by nature neglects long term harmful effects. Something that, as McChesney points out, "has no apparent use for young people, workers, or nature" (220).

  The irony of current policy

Profits soar after investing in development.

Developed nations participate in the global economy.

More sustainable nations means more market share.

Investing in sustainability and raw materials is cheaper than invasion and war.

  Works Cited

McChesney, Robert W. Digital Disconnect How Capitalism Is Turning The Internet Against         Democracy. New York: The New Press, 2013. Print.

Sachs, Jeffrey. The End Of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for Our Time. New York: Penguin     Books, 2005. Print.

Sachs, Jeffrey. “Jeffrey Sachs.” jeffsachs.org. Web. 17 March, 2014. Accessed 26 March, 2014             http://jeffsachs.org/2014/03/lecture-in-vienna-on-the-age-of-sustainable-development/

Cohenmax93. “The Internet, A Modern Messiah.” Cohenmax93 tumblr blog. N. p., 5 Mar. 2014.