Check out some of these links: How do you feel about surveillance culture?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15730499
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/26/oral-b-smart-toothbrush-dentists-spy-on-your-brushing
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2019239,00.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_dx1eTzko4
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/27/gchq-nsa-webcam-images-internet-yahoo
Thursday, 27 February 2014
Monday, 17 February 2014
Film Gigs on Smartphones? Yes or No?
Currently, more and more fans set their phones to cameras and hold them aloft to film gigs. Therefore people hold two different opinions on this problem. Opponents who are audiences think it is infuriating to be behind the phone-wielders at gigs. And some artists also consider it is infuriating to stand on the stage surveying hundreds of people staring intently at their screens. However, others including fans, bands and record labels are passionate about filming gigs.
2. The Issues
1) Gig Etiquette
For fans, many of them longed for the shows when the only thing illuminating the crowd at a packed gig would be a sea of cigarette lighters, not the screen. "put your phone down we can't see', fans need perfect sightline at gigs. However, other fans like to video gigs on their phones.They file footage on YouTube and see it, and relive it, and see all the people in the comments talking about it - they can make more friends with that.
For artists, they prefer their audience to focus on being in the moment, and not distract others out of that moment. And many artists do not like fans to film gigs. It seems like showing a lack of respect to and care for fellow concert goers, or for that matter the artist.
2) Poor Audio Quality of Footage - Weak and Distorted
The problem lies in the person taking the extensive filmed footage-clips are often blurry, dark and with poor audio quality. Smartphone's microphones only capable of capturing anything and everything immediately around it. So some artists think it is only wasting time for fans to take jerky and unwatchable footage.
3. The Solutions
1) it's a growing concern among live artists. As opponents, when the Yeah Yeah Yeahs (an American indie rock band) played at Webster Hall in New York, they posted notices with a request for concertgoers, "Please do not watch the show through a screen on your smart device/camera. Put that shit away as a courtesy to the person behind you and to Nick, Karen and Brian." And Roger Waters (former bassist and vocalist for Pink Floyd) has admitted on Facebook, "I would never turn on a cell phone ar any musical event."
(Yeah Yeah Yeahs)
2)New Technologies
45 Sound is a new service which makes live music videos sound better. It basically replaces the original sound of fans' video footage (which is usually fairly poor) with a high-quality recording of the exact same part of the concert. And in cases where there's more than one recording of the same moment, fans watching the gig on 45 Sound can switch camera angles.
Apps such as Vyclone have been used by the likes of Ed Sheeran to “crowdsource” gig footage, with fans being encouraged to upload their recordings of Ed for it then to be edited together for the official music video.
Another start-up, Outlisten, gathers fan videos and, if there's sufficient interest, will go to record labels after a big show and request the professionally recorded audio.
45 Sound's audio-matching software is considered all completely automated. 45 Sound has the ear of several companies - including Sony Music-owned RCA Records. Bring Me The Horizon (a British metalcore band) has trialed 45 Sound on their latest tour - prompting fans to record their show and upload it after the gig. Carefully shot online footage with decent sound might be welcomed by people who could not make it to the event. It is helping to push the band.
4. My Reaction
Honestly, before I read this article I've never thought about filming gigs as a potential problem. Recalling my few gig experiences, I didn't be bothered by filming footage. And then I interviewed some of my friends who often watch gigs, they have the same feeling as mine. And in Chica, sometimes vocalists promote fans to hold aloft their phones as light sticks. My friends and I often take few pictures of gigs for sharing on social media, but we almost didn't record shows by our phones for we know our equipments are not good at filming gigs. I also read a lot of comments on the internet, many fans agree with that they have the right to film and photography gigs and it is unfair to ban photos, but they also think that waving phones in front of someone's face is rude. And from this article I know the new audio and visual technologiew such as 45 Sound, Vyclone, and OutListen, which could improve fans' footage.
Therefore "sea of cameras" is not only existing at gigs but also appear in our general life. Recording and sharing has been becoming a life habit of our generation. Completely eliminating it is not realistic, but we should respect particular manners to avoid it occasionally. When artists don't like fans film and photography at gigs, we should respect them and follow their requests. And we could try 45 Second to improve our footage and then file on the internet.
I think filming gigs for opponents is like a bad behaviour such as ringing of phones at the cinema, talking loudly at the art gallery or jumping the queue. However, in my consideration, the difference between filming gigs and above dad manners is that filming gigs is not only referring to gig etiquette but also a part of changes of way life.
Therefore "sea of cameras" is not only existing at gigs but also appear in our general life. Recording and sharing has been becoming a life habit of our generation. Completely eliminating it is not realistic, but we should respect particular manners to avoid it occasionally. When artists don't like fans film and photography at gigs, we should respect them and follow their requests. And we could try 45 Second to improve our footage and then file on the internet.
I think filming gigs for opponents is like a bad behaviour such as ringing of phones at the cinema, talking loudly at the art gallery or jumping the queue. However, in my consideration, the difference between filming gigs and above dad manners is that filming gigs is not only referring to gig etiquette but also a part of changes of way life.
Friday, 14 February 2014
Thursday, 13 February 2014
Tuesday, 4 February 2014
Sunday, 2 February 2014
Is living room TV really back?
Is living room TV really back?
1.
The summaries of the article
The statistics from
regulator Ofcom suggest in the UK, television still dominates people’s media
habit. According to the report, people may spend seven hours a day watching TV.
In addition, there used
to be more TV set in the bedroom, but now the number has decreased. Therefore,
people get together in the living room in front TV again with a new multi-task habit.
This trend has been
contributed by the considerably increased ownership of the smartphone and
tablets. And instead of isolating each of the family members, the growth of
mobile devices has the opposite effects. Although half of the respondent have a
strong feeling of distraction when they do the multi-task simultaneously, there
are still many people choose to do it.
The multi-task habit
can be analyses from different points of view:
Gender
|
Female are more like to have the
multi-task habit
|
Age Group
|
Teens are more likely to use the mobile
message apps rather than SMS and they are less restraints and limits
|
Relationship
|
Parents more often let their children use tablet to entertain and
study
While they chose to watch some
other programme on the TV set
|
Content
|
Some of them use mobile devices to
share personal opinions and secret on the social net-work;
Some of them use these devices to take part in the programme during
watching;
|
2.
What are the issues? And what
is my reaction?
There are two main
issues I would like to discuss about:
a)
Is it really a ‘comeback’?
It is true that
people come back and sit together in the living room in front the TV. However
each of them is doing their own business. It is still a huge fragmentation and it
is more like a shared physical space even not a family get-together. Family
members are fragmented into the specialized groups by the mobile devices though
they are in the same room and watch the same programme. They do not share the
same media content. Their specialized interest makes them opt out of the public
sphere and imagined community. Therefore according to the multi-task habit, the
role of living room TV is actually different. In the past it is an essential
way of facilitating the family activities and public sphere. And now it has
almost lost its function.
On the other hand,
some may argue that there might be more interaction with the programme like the
in-show message of Question Time. People use devices to share their opinion
while watching. And it will improve the public sphere. However, this is not the
TV’s function.
All in all, I believe
there might be no real ‘comeback’ for living room TV based on Ofcom’s research
and data.
b)
What has multi-task done to our
brain?
To understand why we
always fall in it the habit of multitasking, when we know we shouldn’t. In fact
the answer is quite simple:
People who multitask are not being more productive-they just feel
more emotionally satisfied from their work (Zhen Wang)
Zhen Wang is a
researcher for multitasking and she is the lead author of the study and assistant professor of communication at Ohio State University.She mentioned that if we study with our books
open, watch TV at the same time and text friends every so often, we get a great
feeling of fulfillment and we feel incredibly efficient.
However, much
research has shown again and again that the human mind isn’t meant to
multitask. Even worse, research shows that multitasking can have long-term
harmful influence on our brain function. In addition, Clifford Nass, a
researcher at Stanford assumed that people who multitask a lot are in fact a
lot worse at filtering irrelevant information and also perform significant
worse at switching between tasks, compared to singletaskers.
In 2010, a study by
neuroscientist at the French medical research agency suggests a two-task limit
on what the human brain can handle. Taking on more task increase the like hood
of errors, so they suggest ’20 minutes rule’. Instead of switching task from
minute to minute, dedicate a 20-minute chunk of time to a single task, and then
switch to the next one.
To sum up,
multi-tasking habit may hurt our brain and this is also the reason why people
will feel distracted. It is exemplified and analyzed that, from the biology and
medical science point of view multi-tasking has the opposite influence on the information
receiving.
3.
Anything I read link to this?
http://business.time.com/2013/04/17/dont-multitask-your-brain-will-thank-you/http://lifehacker.com/5922453/what-multitasking-does-to-our-brains
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2516990/Sorry-chaps-brains-arent-multi-tasking-But-women-hard-wired-juggle-jobs.html
http://venturebeat.com/2012/01/09/how-we-watch-tv-now-viewers-are-going-mobile-and-multi-tasking/
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/multitask.htm
Friday, 31 January 2014
Monday, 27 January 2014
Forget the Past？ or Total Recall
Introduction
Imagine that you've got a hyperthymesia and you can never forget anything in your brain. How could your life be? You may remember everything you experienced. Both achievement and failure. It is right to learn from mistakes, however, it can be too much to keep all bad things in your head. This will be a burden which will become an obstacle to your success.
How could this happen to me?
Sadly, we all are involved.
Try your name on Google search, you may find something you did but forgotten. I got some, including failing an exam in my college. LoL
Why my name is there for years, and no one delete it? Who put it on the net?
Are they responsible for this consequence? Do we have the right to be forgotten?
'Digital memories will only remind us of the failures of our past.'--Viktor Mayer-Schönberger:
 |
| Photograph: Martin Godwin for the Guardian |
Nine months ago, Mayer-Schönberger, professor of internet governance at the Oxford Internet Institute, said that it is human right to erasure digital footprint and this right is for the freedom to forget the (trouble) past.
What is a digital footprint?
- A digital footprint is the data trail left by the interactions in a digital environment; including the use of TV, mobile phone, the World Wide Web, the internet, databases and other connected devices and sensors. Digital Footprints provide data on what has been performed in the digital environment (e.g. what you clicked on, searched for, Liked, where you went, your location, your IP address, what you said, what was said about you); and the data can be used in behavioral targeting, behavioral economics, personalisation, targeted marketing, digital reputation, social Influence and other social media or social graphing services. In social media, a digital footprint can refer to the size of a person's "online presence" measured by the number of individuals with whom they interact.
(Wikipedia)
Managing Your Digital Footprint
By Robert GraysonLKU~OG4.jpg)
Things to think
We are more and more dependent on digital devices nowadays, which has already brought us many problems including privacy issue and online bullying etc. All of those trouble came out while the rapid development taking place in digital techniques.
These days companies are trying to make full use of our digital footprint to make profit.If you have searched something on shopping pages, you will probably find it stay on your screen when there is an ad and the product is exactly the kind of what you wanted. Do you think our online shopping is still a private thing to do?
Even if you did it alone in your own room, someone will know. It is hard to define this behavior as a private affair or not due to its interaction. But for ourselves, digital footprint recalls our past, and this is absolutely individual's affair which associated to human freedom.
Legalizing
There has always been a lack of legal regulation for new things. Legalizing also takes long time and when finished maybe it could have been out of date already.
And in some technical field, there is deficiency of experts in legalizing apartment.
Is there any advantage?
Everything has two sides. Digital footprint helps investigation of crime.
It can remind you of your history.
The problem is not the technology , it is the way we use it really matters.
About privacy
What digital footprint means to us? It means Obama can know the details in your phone-call with your girlfriend if he want.
*Things happening in China(not very relevant)
Digital footprint also transfer into reality format.
Inter-persons search often takes place in China.
If someone offend 'the public'(often reveals to most of active and aggressive internet users), they got searched in reality by someone using digital techniques. Some people get hurt mentally and even physically by this. It is a terrible trample of people's privacy.
relevant links:
Friday, 24 January 2014
Monday, 20 January 2014
Will the office telephone become extinct? Do we still need this?
I.Introduction
It's widely acknowledged that technology has changed the way people live and work. This post is aimed at looking at the problems which have arisen with the adoption of a telephone and incalculable office devices as inevitable tools used in every office around the globe. Moreover, we are going to give predictions about future of the office telephone and provide readers with reasonable points why telephone is about to face its decline as an instrument used in many working places and offices.
some links dealing with the topic:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Office_Technology.aspx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23448353
II. Changes in modern offices.
The modern office has changed dramatically since the 1990s. Offices in today's society are transmitting information via electronic mail (e-mail), electronic calendars, and teleconferencing, as well as other electronic devices. Communication via technology is just as important as oral and written communication in the work environment. Technology continues to play a vital role in transforming the business environment.
The most amusing thing about modern technology that it has changed the sound of office life. For a hundred years it was a noisy place, filled with the sound of telephones and typewriters. Now it is almost silent.
It is notewothy that not long ago being an office instrument of special significance and considered to be irreplaceble, telephone now is about to become extinct, just like it has already happened to his predecessor - typewriter. In the modern office environment telephone is no longer required.
III. Historical Background of the Office Equipment of XIX century.
1.In the beginning there were just paper and quills.
2.Then came the typewriter in 1860s.
3.Another breakthrough came in 1870 - the filing cabinet.
4.Then came the telegraph - also in 1870s used for office purposes.
5.But in 1876 came the telephone!!! and with it a new sort of behaviour.
But by middle of the 20th Century most workers had a phone on their desk. They got used to the constant ringing and interruptions. The office switchboard was the hub of office, a sort of social glue connecting everyone to everyone else.
IV. What is the threat that has led to the extinction of these devices and office telephone in particular?
The invention of the PC in the 1980s altered the way computing power was distributed within an organization—changing how companies were run, the ways in which information was created, and the ways in which information was used by individuals in carrying out their jobs.
Once a company had the PC, it no longer needed all the equipment stated above. The functions of PC consist in fulfilling all the work which is done by each of these office instruments but much more efficiently and conveniently.
For instance, with the filling cabinet, it created an entire industry of unnecessary work by stuffing paper into bulging files knowing perfectly well that no-one would ever look at it again. On one estimate, the UK in the pre-computer age shoved more than two million tonnes of paper into filing cabinets every year. Unnecessarily.
Prior to the advent of the PC, secretaries typed letters, created reports, and organized information in files, made and received phone calls from the company collegues and clients. The nature of secretarial positions changed with the arrival of the PC, from a focus on document creation and production to a focus on other kinds of administrative functions, as reflected in the changing work patterns of the office.
Some of the technologies used in today's offices are:
•Internet
•Web pages
•Web-based e-mail
•Voice Mail
•Electronic Calendars
•Office Suites
•Portable PCs
•Teleconferences
•Multimedia system
•Smart Board
V. Conclusions and my personal attitude.
To sum it up, I would say that office arrangement is undergoing new developments. I believe that in the nearest future the office telephone will become obsolete and will be no longer used. The office telephone already has his rivals such as the Internet and the PC, which are by far the most useful tools and they fulfill their functions much more efficiently and less costly.
Nevertheless, the office telephone still will be found in any local insignificant companies.
Contrary to the belief, the best technology is not necesseraly the most innovative and expensive. That's why I expect the PCs and the Internet to remain for at least a decade the key components of the office environment. As long as these office instruments remain the cheapest and the most available means of accomplishing office work, they will be broadly used. It is also worth mentioning that almost all representative of young generation are capable of doing the work using these devices. The ability to use technology is an essential skill in the ever changing workforce of the twenty-first century.
To put it in plain English: We are now witnessing the death of the office landline including the office telephone.
It's widely acknowledged that technology has changed the way people live and work. This post is aimed at looking at the problems which have arisen with the adoption of a telephone and incalculable office devices as inevitable tools used in every office around the globe. Moreover, we are going to give predictions about future of the office telephone and provide readers with reasonable points why telephone is about to face its decline as an instrument used in many working places and offices.
some links dealing with the topic:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Office_Technology.aspx
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23448353
II. Changes in modern offices.
The modern office has changed dramatically since the 1990s. Offices in today's society are transmitting information via electronic mail (e-mail), electronic calendars, and teleconferencing, as well as other electronic devices. Communication via technology is just as important as oral and written communication in the work environment. Technology continues to play a vital role in transforming the business environment.
The most amusing thing about modern technology that it has changed the sound of office life. For a hundred years it was a noisy place, filled with the sound of telephones and typewriters. Now it is almost silent.
It is notewothy that not long ago being an office instrument of special significance and considered to be irreplaceble, telephone now is about to become extinct, just like it has already happened to his predecessor - typewriter. In the modern office environment telephone is no longer required.
III. Historical Background of the Office Equipment of XIX century.
1.In the beginning there were just paper and quills.
2.Then came the typewriter in 1860s.
3.Another breakthrough came in 1870 - the filing cabinet.
4.Then came the telegraph - also in 1870s used for office purposes.
5.But in 1876 came the telephone!!! and with it a new sort of behaviour.
But by middle of the 20th Century most workers had a phone on their desk. They got used to the constant ringing and interruptions. The office switchboard was the hub of office, a sort of social glue connecting everyone to everyone else.
IV. What is the threat that has led to the extinction of these devices and office telephone in particular?
The invention of the PC in the 1980s altered the way computing power was distributed within an organization—changing how companies were run, the ways in which information was created, and the ways in which information was used by individuals in carrying out their jobs.
Once a company had the PC, it no longer needed all the equipment stated above. The functions of PC consist in fulfilling all the work which is done by each of these office instruments but much more efficiently and conveniently.
For instance, with the filling cabinet, it created an entire industry of unnecessary work by stuffing paper into bulging files knowing perfectly well that no-one would ever look at it again. On one estimate, the UK in the pre-computer age shoved more than two million tonnes of paper into filing cabinets every year. Unnecessarily.
Prior to the advent of the PC, secretaries typed letters, created reports, and organized information in files, made and received phone calls from the company collegues and clients. The nature of secretarial positions changed with the arrival of the PC, from a focus on document creation and production to a focus on other kinds of administrative functions, as reflected in the changing work patterns of the office.
Some of the technologies used in today's offices are:
•Internet
•Web pages
•Web-based e-mail
•Voice Mail
•Electronic Calendars
•Office Suites
•Portable PCs
•Teleconferences
•Multimedia system
•Smart Board
V. Conclusions and my personal attitude.
To sum it up, I would say that office arrangement is undergoing new developments. I believe that in the nearest future the office telephone will become obsolete and will be no longer used. The office telephone already has his rivals such as the Internet and the PC, which are by far the most useful tools and they fulfill their functions much more efficiently and less costly.
Nevertheless, the office telephone still will be found in any local insignificant companies.
Contrary to the belief, the best technology is not necesseraly the most innovative and expensive. That's why I expect the PCs and the Internet to remain for at least a decade the key components of the office environment. As long as these office instruments remain the cheapest and the most available means of accomplishing office work, they will be broadly used. It is also worth mentioning that almost all representative of young generation are capable of doing the work using these devices. The ability to use technology is an essential skill in the ever changing workforce of the twenty-first century.
To put it in plain English: We are now witnessing the death of the office landline including the office telephone.
Friday, 17 January 2014
Sunday, 12 January 2014
【Sherry】Google Glass~ it's Cool！
This was the moment when wearable computing stepped out of the science-fiction films and into real life. The invention of Google Glass might turn us all into cyborgs.
1: Summarise the information of Google Glass:
Google Glass is a wearable computer with an optical head-mounted display which was developed by Google in Feb. 2013.
The hardware of Google Glass including a camera, so it can be used to take pictures and recording videos in a really convenient way even without subject knowing. The voice recognition of the glass is very smart as well, consumers can use voice and a series of touch commands on the arm of the glasses to control the interface. With internet connection, Google Glass has more functions, for example, it can be used to search information, send photos to facebook or other website, use google map to get direction , make a phone call and so on.
The price of this new technical device is 1500 USD for explorer version but might be a little bit cheaper for comsumers in 2014. However, at the moment, there is a limited amount you can do with Glass, because the lack of dominant and useful apps, and there are also some serious debates about its legal and social implications because of some functions.
The link to wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Glass
The link to BBC news:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22538854
2: What are the issues ?
There are two kind of issues, one is about technical problems:
There is not enough apps to Google Glass, so the function is limited no matter how smart the device is. Some explorer user said that the command should be given by voice and gestures, so it looks a little bit daft and weird when you talk to yourself on the street. And the display screen is not big enough so it might be harm to the eyes when stare at it and read the information. Some explorer user also complain about that there is no version for shortsightedness person so the user need to wear the contact glasses before use the Google Glass. Some other issues are from the complaint about the storage, sound, msharpness of separation , and the price as well.
However, the most serious issue is about privacy:
Where Google's big idea impresses most is as a camera. Because it captures exactly what you see, you get the kind of pictures you often miss with a camera you have to ready for action. But because the camera can be used even without the subject knowing and the pictures straight to cloud, even to the internet with the wifi or 3G connection, people are afraid of their privacy would be exposed with careless abandon.
On the other hand, this kind of problems are hard to be solved because the lack of law and the debate of its legal. Althought this new technology promises to reshape our relationship with the online world.
3: What are the solutions?
For the technical problems, Google promised to improve and develop the control of interface and make project cooperation with glasses producters, the special Google Glass for shortsightedness person would be created in future.l
For the privacy issue, there are 7 countries’ Privacy Commissioner, including Canada, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Israel and Switzerland, signed a joint letter to ask for more information about Google Glass and test whether it would leak the privicy or not. Google also be request to answer some questions in public, for example: how does Google Glass comply with the Data Protection Act? What kind of privacy protection measures google would make?and so on.
4: My view and other comments of Google Glass:
In my opinion, the advance of technology always full of debate, but it doesn’t mean that we should not attempt to new technical device. Google Glass, brings us a more convient way to captures exactly every moment in our daily life, and it also makes it possible to live a technical life without the use of normal laptop or smartphone. To talk about its appearance, either the wearable computer or head-mounted display make us look like the “future style”,it attract me a lot, it also have the positive influence on the disabled people who cannot use their hands typing on the keyboard. It is a kind of humanitarian, isn’t it?
Although there are some critiques said that “Google Glass Isn’t the Future of Wearables”, link:http://blogs.hbr.org/2013/10/google-glass-isnt-the-future-of-wearables/
People also thought this kind of werable computing technology is more creepy than cool, like some comments in internet:
“Social awkwardness is the major problem and likely hinder for adoption of such devices. The rate at which technology is surpassing our beliefs, I think the next stage is already in the horizon, which is implants.This not only solves the problem of awkwardness (If executed appropriately), but also merges humans with technology at its highest level.”
Other sources about Google Glass:
Ted talk: why google glass?http://www.ted.com/talks/sergey_brin_why_google_glass.html
advertisement:http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDIyNzA5NTY0.html
Friday, 10 January 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)