Mashups

1)Being from Los Angeles and living currently in San Francisco, I always have a lot of people coming to visit me. The problem is, I live in a dorm so they can't stay with me and they always want hotel suggestions. I usually suggest a hotel downtown because I know there are a lot, but there must be some closer to school. Through programmableweb.com, I found a mashup of google maps and 4Hotels.us which maps all the hotels in an area and allows you to click on them. I will definately use this next time I have visitors so they can stay closer to usf rather than downtown!
here is the link- http://hotel-map.4hotels.us/

2)http://www.thursdayclub.com/city/
This mashup of twitter and google maps allows me to click on my city (SF in this case, but they have every city in the world) and find all the restaurants, bars and clubs in that city. Not only that, it gives links to reviews and ratings of all the venues. This is useful to me being new to the city, but I would also use this when I travel to unfamiliar cities to know where to go for food and fun.

3) http://www.ilovemusicvideo.net, this one is amazing! It is a mashup of lastFM and youTube and it allows you to type in an artist you want and watch all music videos of them that are available. It is really easy to use, I used it to watch morrisey videos that are rare just now, otherwise I would not know where to find them! Unlike some mashup sites that I have looked at, it is very clean cut, easy to use and organized with a definitive purpose.

sharing or piracy?

Whether you call it file "sharing" or music "piracy", downloading music for free off the internet is wrong eigther way. Just like any other industry, countless people work behind the scenes to get each and every song and album up and running. The process is costly and their hard work deserves to be redeemed through album sales, but this is unfortunately happening less and less. In fact, it is estimated by te RIAA that the music industry takes a 12.5 Billion dollar hit each year because of file sharing. 

In my opinion, downloading a song you don't own from a struggling artist and downloading a song from a major label artist are the same issue. Eigther way a lot of hard work went into that song and even though the artist may already have a lot of money, the other people who worked on the song aren't rich and famous. Some bands that are already very famous such as Radiohead choose to put their music on the internet for free downloads. This is different because the artist in this case and everyone behind the record had to agree for the record "In Rainbows" to be put online for free, it was their choice. 

Downloading a copy of a song you already own is in my opinion okay as long the copy you already have was bought legally and you are only downloading one other copy for whatever reason. This kind of goes along the same lines as copying a cd for a friend. I do this sometimes to make my friends mixes, this is a form of expression such as mixed tapes or collages. Also, if someone has taken the time (and money) to go buy blank cd's, which arent cheap, they are likely to be choosy about who they burn a cd for. This, in my opinion, is the real definition of music "sharing", taking the time, money and effort to make your friend a cd of music you think they would enjoy, like the mixtape of yesteryear, it is not stealing from anyone if the said music has already been purchased. 

Downloading a song to try it out seems harmless enough, but it can be a slippery slope. Once you have the song and know how to download for free, it seems unlikely you will really purchase the cd. I believe that downloading an album online for free is just as much stealing as shoplifting that album from a store. When I was younger I pretty much ruined two consecutive family computers by using Kazaa and exposing the innocent Dell's to viruses. Though I loved getting free music, I stopped when I got my own computer last year. Now I only use iTunes, and as of today I have purchased 1,566 songs from iTunes, the rest of the songs in my Library are from purcased cd's. On iTunes it is an option to listen to the music in other people's libraries in my network and to let them listen to mine, a feature I utilize. However, the different between this and putting all my music on Kazaa for anyone to download is that on iTunes people can only listen to my music, they cannot copy or download it. There have been many times I have listened to someone else's music and then downloaded it for myself off iTunes.

After using Kazaa for years and switching over to iTunes I would never go back. I feel bad for exploiting the hard work of artists, producers and everyone involved in the past but I do understand the temptation of websites like Kazaa. My roommate has Limewire and I sometimes get jealous of all the music she downloads, but I am not jealous about how slow I know it is making her computer! Music is art and while I think it is great when artists like Radiohead allow people to enjoy their art for free, we the public should respect the other artists and people in the music industry for not illegally downloading music.

Digital Media

The progression from analog to digital has really changed the way people, including myself, interact with media. It seems that as technology improves and becomes more fast paced, so does the media along with it. 

It is amazing to me that I can if I miss an episode of Lost, I can simply watch it on my computer whenever I want at equal quality to my T.V. When I watch old television shows such as the Fresh Prince of Bell Air, the quality of the picture takes me right back to the 90's because it looks so old compared to shows now. Though it is nice and nastalgic to watch old television shows and movies, I love watching shows in High Definition because it is so clear and feel that there is no downside to this improvement. I also enjoy experimenting with Garage Band and Photoshop on my computer, which would have been unheard of ten years ago. I feel that the more art people create, the better, I like listening to music such as Myspace Music which is recorded mostly by people on their own computers. People are more able to spread and explore their talent when it is right at their fingertips. 

The downside to me is that as media keeps improving, old machines and therefore old forms of media are being somewhat forgotten. It makes me sad that Polaroid is discontinuing instant film, because I love my Polaroid instand camera and think it is a different kind of picture than digital, so much more permanent. Also, when I want to watch old home movies, I have to hook the tape player back to the T.V. because it no longer is useful enough to stay there all the time and has been long replaced by the dvd player. The same thing goes with old mixed tapes from my childhood, I literally don't have a tape player in my house and therefore cannot listen to them at all!

I think the progression of technology and media is overall a positive thing, as long as the old forms of media are not forgotten and can still be appreciated!

electronic waste

The issue of electronic waste is a huge problem, but one that is not widely recognized by most people. Once our devices become outdated, they are ignored in favor of the newer technology, and consumers usually don't really think about old electronics once they are no longer using them. However, such devices contain materials that can be reused such as precious metals and transistors. Recycling centers in America have strict laws and use what they can from the materials, and once the electronics are stripped, they are sent to countries with relaxed laws and low wages such as China and India. The workers there then extract what they can from the machines, but it is VERY dangerous. Lead and mercury can seep into the water, toxic fumes and chemicals can be released and some of the substances can cause birth defects and cancer. But it gets worse. Everything that cannot be extracted and reused is sent to a landfill or just sits in piles around worksites. 

Though this is all very upsetting and everyone who is educated about it would agree that it is an imminent problem, there are little or no laws in the majority of countries concerning this issue and there is a huge international market for scrap equiptment. In poor regions of the countries where the machines are sent, people will work for practically nothing, and while it is a good thing that goods can now be shipped anywhere in the world and there is a flow of information, electronic waste is a downside of globalization. 

Just before I sat down to write this post, I changed the cartridge for my printer and sent the old cartridge back to HP in the pre-paid envelope in the box. Though this is a small thing, it made me happy to see that the company HP is making it easy for consumers to do the right thing by providing a convenient alternative to throwing the old cartridge in the trash. A good way to cut down on my impact seems to be to buy electronics that can be upgraded, it just makes sense both financially and enviornmentally. It is hard to break the habit of throwing away something once it is of no use to me, but with things like cell phones and computers, I always try to give them to someone I know so I don't feel wasteful. I have given all my old cell phones to friends and my old computer is now my moms computer. Though I'm not out crusading daily against electronic waste, I am making an effort to reduce my negative impact on the enviornment, and knowing more about the problem makes me even more motivated to do the right thing, even if its not as easy as finding the nearest trash can.

It seems like new devices are comming out almost everyday, so this problem is not going to go away and if everyone just became more conscientious about their habits with electronics, it would really benefit the enviornment and the health of people in developing countries. 

Math!

*part one*

(1.) 1011... 8+0+2+1 = 11

(2.) 101010... 32+8+2 = 42

(3.) 11111... 1+2+4+8+16 = 31

(4.) 10010... 16+2 = 18

*part two*

(1.) 31... 31-16=15-8=7-4=3-2=1... 11111

(2.) 51... 51-32=19-16=3-2=1... 110011

(3.) 7... 7-4=3-2=1... 0111

(4.) 103... 103-64=39-32=7-4=3-2=1... 1100111
*part three*
(A.) 56 kilbits/sec, divide by 8 = 7 kilobytes/sec. 100*1024=102400 kilobytes. 102400 divided by 7 = 14,628 seconds = 237 minutes = 3.95 hours.
(B.) 5 megabits/sec, divide by 8 = .625 megabytes/sec. multiplied by 1,000 = 625 megabytes/sec... 100 divided by 625 = .16*1,000 = 160 seconds

(C.)10 megabits/second, divide by 8 = 1.25 megabytes/sec. multiplied by 1,000 = 1,250 megabytes/sec... 100 divided by 1,250 = .08*1,000 = 80 seconds 

*part four*

(1.) 3 megabits(divided by 8) = .375 megabytes/sec...seconds in an hour(60*60=3600) 3600*.375 = 1350 divided by 60 = 22.5 per hour

Net Neutrality

Net neutrality can seem like a confusing issue, but I like to think of it simply; basically net neutrality has to do with whether the internet should be run like the phone companies or like cable companies. Phone companies, or telecommunication (open) networks, treat all data equally while cable companies, otherwise known as information (closed) networks, can give certain data preference depending on how much the customer pays or which channels they want. The main issue is of what consumers can view and how quickly based on which company is providing their internet service. As of now, all data is treated equally, whether it be a youtube video or a simple email, because of net neutrality. This is how the internet has always worked, but critics feel that because of new applications such as video and television online, it would be benefitial to provide consumers with a choice of giving such applications preference for better quality and speed of viewing. 

There are many supporters of net neutrality and many critics, and both sides include large and influential companies. Those in support of net neutrality include Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, librarians and many liberals. Such supporters feel that the internet has always worked as it is and there is no need to change it. Other arguments are that net neutrality prevents monopolies from forming and that ending net neutrality would harm both small sites and consumers. Those against net neutrality are AT&T, Sprint, libertarian groups and pro-free market groups. They believe that the internet needs to change as the services it provides (such as video) are changing and that such services should have a higher priority. Also, they feel that net neutrality prevents innovation and investment. 

In my opinion, net neutrality is definately a positive thing and I feel that it is crucial that the internet stays how it is now and always has been. The government says that the phone is a necessecary service and therefore it should be provided to everyone while the cable company is not a necessity and should be treated differently, as an "information" network. While the television is purely for entertainment, the internet is used for so much more in this day and age. In fact, I feel that the internet is becoming just as much of a necessity as the phone and it should therefore be provided to consumers as such. Also, one of the greatest things about the internet is that anyone can make a sight if they have a good idea and it can become popular and thriving, big companies do not have the upper hand in this regard. The internet has always worked so well and I believe that it would be a huge mistake to change it now. 

Cybersquatting

After reading all three articles, I feel that all in all, cybersquatting should be illegal. To me, there does not seem to be any upside in allowing some kinds of cypersquatting to be tolerated. Websites like whitehouse.org are just trying to exploit a person's typing error in order to gain popularity. It seems to me that if a website wants to gain viewers, they should have to do it by the strength of their content, and not by riding on the coattails of another more frequented website. Other kinds of cybersquatters, such as the creator of SteveJobs.com, are doing the same thing; exploiting someone or something else in order to gain, not popularity in this case, but profit. 

It is outrageous that people can make a website where their only contact information listed is a sequence of random numbers or letters or a meaningless word such as "meow", in the case of mymorganstanleyplatnum.com. I realize that it is extremely hard for anyone to regulate the internet, because it is so widespread across the globe. However, when people and sites are being taken advantage of because of a famous name or popular website, it should definately be against the law in America. The internet has become a huge part of our society, largely because anyone can access it, and I think that is great. But, because it has grown so large, it is irresponsible to let something like cybersquatting get out of hand and for the squatters themselves to go unpunished.