Modeling Reality with Virtual Worlds

Real life brings uncontrollable variables, virtual life on the other hand isn't as unpredictable rather much more controlled. The virtual avatar environment in online worlds such as Second Life allows players to create an alternate reality and do what ever they please. Players can even use real money to buy items in the virtual space which opens up a whole new market for revenue. It even provides a sort of utility to get a feel for architecture and interior design. 

Many things can be purchased like land, house, furniture, and clothes. Shorty after the recession of 2008, Ruth La Ferla of the NY Times interviews a virtual business owner, Jonty Glaser, who states that, "as fewer people travel or spend on entertainment, we have seen them focus online and accelerate purchases." Good thing about virtual worlds: in recessions, consumers are still able to make "micro-purchases" as Glaser describes in the article. Businesses are starting to use Second life to host virtual meetings. Mark Tutton of CNN writes as travel budgets are constrained during the recession, companies are seeking other ways to meet up and collaborate. Fast forward 20 years after these articles were written, we will be reading about VR headsets and first person view styled virtual worlds.

Blog about Twitter

How does a Twitter discussion compare to a BlackBoard Discussion?

In Blackboard, you are not limited to 140 characters in your posts. Blackboard is better for in-depth discussions and allows you to leave links in your post regardless of how many characters you use. Twitter is good for making small posts, and the class can follow with a simple hashtag entered in each post. In comparison, Twitter isn't very good for discussion. Lets reference the bird in the picture above, all it says is tweet tweet. Not much of an insightful statement.

Social networking sites

Social Media Impressions

Facebook

Twitter

Instagram

Snapchat

     These are the top four social media sites that have leveled the playing field when it comes to features, accessibility, and popularity. Facebook has it all; pictures, live video, status, groups, and events. My impression is that they are a hub for all types of content sharing when it comes to media and text. Facebook seems to be more centered towards status updates. The format invites others in for conversation through a comment thread. On the other hand, some social media users prefer a simpler version of content sharing. Perhaps participating in comment threads and discussion isn't your forte. A watered down version of Facebook in my point of view would be Instagram. On this platform, users can only share pics and videos with a small string of text to leave a description. Users can tag their followers to share content with each other. There isn't much room for discussion on this site and the downside is you cant hyperlink in your posts. A similar platform that is right behind Instagram is Twitter. This site is all about the status updates with the occasional picture and nothing but that. Great tool for business's in my opinion. Finally, we have Snapchat. The app that lets users record and snap anything they desire and send it to their friends for a one time viewing. The newer updates actually allow replays now. I prefer Snapchat's features over the rest because of its simplicity. I can record a whole days worth of snaps and have it posted to my story, which is a neat little timeline of the snaps I take. 

Social Networking

Stemming from the launch of Web 2.0, microblogging has taken over in more ways than one. It has since then gradually evolved into the popular platforms most of us use today, such as Facebook or Twitter. Microblogging turning into social media has delivered many positive aspects to our relationships. With this, anyone can stay updated on the latest news with whoever they choose, like friends, family, celebrities, and so on. Clive Thompson of the NY Times writes that social scientists have come up with a term for this called “ambient awareness”, which means staying updated by status is very much like being physically near those who you wish to connect with. Social networking doesn't have to be exclusive to keeping in touch with friends. Frank Langfitt of NPR wrote an article about LinkedIn, a professional niche in social networking. Recruiters can use keywords to search for professionals who they may need to hire to fill specialized positions. The profiles allow them to sort through and pre-screen potential applicants. By doing this, firms and organizations save lots of time in the recruiting process.

The question many researches are asking today is whether this new form of staying “in-touch” with people creates more of a positive or negative social environment. Some say that the imbalance of electronic and face-to-face communication presents a challenge to those who avoid face-to-face. According to Professor Parker, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Alabama, it may inhibit the development of functional communication skills needed as an adult. Hillary Stout of the NY Times writes that researchers are now working towards making a more concrete claim on how the developmental process may be effected from this imbalance. Stout questions whether or not “today’s youths may be missing out on experiences that help them develop empathy.” We will have to leave it up to the researchers to obtain feasible evidence to determine whether these trends are inhibiting physical social growth…or not.

Blog V Wiki

In the age of new media, wiki’s and blogs have become the new standard of information sharing amongst individuals within an organization or amongst a much larger community. They both offer similar utility on the basis of sharing information, but one may be preferred over the other or more appropriate rather.

Let’s explore some of the reasons why one would lean toward a blog over a wiki, or vice versa.

Wiki’s are basically webpages that allow multiple users to create and modify content in many ways. It can be used strictly as a collaboration tool or it can be used as a non-static page of information pertaining to a person, place, or thing, that may require updates and changes. Sounds like it can be a perfect tool to build a knowledge base for a business. But can the integrity of a wiki page uphold when anyone who visits the page can make changes as they see fit? Apparently, someone at the LA Times thought it would be a good idea to make a wiki about a global issue available to the public, specifically the war with Iraq and the USA. New York Times did a follow up on the 'wikitorial' page which became a subject of spam and profanity. This experiment proves that extra precautions must be taken when publishing a page that is open to the public and subject to opinion. Since then, Wikipedia has done a better job at maintaining its informative and factual integrity. John D. Sutter from CNN writes that since Wikipedia has launched, they have made several improvements by learning from these mistakes. They now assign expertise editors to specific areas for moderation and control, even freezing some pages like senators and celebrities. Wikipedia’s improvements show that they are more centered on sharing knowledge and information rather than opinions.

There is always room for opinions on the web and those who seek such may find themselves reading or editing a blog just as I am doing now. Unlike wiki pages, blogs are usually run by a single author who controls all of the content at all times. The author makes the post, and the readers can comment. To determine if blogs are more effective than wiki’s for collaboration is a subjective question. Depending on the content you choose to write about, you may invite others in on the topic where they can share their thoughts and ideas with you. For instance, in this blog I can post about methods of maximizing growth for an e-commerce page, some may read what I have written and drop a line to let me know what they think about the subject. Although blogs can feature facts and concrete information, blogs are more centered toward opinion sharing.