Shredded Blogs

I typed the addresses of some of me and my friends blogs into http://www.potatoland.org/shredder/ and came up with these interesting "shredded" versions:

ONLINE IDENTITY: INTRODUCTION AND KEY ISSUES

WHAT IS IDENTITY? WHAT IS DIGITAL OR ONLINE IDENTITY? HOW IS IT DIFFERENT FROM "IN PERSON" IDENTITY?

• One definition from the Concise Oxford English Dictionary for identity is: "the fact of being who or what a person or thing is, the characteristics determining this." More simply, one might say your identity is the answer to the question: "Who are you?"
• Digital or online identity is a portrayal of who you are in a digital or online format. Like any form of identity, this presents only a slice of who you really are, and in some ways allows a person to more carefully control what that presentation of identity is.

QUESTIONS OF AUTENTICITY

• With the ability to construct your online personas, questions are raised related to the intention behind how this representation is conveyed. Is an online identity a "true" identity or is it something inauthentic, simply constructed by the portrayer.
• "In sum, the selves that we have are composed of multiple identities and contradictory experiences. In late-modern society, it is almost impossible to have a fully unified, completed and coherent 'self'; rather, we all tend to have fleeting, multiple and contradictory selves" (Charles Cheung "Presentations of Self on Personal Homepages", p45)

IDENTITY CONVERGENCE is when you have a crossover between different portrayals of your identity. As many people have multiple online identities this becomes a more relevant issues. Some risks that could come along with this would be if one identity is intended for a specific audience but the audience of a different one of a person's identities encounters both identities. They then might question the person's integrity and character through these contrasting portrayals.

PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE SHARING OF PERSONAL INFO

• Online identities can blur the line between what we traditionally think of as public vs. private information. It also can challenge comfort zones regarding what we might consider personal spheres.

ETHICS ISSUES

• By placing your identity in a digital format instead of a living format, it places this information in a place that can potentially be used by others
• People can hide behind a constructed identity to harm others in ways they might not as their "real life" identities.
  

What is art, videogames?

a) How does Adams define art? Do you agree with his definition?
According to Adams, art can be divided into categories like: literary arts, fine arts, and decorative arts. The line though between what is art and isn't is very blurry and can be complicated by things like architecture and things that are both creative and have a utilitarian aspect.

-art should have some moral values, games can be just an activity
-contains ideas, must have meanings
-if the focus is on how it's used--> less of an art
-if there are critics that review it as art

Drawing lines around what is art seems problematic to me since every boundary that can be drawn is sure to have exceptions. For example saying that art must be recognized as such by critics or by the public would exclude anything that an artist never shares with anyone else. Also saying that something with a utilitarian primary focus is not art might exclude interactive art that is meant to be used in some way. This could go on forever, but what's important is the point that for each qualification of what is not art there is bound to be something with the same characteristic that is art. What seems important to me in this question is the issue of intention. By this I mean if the creator of something intends to be art, then I think it can be.

b) According to Adams, what is needed for videogames to be considered as art?
-If a game has a narrative it can fall into the category of literary arts
-Exploration of aesthetic properties: plays around with issues of perspective, color, and other visual considerations that artists might consider when working with more traditional types of art

It seems like a lot of the arguments related to defining what is or isn't art in terms of video games comes down to the intention and attention of the creator. If the artist pays attention to visual and conceptual considerations in the way an artist would then the video game is pushed into the realm of art. Also it seems like one can say that when a person seeks out to create something as art (be it a video game or not) then it can be considered art, just not necessarily good art, or successful art I would add.

Ethnics of Digital Gaming

a) According to the film, what are some pros and cons of playing video games for individuals and societies? PROS:

• Can be used as a recruiting method for the Military or other groups
• Can be used as an alternative therapeutic method for kids coping with disease, for example playing a game called "Remission" for a boy with Leukemia that treats him about issues such as chemotherapy treatment.
  

CONS:

• Some arguments suggest that violent games can encourage similar behavior in the non-virtual world.
• Playing video games frequently goes against some of the basic things that we consider important in contemporary society such as live social interaction and also physical activity. Participating in these activities in a simulated reality is not a valid substitute.
  

b) According to the film, is there any evidence that digital games can encourage aggressive values and anti-social actions in the real world? Do you agree?

• A brain study showed links between playing violent games and aggressive brain activity, though not necessarily actual aggressive actions.
• In one case, a boy who had only handled a gun once in real life but had significant experience shooting to kill in the virtual world had not only nearly perfect accuracy but also showed a level of desensitization in his ability to shoot his victims in the face.

c) Should governments have the right to ban certain games? Why or why not?
This is a difficult issue because government censorship can be a slippery slope resulting in more things banned than one would initially desire. However I feel that if enough hard evidence can be drawn to make connections between violent games and real life aggressive and dangerous behavior some government action should be taken for the general safety of the public.

I think what is most important is to inform people (especially parents) on these types of issues and helping them to differentiate on their own which games might be dangerous to use. Since perfect education on any topic seems impossible, the best solution may be some sort of government restrictions limiting the use of these types of games but not all together banning them. A rating system (I think some countries already have this?) like what we see with film seems like a good solution to this, only allowing people over 18 to purchase games with potentially harmful content.

d) Interview with classmates:

• Name: Penny
  
• Game: The Sims
  
• Why do you like it? You can control the people, and you can have things that you can't have in real life, for example pets. Also you can make yourself look however you want to look, you can change your face or your hair easily if you don't like what you have to start with.
  
• Does this game encourage any ways of thinking or behavior that you find questionable or worrying? It might make people respect real life less and not appreciate the life they have or the things they have in it as much.
  

mouchette.com

This site strikes me as very peculiar and kind of disturbing. The girl seems to be a constructed identity and the site in general seems to be creepily ambiguous. The site also seems to go out of its way to touch on controversial and disturbing subject matter. Something else left ambiguous is the purpose or motivation behind the site. The space for the viewer's interaction with the site through sending e-mails or posting comments seems to be a sort of request for the viewers of the site to try and answer those ambiguities themselves through contemplation as she draws them in.

The biggest question to me is why would a person want to engage with this site? What about it draws people in? The graphics and overall design are very dated and the construction of the site is confusing and difficult in terms of navigation. This again makes me ask what is the creator of this site hoping to achieve? It does not explicitly express much about who Mouchette is, and it does also not cater to the viewer with a user friendly design. Who is the site for? And what is the audience supposed to do or think? What should we be taking away from our time at this site? Perhaps the true content of this site has little to do with Mouchette herself but is in fact these very questions. The various graphics, statements, pages, etc. are merely the medium with which the artist has worked to convey their message.

NY Times Article: "In a Digital Age, Students Still Cling to Paper Textbooks"

Here is an interesting article about the popularity of paper textbooks in today's digital age:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/nyregion/20textbooks.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

My Online Identities

I would say that I have 6 total online identities. I am counting my facebook profile as two because I have different levels of privacy settings for my friends vs. say my parents. Then I have four blogs, one is sort of like a personal diary that I only share with a couple of close friends, one is public on tumblr.com that I use to post images, articles, videos, music, or thoughts that I find interesting and want to come back to later and share with others. Then I have two blogs with more specific purposes, one is for this class and the other is to document my time in Hong Kong. For my Hong Kong blog I have to be very conscious of what side of my identity I show since some of the kids who I babysit for read it. At the same time, I like to post some content that readers like my parents or family friends would be interested in so it's a mix of things that I try to make appropriate for and interesting to all audiences. One benefit is the fact that online identities allow for this type of control. Each one of my online identities represents a different aspect of the full picture that is only seen when interacting with me in real life. The other side of this though presents a risk of online identities: the fact that this sort of constructed facade can be shattered as other sides of your identity might leak through in ways that you don't want. Also sometimes I think that people express aspects of themselves online that they don't want to leak out into real life which could lead to trouble.