labs

=Lab 7:=

=
Web 2.0 is a new web design structure that makes a website more intuitive in terms of user experience. The goal of web 2.0 is to improve functionality for its users. Furthermore, it strives to add functionality and features by blending (or representing) other technologies that exist by using convergence. For instance, web 2.0 strives to be better than television. It is able to provide on-demand programming using just a computer and an internet connection. Websites like Youtube let a user view content whenever they like.======

Second, Web 2.0 strives to give the general public a voice in the internet world. The idea of being able to publish content in a variety of formats (video, text, and audio) is highly interesting. Additionally, one may even share their opinion on a certain piece of work, making the internet a form of critical media.

Third, Web 2.0 allows people with common values and interests form groups or "virtual communities". People can collaborate and communicate their ideas among minds alike. This improves the knowledge set they gain, as well provides a common ground for interaction and knowledge building. =Lab 5:= I believe social networking websites bring a strong sense of community to users. It is a revolution that stemmed from the typed There is a certain way people deal with privacy issues on the internet. Every decision they make online regarding sharing information is based on the trust factor. Trust on the internet is dependent on several factors. First let’s discuss the technical factors. The website has to look credible. This includes things such as professional website design. It is also important to have security features such as SSL certificates (only applies to financial privacy).

Secondly, there are many social factors that would cause an individual to trust a website. A website has to be talked about by one’s friends. This builds credibility for that website. For instance, John will only share his private information with Facebook because Mike and Don have done it without having any problems. Additionally, an individual may start with sharing very little information with (for instance) Facebook. Then as time moves on, and they find them self using the website more, they will eventually share more information. The thing about social networking is no matter what they do on the website, they are sharing information. For example, John changes his status update to “drinking soda... yumm”. He is sharing information with Facebook, who might potentially use that information to provide the right advertisements. They may also choose to share this information with marketing research firms. = = =Lab 4:=

=
I believe social networking websites bring a strong sense of community to users. It is a revolution that stemmed from the typed conversation revolution. The typed conversation revolution started with email, then spread to instant messaging. Then there was a phase where it spread to "mobile" devices (text messaging) before eventually making its way to its social networking form. The typed conversation revolution wasn't an "evolution" because people still use old technologies like email, instant messaging, and text messaging.=====

=
The way social networking websites are built is the web developers provide the "framework" while the users provide the "content". We value the website because we realize our friends (our community) are involved with it. We value it also as a way to virtually "hang out" with our friends when we are not around them. It can be almost misleading for a person to consider themselves as social just because he/she may have hundreds of friends on Facebook. Additionally, it is also unfortunate that we value social networking as valuable as real human conversations. It will be interesting to see how social networking will evolve to provide a more human way to connect, if it does so at all.===== = = =Lab 3:= I don't think the iPad is a revolutionary device. They shouldn't even have the right to call it a tablet. It does not have any features that even allow it to be considered a tablet (other than the touch-screen and size). A true tablet should be able to provide portability while offering computer-like features at the same time. The hardware specs do live up to this criteria (with the 1Ghz processor and WiFi), however this is in no means a tablet. It misses several hardware features that a modern tablet has.

A new tablet company Viliv has set the bar quite high for Apple. For example, the Viliv S7 has Windows XP onboard, which means it is possible to download almost any PC application. The iPad only allows the user to download select apps from the App store, which means its a closed application environment. It doesn't allow Mac OSX software like Photoshop or Firefox to be installed. In addition, The S7 allows multi-tasking because it runs Windows. The iPad doesn't. A tablet without multi-tasking is not a true tablet. The Viliv S7 also has a camera that can be used for video chatting and taking pictures; the iPad doesn't. The S7 is offered optionally with a built-in physical keyboard, whereas the iPad relies on the virtual keyboard. The iPad does offer compatiability with an Apple Keyboard, but carrying both around seems impractical. Additionally, the iPad is not a widescreen device nor does it support Flash, which is a huge dissapointment for both movie fanatics and web surfers. Hence, due to its severe lack of advancement, the iPad is not a revolutionary device.

=Lab 2:= I think the one laptop per child is not a neo-colonial trojan horse, because it is not just focused on dispersion of technology. Rather, it focuses more on what can be done with that technology. The trojan horse statement refers to the negative impact a developing country could face by spending their education budget on something they don't know how to use. From my perspective, the dispersion of an unfamiliar technology such as a laptop is more of a learning process that is slowly adapted over time. Once it becomes mainstream technology used for education, there will be no adaptability issues. Technology, and the internet, is very internationally adaptable. For instance, the language on a webpage can be translated into so many languages. This way, people in African nations can understand the internet in a local language like Afrikaans. The barrier appears when the literacy rate is put into the equation. For instance, many African nations can speak and understand Afrikaans, but how many of them are literate enough to read the language off a computer screen? Hopefully, technologies like screen readers can help solve this connundrum. = = =Lab 1:= One of ChangeCamp's goal is to help citizens become more connected to each other (ChangeCamp). Hence, my focus for ChangeCamp would be to turn outdoor parks into outdoor movie theatres on Sundays. The movie theatre will compose simply of an outdoor movie projector and a 50-foot wide screen. The theatre will screen only family-friendly movies. Families are free to bring their own lawn chairs and picnic mats. If they bring their own food, they can have a dinner picnic movie.

The movie will screen during sunset to ensure proper weather conditions. The movie screen will have sun shades on all of its sides to ensure good viewing conditions (like a traffic light). There will be a website that shows what movie airs on certain days. The movies won't be brand new. They may be DVD-releases since they are cheaper than licensing a brand new movie. The motive behind this project is to encourage people to step outside the house; to teach them that some indoor activities done outdoor can be more fun. If outdoor activities are done as a family, it becomes a more accepted tradition for that family. It could be something they look forward to after Sunday church.