Open Source

Open Source and Crowdsourcing.

What are the values implicit in both collaborative open source activities and "crowd-sourced" activities on behalf of a corporation, school or organization? Has the open source movement created new forms, or just copies of old ones? What are the possibilities, here, for new cultural and economic institutions, and how might they be improvements on the status quo? 


Like the democratization of media, open source projects require only individual input and no expectation of recognition. One can assume that their viral Youtube video could propel them into fame but it should not matter. That person posted their video because they created it. Source code is the same way.

What I mean by all of this, philosophy aside, is that open source activities exist to better the world by mass contributions. For example, Mozilla Firefox is a hugely world-renowned internet browser. It is the open source evolution of the old Netscape browser. When Netscape could not make a profit as a private enterprise (largely due to AOL controlling the market), they made the program open source. Five years later when 56k and AOL were dead, Mozilla stood strong with one of the most active online development teams around. This team consisted of people from around the world who worked on Mozilla just to make it better, for themselves and for all other users. Today the community is still active.

Has the open source movement created new forms, or just copies of old ones?

Open source as a movement makes me think of communist work efforts. Everyone has a job, receives no special rewards and develops something greater than themselves for the population.

This class is about the Internet and media so I'll stick with that. The Internet itself was an open source project sponsored by the US government. Everyone connected computers and developed programs for everyone else to use. There were no companies like Microsoft or IBM around to make programs for profit. Profit was nonexistent because everything was free to use and expand upon.

New Institutions

The sky is the limit. If other institutions like the arts take the open source model they can create great things. The status quo can be increased because productivity can be higher when everyone works together. I really don't know how an economic institution would be 'open source.' It is possible for a school to have an open source project where they can collect donations for a cause. It could be an art project or an iPhone app about class cancellations.

Rushkoff in Digital Nation did segments on Korean video game addiction. I think open-source could work here. If concerned parents or fellow gamers see a problem with addictive games, they could create a timer that would not allow players to game to excess. This could work great in a PC Bong. Instead of just taking the gamer's money, they could cut them off like a bar would.

Opinion

I think mostly all programs from Photoshop to Firefox should be open source so the online community can improve whatever they see fit. It can only benefit the user and although the corporation may not make a lot of money, they can use the program's popularity to get sponsors or advertisements.

Social Media & Web 2.0

1. I don't think professional production values will drop. For example there is a huge difference between Avatar and an amateur documentary. They serve different purposes and audiences. Because of YouTube amateur video has a new appeal that isn't discredited because of poor production value. Regardless, I believe with new technology amateur's videos will get better but the gap between professional and amateur will remain apparent.

2. I use Facebook the most and Twitter frequently. I use Facebook the most because it's where all my friends and family are so I communicate with them through the convenience of Facebook. Facebook is more successful than Myspace because the website design and speed on the web is vastly superior. Myspace used to drag, lag and freeze. Also, Facebook has everything you need in one place so why go anywhere else?

Facebook is here to stay. When Facebook messaging comes out it's email may even replace Gmail and other popular email websites.

3. Transparency is important to keep people honest on the web. If there isn't transparency then the anonymity will empower people to run their mouths in negative ways that they would not do in public, real life.

It's less important in real life because people physically and socially represent themselves by how they present themselves and how they speak.

Au Revior LCD Soundsystem

So LCD Soundsystem is playing their last 5 shows here in New York. They performed their last televised appearance on The Colbert Report and here's the video of them playing, 'I Can Change.'

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/374293/february-14-2011/lcd-soundsystem---i-can-change

And here's the link for the interview with lead singer, James Murphy and why the band is breaking up.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/374292/february-14-2011/james-murphy

I'm glad I got to see them at Bonnaroo last spring before their permanent hiatus. Speaking of 'Roo, the line up is on the Bonnaroo website now and I'm definitely attending. The Strokes, Buffalo Springfield, Eminem, Wiz Khalifa and the Arcade Fire all at one festival? Best believe i'll be there. Even if it takes 12 hours in a van both ways, again. Manchester, TN here I come..

McLuhan Photoshop Final Post

"In the beginning, the message was the word..."

Pictured above you have my rendition of film as a McLuhan medium. I merged the look of a traditional Roman amphitheater with that of a modern cinema. The image on the screen is of Egypt's huge political demonstrations.

McLuhan denies electricity as a medium with a message. I believe in my example, electricity does indeed qualify as a medium. In a traditional Roman amphitheater the message was the word, the spoken word of actors and orators. In the modern cinema electricity is the essential medium and its message is to submerge the human mind into the film's topic.

The reason I used an image of Egypt was because if we viewed the riots in a film, we know what the content is. But it is the message that everyone views differently, whatever it may be.

Content vs. Message

The content of film is an extension of man. Man creates and watches film to convey a message. The different between the content and the message is based upon individual response. If a group of people watch James Cameron's Avatar, one person may be captivated by the story and another may be distracted by the advanced CGI graphics and completely ignore the storyline. The content is always meant to convey a message but the message is never concrete because every person percieves this message differently. We're all snowflakes.

Modern Mediums

The following are three examples of McLuhan-esque mediums:

1. Formspring.me

Formspring is an internet based medium which allows you to pin-point your current location and share information about your favorite places to go. It connects with Facebook and Twitter so you can relay the information to any of your friends, followers, etc. By posting where you are at any time, it makes yourself available to anyone. This sort of openness makes the Global Village a reality.




2. ASL or American Sign Language. ASL allows deaf and non-deaf people to communicate in a standard language. It's a medium because without it, sign language could be interpreted differently by each person. Like English it has its rules and this keeps the medium working and the message clear.









3. Film. This is an interpretive medium but a medium nonetheless. Although everyone may get something different out of a movie, film is a universal medium because it is as it is. You watch the characters, order of events and action and receive information from them. Movies are widely available therefore the message can be understood by the masses. People talk about blockbusters like Inception and the message they convey. This ties us together in a global village discussing the art of film.