Thursday, May 14, 2009
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
The Future of Gaming
The era of thought controlled games is here! The days of hand controlled gaming could be on the way out. Soon you could be required only to think to operate a video game and maybe you'll even have the chance to be completely immersed in a video game 'world'. This can all be made possible by a headset called the
Emotiv EPOC. This is the first Brain Computer Interface device for the gaming market and is the technology behind the revolution. The EPOC detects and processes real time brain activity patterns using a device that measures electric activity in the users brain. It allows the user to manipulate a game or virtual environment naturally and intuitively.
In total, it can pick up over 30 different expressions, emotions and actions.
President and co-founder of Emotiv Systems, Tan Le, said the brain-to-computer interface was undoubtedly the future for video games.
"Being able to control a computer with your mind is the ultimate quest of human-machine interaction. When integrated into games, virtual worlds and other simulated environments, this technology will have a profound impact on the user's experience."
Brain Computer Interfaces could bring exciting times in gaming leading the way for the future of game development.
Here is another interesting article I fould on the future of gaming:
Could Google bring cloud computing to gaming?
What if Google did video games?
Sunday, May 3, 2009
If we are all amateurs, there are no experts
“Web 2.0 is the term given to describe a second generation of the World Wide Web that is focused on the ability for people to collaborate and share information online.” (http://webopedia.com/TERM/W/Web_2_point_0.html)
Web 2.0 websites allows for increased interaction compared to Web 1.0 websites that just retrieve information. It has been a improvement on the interactive facilities of Web 1.0 to provide cloud computing, allowing users to run software-applications entirely through a browser. Users can own the data on a Web 2.0 site and exercise control over that data. e.g facebook, bebo, twitter etc. These sites encourage users to add value to the application as they use it, which stands in contrast to traditional websites, that tended to have a limited visitor experience and whose content the user could not interact with. Web 2.0 sites offer a much richer and more user-friendly experience. It differs from Web 1.0 because it allows for user generated content, citizen journalism, social networking, information sharing etc and is therefore often referred to as the 'DIY Internet' or 'architecture of participation'.
Is today's Internet killing our culture?
The rise of Web 2.0 has negative aspects also allowing anyone to generate content to share it with an audience across the web. As a result the quality of media content that certain generations are taking in has gone down. User generated websites such as Wikipedia can have a negative impact on society. Wikipedia is an on-line encyclopedia written collaboratively by its users from all around the world. The fact that anyone can edit its content, means that a lot of the information might not be necessarily factually correct. Where are the contributors sourcing their information? If you compare it to another on-line encyclopedia e.g Britannia Online encyclopedia, which website would you go to for researching founded facts? There are also other negative aspects some of which are, a lack of face-to-face communication, an avoidance of interpersonal interactivity, obesity amongst children, sexual predators, identity theft, on-line bullying.
Although, there are these negeative aspects the user-generated revolution of web 2.0 is clearly gaining more popularity and is noticeably replacing the more traditional means of information sharing. Media companies are betting on the longevity of user-generated sites by acquiring them. News Corp bought MySpace, AOL paid $850 million for social networking site Bebo and The New York Times owns About.com.
Web 2.0 technologies have become an effective means of communicating within our society as it allows for instant communication and information gathering thereby helping to bring the world closer together through allowing users to experience other cultures with the click of a button and helping to eliminate ignorance towards other cultures. Although these services are very beneficial to our society, I still believe that more strict regulations should be implemented to combat on-line bullying, identity theft and factually incorrect content.
So, are there any experts?
User-generated content will never replace The New York Times or Britannica Online for the overall quality of content, but reading informational blogs, or political blogs about issues such as global warming provides some perspectives that you don't get from newspapers. Even though Britannica Online's content is more reliable, there is no way it will ever match the coverage of Wikipedia, because of it thousands of amateur contributors. Although the quality of most Wikipedia entries is surprisingly good and factually correct, there are times I want the certainty that the work I am referencing is factually correct, written and edited by experts.
“Ideally, I see Internet content being a blend of professional and amateur content, but how do we develop an economic model that supports both?" (Whitehouse, 2008)
Sources
What is Web 2.0?
The Architecture of Participation
The Social Impact of the Web
The Experts vs. the Amateurs: A Tug of War over the Future of Media
Web 2.0 websites allows for increased interaction compared to Web 1.0 websites that just retrieve information. It has been a improvement on the interactive facilities of Web 1.0 to provide cloud computing, allowing users to run software-applications entirely through a browser. Users can own the data on a Web 2.0 site and exercise control over that data. e.g facebook, bebo, twitter etc. These sites encourage users to add value to the application as they use it, which stands in contrast to traditional websites, that tended to have a limited visitor experience and whose content the user could not interact with. Web 2.0 sites offer a much richer and more user-friendly experience. It differs from Web 1.0 because it allows for user generated content, citizen journalism, social networking, information sharing etc and is therefore often referred to as the 'DIY Internet' or 'architecture of participation'.
Is today's Internet killing our culture?
The rise of Web 2.0 has negative aspects also allowing anyone to generate content to share it with an audience across the web. As a result the quality of media content that certain generations are taking in has gone down. User generated websites such as Wikipedia can have a negative impact on society. Wikipedia is an on-line encyclopedia written collaboratively by its users from all around the world. The fact that anyone can edit its content, means that a lot of the information might not be necessarily factually correct. Where are the contributors sourcing their information? If you compare it to another on-line encyclopedia e.g Britannia Online encyclopedia, which website would you go to for researching founded facts? There are also other negative aspects some of which are, a lack of face-to-face communication, an avoidance of interpersonal interactivity, obesity amongst children, sexual predators, identity theft, on-line bullying.
Although, there are these negeative aspects the user-generated revolution of web 2.0 is clearly gaining more popularity and is noticeably replacing the more traditional means of information sharing. Media companies are betting on the longevity of user-generated sites by acquiring them. News Corp bought MySpace, AOL paid $850 million for social networking site Bebo and The New York Times owns About.com.
Web 2.0 technologies have become an effective means of communicating within our society as it allows for instant communication and information gathering thereby helping to bring the world closer together through allowing users to experience other cultures with the click of a button and helping to eliminate ignorance towards other cultures. Although these services are very beneficial to our society, I still believe that more strict regulations should be implemented to combat on-line bullying, identity theft and factually incorrect content.
So, are there any experts?
User-generated content will never replace The New York Times or Britannica Online for the overall quality of content, but reading informational blogs, or political blogs about issues such as global warming provides some perspectives that you don't get from newspapers. Even though Britannica Online's content is more reliable, there is no way it will ever match the coverage of Wikipedia, because of it thousands of amateur contributors. Although the quality of most Wikipedia entries is surprisingly good and factually correct, there are times I want the certainty that the work I am referencing is factually correct, written and edited by experts.
“Ideally, I see Internet content being a blend of professional and amateur content, but how do we develop an economic model that supports both?" (Whitehouse, 2008)
Sources
What is Web 2.0?
The Architecture of Participation
The Social Impact of the Web
The Experts vs. the Amateurs: A Tug of War over the Future of Media
Saturday, May 2, 2009
The Creative Class
The creative class was first popularized by theorist Richard Florida. Florida believes that in order for a city to further develop and thrive economically, it needs a creative class.
“Cities are cauldrons of creativity. They have long been the vehicle for mobilizing, concentrating and channeling human creative energy. They turn that into technical and artistic innovations, new forms of commerce and new industries”
(Cities and the creative class By Richard L. Florida, 2005).
He claims that the world has moved away from the more traditional era of corporations and homogeneity and into the creative era. The creative class is described as a new demographic that is made up of a certain of workforces that is the driving force of any economy. The creative class is composed workers that range from but not limited to architects, engineers, computer scientists, educators and engineers to the more creative individuals such as artists, graphic designers, musicians etc, whose economic function is to create and develop new designs, ideas, technologies and creative content. It is now believed that the creative class makes up for 30 percent of the U.S. workforce.
Florida uses the 'Creative Class Index' to assert his theory on the creative class as a baseline indicator of a region or city's overall standing in the creative economy. This index is broken into five factors: the High Tech Index, an Innovation Index, a Talent Index, a Gay index and a Bohemian Index. Cities with these factors tend to foster a young open, dynamic professional working environment and in turn attracts more creative workforce as well as aiding economic growth.
The majority of Ireland's creative class is in Dublin city. Dublin comes third amongst other European cities with a creative workforce of 36.9 percent, behind first place Copenhagen 62.5 percent and Barcelona 43.9 percent. This was helped be the Celtic Tiger boom over the past ten years which attracted a lot of multinational companies, thus providing a haven for the young and talented workforce to blossom.
Dublin has become a thriving cosmopolitan city that attracts workers from across the globe. It is possible that the percentage of creative class in Dublin has dropped since the economic downturn, but in order for Dublin and Ireland to continue to hold its creative class, its needs to continue to promote and extensively fund education and research. Ireland, currently has the second highest number of Diploma / Certificate graduates in the world and ranks eleventh for Degree graduates. This has been catering for and should continue to provide a foundation for companies to build and utilize these resources.
It is clear that there has been a shift from the industrial economy to an informational economy. Ireland needs promote its creative class as it is now a key economic stimulus and companies and governments should invest in it, which will encourage company formation and attract more to our already flourishing creative class.
Sources:
Cities and the creative class By Richard L. Florida, 2005
Richard Florida's Creative Class
Creative Cities: The Rise of the Creative Class
An Inside Look at Europe's Coolest Cities
Be creative -- or die
Knowledge Ireland Fund would guarantee stability for future funding for R&D says HEA Submission
“Cities are cauldrons of creativity. They have long been the vehicle for mobilizing, concentrating and channeling human creative energy. They turn that into technical and artistic innovations, new forms of commerce and new industries”
(Cities and the creative class By Richard L. Florida, 2005).
He claims that the world has moved away from the more traditional era of corporations and homogeneity and into the creative era. The creative class is described as a new demographic that is made up of a certain of workforces that is the driving force of any economy. The creative class is composed workers that range from but not limited to architects, engineers, computer scientists, educators and engineers to the more creative individuals such as artists, graphic designers, musicians etc, whose economic function is to create and develop new designs, ideas, technologies and creative content. It is now believed that the creative class makes up for 30 percent of the U.S. workforce.
Florida uses the 'Creative Class Index' to assert his theory on the creative class as a baseline indicator of a region or city's overall standing in the creative economy. This index is broken into five factors: the High Tech Index, an Innovation Index, a Talent Index, a Gay index and a Bohemian Index. Cities with these factors tend to foster a young open, dynamic professional working environment and in turn attracts more creative workforce as well as aiding economic growth.
The majority of Ireland's creative class is in Dublin city. Dublin comes third amongst other European cities with a creative workforce of 36.9 percent, behind first place Copenhagen 62.5 percent and Barcelona 43.9 percent. This was helped be the Celtic Tiger boom over the past ten years which attracted a lot of multinational companies, thus providing a haven for the young and talented workforce to blossom.
Dublin has become a thriving cosmopolitan city that attracts workers from across the globe. It is possible that the percentage of creative class in Dublin has dropped since the economic downturn, but in order for Dublin and Ireland to continue to hold its creative class, its needs to continue to promote and extensively fund education and research. Ireland, currently has the second highest number of Diploma / Certificate graduates in the world and ranks eleventh for Degree graduates. This has been catering for and should continue to provide a foundation for companies to build and utilize these resources.
It is clear that there has been a shift from the industrial economy to an informational economy. Ireland needs promote its creative class as it is now a key economic stimulus and companies and governments should invest in it, which will encourage company formation and attract more to our already flourishing creative class.
Sources:
Cities and the creative class By Richard L. Florida, 2005
Richard Florida's Creative Class
Creative Cities: The Rise of the Creative Class
An Inside Look at Europe's Coolest Cities
Be creative -- or die
Knowledge Ireland Fund would guarantee stability for future funding for R&D says HEA Submission
Thursday, April 16, 2009
The Youtube Generation: YouTube orchestra makes its debut
An Orchestra formed by Youtube consisting of musicians from more than 30 different countries gave their a performance in the YouTube Symphony Orchestra in New York.
Youtube held a contest that allowed anyone, anywhere to upload a clip of themselves playing. A selection went to a popular vote.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8001253.stm
Youtube held a contest that allowed anyone, anywhere to upload a clip of themselves playing. A selection went to a popular vote.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8001253.stm
Spam 'produces 17m tons of CO2'
This is just amazing...something you never really think about!
'A study into spam has blamed it for the production of more than 33bn kilowatt-hours of energy every year, enough to power more than 2.4m homes.
The Carbon Footprint of e-mail Spam report estimated that 62 trillion spam emails are sent globally every year.
This amounted to emissions of more than 17 million tons of CO2, the research by climate consultants ICF International and anti-virus firm McAfee found.'
from: news.bbc.co.uk
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8001749.stm
'A study into spam has blamed it for the production of more than 33bn kilowatt-hours of energy every year, enough to power more than 2.4m homes.
The Carbon Footprint of e-mail Spam report estimated that 62 trillion spam emails are sent globally every year.
This amounted to emissions of more than 17 million tons of CO2, the research by climate consultants ICF International and anti-virus firm McAfee found.'
from: news.bbc.co.uk
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8001749.stm
There is No Web 3.0, There is No Web 2.0 - There is Just the Web
While doing some research for a recent essay on digital media technologies I came across this article, 'There is no Web 3.0, there is no web 2.0 - there is just the web'. There are some interesting points made in it so I have a read and see what you think.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/there_is_no_web_30_there_is_no_web_20.php
"The points of contrast [between Web 2.0 and Web 3.0] are actually the same points that I used to distinguish Web 2.0 from Web 1.5. (I've always said that Web 2.0 = Web 1.0, with the dot com bust being a side trip that got it wrong.)," wrote O'Reilly last fall. In otherw words, the versioning of the web is silly. Web 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 is all really just whatever cool new thing we're using the web to accomplish right now.
I won't use the term "Web 2.0" in my reply, I'll just tell them that we write about the web, what you can do with it now, and what you'll be able to do with it in the future.
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/there_is_no_web_30_there_is_no_web_20.php
"The points of contrast [between Web 2.0 and Web 3.0] are actually the same points that I used to distinguish Web 2.0 from Web 1.5. (I've always said that Web 2.0 = Web 1.0, with the dot com bust being a side trip that got it wrong.)," wrote O'Reilly last fall. In otherw words, the versioning of the web is silly. Web 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 is all really just whatever cool new thing we're using the web to accomplish right now.
I won't use the term "Web 2.0" in my reply, I'll just tell them that we write about the web, what you can do with it now, and what you'll be able to do with it in the future.
Monday, April 6, 2009
Quest 3D
For anyone interested in 3D animation...Quest3D is a development tool for creating real-time 3D applications. Using your mouse and keys, you can navigate your way around the scenario.
There are some really nice exmaples on this site.
http://quest3d.com/index.php?id=15
There are some really nice exmaples on this site.
http://quest3d.com/index.php?id=15
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Digital Age Album Art
I stumbled across this article...it's quite interesting. Album art pushing the boundaries for designers.
http://www.wired.com/culture/design/magazine/17-03/dp_recordart
http://www.wired.com/culture/design/magazine/17-03/dp_recordart
Friday, March 27, 2009
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Looking for flash inspiration?
I really like this guys work....has some really cool amusements also!
http://www.andyfoulds.co.uk/flash_design.html
http://www.andyfoulds.co.uk/flash_design.html
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Friday, March 6, 2009
Last website I worked on
Here is a link to the last website I worked on...have a look and let me know what you think.
http://www.modelworks.ie/
http://www.modelworks.ie/
Nice site for V-ray materials
Check this site out if havent already and obviously if you use V-ray !
http://www.vray-materials.de/
http://www.vray-materials.de/
Does the Technological Determinism vs. Social Shaping debate accurately describe the relationship between Technology and Society?
Firstly, I would like to give a brief explanation of each ot these terms:
Technological Determinism is a theory that technology is the driving force behind the social change throughout history and will continue to be in th future.
Social Shaping is a theorythat when technology is available, it is social issues that influence how it is used.
I am of the opinion that this debate does accurately describe the relationship between technology and society. There are many theorists out there who are in favour of Technoligical Determinsm such as Neil Postman who had a theory referred to as the Franenstein Syndrome: " One creates a machine for a particular and limited purpose. But once the machine is built, we discover, always to our surprise - that it has ideas of its own, that it is quite capable not only of changing our habits but of changing our habits of mind" (Neil Postman,1983). Does Hal from 2001: A Space Odyssey springs to mind here!!?
I can see why Postman minght have thought this. There are many cases where a machine is built that has the possibility of changing the way we might use it. It is clear the nowadays society depends largely on technolgy to communicate. Technologies such as emailing and sms messaging have replaced the more traditional ways of long distance communication such as letter writing. In some instances like this, technology can shape our social society.
Saying this, I am strongly in favour of Social Shaping of Technology. Ther term ' Necessity is the mother of all inventions ' sums up the relationship between technology and society. When there is need for something, it is humans that are the driving force in developing a solution to this need. Without humans, there would be no such things as technology. As humans have evolved so has the technolgy we humans use and need. There is constant technological development as our needs constantly change.
Over the past ten years, we have witnessed a huge growth in technological evolution. Technologies such as Internet, Mobile Communication and personal media devices have all changed due to social shaping and demand. A mobile phone now also acts as a web browser and media player due to the technological demand.
I believe that in the future technologies will continue to be shaped by society as long as there is a necessity. There will always be a human input into the development of technology...lets hope so anyway!
Technological Determinism is a theory that technology is the driving force behind the social change throughout history and will continue to be in th future.
Social Shaping is a theorythat when technology is available, it is social issues that influence how it is used.
I am of the opinion that this debate does accurately describe the relationship between technology and society. There are many theorists out there who are in favour of Technoligical Determinsm such as Neil Postman who had a theory referred to as the Franenstein Syndrome: " One creates a machine for a particular and limited purpose. But once the machine is built, we discover, always to our surprise - that it has ideas of its own, that it is quite capable not only of changing our habits but of changing our habits of mind" (Neil Postman,1983). Does Hal from 2001: A Space Odyssey springs to mind here!!?
I can see why Postman minght have thought this. There are many cases where a machine is built that has the possibility of changing the way we might use it. It is clear the nowadays society depends largely on technolgy to communicate. Technologies such as emailing and sms messaging have replaced the more traditional ways of long distance communication such as letter writing. In some instances like this, technology can shape our social society.
Saying this, I am strongly in favour of Social Shaping of Technology. Ther term ' Necessity is the mother of all inventions ' sums up the relationship between technology and society. When there is need for something, it is humans that are the driving force in developing a solution to this need. Without humans, there would be no such things as technology. As humans have evolved so has the technolgy we humans use and need. There is constant technological development as our needs constantly change.
Over the past ten years, we have witnessed a huge growth in technological evolution. Technologies such as Internet, Mobile Communication and personal media devices have all changed due to social shaping and demand. A mobile phone now also acts as a web browser and media player due to the technological demand.
I believe that in the future technologies will continue to be shaped by society as long as there is a necessity. There will always be a human input into the development of technology...lets hope so anyway!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)