Intervention and Observation: Be My Friend… Add Me On Facebook!

Here are all of the details and documentation regarding this “sign”…

Skibbles – Create a Keeper 2.0

Hey folks, here’s my documentation for the keeper project:

…::…!!..:::…!!!…::::…..:::::::::..!!…:::::……!……!!!….::…..:::::……::……:::::::….!!!!……!!….

Wing Lok’s/Veronica’s Virtual Keeper

1)  a discussion of the effectiveness of the various communication means we used for you to get information on your partner. (1 paragraph)

In the first stage of the meeting process, the effectiveness of the web presentation ( exchanging websites ) is a good starter to get to know something about someone I never met, but it is still not enough. Information given was too basic(favorite things, likes and dislikes etc.., it needs to be more in depth). In the second stage, Second Life is more effective than the website, because we are able to chat with one another virtually. In the third stage, the effectiveness of Facebook a bit more effective than Second Life as means of communication( setting up meetings to discuss about the assignment.) This is because my partner and I use and check Facebook more often than Second Life. We don’t regularly use Second Life unless being told/ask to. In the last stage, communicating face-to-face physically was more effective than Facebook, because this way, we got things done a lot quicker. It takes longer to get something done when sending messages virtually back and forth. By going through the process step by step, I realized that it becomes more effective as I went through each mode of communication by the way it was organized.

2) I asked at the beginning of the process for you to keep a diary of each encounter.
Now is time to look at these entry and for you to tell me  the differences between these different media. Tell me what worked, what did not work and how all this compared to meeting the person in real life. (1 paragraph)

Diary entries:

Entry #1:
Feb/2/2009

Search on the Web!

The website exchange give information, but I still feel like it wasn’t enough. It’s a good starter though for this exercise.

Entry #2:
Feb/26/2009

Let’s meet on Second Life!

We have met each other’s virtual self! Second Life was somewhat difficult to contact my partner, because since she does not check Second Life often like I do, it takes longer for us to read the offline messages. Sometimes we check so late, that we’re suppose to meet on that day, and we weren’t able to, so we postpone the meetings to a later time.

Entry #3:
Feb/28/1009

Facebook Encounter!

We have finally found each other on Facebook, and this is also the first day we communicated through this method of communication. I have to say, it’s a bit better than Second Life, because both of us use/check it more often than Second Life. We only go on Second Life when being asked to, so it gets different getting offline messages through each other.

Entry #4:
Mar/31/2009

Face-to-Face at last!

We have finally met our physical forms. It was a little awkward at first, because I never spoken to or met my partner in person before, and this is the first time talking to her. We got along and worked well together when we were documenting our virtual keeper exchange on Second Life.

From my experience while doing this exercise, all four worked successfully when they work together in the way it was organized. Web presentation is a good starter to get to know someone, but it’s not enough information. Second Life is a good starter to communicate person-to-person virtually, but lacks convenience, because both of us rarely check our accounts on Second Life. The problem with this mode of communication is that sometimes we read our offline messages too late, that we have to postpone the meeting dates. Facebook is a bit more convenient than Second Life, because we check it more often, and we never had to postpone meetings when using it. Physical relationship was convenient and effective, because unlike the previous modes, we were able to finish tasks a lot faster since we were face-to-face. The problem with this mode is it got a little awkward to talk to my partner, because I never met/talked to her before. It became challenging talking to her as myself, but it was easier when talking to her virtually.

3) Tell me whether this exercise confirmed what you wrote in your digital native entry about your favorite mode of communication. Explain why. (1 paragraph)

This exercise have not identified my favorite mode of communication, from what I wrote in my digital native entries. This is because each mode have advantages and disadvantages, and is effective and ineffective in different ways, even though from what I wrote sounds like meeting face-to-face is my favorite mode. Web presentation for example is a good starter, but not enough information. Second Life allows us to chat with one another, but is an ineffective social network website, because both of us don’t use it often. Facebook is effective for getting messages through to one another, because we check our accounts often, and we didn’t postpone any meetings. It’s inefficient, because it gets things done slower when sending messages back and forth. Physical relationship is effective for getting things done faster, but it was awkward communicating with my partner. As I mentioned before, the exercise is successful when working with all four modes together in the way it was organized.

4) Tell me what design situation you can see the different modes of communication be appropriate for. The modes being (web presentation, virtual worlds, physical relationship). (1 paragraph)

The design situation in web presentations are mostly suitable for initiating information of the other partner through their websites. This is helpful for the first stage of the meeting process, because you want to get to know a little about them first before contacting them in any way. The design situation in Second Life is appropriate for initiating the first conversation (talking to the partner for the first time, but virtually), getting comfortable talking to them. The design situation in Facebook is appropriate for receiving and sending messages on time, because both of us check our accounts quite often. The design situation in physical relationship is appropriate for getting things done quicker, because we are face-to-face, we are able to transfer information directly instead of waiting for replies on Facebook or Second Life.

My Gift to Alexis Crumb(my partner, Nastashia Hyam’s Second Life avatar) was exchanged virtually:

My gift to Alexis Crumb is a Snow Globe of memories of her 2 weeks trip in Europe one year with her school. I liked how she thought of sitting on the globe, as if she was in Europe.

Skibbles Ohmai! Intervention

Hey folks, here’s my documentation. Text will be added shortly.

…………………………

Veronica’s avatar, Alice3Riddler’s Second Life Documentary

Here’s my avatar, Alice3Riddler’s  Second Life documentary. It includes the director’s audio commentary. Please enjoy! It’s on my youtube account.

Fitzgerald Uxlay’s Second Life Documentation

Here is the link to my documentation page:

Fitzgerald Uxlay’s Second Life Documentation

-Lucas Thurston

Andre’s Assignment 3 Article

From New Media By Martin Lister

Artificial life is a development of artificial intelligence that is based on a more biological, less psychological approach to the creation of intelligent machines. The aim here is not merely to simulate but to synthesise intelligent life forms. Intelligent artificial life forms are then characterized as being embodied, autonomous, self-organised, emergent, and evolving.

Lucas’ Assignment Three Article

On Tangible User Interfaces, Humans and Spatiality by Ehud Sharlin, Benjamin Watson Yoshifumi Kitamura, Fumio Kishino and Yuichi Itoh

A tangible user interface (TUI) is something that is used by humans. They are interfaces that are physical, that can be touched and held in the real world, but can sometimes effect the digital realm. A good examples of TUI’s are the computer mouse. It combines spatial elements with the computer. People could move something on the computer while manipulating an object. The better TUI’s create more productivity as humans will be able to quickly get used to a certain interface. Creating more immersive TUI’s allows for more accessibility with technology.

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1023818

-Lucas Thurston

Library Assignment MPM17B :)

Part 2 :

http://delivery.acm.org/10.1145/1460000/1453154/a11-baljko.pdf?key1=1453154&key2=8633316321&coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=20055766&CFTOKEN=59708862

Theres the pdf file for thearticle

and heres the link to the other page:

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1453152.1453154&coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=20055766&CFTOKEN=59708862

Part 3

This article primarily discusses the process of  making this A-life (artifical life) sculpture. This article talks about the relationship between the sculpture and the actions of people around it, as the sculpture reacts to the movements of those around it and it is supposed to invite the viewer to explore that relationship. It is similar to the other two articles because it is talking about blending the artificial with the real, through the interactions between the sculpture and the viewer. It is also similar to the other articles because it discusses in great detail the thought, beliefs and ideas that went into making the sculpture  so that it would incorporate all of the elements of aesthetics, interaction between humans and computers,  and the user experience.

- Ashesjustfall

BlackxDaisy’s Research assignment 2009

Addition to part 1:

Hi bockssociale members, I posted this up on our wiki page a while ago. I’m not sure if this is useful to our part one summary paragraph, I found one thing in common between the two articles. Feel free to include it =):

Simon Penny and Stefan Helmreich’s discussions in interdisciplinary pedagogy is quite similar. Both agreed that New media has become an interdisciplinary field, in which humanities, sciences, and art are three components essential in bringing aesthetics, interaction, performance, and self-discovering to the media arts.
Part 2:

Troy Innocent’s: Blending Realities in Game Space

Part 3:

My own abstract:
Troy Innocent’s article, “Blending Realities in Game Space talks about relationships between the representation and the system that are developed within electronic spaces. Iconography, synthetic materials, and skins are several elements that are used to represent the virtual world created in electonic spaces. By experimenting with this relationship, we are able to generate a whole new set of meanings and purposes. This gives us the opportunity to not only explore the virtual world as a representation of the real, but for developing other alternative worlds as well. It gives us the idea of world-making, creating our own worlds through our own imagination, personal experiences, and dreams. Digital games are one representation that can be created within electronic spaces. The aesthetics of games can be explored by exploring their icongraphy, artificiality and the various representational modes. Artificial intelligence and behavioral systems help develop the logic and language of the digital games. Through the process of structuring, strategic planning, and the aesthetics of games, we are able to create new media art. We can now discover different ways of communicating, by practicing the art of “‘world-making,’ the nature of the computer as a shape-shifter, and gameplay as a ‘generative meaning system.’”

Abstract from site:

Modes of representation in digital games are explored in terms of game aesthetics, structure, and logic. A model for “world-making” is developed that identifies key components of digital media language and their relationship to shifting modes of representation. These ideas are demonstrated through three art works created by the Idea-ON>!, Iconica, and Semiomorph. The final work, Semiomorph, combines the theory of “semiotic morphism” with gameplay to create a digital game that generates blended realities. This work is described and analyzed in detail to illustrate the proposed model.

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1394021.1394028&coll=ACM&dl=ACM&CFID=25154171&CFTOKEN=58337456

Comparison summary (I compared my article with the other two in this paragraph):

In comparison to Penny and Helmreich’s article, although Troy Innocent’s “Blending Realities in Game Space,” discusses similar approaches to aesthetics and its relation to the notion of experience, it focusses primarily on the aesthetics of the virtual realities in the gaming culture. Such culture has become an interdisciplinary field in the digital and new media, opening many opportunities for agents everywhere to express, perform, and experiment. The collaboration of various mediums allows us to create a world through theory, ideas of reality, human imagination, our past personal experiences, and dreams, in which Penny and Helmreich encourages us to do when practising art. Such mediums make components of a virtual world; such as, appearances, spatial spaces, and gender, constantly changeable with a click of a button. Therefore, life has become “a process, an unfolding of activity, and “what we make of it,”creating abstraction and blended realities.