Limewire: Didn't you learn from Napster?

Limewire has been shut down due to copyright infringement. The program was a file-sharing service where people could search music and download it for free. Limewire was the "victim" of a permanent injunction not so long ago. The case is that Limewire encouraged copyright infringement and caused damage to many artists. Although many people using it thought it would never end, it did. What I find interesting is the people's idea of cost and worth. Buying a song on amazon or iTunes costs about $1...that's not that much. Then you have to factor in how many times you'll listen to it and how much you like the song. A dollar is not much at all if you think about it that way. People pay $1 for a soda they will drink ONCE and never have that experience again (unless you buy another soda). By getting the music for free, you're cheating the artist and everyone else who put work into the music. A lawsuit for copyright infringement will cost you a lot more than the money you would have spent had you bought the music online. What trend do you think is next for music downloading?

Manners Please!

Some people don't know how to act properly. Unfortunately, this carries over to the internet. Facebook is the prime example of this. Many people don't know what is appropriate online and what should be kept private. Boundaries can be crossed easily when someone violates the rules of online etiquette. Posting inappropriate pictures, making explicit comments, and starting rumors are all things that at the moment seem somewhat harmless, but they can come back to hurt you later on. Actions have consequences, even online actions. What I find funny about facebook is how relationships can come to be defined by what goes on on facebook. If a couple is having problems they can put their relationship status as "it's complicated"....does the world really need to know that? Also, if pictures of you and an ex are still online, your partner might read into it and get mad. Facebook ends up having more control over the relationship than you. Naturally we are nosey people, so many do have a tendency to snoop people's profiles and see what they've been up to. I'm not saying this is right and I'm not saying this is wrong....but if you don't want people to see something, don't post it! It's put there to be viewed so people can't really get mad at someone for commenting about their facebooks. For cheerleading we were held to the standard that if there was anything inappropriate on our pages, we could risk discipline and/or being removed from the team. People would get in trouble for not going to practice and then posting on facebook that they're doing something else. Making some information public is not a good idea. I have friends that have pictures of themselves on facebook that I know they will regret someday, but right now we're in college....so anything goes I guess. People need Internet Etiquette lessons....hmmm sounds like a good course...

When movies go too far...

Films have long been used as an outlet for entertainment purposes. Some are informational, and these are known as documentaries. But, some documentaries take it too far and exploit a situation just for publicity. The Cannes Film Festival screened a movie called "Unlawful Killing' about the death of Princess Diana and those who were involved in the car accident in the Paris Tunnel. The film reportedly has a picture of Diana the moment before she died. This image is so graphic that it has never been shown before. Also, the film is not allowed to play in Great Britain because of the contract the royals have with the media. This would be seriously devastating for public opinion of the family. Diana was loved internationally and many people still feel the pain of her death. I was 5 years old when it happened and I remember being sad...I liked fairytales and princesses were not supposed to die. What the film aims to uncover is a conspiracy by the british monarchy and many people in the media and society to kill the People's Princess. I truly feel bad for Prince William, Prince Harry, and their loved ones. I think this film will be more devastating than relieving.

Slander vs. Libel ...when do you have the right?

It may not be right to negatively affect someone or something's reputation. but at times it is wise to consider the situation the person was in when they committed slander or libel. Is it really right to seek a law suit for everything? I don't think so. In the case with Amanda Knox and her family, they are being accused of slander against the Italian police. Amanda said she was treated badly during the interrogation and her mom repeated the story to a journalist. The ironic thing is that before Amanda was even convicted of the murder, the media in Italy had already had her pinned as a cold-blooded killer. Now isn't that wrong? In the Court of Public Opinion, this could be greatly significant. This will affect her for the rest of her life. In this case, did the media cross the line or did the Knox family? I would have to say that the media's articles about her being a murderer and cold-hearted were more wrong than Amanda claiming that she was treated wrongly. Her case is still on-going and although there is a movie and books out now, people still do not know the truth. If they hear the bad stories first, chances are that even when the truth comes out they will already have a skewed opinion.

This one hits close to home...

I was watching the movie "You Again" last night and there was this part where she is giving a speech on how what is important is not the actual situation but how the situation is viewed - perception. Recently there was a pipeline explosion in San Bruno, my hometown. The explosion lead to a fire and the deaths of people from the community. One of the crazier parts of this experience was having to deal with how PG&E seemed like they were trying to come across as better than they were and were putting on public acts of sympathy. What had actually caused it was inattention to detail and negligence. It amazes me that PR can turn a negative situation into something much less just by how they react. Not necessarily what they do or what the truth is, but how they react to what happens. So while people in my community were receiving help from others in the community and from the Red Cross, PG&E was probably desperately trying to save it's reputation. What comes first? Business or People?

To be fair, PG&E did help some people....but like the saying goes Once you put a nail in a fence, when you take it out there will still be a hole.

We live on the Internet

I believe that someone is not defined by what they are or are not, but more by what they consider home or by their routine. Now many people are interacting less personally, often opting to text or talk online rather than actually spend time together. The internet allows us to do pretty much anything from one place. We can watch TV, play games, shop, order food, talk to people from all over the world, gossip, and discover music and news. This is reflected in advertising now. While most people will skip over a commercial on the TV or change the radio station when one comes on, on the internet they are hard to avoid. Ads are in the sidebars, popups, logos, short video commercials on youtube before the video (sorry....a bit bitter about those) and through special offers in flashing lights on pages. Yet, while we may find them annoying the chances that we'll listen to these more than ones on other mediums is high. What does this say about society? Are we so anti-social and internet based that we now can no longer be influenced unless it's through some sneaky web tactic? Only time will tell....I wonder...what comes after the internet?

You can run....but you can't hide.

One of the main things I value is my privacy. What is scary is the thought that privacy is almost non-existent now. Chances are if you have a smart phone, it is very easy to track where you are via the phone's GPS. Newer iPhones and iPads have technology that time stamp the location of their owners. The records can be found, unencrypted, on the owners personal computer. Feels like big brother is watching you right? This information can be made public. Imagine, something is keeping tabs on you. It could even be used against you in the workplace, your personal life, or even in court. The real question we must keep in mind is whether technology is moving too fast for us to keep up with it and when is enough enough? As privacy policies change rapidly, confusing the readers so they'll just accept them, we are being lured into a trap where nothing we do is ever private. Anything we say or do on the web is public and never goes away. The internet is not pencil, it's permanent ink on indestructible paper. It is the cockroach of species. Once it's online, it's done. We may believe we are anonymous online, but that's never the case.

Schemin' Apple(s)

Apple is facing a federal class-action lawsuit claiming that it is complicit in a scheme to get kids to buy things within apps (such as level-ups and game credits). These level ups and game credits are being promoted in games that are promoted to kids as being free. The reason this is so successful is because of how addictive the games are and how currency that can be bought with real money can help you advance in the game rather quickly. The Federal Trade Commission launched an investigation into the matter. Apple has started to add warnings to games about in-app charges, but that's only half the battle. Parents need to control what their kids are doing online. They can't wait until the charges show up on a credit card bill to know what their kids have been up to. In this case I believe that Apple should not be held accountable. Many other companies use the "game credits" and "level-ups" tactics to try to get people to spend money on their games. It is simply a matter of parents controlling their children and not allowing them access to a credit card when they're online.

Other websites can be addictive as well. Personal experience....I was addicted to Ebay for a while. When I turned sixteen my parents gave me my own card with access to some of my accounts. I took this as an opportunity to do a bit of online shopping. It got to the point where I had spent a large amount of money on seemingly worthless items. Was it ebay's fault? NO. It was mine. I did not use my card properly and my parents had given me too much freedom with it before I was ready. That's why I believe Apple is not to blame. You can't always put the blame on a big corporation for something that is your fault as a parent.

Au Revoir Google Video!

Google has just announced that it is shutting down Google Video. Personally, I think this should have been done a long time ago. Google owns Youtube and Youtube is the largest video service on the web. This has been a long time coming since Google Video stopped accepting uploads in May 2009. Now users are being told that they should save their video content or move it to Youtube. While this will be centralizing videos on the web to be mainly held on one site, it is not decreasing competition considering that Google owns youtube. Perhaps this is part of one of Google's plans. I think Youtube will be receiving some steep investments soon. We already are faced with commercials when we want to watch a video. Maybe we'll see another way for youtube to make money emerge.

On a different note, what is your opinion of online video sites where anyone can post? Are they safe?