Nerd Alert. Microsoft Worddd!!

Well, today's tutorial task is not the greatest but for the sake of marks, I did it and felt like a dork whilst doing it ha ha. We had to open a new Microsoft word document, numerous times and muck around with formatting and all the rest of it. But now I am analysing the following:

Tutorial Task: Complete the Exercises below, and then write a report in your blog about your experience doing the exercises; were there any problems? What were your solutions? Did you find it too simple, or was it confusing? Can you see how this software might be useful to you?

OK well there are always problems when it comes to computers so naturally I had one issue arise. This problem was due to the old instructions posted by the tutor..tut tut! Therefore I could not successfully complete the task without raising my arm and asking for help.That simple act of raising my arm is my solution for any problem. God bless Adam, he helped me battle through this issue with a few simple words and bingo! Problem solved. The tasks were pretty simple, but who doesn't like simple and uncomplicated things?

This software is very useful to me. Because I am not exactly the most reliable employee I am constantly updating my resume and cover letters in search of the next best job (that hopefully does not require early starts on the weekends). Mail Merge will help me get a job and save me a lot of time by posting all potential employers addresses straight into my word document, where I can print it off straight away. Technology does not frustrate me all of the time. Thank god for spell check also.

Microsoft Excel..sucks!
I did not do this second task as I hate Microsoft Excel with a passion. I have tried to use it before and it sucks. So to answer the questions above: There are problems, there are no solutions, I do not find it simple, I find it highly confusing and I do not see how it would be useful to me. That's all!

ACTIVE WORLD. A WHOLE NEW WORLD!!!
This task is much more interesting and I really enjoyed it, even though cyber chatting over a game site is something I consider as boring and a bit on the goober side.

We took an Internet field trip today, to Active Worlds. Active Worlds is a 3D chat world environment which looks like a cross between a computer game, and a regular chat room. You can fly around, do the Macarena, kick strangers in the head and fly Aladdin's magic carpet whilst chatting absolute rubbish to some stranger from the other side of the world. Check it out. http://www.activeworlds.com/ Here is what we have to consider after visiting Active Worlds.

Presuming that you are a user of MSN, or other IM programs (or have used it before, or at least know about it)... Besides the obvious differences (such as Active Worlds is 3D and MSN isn't, etc) what are the qualitative differences between the regular IM program and a 3D environment?
What is different about the kinds of socialising that happens in these spaces? Does the 3D aspect make much difference?

The "qualitative" differences between MSN and Active Worlds is clearly the 3D aspect but MSN has more gadgets such as emoticons and nudges and all of that annoying stuff, however on Active Worlds you can do the Macarena (I know, right!) and walk through trees and more importantly, people. I actually got into bit of a cyber verbal fight because I kept on walking back and forth through another girl who was using the site. Yes I get small kicks. One thing annoyed me about Active Worlds, it is the same thing that annoys me when your at a concert. People pay to go to concerts and people pay to use Active Worlds yet they just stand there and do nothing and have the hide to whinge. For example on Active Worlds, this girl that I was amusingly walking through got upset because I was walking through her 'cyber body'. What annoyed me about this was that people pay to use this site and don't play on it, if you don't want to play and just have a nice conversation go on MSN for f**k sake. This example from Active Worlds, reminded me of a few incidents that have occurred at concerts. This one time my friends and I were at The Wombats concert dancing, singing and doing what normal drunk people do at a concert, and got yelled at because we were standing on her toes (ha ha, whoops) and that she couldn't see. What do you expect at a concert? This girl paid $50 to go to a concert and stand there and expected not to get crushed and have a prime position at the front. So there you have it.. My analogy of Active Worlds, compared to a concert.
The difference between the 3D world chatting and MSN instant messaging is the fact that you have a body(cyber body) on Active Worlds and you can roam this world and see the characters you are chatting to. On MSN you are talking to your friends and family mostly, where as on Active Worlds you can talk to foreigners and discuss things about the Internet (boring) or even help each other work Active Worlds controls etc but even better get in arguments with a complete stranger. The 3D aspect makes a huge difference because it distracted me big time. I hardly even had a conversation, just the argument, and the rest of the time I was flying around on magic carpets, sitting on top of a clock and kicking some chick in the head. Surprisingly I liked Active Worlds but not enough to download it at home and pay for an account.

Week 7 already!

Just a quick little blog today as we do not have tutorial tasks due to Anzac Day. Thank gosh we do not have Uni and that we do not have to do a complex blog like Walter Benjamin. Today we are discussing past lectures and our dear little friend, the essay. Yuk! As if we don't have enough essays already. As I do not have to ramble on about some strange topic today,I will kindly leave you a picture that depicts my mood at the moment. I love this photo. Somewhere in the world, can't be sure where.

Wikipedia. Fact or Rubbish?

I think this is my favourite tutorial blogging task, so far. We have been asked to go onto Wikipedia and find two articles/entries that we are "experts" on and judge whether or not the articles are reliable or if in fact they are complete rubbish. We have to write a blog on these articles and to consider the following things in our lovely blog.

* Is this an accurate article?
* Does it cover all the basic facts that you'd need to understand this topic?

* Does this article follow the Wikipedia guidelines for useful articles?

* Is this article fair and balanced, or is it biased towards a particular side or argument?

* What changes would you make to this article to improve it and make it useful for the wider Wikipedia community?

The first article I reviewed on Wikipedia was an article about Robert Smith, the lead singer and instrumentalist of The Cure. I only found a few minor things that I believe are incorrect and would be misleading to somebody wanting to know more about the formation of The Cure and Robert Smith' s role in this. Other than these few mistakes I found the article pretty accurate and rather interesting. I also noticed that it does cover all basic facts in helping somebody understand Robert Smith.

Oh my gosh! The incorrect 'facts' and the things I would change to make this article on Robert James Smith superb!

The Wikipedia article on Robert Smith states that The Cure founded in 1976. Wrong! The Easy Cure formed in 1976, they did not drop 'Easy' from their name until 1978. So to all you Wikipedia and Robert Smith fans, The Cure did not technically form until 1978 when they also became a trio by dropping Porl Thompson. The Cure originally started as a trio, which Wikipedia editors failed to mention as well, it wasn't until 1984 that Porl Thompson rejoined the band. I thought that it would've helped adding in the following information to the article on Robert Smith to somewhat understand Smith's changing styles of music and an insight to his personality and attitude with his fellow band members.

Thompson was a Cure from June 1977 to May 1978 and from April 1984 to December 1992. Thompson originally played guitar for The Cure however he was dropped from the band as his style was at odds with Robert Smith's growing preference for minimalist songwriting. Porl rejoined The Cure in 1983 on saxophone and occasionally played keyboard.

The article on Wikipedia about Robert Smith is fair and unbiased. When the person who created this article spoke of Smith's style concerning music and fashion, they did not put him down they created interest and also backed Smith up by adding a quote from Smith in an interview he did for The Holy Hour, to add credibility to the fact that Smith's public persona of a 'depressed' image does not reflect in his songs. "At the time we wrote Disintegration...it's just about what I was doing really, how I felt. But I'm not like that all the time. That's the difficulty of writing songs that are a bit depressing. People think you're like that all the time, but I don't think that. I just usually write when I'm depressed." http://imaginaryboys.altervista.org/english/cure/articles/tib_holyhour.htm.

Robert Smith is extremely talented among many other things. I believe this article about him on Wikipedia demonstrates this well. I now think it is love.

If I could come back as one person in my second life, it would be Harry Potter!

OK, the second article I searched on Wikipedia was Harry Potter because I am pretty sure that reading the series 3 times and watching the DVDs about 4 times over, would make anybody an expert. I am beginning to think Wikipedia is reliable because this article on Harry Potter, or as some people like to call him 'Harry Pothead', is credible. I also learnt some things I didn't know myself. I thought I knew everything when it comes to Harry Potter.

This article is accurate, fair and unbiased, the only thing that I would change about the article is add way more photos, because who doesn't like looking at pictures?

Walter Benjamin eat your heart out!

Write a post that considers...How do the ideas from Walter Benjamin's "Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" apply to contemporary digital media?There was a time when "Art" was made by artists who were skilled professionals. Now that anyone with a computer can create things digitally (music, images, videos, etc), what does that mean for "art"? Is a photo shopped image "authentic"? Do digital "things" have an "aura" (in Benjamin's terms)?

Whoa, heavy! I know, I thought the exact same thing. This is a pretty complex and difficult task so I hope my blog is not too mind numbingly boring and that it is a tad more coherent and exciting than Benjamin Walter's article.I highly doubt the excitement part. Sorry! Whoever it was who complained saying our tutorials were "too easy" should wake up to themselves, because it didn't get a little harder it got a heck of a lot harder. I hope they don't get top marks, yes I am cruel.

Benjamin Walter believed that modern technologies destroyed the uniqueness of art work, this applies to contemporary digital media, as art can be reproduced and duplicated with the click of a mouse and a push of a button. Walter thought that these technologies wrecked the historical concepts of art work, so to answer the question about digital things having an "aura", Benjamin Walter would say no. Walter states art works that are reproduced, lack presence in time and space because it it fails to be there at that unique time, where the art work originated and existed. It is similar as my refusal to burn Cd's off friends because I like to have the original CD with the front and back sleeves and the oh so pretty band name and their artwork on the actual CD. CD'S are just not the same if they are burnt.

I believe that contemporary digital media can have a very negative and painful outcome when it comes to singing as an art because any half wit actress or actor that came straight off the Neighbours or Home and Away set can digitally enhance their voice and make a career out of it, even if it is a short lived one. Take Bec Cartwright for example, her voice is as plain as the girl next door, but due to her acting role on Home and Away and her connections she got her hands on a pitch corrector and Ta-Da, she recorded an album by singing line by line and over lapping those lines to make her voice sound stronger. Marvelous you may think but not for those who listen to mainstream radio.

The standards of technology today can make anybody an artist so to speak. Benjamin questions the authenticity of reproduced art work. Walter Benjamin states "mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual." This meaning that reproduced art work loses its ritual, where it orginated. He believes that the moment where the art work was created is stripped and it is no longer contemporary to the person who is viewing it. Walter states that reproductions made by magazines and newsreels of art works do not portray the true essence of the art work to the "unarmed eye." Benjamin also questions and compares performances of a stage actor to a screen actor, the former being presented to an audience in person and the latter being presented through a camera, stating that "The camera that presents the performance of the film actor to the public need not respect the performance as an integral whole." Meaning that the camera person and special effects comprise certain aspects of the actor's movement, whereas a stage actor adjusts to thier audience during the performance relating with the audience on a deeper and more pesonal level. When the audience is replaced by a camera the viewers of the screen play become more like critics. Benjamin believes that by filming performances the values of cult can not be "exposed."

Benjamin uses the analogy of a painter and a cameraman, the painter being a "magician" and the cameraman being a "surgeon." He states that a painter maintains his distance from reality while the camerman delves straight into realities web and that there is a noticable difference between the pictures they attain, saying that the painters picture is complete where as the cameraman's picture's are fragments which are assembled under a complete different "law." Benjamin concludes "Thus, for contemporary man the representation of reality by the film is incomparably more significant than that of the painter, since it offers, precisely because of the thoroughgoing permeation of reality with mechanical equipment, an aspect of reality which is free of all equipment. And that is what one is entitled to ask from a work of art." Meaning that because the cameraman has access to so much evidence they are able to portray reality with more conviction with the use of contemporary mechanical equipment such as the camera and editoring material.

Personally I believe that only sometimes a photoshopped image can be authentic in an individual way, as you are creating a new element or meaning to the art work, however it can be unauthentic as it was not your work to begin with and you are reproducing the art work and stripping away its original aura and history. Digital things can have an aura, especially a movie like Sweeney Todd with the hunk Johnny Depp as the main character (had to add that fact), this movie had a massive impact on me as it's atmospshere became apart of you and made you feel the emotions the characters felt which tended to make you brood. Comtemporary digital media and the mechinical reproduction of art definately has many positivie aspects when it comes to creating art but it can also have a negative impact on art work when it is mass produced and when its history and cult are lost.

Readers, I hope I did not loose you in the first paragraph and hopefully you learnt something new, because I sure did. Whoever thought movies and acting were so complex and indepth? I can not say I know too many people that would sit down to watch a movie and ponder if the art work is being ruined because of a certain camera angle.I'm pretty sure that the only thing they would be pondering is how the hell can you open a stupid bag of maltesers with out spilling them all over the hygenic carpet at the cinema?