http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123980920727621353.html
Author Steven Johnson outlines a future with more books, more distractions -- and the end of reading alone
With Amazon.com's introduction of the Kindle, the history of books is taking a major, noteworthy turn. This is a really great and interesting article that I think you should read. The writer discusses some of the pros and cons of having devices like the Kindle.
With all the technology at our fingertips it is easy for a person to do reasearch for a paper without ever going to a library or even touching a physical book. Between online journals, newspapers, magazines, etc there has been a short instance of neglect of books. However, now with this Kindle books being accessible through this technology are once again available throught a few searches and clicks. It is really changing this the history of the book itself. You no longer will have to scan library shelves and collect all the books on a certain topic, page through those books to see if they even have noteworthy information, etc.
Not only this, but the article mentions how it may increase the impulse buy and how this can be a great tool to increase book sales. Knowing you are in the mood for a certain book, or hearing someone you know mention a good book they just read, now all you have to do is search the name and buy and you have it right there. "It is like the bookstore follows you wherever you go." Furthermore, now it will be even easier for people to publicly talks about books. The author of this article mentions it can turn into a never ending, large Google book-club. And it is true, now you can just blog about what you are raeding at that very moment and discuss what you like and dislike with others.
I mean, personally I do not know if I would be a fan of this. I like to actually flip through pages and, if doing research, have the ability to highlight important points, etc. Another con that the article mentioned was the notion of reading a book and being immersed in another world almost and how that may diminish with the likes of a product such as the Kindle. He did not go into to much detail here, but it is interesting to think about. Also, now you can "put down" a book one second and "pick up" another book the next second. It is almost as if you are carrying your personal library around with you. So it is easier to bounce between books and not so much be involved with one particular book, which is where I think he was trying to maybe go with that point.
Overall, it is definitely an interesting turn in history for the book and am curious to see how much this is picked up by people. Like I said I don't know if I would like it, but I could see how many people would. Do you think this really is going to hae a huge impact in the future for the book industry or what do you think will come of this?
Monday, April 20, 2009
Is It Brad or Is It Fake?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123980973974821393.html
Breakthroughs in computer-generated characters open up all sorts of artistic possibilities. Just don't tell that to the actors.
This was a pretty neat article to come across in today's WSJ. The article discusses the progression of improvements made to computer generated characters for movies. Most recently, the most notable success of this is Brad Pitt in Benjamin Button. For most of the movie there is a computer generated version of the elderly Brad, not Brad himself. The article goes on to discuss some of the difficulties cg characters have come to face like the believability of these characters.
The eyes and mouth seem to be an area of difficulty as it is hard to exact the way skin moves in these areas, the lighting in the background being accurate for these characters, etc. This is just another example the incredible process technology has made in today's world. There is even mention of the possibility among perfecting this talent in diminishing the need for actual actors. I think that is a pretty crazy concept. Today, they mention that they use actors as a base for their computer generated characters to capture the accuracy, but what about in five or ten years?? Technology has really grown and this is definitely fascinating and good, but aren't there downsides to all of this?
Technologies progress, I feel, has really been threatening to some of the jobs in the world. You have factories developing special machines to do the work that took 20 people to complete. Or in grocery stores you see, increasingly, self-checkout counters. Now there is this future possibility of cg characters getting rid of the need for actual actors and actresses. I mean I guess what I said sounds a little extreme, but it is definitly not so farfetched that it isn't something we should think about. How much can computers and growing technology take over? Are they really a huge threat to some people's jobs. Sure they can be more efficient and cost-effective, but is that really worth putting people at risk of not really being needed?? I don't know..I obviously grew this into something a little larger than it is, but I think it is an interesting thing to think about and discuess and I am curious how other people feel about it.
In an earlier blog that I posted towards the beginning of this assignment, there was a YouTube video that I thought was really interesting and pertained to this very topic. It is interesting, but also a little scary to really think about. I will post the link again in case you did not see it the first time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpEnFwiqdx8
Breakthroughs in computer-generated characters open up all sorts of artistic possibilities. Just don't tell that to the actors.
This was a pretty neat article to come across in today's WSJ. The article discusses the progression of improvements made to computer generated characters for movies. Most recently, the most notable success of this is Brad Pitt in Benjamin Button. For most of the movie there is a computer generated version of the elderly Brad, not Brad himself. The article goes on to discuss some of the difficulties cg characters have come to face like the believability of these characters.
The eyes and mouth seem to be an area of difficulty as it is hard to exact the way skin moves in these areas, the lighting in the background being accurate for these characters, etc. This is just another example the incredible process technology has made in today's world. There is even mention of the possibility among perfecting this talent in diminishing the need for actual actors. I think that is a pretty crazy concept. Today, they mention that they use actors as a base for their computer generated characters to capture the accuracy, but what about in five or ten years?? Technology has really grown and this is definitely fascinating and good, but aren't there downsides to all of this?
Technologies progress, I feel, has really been threatening to some of the jobs in the world. You have factories developing special machines to do the work that took 20 people to complete. Or in grocery stores you see, increasingly, self-checkout counters. Now there is this future possibility of cg characters getting rid of the need for actual actors and actresses. I mean I guess what I said sounds a little extreme, but it is definitly not so farfetched that it isn't something we should think about. How much can computers and growing technology take over? Are they really a huge threat to some people's jobs. Sure they can be more efficient and cost-effective, but is that really worth putting people at risk of not really being needed?? I don't know..I obviously grew this into something a little larger than it is, but I think it is an interesting thing to think about and discuess and I am curious how other people feel about it.
In an earlier blog that I posted towards the beginning of this assignment, there was a YouTube video that I thought was really interesting and pertained to this very topic. It is interesting, but also a little scary to really think about. I will post the link again in case you did not see it the first time.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpEnFwiqdx8
Lean Times Bring Workouts Home
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123984558896723563.html
There have been several blogs within The Blogaroos that discuss the effects of the recession that the economy has been facing. A couple blogs discussed making sports gambling and weed legal in the country. I have another interesting article that relates to this area, but on a more individual level than a nation-wide one. When reading the WSJ last week, there was an article talking about people no longer going to gyms for exercise and are starting home workouts.
The article notes how some people are either doing workouts from Exercise TV or getting them from ondemand on their Netflix subscriptions. Also, sales of personal workout dvds and mats etc have seen an increase, where high-end gym memberships have been either flat or seeing a decrease.
I thought this was a good article because I think it is interesting to see how people change their everyday activities when facing economic downturns. Some people stop buying their cup of coffee before work and start brewing at home, some carpool to work or take the bus rather than fill up on their own cars, and now, some workout and exercise at home rather than pay a gym membership fee every month. People really begin to realize what the need and what they don't need, or at least how to use their resources to more efficiently enjoy the things they are used to. So my question is, do you think that once the economy gets back on its feet that people are just going to be jumping back into these daily luxuries? I feel like once you realize the money you can be saving and essentially getting the same outcomes like cups of coffee or at home workouts, do people just go back or do they realize their savings and keep it up?
Obviously there are more conveniences with these luxuries, but I do not know if I necessarily think they outweigh the cost benefits that you save. Once again, I just thought that this was an interesting side-effect to the recession the economy is facing and wanted to see what other thought...
There have been several blogs within The Blogaroos that discuss the effects of the recession that the economy has been facing. A couple blogs discussed making sports gambling and weed legal in the country. I have another interesting article that relates to this area, but on a more individual level than a nation-wide one. When reading the WSJ last week, there was an article talking about people no longer going to gyms for exercise and are starting home workouts.
The article notes how some people are either doing workouts from Exercise TV or getting them from ondemand on their Netflix subscriptions. Also, sales of personal workout dvds and mats etc have seen an increase, where high-end gym memberships have been either flat or seeing a decrease.
I thought this was a good article because I think it is interesting to see how people change their everyday activities when facing economic downturns. Some people stop buying their cup of coffee before work and start brewing at home, some carpool to work or take the bus rather than fill up on their own cars, and now, some workout and exercise at home rather than pay a gym membership fee every month. People really begin to realize what the need and what they don't need, or at least how to use their resources to more efficiently enjoy the things they are used to. So my question is, do you think that once the economy gets back on its feet that people are just going to be jumping back into these daily luxuries? I feel like once you realize the money you can be saving and essentially getting the same outcomes like cups of coffee or at home workouts, do people just go back or do they realize their savings and keep it up?
Obviously there are more conveniences with these luxuries, but I do not know if I necessarily think they outweigh the cost benefits that you save. Once again, I just thought that this was an interesting side-effect to the recession the economy is facing and wanted to see what other thought...
Friday, April 10, 2009
Big Rapper on Campus
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123932118390206983.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_weekendjournal
Asher Roth courts fans with a suburban spin on hip-hop
More and more Asher Roth has been entering the musical spotlight with his hit single "I Love College." Funny enough, my friends and I have actually been listening to this song for months now and think it is so funny, but true at the same time. I feel like a good portion of people in college can relate to his song which is why it has become so popular in the recent past.
This article, I thought was interesting, because the highlight of Asher Roth is that he is a white rapper, comparable to Eminem. There have been very few succesful, noteworthy white rappers in an area of music that is predominantly African American. Not only this, but many rappers rap about the hard times they have lived through and overcame and it is an outlet for them to express their feelings and ask questions. Asher Roth is from an opposite end of the specturm: "Mr. Roth is challenging that cultural barrier -- in part by joking about it with rhymes about his suburban roots and supportive nuclear family." Does this hurt him in the hip-hop industry? I am curious to see his success.
This is an interesting area in music as a medium for me. Here we are as a people trying to completely dimolish stereotypes of people and equalize America whether dependent on race or gender. For some reason, however, the hip-hop industry has been hard to overcome and break-away from the African-American hold that it has. With few successes such as the Beastie Boys and Eminem there has been little success otherwise. Why is it so hard I am wondering? Is it really because certain people do not fit the mold of rappers that has been created over the past few decades, or is it simply that there is just simply no talent?
I have not heard many of his songs besides his hit single, which I think is funny and good. But I can see him being another short-lived artist and am curious to see him try and overcome the pressures that have already been applied to him. I am curious to know what others think about this topic and Asher Roth the artist.
Asher Roth courts fans with a suburban spin on hip-hop
More and more Asher Roth has been entering the musical spotlight with his hit single "I Love College." Funny enough, my friends and I have actually been listening to this song for months now and think it is so funny, but true at the same time. I feel like a good portion of people in college can relate to his song which is why it has become so popular in the recent past.
This article, I thought was interesting, because the highlight of Asher Roth is that he is a white rapper, comparable to Eminem. There have been very few succesful, noteworthy white rappers in an area of music that is predominantly African American. Not only this, but many rappers rap about the hard times they have lived through and overcame and it is an outlet for them to express their feelings and ask questions. Asher Roth is from an opposite end of the specturm: "Mr. Roth is challenging that cultural barrier -- in part by joking about it with rhymes about his suburban roots and supportive nuclear family." Does this hurt him in the hip-hop industry? I am curious to see his success.
This is an interesting area in music as a medium for me. Here we are as a people trying to completely dimolish stereotypes of people and equalize America whether dependent on race or gender. For some reason, however, the hip-hop industry has been hard to overcome and break-away from the African-American hold that it has. With few successes such as the Beastie Boys and Eminem there has been little success otherwise. Why is it so hard I am wondering? Is it really because certain people do not fit the mold of rappers that has been created over the past few decades, or is it simply that there is just simply no talent?
I have not heard many of his songs besides his hit single, which I think is funny and good. But I can see him being another short-lived artist and am curious to see him try and overcome the pressures that have already been applied to him. I am curious to know what others think about this topic and Asher Roth the artist.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Lost in Ficton
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123880307592488761.html#mod=todays_us_nonsub_weekendjournal
Alexander McCall Smith on the intense personal relationships readers form with characters and the ways that complicates the lives of authors.
This is an extremely interesting article I found in the Weekend Journal of WSJ. It is from the perspective of an author of fictional novels and how his job is complicated by people who look at stories too realistically as if they were true stories.
I thought this particular article worked really well with what we have talked about in class previously, especially remembering Dr. Lule's book. For instance, he brings up an issue of reader expectations when reading a crime or mystery fiction novel and how all of these stories follow a classic pattern: "First there is peace, then this peace is shattered bty the occurrenve of a crime, usually a murder. This leads to a search for the wrongdoer, his apprehension and punishment, and finally a return to peace." The suggestion here is that as readers, people want to see the moral balance restored. "It is these traditional novels that reassures us that we live in a moral universe."
I thought this particular comparison correlated really well with some of the points Dr. Lule was trying to get across in his book and what we talked about in class. How these templated stories, whether news stories or fictitious stories, provide a balance for society.
There is a lot more being talked about in this article and I think it would be a good read for everyone to check out. I just wanted to bring up that particular point in the article. In the end, the article is just trying to point out that it is in fact, just a story and authors should have a bit more freedom with where they want to take their work. Unfortunately, readers opinions sometimes skew where they take their stories.
Alexander McCall Smith on the intense personal relationships readers form with characters and the ways that complicates the lives of authors.
This is an extremely interesting article I found in the Weekend Journal of WSJ. It is from the perspective of an author of fictional novels and how his job is complicated by people who look at stories too realistically as if they were true stories.
I thought this particular article worked really well with what we have talked about in class previously, especially remembering Dr. Lule's book. For instance, he brings up an issue of reader expectations when reading a crime or mystery fiction novel and how all of these stories follow a classic pattern: "First there is peace, then this peace is shattered bty the occurrenve of a crime, usually a murder. This leads to a search for the wrongdoer, his apprehension and punishment, and finally a return to peace." The suggestion here is that as readers, people want to see the moral balance restored. "It is these traditional novels that reassures us that we live in a moral universe."
I thought this particular comparison correlated really well with some of the points Dr. Lule was trying to get across in his book and what we talked about in class. How these templated stories, whether news stories or fictitious stories, provide a balance for society.
There is a lot more being talked about in this article and I think it would be a good read for everyone to check out. I just wanted to bring up that particular point in the article. In the end, the article is just trying to point out that it is in fact, just a story and authors should have a bit more freedom with where they want to take their work. Unfortunately, readers opinions sometimes skew where they take their stories.
Friday, April 3, 2009
Graduating With a Major in Go-Getting
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123845358462571299.html
In this past Tuesday's WSJ there was an article talking about after-graduation jobs. Unfortunately the article states that college-campus recruiters intend to hire 22% fewer graduates from this year's class than last year's class. That is a really big number and I feel like the article is really relevant for us and thought it would be interest to post and get some feedback on what the article is saying.
One of the advantages of being a graduate has over a senior professional has to do with our youth. Although newly graduated students do not have the amount of experience, they are cheaper to hire, hard working, and more flexible than senior professionals. The article also offers some tips like taking on internships even if they offer little or no pay for the experience that can set you aside from others on your resume. I thought this was an interesting suggestion and it made me think of class yesterday.
The end of class we were talking about how we feel about unadvantaged people and the opportunites they have in going up society's ladder. With that being said, I do not think it is everyone's abilitiy to take on internships that pay little or nothing at all. I know I could not do this. I have bills and rent that keep coming whether the money is there or not, just as everyone does, but absolutely no outlet of income besides my job. Unfortunately, my family can not really help me out with most of these expenses. There are the options of loans, but with already having loans out for school, I do not see how it would be smart or feasible. So are the same opprotunities and ability to take advantaage of these opportunities there for everyone?
The article further talks about students being creative and reaching out to their industry. I thought this was some good advise that would be helpful for everyone. Networking is such a help when looking for a job and the alumni at colleges can often help even more. I know Lehigh has a great alumni base so I found this to be some good advise as well.
Overall, I thought the article was good and offered some helpful points that would be relevant to us in class. However, I also thought it was interesting the link I found to class as far as whether everyone has equal opprotunity to set themselves apart from every other student as far as internships go. Either way, I wish the best of luck to everyone and pray the economy turns around in the next year!
In this past Tuesday's WSJ there was an article talking about after-graduation jobs. Unfortunately the article states that college-campus recruiters intend to hire 22% fewer graduates from this year's class than last year's class. That is a really big number and I feel like the article is really relevant for us and thought it would be interest to post and get some feedback on what the article is saying.
One of the advantages of being a graduate has over a senior professional has to do with our youth. Although newly graduated students do not have the amount of experience, they are cheaper to hire, hard working, and more flexible than senior professionals. The article also offers some tips like taking on internships even if they offer little or no pay for the experience that can set you aside from others on your resume. I thought this was an interesting suggestion and it made me think of class yesterday.
The end of class we were talking about how we feel about unadvantaged people and the opportunites they have in going up society's ladder. With that being said, I do not think it is everyone's abilitiy to take on internships that pay little or nothing at all. I know I could not do this. I have bills and rent that keep coming whether the money is there or not, just as everyone does, but absolutely no outlet of income besides my job. Unfortunately, my family can not really help me out with most of these expenses. There are the options of loans, but with already having loans out for school, I do not see how it would be smart or feasible. So are the same opprotunities and ability to take advantaage of these opportunities there for everyone?
The article further talks about students being creative and reaching out to their industry. I thought this was some good advise that would be helpful for everyone. Networking is such a help when looking for a job and the alumni at colleges can often help even more. I know Lehigh has a great alumni base so I found this to be some good advise as well.
Overall, I thought the article was good and offered some helpful points that would be relevant to us in class. However, I also thought it was interesting the link I found to class as far as whether everyone has equal opprotunity to set themselves apart from every other student as far as internships go. Either way, I wish the best of luck to everyone and pray the economy turns around in the next year!
Friday, March 27, 2009
Firms Seek Profit in Twitter's Chatter
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123793945676332341.html
I thought this article from this past Wednesday was good in relation to some conversation we have been having in class lately. I do not use Twitter, but do not what it is. Although it has become increasingly popular and is mentioned almost everywhere you turn, apparently it's ability to make profit may be minute. So what better wat to create profit than to somehow include advertising in people's "tweets?"
Basically, advertisers place bids to place their advertisements in tweets that mention specific words like iPod or NCAA. Then people who follow those people's twitters will see the advertisements while reading their updates. Advertising has really flooded everything around us, and anywhere there may not be advertising they are now finding ways to make their way there.
It is so crazy how much advertising there is around us. Just like in that presentation two weeks ago when we watched the clip on advertising placement in movies becoming a bit much, they are becoming a bit much everywhere. I am just curious as to how effective all this advertising even is. There has to be a point where the additional advertising does little to help the company. There has to be a point where the return diminishes in comparison to the money paid for the advertisements.
I thought this article from this past Wednesday was good in relation to some conversation we have been having in class lately. I do not use Twitter, but do not what it is. Although it has become increasingly popular and is mentioned almost everywhere you turn, apparently it's ability to make profit may be minute. So what better wat to create profit than to somehow include advertising in people's "tweets?"
Basically, advertisers place bids to place their advertisements in tweets that mention specific words like iPod or NCAA. Then people who follow those people's twitters will see the advertisements while reading their updates. Advertising has really flooded everything around us, and anywhere there may not be advertising they are now finding ways to make their way there.
It is so crazy how much advertising there is around us. Just like in that presentation two weeks ago when we watched the clip on advertising placement in movies becoming a bit much, they are becoming a bit much everywhere. I am just curious as to how effective all this advertising even is. There has to be a point where the additional advertising does little to help the company. There has to be a point where the return diminishes in comparison to the money paid for the advertisements.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
