COM 125- Government 2.0?

How should government best utilize technology to engage the public and make government more transparent and accessible? Well I think that what Obama is already doing is a good start, by allowing the public to access government through the use of technology. With Obama being a big advocate of change, the announcement of his weekly address as a YouTube video is just the beginning of many changes that will take place as a result of him becoming president. Throughout his campaign, Obama grabbed the attention of young voters and by posting his weekly addresses on YouTube, it will be convenient for young Americans to have access to these addresses on a popular site. 

This is just one of the ways that Obama will make change during his presidency. According to the Washington Post article by Jose Antonio Vargas, linked in the original blog post, Obama has other plans of making the White House and political process more transparent. In addition to the YouTube videos of the weekly addresses, Obama will also conduct online Q and A’s and video interviews. Also, members of the cabinet and other will make their own videos for Change.gov to join Obama and this change to a transparent government. 

Reading further into this Slashdot post, I clicked on the link to the New York Times article by Jeff Zeleny, where it informed me that upon his arrival at the White House, Obama will have to say goodbye to his Blackberry. This means that Obama will no longer be able to have access to emails, due to the Presidential Records Act. According to the article, a decision has not been made yet whether or not Obama will be the first emailing president, but aides said that it seems doubtful. I feel that Obama becoming the first emailing president will further provide transparency. This has never really been a problem, but with the fast advancement of technology, it seems like it would be necessary for a president to have access to email, especially when Obama has been relying on it heavily throughout his campaign. Maybe the start of this comes when Obama becomes the first president to have a laptop computer on his desk at the Oval Office.

So to answer the question, how should government best utilize technology to engage the public and make government more transparent and accessible? I think that by going through with the weekly video address on YouTube and the video interviews and Q and A’s, Obama is off to a great start. I’m not really sure where to go from there though, because as time passes technology will be further advancing and who knows what technology Obama will have at hand and what he will be able to do with it. This change to make government transparent seems to be a huge step in Obama’s presidency. Obama will further grab the attention of young Americans by giving them access to the political process by using technology that most of us use daily. Keeping this transparency limited will allow Americans a better view as to what is going on, but will keep some things behind closed doors. With our current situation, I’m sure Americans want more access to the political process and want to see what is happening as it happens instead of being surprised when it happens.

COM 125-Net Neutrality

According to Wikipedia, net neutrality is “a principle that is applied to residential broadband networks, and potentially to all networks. A neutral broadband network is one that is free of the restrictions on the kinds of equipment that may be attached, on the modes of communication allowed, which does not restrict content, sites or platforms, and where communication is not reasonably degraded by other communication streams.”

 The debate over net neutrality is about the rules of net neutrality and the quality of service. Critics of net neutrality believe that these rules would take away incentives to upgrade and launch network services. Others argue that the quality of service is not problematic, but is desired by many. The broadband industry is evolving and since there have been no major failure or harm by broadband providers, these regulations may not be good on consumer welfare.

 The interests of the consumers and of the internet providers are at stake with these issues. Consumers want to be able to have access to the internet at a reasonable price and not have to worry about restrictions on their content, sites and platforms. The internet providers on the other hand are in it for the money. They want to make as much of a profit as possible and want to eliminate all other competition. Instead of putting the consumers first and offering the best product at a fair price, they want to jack up the prices to make sure that everyone involved is earning a hefty pay check.

 I would have to support net neutrality, because I think that it is important for consumers to always have the best product available for them at a fair price. All providers should offer the best product, because it isn’t fair to consumers who do not have these options available for them. I know when Time Warner stopped broadcasting channel 4 it was ridiculous, because Bills fans were unable to watch their home team play, but at the same families like mine could not switch to another provider, because we also rely on Time Warner’s phone and internet service. 

COM 125- Virtual Worlds

Virtual worlds have become an interesting part of life. As technology continues to grow, these virtual worlds become more and more realistic and more and more people are becoming involved. I personally know nothing about these virtual worlds and have no idea how you become involved, but I have heard some serious stories of how addicting these things are and the effects they can have on a user. In worlds like SecondLife, users experience an open virtual economy whereas users in World of Warcraft experience a closed virtual economy. 

In Second Life users have the ability to become very interactive by using an internal currency called Linden Dollars. These Linden Dollars can be obtained by purchasing them from other users by using real money. Users may offer services and items in exchange for this currency. These services include working in stores, business management and adult entertainment, while the items include buildings, cars and clothing. A very small percentage of users gain a net income from this economy and the issue has become a concern for taxation. Another way for Residents to make money is through real estate, just like in real life. The “open” Second Life  economy allows its users to use real life money and buy virtual goods and services with the actual money in their wallets. 

The economy in World of Warcraft is also similar to the economy in real life where as it is based on supply and demand. In the game you will most likely have to contact another member or a vendor in order to get an item that you need. These items are also similar to real life, because some of these items are easy to find and other are not so easy to find. In World of Warcraft, auction house is available to users to help them decide if they want to sell an item or wait to see if the price is right at a later time. Money is obtained by success in the game. This money is not real and cannot be exchanged into US currency. Users spend their money on weapons, equipment and skills to help them advance in the game. The “closed” economy in World of Warcraft does not allow users to pay for these goods in the game with their own money. The users must play the game and earn points to receive money in the game to buy what they need. 

These virtual worlds have become way too realistic for my liking, and it doesn’t surprise me why people become addicts. To me it seems like when a person does not have much of a social life and cannot interact with others, their only way to do so is through one of these virtual worlds and once a person becomes knowledgeable and experienced they are addicted and cannot break the habit. It is crazy to think that you can earn any sort of income from a virtual world like Second Life and part of the reason people become addicted, is because real money is involved and there is a chance of making money through this virtual open economy. I am definitely grateful to have never experience myself or anybody I know become an addict to a virtual world, because the thought of someone’s life being consumed in a virtual game scares me and I can’t imagine how someone could live like that.