Tag Archives: week 3

QUESTION TIME

Posted on by
Reply

This week in our class, Jasmine told us that we were the guinnea pigs for something they would be trying out at the next Un-Lecture. We were to come up with 5 questions through a process of elimination which would be brought to the panel to answer.

First step – Brainstorming. What makes a good question?

  • generates more than a yes and no answer
  • what a phrase or sentence or passage means
  • could be about how one thing relates to something else: making connections between various things
  • how things might be applied
  • “does this mean this? does anyone agree? why?

We came up with 5 questions (after a hectic voting system) and managed to join questions together and eliminate some so that what we wanted to know was more concise. The white board got wiped pretty fast, but two that were up there were:

  • After we graduate can we separate the blog from the mediafactory? ♥ #BBB
  • As content producers is it more important to speculate for into the future or pay more attention to the present?

Eventually we ended up with 5:

  • What is the practicality of design fiction for people who are not designers? What separates it from science fiction?
  • How is a network influenced by its constituents, and how does it influence them?
  • As content producers, is it more important to speculate far into the future or pay more attention to the present?
  • What do you think the future of networked media will involve, and how will it benefit us?
  • How have mobile devices changed the way blogs are produced and consumed

Looking forward to how it all unfolds next Tuesday.

 

BEING CYNICAL

Posted on by
Reply

This weeks readings were actually quite interesting, and I appreciated the use of multimedia to keep us engaged as well. I never really thought that there was a fictional element to design… apparently I was wrong. To create we have to use our imaginations, and what we produce, at the present time doesn’t exist until we make it.

My idea from this stemmed from movies I’ve seen.

When I try and imagine what the world will be like in the future, I always picture such dramatic technology changes. This makes me think back to when I was little and watched Back to the Future, and the main guy (Michael J Fox) was standing in front of multiple T.V’s, watching them all. I might just google that now so you can see what I’m visualizing.

Six Channels at once? Oh wait, we do that now.

Isn’t it funny how back in the 80’s our vision for the future was so hopeful, colorful and inspiring. It seems like now when we make movies set in the future, they are depressing commentaries of what society thinks we will become, and generally are of an apocalyptic nature. It’s as if technology will take over, or there will be world wars resulting in the extinction of the human race.

 

Contagion – a virus threatens the human race
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KoyvHCPKlW4/ToY0C_FpbxI/AAAAAAAAAyo/5aAG25-SLlU/s1600/Contagion-movies-wallpaper.jpg

World War Z – the war to end all wars
http://msmagazine.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/WWZ.jpg

Terminator Salvation – technology vs man
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/images/still/terminator_salvation87.jpg

They don’t really paint a positive picture.

This isn’t saying that technology which will make our lives more efficient and easier (such as those developed by design students) will ruin us, but they are essentially predictions of what we will need in the future. In a way, predicted human behavior will influence what we design.

“We always design for a world that sits, sometimes just slightly, out of sight.”

So making reflective mirrors with the time built into them along with access to internet and emails … is that saying that we will eventually become workaholics, with a thirst to constantly be connected to the rest of the world? That could be good, that could be bad. The technology will only do as it is wired to do. We have the control to use it how we wish. It’s like having guns. Leave it in a cabinet and it won’t kill anyone. I could be getting into some political territory there, I might stop.

But basically, whatever we design now is thinking towards the future. And something I find really interesting, is this article on Back to the Future:

http://www.11points.com/Movies/11_Predictions_That_Back_to_the_Future_Part_II_Got_Right.

The film wasn’t designing for the future, however it was fictional – but the writers were highly accurate with a lot of what they predicted.

THE FALL OF THE RIGID SYSTEM

Posted on by
1

Seeing as we are permanently old school and only writing with paper and a pen, it feels like my fingers just can’t keep up with taking notes. So it was a blessing in disguise when a friend asked me to record the lecture for her as a voice memo, as I can now listen back to the important parts which went so fast I had no time to take notes.

During this session, Adrian did not implement the same system as last week. There were no more question boxes (which was a shame, as I actually did have a few questions to ask). But Adrian explained that next week, he hopes to have a panel of the four experts in Networked Media (Jasmine, Elliot, Brian and himself) to answer questions, debate the readings and discuss important networked media related subjects. I think that this will work extremely well and perhaps be more interactive and productive than last weeks.

“Structure emerges through practice… the structure preexists the individual. In networked media there is no pre-given structure.” – Adrian

Adrian explained that eventually, our blogs will become more popular for the certain things they do well: some may be more technically savvy than others and give good descriptions of how to do certain things in our blogs; others may discuss more about the lectures; and other blogs may specialize in random, everyday events. This made me wonder what mine would excel in.

“Some of you will struggle in this model. The fault is not with the model. The fault is not with you. It’s just that some people struggle with what I define as highly defined and rigid systems.” – Adrian

Relating to the above quote, Adrian used the example of constructing an essay in high school where there are specific rules as to what ideas can be introduced and where i.e. no introducing new content in the conclusion because that is a sin and you will fail etc. English was my best high school subject, and I knew the correct method of writing a VCE essay. I can stick to a rigid system.. but I guess what this subject is testing, is can I do the opposite? Can someone take away the guidelines and mess up the system? Will I flourish then? I bloody well hope so, and I guess time will tell.

At the start, I put blogging off because I thought I would sound a bit pretentious and silly talking about myself – why should I think my voice is that important? I guess I had the same mentality in school: ask me to write an essay about Terry Malloy and I could do it. Ask me to write an essay about a personal event and I wouldn’t really know where to start.

But I now I realize it’s not really like that, and my voice is important, as well as my ideas and thoughts. I’ve broken down the mentality that I need guidelines and rules to direct my learning. I’d like to think I am navigating well under the circumstances of not really having many constraints in this subject. I don’t think I’m floundering without the strict system… yet. I guess well have to see how I keep managing over the next few weeks.

Oh and apparently Wikipedia is a reliable source… ? Try telling my high school teachers that.