8 Principles of Web Design: Good and Bad

        One site that I felt was a good example of some of the 8 principles of web design, was Pandora Internet Radio. Immediately I saw that this was a cite that had a few of the criteria done. Similar to what was shown in the article with Spotify, Pandora meets the parameters of Fitt's Law, which says 

"the time required to move to a target area (e.g. click a button) is a function of the distance to the target and the size of the target. In other words, the bigger an object and the closer it is to us, the easier it is to use it." 

This was again evident, as the play/pause button is made so that it is slightly bigger than the other buttons on screen. There is also not a lot of clutter on the screen, allowing a more comfortable viewing of the page, and meaning more accurate readings, It's more streamlined, as shown in Hick's law, which says:

 "with every additional choice increases the time required to take a decision...So in order to provide a more enjoyable experience, we need to eliminate choices. The process of eliminating distracting options has to begin from the get go of the web design and should be carried on throughout the design process."

 I also noticed a little bit of the Rule of Thirds, as the main part of the page has one third for the selected artists, neatly organized, and the second third shows the main play, pause, fast forward and rewind buttons, meaning that this third is the most important in the whole page. Then the third section is for the person's account, and more personalization to their profile. All in all, there were enough of the 8 principles of sound web design met that makes this a well made web page.

        Then there's this site. This is TeacherXpress.com. While this does have the Rule of Thirds down, It has completely forgotten about Hick's Law, despite the fact that it has some poor level "organization". The main reason for this site not being well made is because it's far too busy. Right off the bat, you notice that there are way too choices for the viewer to look at at any given time. This needs much more organization and filtering, and could even use more Visual Hierarchy, as everything seems to be on even ground, which in web design terms is not necessarily best.
        Although you do see a little of both Laws of Proximity and Similarity, they don't help to aid the viewer in gaining more of an understanding of what to look for and where. There needs to be some sort of main graphic to draw people in, and then have a more simplified, organized way of showing all of the links that this site has to offer. Too busy in this case is terrible for the site, as even though there is tons of information here, there is just no one that will be able to go through all of, or any of it, really.



Links:

Teacher Xpress Main Site:
http://web.archive.org/web/20101225204203/http://teacherxpress.com/


Pandora: Internet Radio Main Site
http://www.pandora.com

Video Games Being Blamed for School Shootings

                                         Obama's Gun Control Announcement- January 16, 2013



        The tragic school shootings in Newtown, connecticut will resonate to us forever. Poor defenseless children gunned down for no reason by the hand of a maniac. Adam Lanza, age 20, was the culprit responsible for shooting and killing 26 people, 20 of them under the age of 7, and 6 female staff at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Because of this horrific event, the conversation of gun control has yet again saturated the TV screens and has been a hot button topic on the Internet. While there is some reform being instituted now by President Barak Obama, something interesting has surfaced. Vice President Joe Biden has apparently visited the video game industry to talk about controlling the violence and use of guns in games that are distributed to the public. In short, video games are being said to have a direct link to the violent shootings that have plagued this country since they originated.
        With the new gun control policies that President Obama is trying to pass, this would mean that there would be a stricter hold on those that are trying to purchase firearms. This is a very good thing, as there will finally be more background checks, in theory reducing the number of people "unsuitable to have a gun" from actually possessing one. This is the biggest gun control push since Reagan, and would hopefully be a more welcome reform, even though the NRA may have other ideas about it. But regardless, the fact that Video Games are still being under fire and being blamed for horrific massacres in the real world, is absolutely ludicrous and absurd.
        Frankly, this whole argument needs to stop. You can't expect this to really catch on as the source. How is it that virtual, unreal bullets are taking  responsibility for the damage done by real ones? According to Forbes, Joe Biden is meeting with "representatives" of the video game industry to talk about a solution to the violence of the games themselves. They stated:

"the idea that these two are remotely even close to equally responsible for mass shootings is ludicrous, as evidenced by countries like Japan with die-hard gaming populations but nearly zero mass shootings. What they do have? Much more restrictive gun laws, and far fewer firearms."

        Is the solution really that simple? Have the government take responsibility for their own actions and flawed regulation of the distribution of firearms? Why does Washington insist on blaming things that they don't have a stranglehold on? The gaming industry has made many different strides to preventing underage kids from getting their hands on violent video games. from "M" rated games, to explicitly telling parents NOT to buy those games for their 10 year old son, what else can they possibly do? The video game industry is merely a scapegoat for the misgivings of the government, and it's sad.
        CBS gave insight as to president Obama's policies for gun control, and it does seem to be much more aggressive than we've seen towards gun control in recent memory.

1. Assault Weapons Ban

There was a 10 year ban on 19 military grade weapons in the US in 1994, but since then has not been reinstated. Obama has tried to make an even more aggressive push to having it reinstated, and have it be an even tougher ban that the expired ban in 2004. However, because of the strong opposition from the NRA, having it passed will be easier said than done.

     2. Ban on High-Capacity Magazines

There is still some legality regarding the amount of rounds allowed per magazine, as there can essentially be dozens allowed without reloading. There is a major push now, especially since the summer shooting in Aurora, Colorado, and now with the Newtown, Connecticut shooting, to have a 10 bullet cap on magazines, a dramatic decrease from what is allowed now.

     3. Universal Background Checks

According to CBS, there is a very interesting statistic in the world of gun laws,

"Currently, criminal background checks are required only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which according to the Campaign to Stop Gun Violence (CSGV) account for only 60 percent of gun sales in the United States"

That means that there is 40% of gun transactions that are not licensed and do not have extensive background checks.

            The list goes on. But throughout all of this regulation, why is video games going under fire? Why is Newtown burning violent video games, when there has never been a direct link between the games themselves and the violence of those that play it? Adam Lanza is one of MILLIONS of people that played games, yet not everyone is going out and shooting up a school. The real reason? The man was insane. He had a chemical imbalance in his mind that made him believe that what he did was right. And yet, video games is the reason for that? Maybe it's the parents that should finally step up and take responsibility for the fact that they buy their children games that are far too mature for them. The argument is ridiculous and should be thrown out immediately, because the government is trying to blame something that they know nothing about, shocking I know. What do you think about the new gun laws that may be implemented soon? Do you blame video games for all the shootings and gun violence in the real world? Or do you think that there should be responsibility taken by the parents and how they monitor their kids? Please comment below and tell me what you think


Joe Biden and Video Game Industry "representatives" Meeting:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2013/01/10/joe-biden-meeting-with-video-game-industry-about-gun-violence/

CBS lays out Obama's plan for Gun Reform:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57564192/what-are-obamas-gun-control-proposals/

Video Games Being Scapegoated for Sandy Hook Shooting
http://www.policymic.com/articles/23298/gun-control-debate-video-games-are-being-scapegoated-for-the-sandy-hook-shooting/experts

Bonus Content:

Ralph Nader Speaks Out on Video Games:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/01/21/ralph-nader-calls-violent-video-games-electronic-child-molesters/

Background Information Regarding the Newtown Shooting:
http://www.greenwichtime.com/newtownshooting/article/State-Police-All-26-Newtown-victims-shot-with-4220548.php

Virtual Revolution

Questions for the documentary “Virtual Revolution” part 1, 2, and 3.

1.     The web is celebrated as the revolutionary technology that is great leveling of humanity creating equal opportunity, equal access, and equal potential. However, there are only a quarter of people on the earth who can use it. How do you explain the controversial argument here?

            The reason why there is that controversial argument here is that those people that are put into the quarter group are the one’s that can afford and have easy access to the Internet. Then there are others all over that world that simply are unable to access the Internet, whether it be due to financial reasons, or even the situations in the country they live in, similar to that of China with there restrictions on the Internet. That is why the ability to use the Internet, and becoming technologically literate is finally being implemented in Africa. Once they are able to receive and teach how to use the internet it will change the human race in many ways, allowing everyone to share information faster than ever, and having the network of people on the Internet expand even greater, gaining more knowledge into the collective.

2.     How is Wikipedia the best example to implement the leveling ideas of the Web rooted in the cultural revolution of 1960s, namely the Libertarianism in the counter culture? How does it explain some of the digital convergences?

The Wikipedia encyclopedia offers convenient and somewhat reliable free information that is uncensored and evades government control. The website offers the opportunity for anyone to edit and share information on any subject. It creates a collective hub of information that even the most average person can shape. There doesn't have to be any qualifications for the user to input what they feel is correct. The establishment of Wikipedia is a fulfillment of the mission statement of the Internet’s founding. The Internet was shaped off of the idealism of the hippie counterculture, which was simply free will and the ability to create an identity away from government control. Libertarianism is a political philosophy that encourages more of an absolute freedom, liberty and little to no government regulation or control. The creators of the once pubescent Internet were born into a time where computer technology, which was once government owned, was now becoming affordable and marketable to the American consumer. Of course, the Internet became a free place for everyone to use.

3.     How does the Web make it possible for different kinds of digital convergence?

            The web allows so many different types of digital media from all over the world to be all in one space, a place where anyone can contribute and alter what is being shared. The web is not controlled by any government, or bias, but rather by the people as a whole, creating a “collective intelligence”, an important part to the idea of what media convergence. The “anti-establishment”  movement that was really the groundwork for the internet itself, is now seen I full effect, as the Internet has been the place for instant feedback and a collection of the world’s knowledge all in one place. In order for digital convergence, there needed to be a space where all of it can be accessed at a given point, and that’s exactly what the web is for.

4.     How can the Internet become a challenge for traditional authority? Use the political landscape changes in some counties to illustrate your answer.

            The establishment of the electronic frontier Foundation championed and campaigned for freedom of ideas, expression and a sovereignty-less cyberspace that has no limits. This limitless atmosphere of information and content is a clear threat to the traditional mindset of authority. In the volatile country of Kenya, a simple blogger who campaigned for civil rights through the open Internet, established an open forum for those suppressed throughout the country to voice their oppression and post their untold stories for others around the world to see. This window into the usually censored Kenyan life exposed the injustices to the people of the web and as a result changed the atmosphere of the civil rights movement.

5.     Do you believe that getting information free can set us free eventually? Why or Why not? Do you see any concerns of the complete freedom or self-expression without limit on the Internet? Why or why not?

            I believe that getting information for free the way we do is an amazing thing. Without limitations or borders, the world truly is free from governments and other organizations limiting our access to the web and all its resources. However, this may be the only place where we will be truly be free, as the government has always tried to implement restrictions on other things, and are now even trying to put restriction and limitations on the Internet itself. I do see a little bit of a problem in the concept of absolute freedom. The fact that some people abuse the whole idea of “no boundaries” can be a problem on a moral level. Some entities would simply cross those borders, and it would be an issue for the community as a whole. All in all, however, the fact that the Internet is a space in which the world can collectively build an empire of collective knowledge will forever remain its greatest asset to society.

6.     In traditional media communications, it has the “vertical” authority. In the Web commutation, it becomes “horizontal?” How do you explain the change? How does this create the possibility for digital media convergence?

            The "vertical" authority on the web implies that there is a more strict level of guidelines. It seems that there is a more finite space and not much room to move around in. The "horizontal" authority, however, is more broad, and covers a wider space, leading us to believe that it encompasses more content from a larger group of people. The creator of the Internet has created an unbelievable power and yet turned his back on making any type of profit on it at all. The reason why it became such a success is because it was given away for free and available to anyone.  With the Internet being a free entity for any to own and use it created a process where the consumer had an equal opportunity to be a producer while being the opposite with producers. Everyone has equal opportunities. When Tim Berners-Lee created the World Wide Web for everyone that was when digital converge was made possible because everyone was on an equal plane, and no one is above anyone in a completely free space.

7.     Why is that the Web is free critical for the success of the Web itself? How does that clash with the corporate business philosophy? How does that pose challenges for copyright issues at the same time? What will happen if the Web is not free?

            Having the web be free is the sole reason why it has been a revolutionary success, and if that is ever taken away, then the value of it to the world would immediately diminish. It clashes with the corporate business philosophy because companies try to limit what people see and share on the Internet, going against the entire meaning of the web itself. The web should either be completely free, or taken away, because it has become a safe haven for people to spread their knowledge to everyone. There is a sort of grey area with copyright infringement, as people are able to basically say and do what they want, yet that technically means that they can copy someone else’s work without asking. A solution to this would be to have copyright infringement implemented, and penalize those that take from others who have had their work copyrighted. That does seem to be a little bit of a contradiction to what the Internet is for, but it does seem like an unnecessary evil. If the web was not free, then the amount of people that would be able to fully access it would greatly decrease, and the whole original idea for the internet would be defeated permanently. That is why it is always important to protect the internet so that it is always a free space for everyone to use.

Historical Development of the Internet and World WIde Web

1. Why is broadband service the key for the success of online communication? What are the social effects of broadband service? How does the broadband service make digital convergence possible?

        Broadband service is the key for the success of online communication because it made the concept so much more expansive than those that have dial-up services to use their internet. Since this is a more efficient way of transferring information, more people are inclined to share information. The article said that "one trend that has been noted is that they are more likely to create and distribute media content than dial-up users, been though upload speeds are still slower than download speeds." It does allow a sense of community more than dial-up. There is also a more human connection created here, as everyone is able to send videos, images, and other content that can receive immediate feedback for the community. It also allows us to get a lot of information at once through a lot of different sources.
        The beauty of using visual media is that it transcends language and cultural barriers in ways that written media is simply unable to do, allowing us to have more of an appreciation of different types of cultures and peoples. This is where media convergence comes into play, as many different types of mediums can transport the same type of media to anywhere in the world.

2. Why does the use if World Wide Web open the door of the internet communication to a much wider audience? In what ways does the web with graphical web browsers move the online communication to "acoustic world" discussed in the previous class?

        The name really speaks for itself in terms of reaching a wide audience. As the internet really is the World Wide Web. Everyone can access the same information, and it can be shared instantly to anyone, and as a result, it allows people to have a united sense of allegiance to everyone, because everyone is equal on the internet. Graphical web browsers move the online communication to the "acoustic world", because each browser is a separate entity that distributes information to a mass audience, but that there is also no boundaries in a sense. The internet is a place where it is constantly expanding, and everyday is something new. The possibilities are endless, and that is how the "acoustic" aspect is still present in the online world.

3. How might telecommunication change if the government supported the development of broadband internet for everyone?

        Telecommunication can change if the government supported the development of broadband internet because a lot of times when the government tries to "support" something, it mostly means that they are going to try and regulate what is being viewed and shared. This would greatly change the sense of community that the internet already has, because then the types and amount of content that can be shared would be censored and limited. It would just seem that there would be some restrictions that the community wouldn't want to have on the internet.

4. News organizations were changed by the telegraph, and a whole new business of news, that of the wire services, was created because of the telegraph. Discuss other industries that could benefit from rapid dissemination of information and how and why they would benefit from it.

        Not just news organizations, but also businesses that are trying to sell new products would benefit from sending information instantly to a wide audience. There is such a benefit that companies are finally realizing, that the internet can be the best way to distribute new concepts, and receiving instant feedback. The benefits behind that speak for themselves, as the sense of community that the internet will get behind something that they believe in, and will even gives insight as to things that they like, things they dislike, and overall improvements that will make what you are trying to show better. Immediately being given information is an amazing way to have both the producer of content as well as the consumer of content to essentially be on the same playing field, and that's what keeps people interested.

5. Choose one of the common methods of online communication and think of how it could be improved in terms of facilitating communication between people, ensuring quality communication, and enabling the greatest number of users to distribute information.

        Social media, in my mind, can be greatly be improved in one major way; there can be more of a filter for different types of content. For example: Facebook should have a filter on your feed almost in the form of folders. There should be a folder for your friends feed, then a separate one for fan pages that you like, and then another one for messages and chat messages. It would just be easier, at least for me so that I can see what I want to, and not see what I don't. It seems to me that the whole point of media and how we access it is determined by filtering what we do and do not want to see, and I don't really see that happening on Facebook or on other forms on social media. This would be great for people to exchange information, because then we could find exactly what to see easily, and the quality would greatly greatly be increased as a result.

The Song of the Alphabet in Cyber-Space

1. What are the differences between the pre-literate acoustic world and the alphabetical visual world? How does the media of television become a part of the acoustic world?

        A pre-literate acoustic space comes before the alphabet. It is the world view through pre-illiterate eyes, a world of no boundaries in which information emerges not from fixed positions, but anywhere and everywhere; total immersion. The alphabetic visual word is different, as it was formed as texts only capable of being translated by those that are capable of doing so. It is a fixed place in which media is filtered and distributed by a more singular means. Television can become a part of the acoustic world because it can obtain and distribute content from anywhere and everywhere, and can allow a form of total immersion.

2. Why does the alphabet have the segregating tendencies? How exactly does the printing press reverse the segregating tendencies?

        The alphabet has segregating tendencies because it was only able to be interpreted by those who were able to, and that single person would then carry the message out to the masses, The printing press, however, has been able to reverse that effect, because it now allows more people to reach out to a much wider audience, and that way the information becomes much more true to the original creator, and not as open to interpretation.

3. How was the alphabetic communication in online communication make cyberspace acoustic? How is the online acoustic world different from the television, radio, or print acoustic world?

        The alphabetic communication in online communication makes cyberspace acoustic, because the alphabet itself is a set structure in which we base our languages and communications off of. We are still using the alphabet as it was in strictly print form, now just in a different medium. There is a major difference between online communication and that of radio, television, or print, because the internet gives us the ability to alter and change in the fly, creating a sort of avenue for evolution of our own means of communicating. 

4. Not only do we invent media and media technologies but also we select their uses in different contexts. What are two selection criteria? According to the selection criteria, please discuss what will happen to our online communication in 20 years.

        The two types of criteria are: 1. We want media to extend our communications beyond the biological boundaries of naked seeing and hearing, and 2. We want media to recapture elements of that biological communication which early artificial extensions may have lost- we want, in other words, our hearth of natural communication even as we exceed it in our extensions. According to this criteria, communication will be constantly evolving until the end of time. Just as many of our means of technology have replaced the more primitive versions of themselves, the current iterations of our gadgets will eventually be replaced with more efficient, necessary versions.