Exercise 2.4 Online Identity and your state of presence

I had not heard of Identity 2.0 before but after having to register multiple usernames and passwords in a variety of sites for this course and having often been unable to re- enter a page I had set up because I couldn't remember which un and pws I should use I could really to relate to the Indentity 2.0 product. I have often tried to comment on my fellow classmates blogs but had my carefully crafted responses removed because I could not get through the identity validation hoops waiting for me before I clicked 'send'.

I don't want to have to prove to myself that I should be able to enter my own site every time but I really understand a person's desire for this sort of security if they thought their information was so precious.

Of course I see the absolute necessity of this security for financial institutions and personal record keeping. Maybe also for substantial intellectual property and for ensuring the validity of some other transactions but for much of the communication done using Web 2.0, I don't know. I don't really care who sees my Facebook profile because I wouldn't put anything there that people could use against me (if they could be bothered). If someone can find value in what I publish then all power to them. I don't care if I don't know who they are and if they want to tell me then my email address is on the page somewhere. Isn't that what the web is all about?

The protection of music copyright occupied many Gigabytes of web babble for many years because traditionally the recording and music publishing industry relied on the proceeds from the sale of CDs and vinyl. Much time and money was devoted to the development of systems that would prevent people from getting access to music on the web without the interaction being paid for or even audited by the music business.

In the last few years, a tsunami of consumer opinion and behaviour has demonstrated to the music business that protecting the downloading of music is futile. The battle has been lost - just deal with it. With the exception of some notable exceptions (the Beatles), consumers now can buy/download legally the majority of music. My point is that the gates to download are open. What is happening is that musicians now see the web as the best marketing tool they could ever dream about and at its core is that consumers (without the restrictive security) can discover them. THEREFORE much of the security is unwarranted IF people act honestly, or are only communicating information that has little real world value - like celebrity trivia.

Simplifying the personal validation process would make the whole thing much simpler and easier.

Phishing refers to spam e-mails that prompt you, often with dire warnings or tempting monetary returns, to click on a link to a bogus website and enter private, personal information such as bank card numbers and login passwords. Pharming also means you enter information into a website that looks like a legitimate site. In this case, you may not even be aware you are visiting a spoofed website. Spam e-mails can send code that corrupts the local host file of your computer, which then misdirects your surfing. Sometimes, it's not your computer at all; the domain name server itself can be corrupted.

http://www.oma.org/Cybermed/tech/privacy1.htm

The right to privacy refers to your right to be left alone. There are several different ways a person's right to privacy can be invaded.

http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/objectId/B9998A9F-B6BE-44D3-AAF526978C49BDD9/catID/268BB6A8-8884-4677-89869B6AD8

Identity theft occurs when somebody steals your name and other personal information for fraudulent purposes. Identity theft is a form of identity crime (where somebody uses a false identity to commit a crime).

www.netalert.gov.au/advice/publications/guides/a_teachers_guide_to_internet_safety/glossary.html

Exercise 2.3: Create and record your online persona

Will you have a persistent avatar across all your social networks and virtual environments ? Why or why not?

The whole point about avatars is that they are 'bits' of what you are. Part of each is truth and part is fiction. If you are going to get anything out of avatars you must be prepared to live outside of your current consciousness.

That does not mean that you need to abandon your current moral compass or that you cannot still use 'bits' of you that are useful with whomsoever you are talking to but to be someone else challenges who you think you are and that must always be good.

People at the other side of the exchange are aware that what you are saying may or may not be a true or accurate picture of what you want to express - and you know that about them.

When I was selecting my avatar in second life, the alternatives did not include anyone I could relate to. The figures were just not real (just like your avatar name choice) and perhaps this is the point. You need to see the avatar as an extension of who you are not a true representation. I certainly do not want to have the same avatar in all the social networking sites. From a programming point of view, this seems impossible anyway but even in real life people live their lives out in a variety of roles.

In my own life I am a teacher, husband, student, artist, farmer, musician, writer, son and uncle. In each of these roles, I play roles with different characteristics and behaviours. In each of these roles, I have a different degree of success and depending on the amount of success, I have a different demeanor. If I am successful, I appear calmer and in more control. If I am less successful, I am more stressed and erratic. I play a different role when I am a teacher from when I am a student at CSU.

It seems futile to try and pretend in cyberspace that I am a complex person that can manage all of these facets when I could just split myself up into many different personas (each with a different avatar) and 'be' a different person depending on the role, environment and desired outcome.

This my CSU student persona signing off.

Exercise 2.1: Virtual environments and your cognition

When I joined, there were 21 CSU students on Facebook. I had created a page before I did this assignment and several things happened. The database immediately spewed out dozens of people I 'should be friends with'.

In amongst them there were a couple of people who I had not seen recently (some of them for decades) and it was great to 'ask them to be my friend' and it was just delerious to be accepted by them via email the following morning.

The majority of people on the list were either unknown to me or people who I had been happy to avoid for years. Unfortunately my Facebook 'debut' was an exquisite pleasure (for them) and they were desperate to 'be my friend'. I felt slightly nasty refusing their request and I resented being put into this position.

I certainly didn't feel the need to start typing in the search engine the names of celebrities or people who I wanted to be introduced to. Call me agrophobic but I just don't feel the need to increase the number of people I call 'my friends'.

I was happy that despite the cyber 'intimacy' I didn't need to tell them 'face to face' that I didn't need their friendship. The security 'veil' that Facebook offers I felt was very good and hugely important. The capability of meeting people is great but I still think the people you share your day to day lives with in the real world will always be more important than any cyber buddy.

Cognition is how we process information.

Social cognition is processing information based on having the 'real world' interaction: availability, looks, smell, body language and reputation with all the baggage that comes with those things.

In Web 2.0, visual cognition is processing information based purely on a person's digital manifestation. In this realm, ideas, accessibility and reactions are the main game. Emoticons become semi important as a way of filtering the cold hard reality of text. However, without the overlay of real world interaction (therefore social cognition) it is often hard to determine the sincerity or authenticity of the information in the interaction.

Web usability report on Sunrise website

The site is the official site of the 'Sunrise' breakfast program on Channel 7

http://au.lifestyle.yahoo.com/sunrise/
date=2009-08-07 22:25:03


Of course this should be very usable. Big budget, every
refreshening content, promoted through breakfast telly and supported by
advertisers and very large and loyal audience. I couldn't really fault the
site except to say the content was a bit lightweight for me.


1. Overall, I am satisfied with how easy it is to use this system 7

2. It was simple to use this system 7

3. I can effectively complete my work using this system 6

4. I am able to complete my work quickly using this system 6

5. I am able to efficiently complete my work using this system 6

6. I feel comfortable using this system 4

7. It was easy to learn to use this system 5

8. I believe I became productive quickly using this 6

9. The system gives error messages that clearly tell me how to fix problems 7

10. Whenever I make a mistake using the system, I recover easily and quickly 7

11. The information (such as online help, on-screen messages, and other documentation) provided with this system is clear 8

12. It is easy to find the information I needed 8

13. The information provided for the system is easy to understand 8

14. The information is effective in helping me complete the tasks and scenarios 7

15. The organization of information on the system screens is clear 7

16. The interface of this system is pleasant 9

17. I like using the interface of this system 8

18. This system has all the functions and capabilities I expect it to have 8

19. Overall, I am satisfied with this system 8

The site is directed at a huge demographic from non web savvy seniors to very web savvy teenagers. A site that tries so hard to be 'all things to all people' is bound to be on the insipid side and I found its manufactured friendliness a little off putting. I started to think I should have chosen a terrorism site or a techie nerd's site.

Folksonomy research

I've looked around for a definition of Folksonomy and this is my favourite: "A folksonomy begins with tagging. On the Web site Flickr, for example, users post their photos and label them with descriptive words. You might tag the picture of your cat, "cat," "Sparky" and "living room." Then you'll be able to retrieve that photo when you're searching for the cute shot of Sparky lounging on the couch. If you open your photos and tags to others, as many Flickr devotees do, other people can examine and label your photos." http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/11/magazine/11ideas1-21.html Folksonomy for me has applications in my file management system. If I look through files on my computer, it provides a snapshot of my personal folksonomy. I divide my documents into the various components of my life. The components range from 'orphan' files that do not belong in any folder but whose filenames are very explicit (because they are desperately looking for a home) to big fat folders containing many other folders and subfolders. As you dig deeper, the information contained in the file names becomes less explicit and more generic. For example, in my documents folder there is a file called ICT 2 because it contains files that are concerned with the second semester of my CSU study. As you drill down you eventually end up with files called 'images' or 'posts' or 'pdfs'. The 'tags' (or filenames) of these files tell you very little about their content unless you locate them using the file path window. Once you read the file path you know everything. You understand MY folksonomy...........

What do I want to achieve from this unit?

Begin your journey by describing what you know/don't know about social networking, online communities and what you want to achieve in this subject.

I don't know too much about digital communities but I think I know lots about real world ones. I work as a teacher and I play as an active musician and energetic member of my local community. I know the technology is one half of the online communities equation so I hope that this subject will give me more capability and capacity in this component. Compelling me to engage with the technology will force me to interact with the technology and the people who are at the other end of the line. I owned my first computer in 1983 and I worked in the IT industry (Internet) 1994-2003 so I'm not afraid of or inexperienced in ICT. Learning new hard and software is something that I enjoy.

So far though, I still think that what holds all communities together is the same: mutual interest, necessity, friendship. It does not matter if they are online or not, if these basics are not part of the relationship that binds a community together, then it will not survive.

Will a study into online communities and social networks change your professional practice?

It already has. I have a whole lot of new friends and resources and I've reconnected with some that I haven't spoken to for years. I've become more experienced with the role that online communities play in the promotion and distribution of music and I have discovered more networks that create and distribute curriculum materials. I look forward to increasing the impact that this knowledge has in my work and life.

Online Communities

"A federal judge at a FCC workshop said "Community is like pornography, I don't know how to define it, but I sure know it when I see it." "When we talk about communities at FE we are not referring to any aggregate of people, but to the quality of communication among them," said M. Scott Peck (Both quotes from Community Building, Renewing Spirit and Learning in Business.)."

(http://www.fullcirc.com/community/definingcommunity.htm)

Successful online communities (as in real world communities) depend on the quality of relationships rather than the number of relationships. Maybe social networking assists in the identification of potential alliances whereas community building occurs through the distillation of the social networking process by reducing the potentials to only the most potent relationships.

One of Facebook’s admirable qualities is the overt privacy restrictions: you can’t be a person’s friend until they have been notified and have approved the friendship. All along the way, there are various encription and password barriers that prevent people from stalking others. In other words, there is a real respect for people’s privacy.

I don’t want lots of friends – I just want a small number of friends with whom I can enjoy wonderful friendships. The better the quality of these friendships the less time there is to develop additional friendships.

Social Networking

In Coaching a Community (ISSUE 280 MARCH 24, 2009), LAURA BRUNOW MINER says:

“A key to running successful “social networking sites” is to remember that they’re just communities. All communities, online or off, have one thing in common: members want to belong—to feel like part of something larger than themselves. Communicating effectively, setting clear and specific expectations, mentoring contributors, playing with trends, offering rewards, and praising liberally (but not excessively) can harness your members’ innate desires—and nurture great content in the process.”

From this and other reading as well as setting up a Facebook page, the difference between social networking and online communities is becoming clearer. The distinction seems to be dependent on the nature of the relationship that binds together the participants.

Social networking (as in Facebook) seems to assist the connection and reconnection of people using the ‘six degrees of separation’ premise. If you can find a friend and see their friends, then chances are that if you know one person, you may know or want to know their friends and if you continue the search the number of people who are within reach increases exponentially. This creates an enormous number of potential ‘new friends’ and leaves it up to you to develop relationships from there.

Listen up

Hi all - in the nicest possible way....................,

I do not like blogging because I like to keep things to myself. I am a private person who believes everyone should just mind their own business. However, in this course, that is not an option.

So let me introduce myself: male, baby boomer, tree hugging, lefty, muso, teacher, migrant parents, arty, aussie.....is there anything else I should mention? Hopefully not.

Now we can get on with interacting about the intersection of communities and ICT.

I live in the bush 5 kms from the nearest town (which is tiny - its called a 'hamlet'). Despite people being separated by huge paddocks, farms and stretches of bush we consider ourselves to be a 'close knit' community. With the annual Carols, the Talent quest, Anzac day dawn service, funerals, births , marriages,Irish night, words in winter, historical society, landcare, CWA (I could go on) there is no shortage of excuses for people to come together and 'interact'.

Most people here are not 'online' and prefer it that way. That being said, everyone carries their closest confident's telephone numbers in their heads easily because of two things:they are always ringing each other up and they only need to remember the last three numbers of everyone's phone number.

Welcome to my world

j