Another great reference :)


https://www.cengagebrain.com/shop/content/littlejohn95877_0495095877_02.01_chapter01.pdf

http://delivery.acm.org.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/10.1145/590000/584093/p3-shannon.pdf?ip=132.234.242.15&acc=ACTIVE%20SERVICE&CFID=47145899&CFTOKEN=53746527&__acm__=1318343613_7911e9607325020eaf723d55891b2011

http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=r3si08flH0AC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=animals+speak&ots=xF5XXwVqp-&sig=mGma2tcfcOH697V-cL0_HIipYwo#v=onepage&q&f=false

http://www.people-communicating.com/what-is-communication.html

This one is about humans' interpretation and understanding of the animal's speech and communication:http://scitation.aip.org.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/getpdf/servlet/GetPDFServlet?filetype=pdf&id=JASMAN000070000002000340000001&idtype=cvips&doi=10.1121/1.386782&prog=normal

Another: http://www.jstor.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/stable/pdfplus/3798575.pdf?acceptTC=true

Week 8 - Response to Content

What is communication? Do whales communicate? Do birds? Do atoms? Does DNA communicate? What would you suggest as the limits to communication? When does a failure of human communication occur?

I have decided to focus my essay topic on part of the above questions. After researching a little, I found a perfect article. This is the link to it:

http://www.amsciepub.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/doi/pdfplus/10.2466/pms.1964.18.2.369

The article is called, 'Can Animals Talk' by R.J. Irwin. I hope to give a general idea of communication, and then speak how animals communicate too!

My thesis will be something like...'Humans aren't the only beings to communicate with each other; animals also communicate with sounds and actions.'

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reference List:

Irwin, RJ 1964, 'Can Animals Talk?', University of Auckland, vol. 18, no. 2, viewed 24 September 2011, <http://www.amsciepub.com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/doi/pdfplus/10.2466/pms.1964.18.2.369>

Week 7 - Response to Content

Kostakis (2010) writes in his article on, 'Identifying and understanding the problems of Wikipedia's peer governance: The case of inclusionists versus deletionists'. He writes that 'Wikipedia is about representations of knowledge, about unfinished artifacts in a constant process of creation and evaluation. It does not rely on hierarchical structures, but on the wisdom of the crowds for its quality control processes.' So Wikipedia is basically just an online encyclopedia where anyone, doesn't matter who they are, can write on the related page, edit and remove text that was there already. That is why some are so dubious, as although it's generally pretty accurate, there is the odd post where some 'idiot' has gone and written false information on there.

University lecturers and high school teachers have warned us and told us NOT to use Wikipedia as a source, but now there are some who say use it? Including this class' lecturer?! It's confusing to be told one thing then another. I understand that it's a great idea to steal the proper references that people have put on Wikipedia, but we're allowed to reference the actual articles now. Hmmmm. haha

Kostakis refers to Bauwens (2008) article, 'Is something fundamentally wrong with Wikipedia governance processes?' often. I looked into Bauwen's arguement, and it is just riddled with quotes from yet others. Both articles are very clear in stating that Wikipedia should be a source to reference if you so wish.
:)




I'm going to put the references for this one in some comments... The picture below describes what happens when I try and put the links in there. Also I had to rewrite this WHOLE post again, since it wiped it all for me :(

Week 9 - Response to Content

Upon reading Stockwell and Muir's (2003) beliefs that the American war over in the middle east is/was heavily fictionly narrated to the general public. They claimed with 'so called evidence' that the military consorted with Hollywood officials on many occasion to aide their attempts to publicise disasterous news to American citizens and in turn the world. This may have happened, and I suppose if there is substantial enough evidence, I should believe it. Yet even if they did...I find no crime in this. Yes, Hollywood is known to over-dramatize things to the point that the truth is now fictionarily twisted, but they are the experts. In cases like the September 11 tragedy, which Stockwell and Muir (2003) do mention, I have absolutely no qualms with it. Such a tragedy was a major blow to the country, and I think that the major influencers of the country were officially gathering together to get their facts straight, as the news was worldwide. I suppose I'm arguing a point that doesn't necessarily need arguing, but I feel the need to fight back.

Stockwell and Muir (2003) claimed that video game combat was becoming an increasing worry, in that soldiers were encouraged to practice on such machinery to prepare themselves mentally for real life battle, and I couldn't help but think, 'is this a bad thing?' If the technology has assisted those who are about to go into combat to mentally prepare themselves and focus whilst incorporating a little fun, then why not?

I suppose my real problem with the article, with all respect to the authors as they have their degrees and know a WHOLE lot more than me, is that their anti-war tendencies and anti-authoritarian (seemingly to me anyway) outlook really reeks throughout their article. Yes, they are incredibly entitled to do that, since of course it is their piece and they can do whatever they want with it, but I was so turned off by their strong opinions as I was reading it. It may just be the way I balk when a one-sided arguement is presented to me, that I feel the need to argue the other point. ahaha But these are just the issues that I felt whilst reading that article. I did not wish to offend my lecturer however, so don't take it too personally. haha
:)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stockwell, S & Muir, A 2003, FCJ-004 The Military-Entertainment Complex: A New Facet of Information Warfare, The Fibreculture Culture, viewed 20 September 2011, http://one.fibreculturejournal.org/fcj-004-the-military-entertainment-complex-a-new-facet-of-information-warfare.

Week 7 - Tutorial Task

Wellll... I happened to be sick on the day in the tutorial class where they picked groups, so I'm happy my friend Tara Morgan teamed up with Ibolya Monai and included me :) They also started to discuss and formulate a plan for the video assignment that's coming up. They decided on making a film that brings awareness to the general public that big brand companies hide things in their Terms of Service. Google, one of the current dominating organisations, is named Gaggle in our video :D We had soooo much difficulty finding pictures from Creative Commons that were relevant...

None of us had a good camera, so we decided to go with still images with motivating images instead. I'm planning on using the prograam 'Final Cut Pro', as I know ALL about how to use the program. I took year 11 and 12 Film and Television...

Week 8 - Tutorial Task

The above video is the completed video needed for class. Ibolya, Tara and myself edited this film using iMovie. Whilst doing this, I believe I as well as the other girls really learnt a bit more about New Communication Technology, well at least the technology aspect, as none of us had any experience with the program. We encountered difficulties such as limited options in regards to some fonts and sizes of the writing, although again, that may have just been our lack of experience with the program. However, the film just started to take shape quite well, and this is the finished product. The biggest difficulty, was that there appeared to be no way to save the project to a usb or indeed ANYWHERE. There was no option to save it that we could find, so after making the mistake of finishing half and coming back the next day to a freshly wiped memory, we had to start from scratch again and finish the whole video in one day :) It was tough, but we managed. There was no original footage of our own, but we just used still images under the creative commons license. The references for each image can be found in the description below the actual film on YouTube. We were planning to have a male voice-over, but when it came down to it, the simple recorder on a phone was too crackely, so we stuck with 'moving titles'. As we had no way to save the file in editing mode, we tried to then go and add minimal changes after it was in its video format already, but it was almost impossible. We were able to make one change though...to cut out one section that was unwanted.

Week 6 - Tutorial Task

According to the lecture, Hollywood has had quite a bit of trouble adapting to the trends of internet sharing online. Back in the good old days, films were only shown in the black and white cinema's (The first cinema was aired in 1895) and were rarely seen again exept in re-runs. As the years bore on, and color cinema was introduced (1929), the attractions drew. The film business was growing, and with it its fan-base. Next to come was the TV that came into the regular family home (1939). Generally it symbolised family unity, as they had family focused shows that had the whole family sitting down together in the family room to watch it. TV was a bit of a difficulty with the cinema business, and only a selection of films were aired on TV. The cinemas tried to combat the problem of TVs detracting from their audience, that they aired a new technique of 3D films (1952). However, only a small portion of these films were a sucess. Television became a strong entertainment in the home.

Sony, a rising company at the time, introduced the first AFFORDABLE hand-held video camera for the average consumer (1967). It was very bulky, so they refined it and brought out a more manageable edition. These home made films were able to be played on VCR, which was the next thing to come. VCR (Video Cassette Recorder which was released in 1969), which played rentable versions of the films, where one could pay money and have a film of their choice playing on their screen on whim. VHS posed as a MAJOR problem to the cinemas, as people prefered to watch things on their own screens, rather than fork out money to go and watch a film on big screen. This cleared up, and then VHS moved on to our current DVD (1997), which has a now extended to Blu-ray (2005).

The internet is different in that rather than a viewer having to pay for a cinema ticket or to rent out a film, they can sit in the comfort of their computer chair and watch a film of their choice. The don't even have to go anywhere. On a whim, they could be watching a newly released film that hasn't even been released in their country yet. The problem for Hollywood, cinemas and dvd rental stores, is that they're not getting the income that they need in order to continue to make films, or sell them etc. Actors are acting, but if their audiences are not paying to watch it, then they will be given less and less payment for it, and will have less and less opportunities to act. Blockbuster films from Hollywood are made on a certain budget, and it is expected that the return sales from those films being shown in cinema, hired and bought, will in turn pay that original budget off. Although being able to download films and episodes online is fantastic for me, in essence, it is really running Hollywood down, as they won't be able to afford to make high budget films anymore...