Virtual World and Real Punishment

In class recently, we began discussing virtual worlds.  In fact, we spent an entire 50 minutes class time discussing pros and cons of virtual worlds like Second Life and There.  Quickly, questions began to arise about how far these virtual worlds went to make the atmosphere as close to the "real world" as possible.  My classmates began asking if an avatar could die in virtual worlds, if an avatar could be arrested or married etc.  Well, when reading news stories on CNN.com, I found my answer.  

A Japanese woman killed her virtual world husband's avatar, and authorities are charging her for it.  The woman was a member of the "Maple Story" virtual world, and one day she logged in and discovered that her avatar had been divorced.  She  found a way to hack into the man's account and destroy his avatar.  She's facing jail time and fees.  Sounds a bit crazy, doesn't it?  For people like this, it seems that their virtual world has become the dominant world.  So what now?

If I have learned anything so far in COM301, it's that CMC (computer-mediated-communication) does not really have limits.  It is going to keep on expanding and creating more "reality-like" types of communication.  Virtual worlds like Second Life and Maple Story are only going to continue growing.  When browsing Second Life, I noticed that it is trying to take precautionary measures to deter incidents, like the one latter stated, from happening.  For example, a member's avatar cannot contain his or her real name.  Also, the avatar does not have to be created in likeness of the actual person.  If a member chooses to later disclose this information to a fellow user it is his or her decision.  This is a positive security measure taken by virtual worlds, but in the end, it is the users who decide whether or not virtual worlds become dangerous worlds.  In class we have learned about cyberbullying and becoming prey on the internet, and there is nothing stopping those kinds of people from finding a way into virtual worlds.

Lime Wire + Online Community = Opportunitie$

For most people my age, I'd say downloading music is about equivalent to getting dressed in the morning.  It is a habitual action, one that people take time doing, and use care and consideration when choosing what to download.  There are various way to download music.  One can use stores like iTunes or Rhapsody, and others use the more frowned-upon method of file sharing.  When thinking of the latter way of obtaining music one obvious candidate pops into my head... by some it is loved, by others it is hated, but to all it is called Lime Wire.

Recently, as I was browsing CNN.com I stumbled across an article called "Lime Wire seeks legitmacy."  The title basically gives away what the article entails, however, as I was reading through I was struck by how this company was trying accomplish exactly what we have been studying in class.  Lime Wire is trying to expand, it is trying to reel the other big names of music onto their side and become legal and yada yada yada.  Later on in the article it starts talking about a more internal kind of expansion, like making Lime Wire users be able to make profiles and creating a "peer-to-peer service."  In essence, Lime Wire is trying to transform from an online group to an online community.

Lately, I've been learning that creating an online community is not a goal easily obtained.  In class, we discussed the necessities a group must have in order to become a community.  Phrases like trust between users, there must be a dependency, frequency, a shared interest, a sense of belonging, and there must be participants, all floated around and enveloped the class until we became determine to come up with more guidelines.  In the end, there were over 30 different requirements that we felt were necessary for a group to have in order to become an online community.  So when I first started reading the Lime Wire article, my immediate reaction to Lime Wire trying to build a social networking site, was why?  Why would they even bother trying?  Since the company is already knee-deep in a court case against the music industry over file sharing, don't they already have a few strikes against them?  What would posses them to, ontop of all that Lime Wire is already dealing with, attempt to create an online community for its users when it is not a goal easily obtained?After some reflecting, I looked at the article again.  The article points out the huge success of Facebook and MySpace, and how Lime Wire trying to create an online community environment is a selling point.  It is alluring to label execs.  

Online communities are not just a term used in class that I will soon forget about after this semester ends.  No, online communities are something that is ingrained in society and will continue to be in my life long after COMM 301 is over.  They are popular, popular enough to help lure label executives away from the idea of denouncing Lime Wire and instead convincing them to partner up with the company.  Since this is so, then online communities certainly must bring in the cash.  Look at all the ads that pop up on Facebook and MySpace these days.  Companies want to be involved with online communities because, even if they are hard to create, they are popular moneymakers.   Looking at it that way, Lime Wire is pretty smart, and label execs are probably smart to join in with the notorious company. If Lime Wire's community becomes successful, but companies watch from the shore, then they'll be hit with the tidal wave of the mass popularity and influence of an online community, and left in the sand as Lime Wire sails to the future.

Facebook or Open Book?

Facebook.  A common aspect of life for young adults everywhere.  People spend hours on Facebook checking posts, posting pictures, requesting new friends etc.  With technology advancing everyday, when will Facebook become too much of an open book about its users?

Recently I read and article on CNN.com about how Facebook is "coming to the streets."  A German company called aka-aki (basically the German version of Facebook) is developing a social networking device for blue tooth users that will notify a user when they come within a 20 meter radius of another user.  Then, they will be able to view the profile of that user and find out their interests, activities, compare them to their profile pictures and so on and so forth.  

When I read this my jaw just about dropped.  What kind of society have we come to live in, that we feel it necessary to know the personal details of strangers lives because we pass them in the street?  This article is proof that the world we live in has become addicted to social networking and online communities.  

I admit I like to "creep" on Facebook.  I also admit that I spend a decent amount of time on this online community, and I think that many of my fellow peers would say they have similar habits.  However, I didn't realize there was obsessive enough use that today's market would feel compelled to create a device that allows a person to be in coffee house, and realize that barista is single and loves the movie Little Miss Sunshine.  No can really be sure that the device that aka-aki is developing will be successful, but the fact that even is being invented is proof that people feel that they need to be able to access their online community all of the time.  There is such a dependency on social networking that people want to know every time they are in contact with someone else who also social networks.  Mass amount of time and mass amount of dependency equals addiction.  People ARE addicted to Facebook, and this is evidence of it.