Part 1:
Word:
After doing the Microsoft Word business letter, I found some new tools that I previously did not even know existed. I have used ms-word countless times for school work, or other misc. things, but I have never known that it can be formatted so easily!
I didn't encounter any problems, but I didn't figure out how to backspace through feel because it was after the Griffith Uni words...but I still managed to figure out that how that is useful.
I did not find it too simple or confusing, I just found it pretty time consuming, and you have to pay attention to what you are doing and follow directions well. It can be easy to get the functions mixed up, so I can see how word can be easily confusing.
This software has been useful to me in the past, and it will be more useful to me in the future!
Excel:
This one was a little bit harder to me! I have never had to use Excel for anything, I've only seen it. The different options and graphs that can be created can be very useful for anyone trying to organize something, and I can understand why this is popularly used.
It was a little confusing due to the fact that I am a new user. Someone that is a beginner to this may have trouble, but it is pretty user friendly-you just have to have patience.
Part 2:
3D chatting is definitely different than regular msn chatting. It feels more or less like the "real world" and since you can make a person chat, which seems more like face to face chatting, you may start to believe that you are actually in this space, and may act like it. Since simulated lands are apart of these chats, more things are possible in that people can talk about different places, or may act differently-more like "real life."
This application may lead us to having another persona online which is even more personal than myspace/facebook. People may feel like because this represents virtual reality, that it is actually a reality. This application could also be helpful if the 3d arena is of somewhere real, like for business operations. This application could hurt us in the fact that face to face communication may become less and less available, making this virtual reality actual reality.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Wikipedia Articles
One of my favorite movies is Good Will Hunting. Matt Damon has become one of my favorite actors, and I seem to like movies that he stars in. I guess being a teeny-bopper at heart, I know some information about him. Looking him up on wikipedia was actually pretty accurate.
1. The article seems to be pretty accurate when it comes to his career. I actually learned some new facts about him that I didn't previously know (like his early career) and his family life.
2. The article covers all the basic knowledge and more about Matt Damon. It covers every film he's been in, every award/honor he's been given, family life, hometown-and much more, and offers further reading.
3.This article does cover the wikipedia outlines for a useful article. Everything that is generally known about Matt Damon is accurate. There seems to be no false information, and the information is presented in an intelligent fashion. There are many third party resources to choose from. There are 46 references (that's a lot for many wikipedia articles I have seen), and there are 9 external links that are legitimate movie databases (not random websites). The further reading that is made available are all biography's that may be found in a library.
4. I'd say this article is pretty fair and balanced. It obviously doesn't show any wrong-doings of Damon, or any negativity. Although he could be someone that doesn't have and "dirt" on him like other celebrities.
I wouldn't change this article at all about Matt Damon. If there were changes to be made they should be an addition for the things that Matt Damon is currently doing, or has in the making. This is one of the best articles I have seen from wikipedia on an actor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Damon
Coming from Los Angeles, California, and previously interning in the Entertainment Industry, I have come across a lot of information about the pop sensation Chris Brown. Remember, I'm a teeny-bopper at heart, so I also do enjoy his entertainment abilities, and believe he is a very talented performer. Looking at his wikipedia article, I have to say I was a little disappointed.
1. This article is accurate, but it excludes a lot of information. Most of the information is general, and does not go into much detail about his personal life, early life, and his career. I know he's done a lot more charity work than is stated, and appeared in numerous articles, and appearances that are not noted.
2. This article does cover most of the basic facts about Chris Brown, but does not cover the extent of his success. He is a huge icon in the States and worldwide, and that is not made prevalent in the article.
3.This article does not cover wikipedias guidelines for a useful article. In the music section it even states that there are no reliable sources and offers for people to help change that. There are only 6 references and there is so much more information available that can be used. The resources aren't even that reliable either (like from MTV, or VH1, anything well known in the music industry).
4. I think this article is pretty fair and balanced, yet is too general. I have seen many articles about top 40 pop stars that are way more informative, and go into more detail than this one.
To change this article I would first make the resources more reliable to the entertainment industry. I would also include quotes by Chris Brown in magazines or interviews he has done. I would also make a section about his personal life, and for his music career I would get better sources than the ones used-probably from his record label. I would also go into greater detail about his charity work done.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Brown_%28singer%29
As we learned, wikipedia is not a reliable source, but I have to admit, when I want to know something fast, wikipedia seems to usually work. Although it is fast and readily available, it shouldn't be considered a reliable, useful source.
1. The article seems to be pretty accurate when it comes to his career. I actually learned some new facts about him that I didn't previously know (like his early career) and his family life.
2. The article covers all the basic knowledge and more about Matt Damon. It covers every film he's been in, every award/honor he's been given, family life, hometown-and much more, and offers further reading.
3.This article does cover the wikipedia outlines for a useful article. Everything that is generally known about Matt Damon is accurate. There seems to be no false information, and the information is presented in an intelligent fashion. There are many third party resources to choose from. There are 46 references (that's a lot for many wikipedia articles I have seen), and there are 9 external links that are legitimate movie databases (not random websites). The further reading that is made available are all biography's that may be found in a library.
4. I'd say this article is pretty fair and balanced. It obviously doesn't show any wrong-doings of Damon, or any negativity. Although he could be someone that doesn't have and "dirt" on him like other celebrities.
I wouldn't change this article at all about Matt Damon. If there were changes to be made they should be an addition for the things that Matt Damon is currently doing, or has in the making. This is one of the best articles I have seen from wikipedia on an actor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Damon
Coming from Los Angeles, California, and previously interning in the Entertainment Industry, I have come across a lot of information about the pop sensation Chris Brown. Remember, I'm a teeny-bopper at heart, so I also do enjoy his entertainment abilities, and believe he is a very talented performer. Looking at his wikipedia article, I have to say I was a little disappointed.
1. This article is accurate, but it excludes a lot of information. Most of the information is general, and does not go into much detail about his personal life, early life, and his career. I know he's done a lot more charity work than is stated, and appeared in numerous articles, and appearances that are not noted.
2. This article does cover most of the basic facts about Chris Brown, but does not cover the extent of his success. He is a huge icon in the States and worldwide, and that is not made prevalent in the article.
3.This article does not cover wikipedias guidelines for a useful article. In the music section it even states that there are no reliable sources and offers for people to help change that. There are only 6 references and there is so much more information available that can be used. The resources aren't even that reliable either (like from MTV, or VH1, anything well known in the music industry).
4. I think this article is pretty fair and balanced, yet is too general. I have seen many articles about top 40 pop stars that are way more informative, and go into more detail than this one.
To change this article I would first make the resources more reliable to the entertainment industry. I would also include quotes by Chris Brown in magazines or interviews he has done. I would also make a section about his personal life, and for his music career I would get better sources than the ones used-probably from his record label. I would also go into greater detail about his charity work done.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Brown_%28singer%29
As we learned, wikipedia is not a reliable source, but I have to admit, when I want to know something fast, wikipedia seems to usually work. Although it is fast and readily available, it shouldn't be considered a reliable, useful source.
Sunday, April 6, 2008
Walter Benjamin and art
Walter Benjamin believed that art could never be authentically reproduced. Replication of art in Walter Benjamin’s mind undermines the authenticity and uniqueness of the original work, therefore digital media would probably not be considered art to Walter Benjamin. He also believed that painting's were more authentic than films, or photographs. Digital media is lots of replications of the same thing over a wide spread area, so in Benjamin's mind-it's very far from art.
Now that anyone can make "art" on the computer, I think that it can go two ways for professional artists. One way that it can go is that people will start appreciating digital art more, because it may be more accessible or more easily made...like more people can be artists when it comes to digital art. On the other hand, professional artists' art may become more valuable because it may become more scarce and unique too. But at the end of the day, who can judge what is a better piece of art, or even what art is exactly-art is different to everyone.
I do not think a photoshopped image is "authentic" because its a version of something else-just altered. The definition is "not false or copied; genuine; real"-so I don't think it's authentic because its based off a copy of an image.
I think digital "things" can have an aura, it just depends on who is looking at the image. I believe that someone can think a digital picture is just amazing, and other's can think of it as an ordinary picture. It goes back to my belief that no one can judge what art is anyways-anything can be art.
Now that anyone can make "art" on the computer, I think that it can go two ways for professional artists. One way that it can go is that people will start appreciating digital art more, because it may be more accessible or more easily made...like more people can be artists when it comes to digital art. On the other hand, professional artists' art may become more valuable because it may become more scarce and unique too. But at the end of the day, who can judge what is a better piece of art, or even what art is exactly-art is different to everyone.
I do not think a photoshopped image is "authentic" because its a version of something else-just altered. The definition is "not false or copied; genuine; real"-so I don't think it's authentic because its based off a copy of an image.
I think digital "things" can have an aura, it just depends on who is looking at the image. I believe that someone can think a digital picture is just amazing, and other's can think of it as an ordinary picture. It goes back to my belief that no one can judge what art is anyways-anything can be art.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
