10 ₪ cчъзя-вuℓℓчiиg
What did you think of the assembly about cyberbullying we saw? What do we consider cyberbullying? What would you suggest as an appropriate punishment for cyberbullying? Any other comments.
The assembly that resurfaced an old topic among everybody that left the cafeteria that morning was cyberbullying. It had been a problem in the past and had continued on til now. But hardly anybody had expected it to actually become as serious and fluent as to make adults have to come on stage and give a whole presentation on it.
So to review what "cyber bullying" is, as the man said - its bullying on the internet! People like to bully others when they see them as persons weaker than themselves and want to provoke them to either get attention, feel mightier, pass time, "try it out", or sometimes even just for fun. Of course we all know or have heard about what bullying to feel higher or getting is, right? As for bullying for fun is mostly among friends that just play around and is usually harmless. But this is because they know that the other is just joking. Yet, when people bully others with the intentions of hurting them, it is not fun. Not for the victim, and neither for the bully (which they might realize later on in life, and things like that... you know). Of course this is all what happens in the real world. What happens in the virtual one, is a little different. As you all know - or might know - cyber bullying is when a person puts up harmful things up on the internet to push down another person whom they might not like. For example: If A did not like B, and A put up a blog or a website dedicated totally on crushing B; A's actions would be labelled under 'cyberbullying'.
However, had A talked with B face-to-face, and even if (s/he had said a few harsh words to B), it wouldn't be cyber bullying of course, right; because it's not on the net where everybody can view the insults or what ever.
Cyberbullying can get you suspended, or even expelled (depending on how far the inappropriate... -ness is). It can cause a huge amount of trouble for a lot of people and it is really not necessary nor worth it. Bullying online can neither hide you nor protect you from punishment. And just recently, bullying has been added to the school board's list of... bad things. So the consequences of your actions (if you have bullied another, that is) can be really severe. For example: do you really think insulting someone is worth losing your credibility to join school (that - you might not care - but will actually help your future)?
So basically, cyberbullying is a form of bullying that can hurt just as much as bullying face-to-face because in addition to insults and harm, it adds in embarassment and humiliation in front of who knows how many people. THEREFORE!! ...Don't bully people! ...okay? ^__^ "
8 ₪ нow иapsτeя cнaиgeđ τнe ωoяℓđ?
Do you think Napster has really changed the world? Did the record companies really win the battle against pirated music or could they have won the battle earlier on? How would they benefit if they didn't push to shut down Napster?Take a look at the five lessons he's learned from the fall of Napster, what does this tell us about emerging technologies in our society? Can you think of another newly emerging technology going throught the same trial?Napster was a file sharing service that allowed us to download and buy music online – seven years ago. Now? There are so many other programs and internet services that permit us to download music, videos, programs, files, etc. Being put that Napster was the legendary popular service for downloads; I personally think that it did change the world. It introduced to everyone the idea of P2P downloading programs that soon continued even after it got shut down. It opened doors for programs like Kazaa, Limewire, Ares, etc. This tells us something about the emerging technologies in our world today. Of course this means huge losses for record companies and artists (and I feel sorry for them and their loss); but it seems to be extremely convenient for us, the public. I’m sure over half the music you have in your computer, iPod, mp3, or wherever right now is pirated because it has been downloaded from the internet. If these downloading programs weren’t available anymore, do you think we would still be able to get new music? I don’t think so. Obviously not everybody would be without latest music, but I bet there would be a majority of people without them than people with them.
Why? Because we cannot afford to buy our favourite artists’ new releases all the time. Maybe some can, but the truth is, most can’t. Programs like Kazaa, Ares, and Limewire actually help us; but not the artists and companies who lose profit. Napster was shut down quite a while ago because companies and artists began to sue them for releasing their music without permission (and sometimes before they even released them). They won the battle against Napster, a company. However, they didn’t win the battle against pirated music. Why? Because are just too many! Even if they somehow manage to shut down a few more companies from discharging pirated music, it will still happen in the future. People will still figure out a way to publish and pass on music without buying it. If they had taken serious action towards media piracy in the past when pirating had just started, we would be without free music right now. In fact, it would be sort of a down side for us.
Anyway (moving back on to the topic), if Napster hadn’t been shut down but bought in stead, the companies would have gotten a rather good profit. Rather than going through all the trouble to sue Napster and causing everybody so much trouble, buying it would have been a better choice.
7 ₪ Λяε ωii τнε cнiℓđяεи oƒ τнε яevoℓuτioи?
There has been quite a bit of hype surrounding the new Nintendo Wii gaming system. Some say that the Wii's ability to "democratize" gaming for people of all ages and abilities is revolutionary. Do you think this is a true technological revolution or just hype? Please defend your opinion. Personally, I think that the Nintendo Wii is really awesome. It isn't like regular video games, it's similar to the ones in the arcade; only this one you can personally own! But we are talking about how the Wii is revolutionary - so speaking of that, I think it is. It's ability to catch people's attention and interest of a wide range of ages is in fact revolutionary. Because it involves exercise and movement around the playing area, it makes it different than other video games and succeeds in making several other points. This gaming system attracts a wider range of an audience because of it's main difference - movement. As you might be aware of: many people like to play video games. And many like to exercise, and play video games. So why not do both at the same time and kill two birds with one stone, right? The Wii makes sure that happens. That is almost the biggest point that makes it unique. For example: old people can play golf, teenagers can play their action games, children can play their games, and so on... This way also gives a better sense of 'feeling' in playing the game. Earlier, in the topic "When War meets Video Games" I also mentioned that young people like to play war games because it feels real and exciting. Well, here is another form of entertainment that can be fun and exciting and real.
Some might say that the new Wii Gaming System is just a hype while I believe that it is a revolutionary change and upgrade in technology - the Gaming Technology. Video gamers everywhere can now really play their games and actually feel it. This is sort of an immense advance in technology because they have now figured out how to make technology like the Wii. As for earlier, we had to keep everything inside the box. Now with the Wii, we can truely experience real participation in the game and enjoy it more than before. So basically, I think the Wii is a vast improvement in technology that will hopefully open more doors to higher levelled technology for us in the future.
[Sorry, kind of sleepy x_x "]
3 ₪ ωнεи ωaя мєєτs vϊđεo gaмεs
Why are war video games so popular now? "If it's not realistic, it's not worth playing," is a quote in the article. Do you think realistic war games desensitive people to the horror of war or is it just fun? What do you personally think of war video games?
War video games: good or bad? This is just like an example for the first journal [With the GOOD, comes the BAD]. Video games -- I would say are so popular now because it is realistic. Most of the people who play war video games are either children in elementary or teens in high school. Why? Because I said so. [No im kidding =P] Its because the characters in the game are so realistic, we can relate to them and feel like its us that is in the game. Why don't we -- teens -- play older games like... say Pokemon or Mario or something. We don't play those games anymore because they are "lame" now. They are "old and stupid". "If it's not realistic, it's not worth playing" -- the article is right. If the game isn't realistic, it isn't as much fun. If you can't relate to the characters, you can't enjoy it as much as you can with a realistic game. I personally prefer games that are somewhat realistic and somewhat not; car racing for instance. So now we come to the topic of WAR video games. War games have characters that are very much like a real soldier or fighter. They can move their body parts like; ducking, sitting, lying down, standing, etc. Unrealistic games cannot do that. Games like Mario and Pokemon just move around, jump, and attack using fake ammo. That's no fun. That's not real.
So, I think that war games do desensitize people but that is not always true... sometimes its just for fun as well. Even though playing war games and hearing about real war is not the same thing, people still know that there is a difference. They do know what the horrors of war are. And they do know that it is not the same as they played in their games. So personally, even though war games are (no fun to me), I think that they aren't wrong either. Because people don't depend on what they learn from the war games, they depend on what they are brought up as. So even if they played a game that includes people killing other people, I don't think that it gives people the wrong idea about the horrors of war.
2 ₪ Λи ipođ cℓassяooм
What if you didn't have to go to seminars at all and you could do all your learning using your iPod? The article suggests that iPod video lectures are effective for '"kinesthetic learners", who tend to be hands-on, active, and require frequent breaks." Do you think that you would learn well using an iPod? Why or why not? An advocate for "v-casting" through the iPod says that: "It's more interactive and more self-directed." Do you think that Mary Ward, with its commitment to self-directed learning, should embrace such technology for education? What are some advantages or disadvantages?iPod -- The latest music and video technology in the hands of... well, a lot of people. Putting aside the fact that they are pretty convenient, versatile, and fun to have around; we must not go over board with it. I mean, using it for education? The whole point of having an iPod is to have fun with it, enjoying it, and listening to your own music (or what ever you are listening to...). If we were to use iPods for education, it wouldn't be the iPod anymore. It'd turn into "Oh-that-thing-that-has-boring-lectures-and-people-talking-to-us-in". Plus, having to get every single student an iPod would cost dearly (which would be a good thing for the Apple company but that is a totally different topic).
Personally, I don't think that I would learn better using an iPod. Why? Many reasons (that actually make sense and are simple). First of all, iPods might be fun and efficient but they are not very healthy for our ears. Some people blast their volume so high; that other people around them can also hear. That can be pretty annoying to some people. They can damage our ears in the future and are not the best option. Secondly, even if there are some people who "kinaesthetic learners", doesn't mean everybody is one. Just because a couple of people have a harder time sitting in class and staying put, doesn't mean that others do. I mean, I wasn't even sure what that word meant until now (that i looked it up ;P). Along with that, I think that being present in a class and being pushed to pay attention and have a teacher looking over your shoulder (...sometimes) is better than giving a student total freedom. Taking our school for an example -- if you just take a look in the halls during school, you will see A LOT of people hall walking. And not just one day or just switching areas -- but everyday, all the time... Hall-walking (Like, you know that is a fact). Also, iPods -- how ever convenient and clear they are -- can not replace teachers. They can't answer questions right there and then. Moreover, if iPods were to be used for "education purposes", updating every one of them and inputting information into every person's would take a huge lot of time -- and in my opinion, I don't think it would be worth all the trouble. Not forgetting the fact that we would be depending on a technology to teach us what we should be learning from teachers. So, I don't think using iPods for Ward would be wise and even though there are or may be advantages by it, we must not forget the disadvantages. Especially if there is more harm than relief.
1 ₪ ωiτн τнє gσσđ τнings coмє τнє вad
In seminar one, we looked at advancements in communication technology and the benefits and shortcomings that come along with them. For this first journal entry, think and write about how an example of modern-day communication technology has a good side and a bad side. [Whew, procrastinated this for a long time but it is finally here..! ;P]Communication Technology -- Cell phones, television, MP3 players, video games, and the Internet; is everything (in today's world). As everyone already knows, life without technology is not possible.. anymore. It has become so advanced that without it, we will not be able to survive. Like, if in the past -- when technology wasn't as advanced as now -- they had destroyed everything down and just continued their "primitive" ways, they would still be able to go on without much hassle. However, if we try that now, we would be doing almost the same thing as suicide! Just imagining a month without communication over the phone, MSN, video games, music, cell phones, and the internet would make some people faint. I mean, I cannot spend one day without music or the internet or entertainment (which is basically technology) so if I was asked if I was up for technology and if I was
in favour of it I would definitely say that I am.
Technology now days is so highly developed that it would be no surprise -- if at some point in the future -- it were able to take over or destroy us completely. [Sorry, I think the whole Terminator thing has gone to my head ^^ "] But if that were true, it would really be no shock because even from the beginning we all knew that technology had its advantages and disadvantages. Yet, we are still going on, destroying all the 'nature' stuff and what not...
For example -- Blogging; it is like a journal online where one can write whatever they wish. There are also sites where you can add pictures and videos and a lot of different kinds of features that can reveal your identity or give away a lot of personal messages. This can be fun, impressive, and good to play around and decorate with. However, it is also another thing -- dangerous. Web sites on the net like MySpace, Hi5, Orkut, and many others where chatting, messaging, sharing pictures and/or videos are enabled are considered dangerous and unsafe. This is because (as you already know) not all people online are friendly or understand what the person they are chatting with or having an online connection with mean. There are people who might mistaken certain connections for a relationship and might come after you (like in many, many, MANY shows) and can be dangerous. Especially stalkers, or mentally challenged people (no offence, like you know... people who misunderstand) [Once again, I'm watching too much television ^^"].
Chat rooms are also risky. I mean of course there are many who have found soul mates and dates through them but there have been more in number that have been put through danger. Yet, I also think that it is not just the chat room's fault for being there but also the victim's who get into a mess because they don't follow the rules. So altogether, I agree that there is neseccity for balance in the world and with the statement With the good things come the bad because it indicates to a lot of things and situations.
Intro.]
Hii, Im ANDREA and I dont usually blog about things but I have to for Media so bear with me ^^ ". I dont really have much to tell except I like anime, asian music, asian dramas, and a lot of other stuff. Umm.. what else, mm.. nope, nothing else. =]
What did you think of the assembly about cyberbullying we saw? What do we consider cyberbullying? What would you suggest as an appropriate punishment for cyberbullying? Any other comments.
