Friday 23 February 2007
Video Review
Robotic Beer Launching Refrigerator - Click here for more free videos
Here we have possibly one of the greatest inventions known to man. Take a standard fridge. Add a man with a degree in Electrical and Computer Engineering/Computer Science. Get him to install a few motors, wiring, controllers, triggers, and a whole lot more technical stuff I have no idea about. Add beer. What do you get? Well it's a beer launching fridge of course!
Lets take a moment to thank Mr John W. Cornwell. Take a look at his site and we see that the Beer Launcher is one of many weird and wacky contraptions, however it is of course by far the best. How someone has never thought of this before I do not know. With the influx of mini-fridges, a fridge in the living room for most students is now par for the course. And how often is it that your watching TV, a film, or playing the computer when you think, "I really need a drink, but I just can't get up and miss this bit." Well with this ladies and gentlemen, your troubles are over.
The fridge holds cans of beer (or whatever you like), in a 'magazine', which self loads the cans into a catapult system on top of the fridge. The catapult can then rotate so as to point in the desired direction, at which when commanded it flings the beer in the air, to it's required destination.
As you can see, the beer launcher is extremely successful, offering precision accuracy to the extent of launching the beer into the man's hand who is sitting on the sofa. However, one possible gripe is the sheer noise of the machine, and it would almost certainly be an annoying put-off whilst watching the TV, even with a crowded room of mates. Keeping on the crowded room theme, surely a misplaced launch towards an unaware friend could also result in some hefty blows to the head, despite offering a chilled, refreshing pain relief for when trying to recover.
Overall, as homemade gadgets go, the Beer Launching Fridge must be up there with some of the best. If you took time to look at the inventor's website, you would have also seen that he is considering manufacturing a few of these things to actually sell, such is the interest in his machine. At a hefty $1500, you better get saving now. Maybe if you and your mates all chip in, the investment would be well worth it. Even I'm cautiously thinking of putting in an order!
Friday 16 February 2007
Writing Opinion
Valentine's Day - Time for Romance or Commercial Con?
I've been trying to make sense of February 14th for many years now. Why have one day a year to show your love when you have 365 of them? Over-priced roses, over-priced cards, over-priced chocolates, over-priced 'set menus' (you don't even get the full choice). There seems to be some correlation here.
Other than the burning hole left in many a man's wallet (and the odd women), it simply makes no sense. Why have a day to celebrate all things 'love' on a cold, wet, dismal day in February. Most have only started to claw back their debt from Christmas when this most manufactured of days is put upon us.
So you buy the card, you buy the flowers, you go for the meal. Does this show your everlasting love? Does this mean that it is simply meant to be? Of course not. Your simply toeing the line, doing what is expected. Through tradition, marketing, advertising, whatever, this is just the norm. Isn't being romantic being spontaneous, giving or doing something because you really want to, not forced by a sense of obligation? If so why do we continue to embrace this day?
I thought I was right in thinking that Valentine's Day is exclusive to couples. However, in this last week I have been severely enlightened. One such enlightenment is the holiday alternative - Singles Awareness Day, or SAD. Created as a humerous alternative to the commercialism of Valentine's Day, single people gather to celebrate or commiserate their single status, often greeting people "Happy SAD!" Strange I admit, but on the surface looks a lot more fun, and more importantly a lot less expensive.
A lot of my single friends have even cited February 14th as 'easy pickings night', implying that as a singleton, going out in seek of love and companionship (whether it be just for that night or your lifetime) is almost guarranteed to bring success. One such friend put it as; "Everyone just wants a bit of attention, and I work on the basis of supply and demand". Supply and demand maybe, but is this really the intention and true meaning (if any) behind Valentine's Day?
In America, Valentine's Day is tagged a 'Hallmark Holiday', a holiday that exists primarily for commercial purposes. So we can chuck in Father's Day and Mother's Day to that collection then too. Days such as these may on the surface seems valuable, and may indeed make many a people happy and content.
Yet what we should all realise is that they are a breeding ground for commercialsim, and we should try to make the most out of these days without breaking the bank. Yes it is important to show your love and appreciation, whether it be for your partner, your mother, your father, whoever. However lets not just save it all for that one day, then maybe there might be a little less 'supply and demand' from everyone.
I've been trying to make sense of February 14th for many years now. Why have one day a year to show your love when you have 365 of them? Over-priced roses, over-priced cards, over-priced chocolates, over-priced 'set menus' (you don't even get the full choice). There seems to be some correlation here.
Other than the burning hole left in many a man's wallet (and the odd women), it simply makes no sense. Why have a day to celebrate all things 'love' on a cold, wet, dismal day in February. Most have only started to claw back their debt from Christmas when this most manufactured of days is put upon us.
So you buy the card, you buy the flowers, you go for the meal. Does this show your everlasting love? Does this mean that it is simply meant to be? Of course not. Your simply toeing the line, doing what is expected. Through tradition, marketing, advertising, whatever, this is just the norm. Isn't being romantic being spontaneous, giving or doing something because you really want to, not forced by a sense of obligation? If so why do we continue to embrace this day?
I thought I was right in thinking that Valentine's Day is exclusive to couples. However, in this last week I have been severely enlightened. One such enlightenment is the holiday alternative - Singles Awareness Day, or SAD. Created as a humerous alternative to the commercialism of Valentine's Day, single people gather to celebrate or commiserate their single status, often greeting people "Happy SAD!" Strange I admit, but on the surface looks a lot more fun, and more importantly a lot less expensive.
A lot of my single friends have even cited February 14th as 'easy pickings night', implying that as a singleton, going out in seek of love and companionship (whether it be just for that night or your lifetime) is almost guarranteed to bring success. One such friend put it as; "Everyone just wants a bit of attention, and I work on the basis of supply and demand". Supply and demand maybe, but is this really the intention and true meaning (if any) behind Valentine's Day?
In America, Valentine's Day is tagged a 'Hallmark Holiday', a holiday that exists primarily for commercial purposes. So we can chuck in Father's Day and Mother's Day to that collection then too. Days such as these may on the surface seems valuable, and may indeed make many a people happy and content.
Yet what we should all realise is that they are a breeding ground for commercialsim, and we should try to make the most out of these days without breaking the bank. Yes it is important to show your love and appreciation, whether it be for your partner, your mother, your father, whoever. However lets not just save it all for that one day, then maybe there might be a little less 'supply and demand' from everyone.
Who's on the Net?
Over the next few weeks, the class is going to produce some blogzines in groups. To prepare for this, it seemed logical to do a bit of audience research to find out who really uses the net, and who would be ideal to target our proposed blogzines at.
At time of writing, Internet World Stats claimed that there are approx. 1,093 million internet users, which is 16.6% of the world's population. So, like expected, there's a fair few people out there who we could target with our blogzine. And the number it going to continue to grow. The graph below shows just how rapid user numbers have grown over the past decade. To refine our search, it would be of use to look at net usage within the UK only, and record certain trends to consider when launching the blogzine.
Looking at the government statistics website, I found that the typical user spends 164 mins online per day, compared to 148 mins watching TV. The biggest growth area in net users is within the 16-24 year olds, growing 24% in the last 4 years. People of this age were found to use the internet mostly for social networking, and sports & entertainment news.
In general, it emerged that 65% of men and 55% of women in the UK accessed the internet in 2006., with the majority using it everyday. When it came to looking at interntet shopping, 53% of men purchased goods and services on the net (leisure, accomodation, holidays) as opposed to 48% of women.
Looking at online sales of DVDs, CDs etc, 45% of men bought these online, compared to 39% of women. Lastly, analysing online clothing sales, the majority this time was with women, with 42% of women using the net, compared to 34% of men.
A short but sweet analysis of internet usage, I'm left with a lot of numbers and a lot of percentages.From this though, it would seem that both genders would be equally reachable, a fact that has only emerged over the past few years.
At time of writing, Internet World Stats claimed that there are approx. 1,093 million internet users, which is 16.6% of the world's population. So, like expected, there's a fair few people out there who we could target with our blogzine. And the number it going to continue to grow. The graph below shows just how rapid user numbers have grown over the past decade. To refine our search, it would be of use to look at net usage within the UK only, and record certain trends to consider when launching the blogzine.
Looking at the government statistics website, I found that the typical user spends 164 mins online per day, compared to 148 mins watching TV. The biggest growth area in net users is within the 16-24 year olds, growing 24% in the last 4 years. People of this age were found to use the internet mostly for social networking, and sports & entertainment news.
In general, it emerged that 65% of men and 55% of women in the UK accessed the internet in 2006., with the majority using it everyday. When it came to looking at interntet shopping, 53% of men purchased goods and services on the net (leisure, accomodation, holidays) as opposed to 48% of women.
Looking at online sales of DVDs, CDs etc, 45% of men bought these online, compared to 39% of women. Lastly, analysing online clothing sales, the majority this time was with women, with 42% of women using the net, compared to 34% of men.
A short but sweet analysis of internet usage, I'm left with a lot of numbers and a lot of percentages.From this though, it would seem that both genders would be equally reachable, a fact that has only emerged over the past few years.
Friday 9 February 2007
Web 2.0 - Who,What,Why,Where,When
Videos in lessons are always a winner. And last weeks BBC documentary was no different. A somewhat surreal insight into the 'new' interactive technologies available on the web that we (myself and my classmates) take for granted.
Myspace, YouTube, Google, Blogger, LiveJournal Second Life, I could go on. All were looked at within the documentary, in a well argued proposal that the web is changing. Are these technologies really changing culture as we know it? One thing is for certain that these sites and services, along with others, form the backbone of second generation of web-based services with the emphasis on online collaberation and user sharing. Welcome to Web 2.0
Struggling to define how the term Web 2.0 came about, it is simple to put it as the next-generation of the web. Wikipedia (a web 2.0 service) puts it as:
"Alluding to the version-numbers that commonly designate software upgrades, the phrase 'Web 2.0' hints at an improved form of the World Wide Web; and advocates suggest that technologies such as weblogs, social bookmarking, wikis, podcasts, RSS feeds (and other forms of many-to-many publishing), social software, Web APIs, Web standards and online Web services imply a significant change in web usage."
However, Wikipedia again explains that Web 2.0 can refer to the following:
It is certainly hard to underpin a clear defenition to what Web 2.0 actually is (just take a look at the pic above of a mind-map from a Tim O'Reilly piece). But does there have to be a defenition? And isn't that what Web 2.0 is all about. It's not about a clear distinction, branding the web and certain sites '2.0' so that they can promote themselves as next-gen. It's about the power being back with the people, and the systems and services that make that happen. Well after one-week looking at online journalism, that's what it seems like to me anyway. Talk about being in at the deep-end!
Myspace, YouTube, Google, Blogger, LiveJournal Second Life, I could go on. All were looked at within the documentary, in a well argued proposal that the web is changing. Are these technologies really changing culture as we know it? One thing is for certain that these sites and services, along with others, form the backbone of second generation of web-based services with the emphasis on online collaberation and user sharing. Welcome to Web 2.0Struggling to define how the term Web 2.0 came about, it is simple to put it as the next-generation of the web. Wikipedia (a web 2.0 service) puts it as:
"Alluding to the version-numbers that commonly designate software upgrades, the phrase 'Web 2.0' hints at an improved form of the World Wide Web; and advocates suggest that technologies such as weblogs, social bookmarking, wikis, podcasts, RSS feeds (and other forms of many-to-many publishing), social software, Web APIs, Web standards and online Web services imply a significant change in web usage."
However, Wikipedia again explains that Web 2.0 can refer to the following:
- The transition of websites from isolated information silos to sources of content and functionality, thus becoming computing platforms serving web applications to end-users
- A social phenomenon embracing an approach to generating and distributing Web content itself, characterized by open communication, decentralization of authority, freedom to share and re-use, and "the market as a conversation"
- Enhanced organization and categorization of content, emphasizing deeplinking
- A rise or fall in the economic value of the Web, possibly surpassing the impact of the dot-com boom of the late 1990s
It is certainly hard to underpin a clear defenition to what Web 2.0 actually is (just take a look at the pic above of a mind-map from a Tim O'Reilly piece). But does there have to be a defenition? And isn't that what Web 2.0 is all about. It's not about a clear distinction, branding the web and certain sites '2.0' so that they can promote themselves as next-gen. It's about the power being back with the people, and the systems and services that make that happen. Well after one-week looking at online journalism, that's what it seems like to me anyway. Talk about being in at the deep-end!
Blog Review - 'Who Ate All The Pies'
In the first session we started by looking at a number of blogs, in particular looking at their use on the web and our opinions on whether it qualifies as journalism. Naturally, I looked at a football blog, and a rather good one at that.
Who Ate All The Pies is a 'Shiny Media' blog all about football. The name obviously derives from the well known terrace chant (now often heard being sung at Wayne Rooney), thus immediately creates a connection with the fans of the game. The blog seems to be written by a number of writers, under the collective alias of 'pies', which is a nice touch, and gives the blog a sense of identity.
'Pies' is more of an up-to-date, interactive fanzine than a blog, and I think this works really well. True fans of the game often eagerly await the issue of their team's new fanzine, and with Pies, you get an instantly accessible online version that looks at the world of football through the eyes of the fans.
Everything a football fan thinks about, talks about, or wants to know about can be found on this blog. From video compliations of great goals, football funnies of howlers or Peter Crouch rapping, to post match 'tongue-in-cheek' analysis or amusing, but honest reviews of new boots and kits, everything is here. Hay, there's even a quiz! Can't be bad.
It's use on the net, from a football fan's perspective is invaluable. It forms a centre-piece of content that many a fan could read, watch and comment on for hours. Focusing not only on the pitch activities, Pies looks at football past and present, to moments and memories that all fans love to remember (or should remember) about the game.
Through YouTube videos, the blog can comment on events and allow the reader to see them first hand, even if he/she had previously not seen what had happened. Therefore we see the benefit of intereactivity that Pies holds, when compared to other less interactive blogs, or the print media.
All in all, Pies is a great blog, and although has the backing of a large company such as Shiny Media, it is an example of how football blogs should be done. Yet does it qualify as journalism? Well... yes! It's citizen journalism written by fans for the fans. Although there is alot of content such as the friday quiz and general rants that you couldn't class as journalism, most of the content you can.
There was even a piece posted about Man Utd midfielder Cristiano Ronaldo picking up a recent speeding fine. This was news I had not heard anywhere else, and as an avid reader of newspapers, news sites, and football sites I found this quite astonishing. An 'exclusive', probably not, but still, they told me and probably a number of others FIRST, and for a blog to do this is quite remarkable. This is but one example of how the power of blogs is starting to change the outlook on journalism forever.
Who Ate All The Pies is a 'Shiny Media' blog all about football. The name obviously derives from the well known terrace chant (now often heard being sung at Wayne Rooney), thus immediately creates a connection with the fans of the game. The blog seems to be written by a number of writers, under the collective alias of 'pies', which is a nice touch, and gives the blog a sense of identity.
'Pies' is more of an up-to-date, interactive fanzine than a blog, and I think this works really well. True fans of the game often eagerly await the issue of their team's new fanzine, and with Pies, you get an instantly accessible online version that looks at the world of football through the eyes of the fans.
Everything a football fan thinks about, talks about, or wants to know about can be found on this blog. From video compliations of great goals, football funnies of howlers or Peter Crouch rapping, to post match 'tongue-in-cheek' analysis or amusing, but honest reviews of new boots and kits, everything is here. Hay, there's even a quiz! Can't be bad.
It's use on the net, from a football fan's perspective is invaluable. It forms a centre-piece of content that many a fan could read, watch and comment on for hours. Focusing not only on the pitch activities, Pies looks at football past and present, to moments and memories that all fans love to remember (or should remember) about the game.
Through YouTube videos, the blog can comment on events and allow the reader to see them first hand, even if he/she had previously not seen what had happened. Therefore we see the benefit of intereactivity that Pies holds, when compared to other less interactive blogs, or the print media.
All in all, Pies is a great blog, and although has the backing of a large company such as Shiny Media, it is an example of how football blogs should be done. Yet does it qualify as journalism? Well... yes! It's citizen journalism written by fans for the fans. Although there is alot of content such as the friday quiz and general rants that you couldn't class as journalism, most of the content you can.
There was even a piece posted about Man Utd midfielder Cristiano Ronaldo picking up a recent speeding fine. This was news I had not heard anywhere else, and as an avid reader of newspapers, news sites, and football sites I found this quite astonishing. An 'exclusive', probably not, but still, they told me and probably a number of others FIRST, and for a blog to do this is quite remarkable. This is but one example of how the power of blogs is starting to change the outlook on journalism forever.
The Beginning
And so it starts. The birth of my 'class blog' if you like. I've got a few things to catch up on from last weeks session, no less thanks to a completely pointless trip to Manchester to see a sorry England lose to a less than bothered Spanish side 1-0 at Old Trafford. Not only is my wallet £50 lighter, but it took five hours in the car there, and six hours back,negotiating the slalom of motorways created from yesterdays blizzard. Who'd be a fan?
Anyway, aside from an all out rant on why McClaren is tactically inept (no matter how enjoyable that would be), there are things to be done. First off is looking at blogs.
Anyway, aside from an all out rant on why McClaren is tactically inept (no matter how enjoyable that would be), there are things to be done. First off is looking at blogs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
