The Huffington Post is a newspaper I subscribe to and comment on. This weekend was a TEDWeekend where various authors (4) were asked to comment on the following video but there are two remarkable coincidences. Firstly I put up the same video on DudeStarship dot com 5 days previously. Secondly two days before, I quoted the same video in starting a TED conversation. Thirdly, despite not being able to count, I put up a new blog dealing with serendipity the day before including an image taken from the video. I was notified of the TEDWeekend yesterday. You would think that I would be pleased at how in step with events I am . Watch and read:
The first commentator I read concluded:
Much work remains on the research I discuss here; through future waves of the online study, a rich, academically sound understanding of how social media and mobile technology consumers use the technology, how they interact with their network, and how they make purchase decisions based on social media input will be developed. At the end of this project, I will defend my dissertation to earn my Ph.D. in marketing. But beyond that, the goal is to provide a rich contribution on how social media and mobile technology usage by “Connected Consumers” is associated with psychological and technology factors.
“Much work remains…” .So many of us are already living what needs to be researched, according to his view, before we should embrace it ,what utter drivel A study, a two year dissertation for a Ph.D ,will be hopelessly out of date by the time it is published. Marketing? OMG what a waste of time. He is already out of date in his chosen field. Where is collaborative consumption ? See my earlier post last December. Failure to do proper TED research. Failure to read Time magazine that lists collaborative consumption as one of the ten things that will change the world. Failure to see how things are changing (RSAnimate Networks, Motivation, Outrospection). The Did You Know? YouTube video of 2008 states quite clearly that buying habits are more influenced by Blog recommendations and technological word of mouth than advertising. “Like” something on Facebook and it can be viral so this comment, (That video has had more than 15 million views) peed me off. Two videos one academic / TED one Social media BOTH 2012.
The Second Commentator said this
The good news is that you can work anywhere, anytime. The bad news is that you can work anywhere, anytime. It’s hard to know when work ends if you interact with global teams across time zones or you don’t leave an office to signify the end of the day.
You can work anywhere anytime is both a good thing and a bad thing. In English this is a) meaningless and b) presumes no self discipline, no technological management and no self control. Children often act in a stimulus response type of way. Has not this person heard of answering machines where you do not have to respond because technology can? Oh we both know I could go on. I have different email addresses that ….oh nvm they probably have two. I got peed off at the suggestion i couldn’t handle 24/7 global technology, in different time zones, that I was a child. Never heard of multitasking either. The idea of one person working 18 hours has already been tackled by some countries nationally by having 3 people work 6 hours and collaborating. See Microsoft > putting a PowerPoint presentation on line and configuring sharing with a team working in their time zone..Networks! :> Stupid comment.
The third commentator said and I will not bore you with the full article :
My years of personal experience and professional practice and research have led me to one rule that governs all of my electronic communication: I never email about anything important. (The same rule applies to text messaging, tweeting, social networking, etc.)
What century is this person living in? Presumably her article was written with a quill pen and delivered by hand. This is denying everything that 21st Century Networks are all about. An emergency with your offspring, friend, colleague, client not at “home”? Use semaphore? I was horrified and very peed off.
Clearly the world is not ready for my TED Conversation:
Robots vs Avatars : Social interaction can be better facilitated through a robot or through an avatar?
An avatar I shall be referring to is one created in Second Life (secondlife.com), a global 3D cybercommunity discussed in an article on cyberculture (onlybrackets.hubpages.com). Firstly an avatar is capable of a far greater range of gestures and interactions than a robot. It can be modeled and dressed to suit any virtual or real environment. If it is winter where one user is they can mimic the real world and dress accordingly. An avatar is ideal for communication at a distance. Real family’s exist in second life and I have witnessed 3rd generation interaction. Young avatars can interact with grandma avatars. Grandma will assist the youth in creating their avatar thus creating a sense of identity and ownership. Interactive play goes on. Currently a 16 year old age limit is in force but could this not be reduced?
Communication can be through voice (microphone) or for those able through typing in a chat box.
As a learning / teaching aide an avatar may attend programmed classes, a gym for example and will be expected to follow a regime in the real world. By engaging in a virtual group activity as an avatar peer support can be had. It would be possible to mimic an overweight avatar, programmed with the users bmi and, as they progress in the real world the avatar would change shape. Virtual classrooms with programmed study exist.
An avatar is also your cyber representative able to meet new people and explore new environments. An avatar is ideal for those with mobility difficulties.
This is all on screen therefore would fall short of having the physical interaction that a robot can provide. We anthropomorphize robots how much easier this is with an avatar. I may own a mobile phone that can do a Gallic shrug yet dancing with a friend on a mobile phone in a blues club is better done with an avatar.
But are they two different things and therefore not comparable? A robot is an independent entity its true but what if an avatar had artificial intelligence?
My answer to this question is in favour of the avatar because generally it is free. Robots are incredibly expensive and the construction of such a mechanical device uses far more resources than warrant the benefits. Ideally the answer is both. However I realise now after seeing the TEDWeekend that the question is totally meaningless to mainstream as exemplified by the above. They just do not understand the technology nor how to use it. It saddens me but ignorance always pisses me off especially by so called “experts” or “leaders”.
I have an acquaintance who writes a blog I admire. She wrote a post on flatterbots . These are bots that go around and will flatter you and then demand money. I commented as a flatterblogbot in fun, flattering her and asking that she put up an ad for me as “payment” but I also created a wordpress blog where I discussed flattery, its divisive nature and included a wonderful video of a flash site I had.
AND THIS ONE from an RSAnimate on Networks:
Make the connection?
She replied “shucks guess you got me there” Here name is Serendipidy . Which I discussed in the blog. She didn’t go to the blog as far as I am aware. That peed me off too.
BUT AS A CYBORG WITH A 21stCENTURY NETWORK OF SHARING TECHNOLOGY>>>>>>
THIS CHEERS ME UP NO END! I nicked it off my 19 year old daughters web site. Ha Like father like daughter!