ATLAS Speaker Series: Digital Media Design, Gender & Games

Digital Media Design, Gender & Games

This presentation was about women in the gaming and technology fields and showing how they are (under)represented. That was interesting to me because our MIT class is split pretty evenly between the genders, but the field as a whole is definitely male dominated. Yasmin Kafai, the speaker, posed the question, “do we need to design different technologies and games for girls?” She said that the reason girls aren’t playing video games as often as boys are is because lack of interest or lack of experience. Girls assume video games are a boys game, and therefore do not play. It was very eye opening to see a woman in the information technology sector explaining how girls are stereotyped against as video game consumers. She said that most video games are designed by men for men and that the only women characters are either passive (princess) or oversexualized. The typical video game directed at girls is “Barbie” where you get to dress her up and do her hair.  How are children ever supposed to challenge gender roles when this industry is feeding stereotypes into their hands? We need to move away from gender as difference to gender as performance. Even when they are young, girls are supposed to play with dolls and boys are supposed to play with cars. I loved the SNL skit about “Chess for Girls” mocking that the only way girls would play chess is if the pieces had cute outfits are hair. If a girl doesn’t feel the way a “typical” girl does with these feminine inclinations, she is instantly shunned. This goes beyond the technology field, but to socialization in our culture itself. Yasmin also talks about girls as video game developers, where females created wonderful, thought provoking games that encourage learning for either gender of children, not catered specifically to either. The speaker encourages everyone of all ages to be a video game creator! She even talks about kids who can do it, so I know I definitely could. I never considered it before because I also assume the stereotypical gaming industry as a place for boys and their toys where I am not welcome.

Remix Culture Questions (Group 1)

1. When I hear "Remix Culture," I immediately think of the discussion we had in class last week about "Girl Talk" and how the deejay takes others songs and remixes them into his own. Remix culture could also be a culture where no content is original anymore, that everything (every sound, idea, logo, shape...) came from somewhere else first. This is definitely apparent in music and films, where I feel like I keep seeing the same story/chorus over and over again. How many remakes of classic movies and songs do we have to hear and see? That leads the question of is the remake even considered original work or will it always just be a remake? I assume this means that anyone is a producer and anyone is a consumer in our culture.

2. The biggest consequence of remix culture is that nothing is original anymore. The remixers are "technically" stealing work of others but not getting in trouble for it... So is nothing protected? What about those copyright laws we fight so hard for? Are you only a thief if you steal a tangible good? Music is created and lots of time is spent into making it so it should have the similar consequences.  Remix culture is even affecting innovation. If people are scared to create because they do not think that they will get the proper money or recognition for their work, then our society stops moving forward completely. But aren't we all innovators? Isn't that how great things are created  by building on something and making it even better? Every good idea had to start somewhere, can we copyright and protect every single inspiration?

IPR, Copyright/ Left, CC Questions (Group 12)

http://www.wipo.int/freepublications/en/intproperty/450/wipo_pub_450.pdf

1. When searching to make sure that no other trademarks are similar to the new proposal, what guidelines does the committee follow to make that decision? What justifies something being too similar or different?

I really like the line, "The progress and well-being of humanity rest on its capacity to create and invent new works in the areas of technology and culture..." This is an interesting perspective and I think it is so true. Without protection of ideas, no new products could ever be designed and created and without this creation, there would be no progress. The core idea of our society is to create and continue moving forward with new ideas and this can only happen with IPRs improving the quality of life. Nothing we take for granted such as movies and medicine, would exist without this system. Until this article, I had no idea how important this system really was.  I have this great idea for a new product, but clearly I can't post it online because someone will try to steal it and make it their own since it isn't patented. I like this though, because it protects from idea theft which can take away recognition or even money from the rightful owner. I also never thought about industrial designs being patented, I always assumed it was s free-for-all, so this was interesting news to me.

Digital Divide Questions (Group 11)

1. To me, the digital divide is the difference in knowledge and access in technology between classes. It is the gap between the haves and the have-nots. The poor people do not know how to use technology the way the rich do because they do not have access or the ability to ever learn.

2. This video was very interesting to me! It is amazing to me how different their society in India is compared to our lives in America. Parveen's village didn't even have electricity until six months ago, her mother left school at age eight, and she rides her bike to school; something that we Americans can't even fathom. I am confused as to why Parveen's school makes the children pay every month to use the computers. It is also surprising that a school of 500 has only three computers. I guess I take for granted how lucky I am to live in a society where every student has their own personal computer and houses have up to four per home. Not only is there a huge divide between U.S. and India, but even between villages in India. The digital divide is prominent everywhere throughout the world. If we work to close this knowledge gap, the world as a whole could be so much more educated and advanced.

Asides: Iran Cuts Off Google

While I understand Iran’s outrage for Google’s offensive video, I think that cutting off your entire country to Google and Gmail is unfair. Not only does that take away Iranian citizens access to countless of important websites and information, but it is taking away their rights of freedom. Iran censors the most of almost any other country. They censor sites like Facebook and Youtube already, and now even Google! The government already has extreme control in Iran, now they are taking complete control of the Internet and disconnecting from the World Wide Web. This seems totalitarian to me- like Big Brother can choose exactly what sites you go onto and is watching you the whole time… Iranians are losing their freedom. They are being cut off from the rest of the world, and there is nothing to be gained from this isolation. How are curious citizens supposed to know what is happening in the rest of the world? How will they know who they can trust if their information is all coming from one biased source? The Internet gives us freedom we have never experienced before, the possibilities of information we can discover are endless. Cutting off access to this information is sad, the citizens will never be able to know the immense knowledge out there, and they will never know anything but their own culture.  A simple feud with Google can be solved without hurting the citizens of the country. But it sounds like Iran has a lot more to worry about than Google since it got the Stuxnet virus. We learned about that in class and the worm can cause mass havoc to the computer or control systems.  Iran suspected it was US who planted the worm, naturally. I can’t say I am surprised though, they are a very paranoid country if they cut off all ties when one disaster happens. They are not only isolating their citizens, but isolating the country as a whole, which is a huge global mistake. 

Music & Technology Questions (Group 10)

I vaguely remember the days when I paid for music, at that time $0.99 for one song seemed absurd. CD's were verrryyyy expensive and treasured purchases. I have been illegally downloading music for years now. I switch from site to site since illegal music sites are clearly "illegal" and are often shut down. I like MP3Rocket and youtubetoMP3 as my personal favorites. I think our generation and the ones following us are past the point where paying for music is even an option, especially since it is so simple to get music illegally or just stream it on your computer. I don't think people realize the morally wrong nature of this act, since it is so common. For the music industry to thrive, they must do something more and different to attract the upcoming tech-savvy generations.

IT & War Questions (Group 9)

1.In general, describe the relationship between I.T. and war as it has existed throughout history and into the present: I never really thought of there being a big relationship between I.T. and war until this class actually, when we read the Vaneiver Bush article. The greater the technological advancements, the higher warfare technology we can employ on our enemies. I think it is a bit ridiculous that we are achieving so much technological greatness only to employ it for a one time use during a battle.

2. Consume the following material:

• Video: "The Military Invented the Internet: What Next?"
• Text: "War and Technology" 

Three Quotes:

1. "War is a driver for technology... everything from the Internet to jet engines to robotics are all things where military is a driver. This goes into question of human duality and human creativity."

2. "Maybe the question is that we can't get past our age old need to destroy each other. Is it machines that are wired for war or are we just inherently wired for war?"

3.  "But countless inventors and innovators, from Alfred Nobel to Robert Boyle, thought of weapons positively. They believed that they could banish the scourge of war, or at least restrain its excesses, if they could only invent the ultimate weapon, the instrument so horrible that no one would dare use it."

I assumed that weapons were only made in war for evil, and it was a negative thing to spend so much time, money and effort making our weapons more powerful. Now I realize, weapons can be made for good. They can be so powerful that nobody would dare use it, such as a nuclear bomb. We can't use that for fear of retaliation. I thought it was really interesting how closely related I.T. is with war, as seen in countless examples and circumstances. Humans are wired to create, but does that mean we are wired to destroy? I know it's the survival of the fittest with the human race, and being technologically smart makes you wartime smart as well.