I'm a peripatetic wanderer through the awesome edifice of human knowledge, intent on self-development, reflection, and the synthesis of disparate ideas. I have always been, and will remain, a student. My interests are truly marvelous but this text box is too small to contain them.
I use Diigo because I like the community, tagging, and highlighting features.
Recent Bookmarks and Annotations
- Natural History Museum about 2 hours ago
- Open source data logger for low-cost environmental monitoring about 2 hours ago
- BBC News - Citizen science study to map the oceans' plankton about 18 hours ago
- An Inquiry into Modes of Existence: An Anthropology of the Moderns // Reviews // Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews // University of Notre Dame about 19 hours ago
- Virginia Master Naturalist Program Home about 19 hours ago
- Nature Abounds Home about 19 hours ago
Sharp Left Turn for the Media Reform Movement: Toward a Post-Capitalist Democracy :: Monthly Review about 21 hours ago
Advertising gave the illusion that journalism is a naturally, even supremely, commercial endeavor. But when advertising disappears, journalism’s true nature comes into focus: it is a public good, something society requires but that the market cannot provide in sufficient quality or quantity. Like other public goods, if society wants it, it will require public policy and public spending. There is no other way. The marriage of capitalism and journalism is over. If the United States is to have democratic journalism, it will require massive public investments.
This begs the question: How did the United States have a press system that was the envy of the world in the nineteenth century prior to the advent of mass advertising? It did so by having massive postal and printing subsidies for newspapers that made the cost of production so low that there were many more newspapers per capita than anywhere else in the world. In the first century of U.S. history, our politicians did not know the term “public good,” but they treated the press in precisely that manner.
Rage Against the Machines | Ian Bogost | The Baffler about 21 hours ago
In their 1983 book Mind at Play, psychologists Geoffrey R. Loftus and Elizabeth F. Loftus pointed out that the era’s games relied on partial reinforcement, a type of operant conditioning that provides a reward intermittently. Partial reinforcement, you may recall, was the logic behind B. F. Skinner’s infamous behaviorist rat experiments. It’s also the rationale employed by casino slots. Indeed, according to the Loftuses, the earliest video arcades were designed to operate on the same principle as the slots—scheduling payments for a short-term play experience. While the content of a game might offer an initial lure to different kinds of players—women and girls, for example, were presumed to be fonder of Pac-Man than of the space combat game Galaxian or the sci-fi shooter Robotron: 2084—the real draw of videogames could be found in time-managed capitalism.
But this was always a minority view in the culture wars of the eighties, especially as videogames left the arcade. By the mid-eighties, games became media consumables like the cartridges and discs on offer from Nintendo, designed to be played in front of the home television.
The new model of videogame delivery is “free-to-play” (F2P). At first it was limited to massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) like Neopets and MapleStory, which primarily relied on kids pestering their parents to fund their accounts so that they could buy in-game goods. These games always offer the first taste for free, and then ratchet up the attraction of paying for a more robust or customized gaming environment. In 2007, Facebook released a platform for developers to make free-to-play apps and games run within the social network’s ecosystem. Then came the iPhone, the Apple App Store, and all the copycats and spinoffs that it inspired. By 2010, free-to-play had become the norm for new games, particularly those being released for play online, via downloads, on social networks, or on smartphones—a category that is now quickly overtaking disc-based games. The point is to sell, sell, sell; the games give users opportunities to purchase virtual items or add-ons like clothing, hairstyles, or pets for their in-game characters.
But the truly amazing outcome of the Zynga case study is that it hasn’t changed anything about how players and investors approach the contemporary gaming market. Despite Zynga’s fall from grace, the dream of free-to-play still tempts game creators and players alike. Given the structure and history of the gaming world, it’s not hard to see why. Like most gamblers, players believe they are exceptions who will resist being duped into spending money on in-game items or energy, or else they’ll be especially market-savvy entrants who will rationalize small payments as a reasonable concession after being backed into a corner. Rank-and-file game developers, unprotected by organized labor and wary of ever-impending layoffs in an industry as fickle as it is fashionable, have resigned themselves to free-to-play as the new normal: the will of the market. As for the executives, they have embraced the trend wholesale—and why wouldn’t they, with the beguiling specter of a $200 million public-offering payday before them?
Despite all these distressing trends of upwardly distributed wealth tortured out of the market for human attention, perhaps there’s still a kind of perverse virtue embedded deep within the free-to-play trend. Games are powerful and important partly because they help us test out the limits of ordinary life. That’s why we play. And these free-to-play games allow us to feel the edges of the unholy reality of our current winner-take-all neo-Gilded Age. Indeed, the gaming economy and the financial sector have perhaps merged to the point that we need these free-to-play games, to help us see and understand the social and economic structures of the early twenty-first century. But, then again, if we do need them, it’s only because the technology industry has thrust such a profane era upon us—a form of unlicensed gambling with the house’s money that can disclose its actual character only through the artifices of play.
- The Top 20 (+10) Films of 2013 | Seed&Spark on 2014-03-09
- Changes by BitBQ on 2014-03-08
438 members, 964 items
Welcome! This is a group for anyone interested in art & its related resources. Members are able to share, review, and comment on bookmarks. To keep track on the latest news and bookmarks, you can subscribe to the feed (http://groups.diigo.com/group/aigeneral/rss) or the email alert (Homepage/Alert settings). Please note that this group is NOT for promoting blogs, websites or product for personal interests.
149 members, 384 items
Share links to astronomy and astrophysics resources, stories, and other ephemera.
1521 members, 3842 items
Collaboration is an exciting domain given the Internet's ability to transcend boundaries, uniting individuals and networks in common goals. Let's celebrate and document this phenomena as it evolves before our eyes. Now that's collaboration!
16 members, 31 items
This space is make for discution about of the collective intellegence and others topic around the e-learning, pedagogia innovation,and web 2.0.
3 members, 4 items
This is for Economics students.