(where voldy went to school after hogwarts &) the fate of musicians

A couple of days ago the New York Times published, "Merely Human? That's So Yesterday", and it caught my attention. The article profiles Singularity University and its discussion about how technological advancement will change the future of humanity. The program includes courses on nanotechnology, artificial intelligence and robotics, synthetic biology, space sciences, medicine and neurosciences, and immortality.

Writer for gizmodo.com, Kyle VanHemert, sums up Singularity U nicely: it's "basically some of the smartest people on the planet having the same discussions you did when you were stoned in college. But at this school, the participants in that conversation are the rare individuals with the intellect and wherewithal to make those ideas a reality."

Voldemort probably would've loved SU. He'd major in immortality. He'd fit right in with the super geniuses. After all, he did "great things. Terrible! Yes... but great."

&&&

In Chapter 5, Lanier discusses the fate of musicians as the world changes with technological advancements. There are hundreds of thousands of musicians hoping to be discovered on YouTube and Myspace. Many of these people want to be musicians for the wrong reasons: not because they are talented or passionate, but because they want to get attention and make millions. Yes, we (regular people) appreciate the entertainment industry, but I believe that the payscale for celebs needs to be reevaluated anyways. Maybe with artists making less money on music, it will discourage the people more interested in the money and glamourous lifestyle than actually creating music and performing for fans.

There will always be music. I'll always be able to get it. However, it might not be prepackaged or easy to find. I think of it sort of like a comparison between a chain clothing store and a vintage shop. In chain clothing stores, there are racks of clothes presented in an aesthetically pleasing and organized way. There are different sizes and colours, so everyone can have their own. There are mannequins to show you how the pieces might go together. There are new lines to tell you what will be cool this season. You are guaranteed that every store will be pretty much the same.

Vintage stores, instead of having mass produced and easy to find clothes, are all different. Some are more organized than others. Some carry only designer clothes in beautiful condition, while others have pretty much everything. They don't have sizes and colours for everyone. Normally, you have to search through racks and bins of clothes to find something that a) you like, and b) fits you.

The online music scene is kind like a crappy vintage clothing store: they accept donations from anyone. This music is not made for the masses. It is not organized. You need to have a lot of time to search through myspace profiles and youtube pages to discover new music. When searching for vintage clothes, you have to sift through a lot of crap to find something great. But, in both cases, when you make that discovery, it's awesome. Finding music on your own that you like is rewarding somehow. It's something the radio or Billboard 100 didn't tell you that you should think is cool. It's unique because not everyone knows the artist (and in the case of vintage clothing, where to get it).

Now, there are too many musicians for the average person (who isn't a University student looking for ways to procrastinate) to sift through and discover on their own. Most of them suck, and it's just easier to download mainstream stuff.

Lanier believes that the internet should be helping people “find new ways to get paid” and instead is causing people to have to run around in vans to go to gigs. I think that people running around in vans to play gigs are awesome and what music should be about (moreso than mansions, fancy cars and papparazzi anyways). While the internet has lead to 'vanity careers' for hundreds of thousands of wannabe musicians, it's also caused more musicians to share their talent. People don't have to rely on a major record label for exposure anymore.

I think that the music situation will become better. As record labels fail and digital music pushes cd's completely off the shelves, more discoveries of indie talent will be made. I think more people will rely on bloggers to sift through the garbage and discover new talent.

fragments & anonymous trolls

I came across this article this week, and it reminded me of Lanier's comment that technology is moving without considering all the effects and adapting as necessary.

I don't know if I'm surprised that children are more likely to own a cellphone than a book. It's sad, but with so many other distractions, it's hard to sit down with a book and read for a while. Manafy, an editorial director Information Today, suggests that if more children have phones, then “we need to be looking much harder at creating content optimized for this reading environment [...and create] a reading experience that coincides with their [...]shorter attention spans [...and] non-linear reading style.” Maybe parents, librarians and educators should celebrate technology like the iPad that is more conducive for reading. Hopefully, eBooks (or iBooks?) will become popular with kids, or we could be facing a wave of illiteracy in the future.

In Chapter 3, Lanier gives readers his thoughts on the perceived wisdom of crowd. We've all done it: googled a question or wikipediaed something. The idea is that the mistakes of people cancel each other out and there's correctness centred around the right answer (this is also pretty much all I remember about my stats class). The fragments we read online obscure the context and author. This ideology devalues authorship and individuality. Collectives can be just as stupid as any individual, and all collectives rely on the leadership of intellectuals and visionaries to lead them. Therefore, I agree with Lanier's opinion that quantity doesn't become quality. I can't help but think that there's about to be a whole lot more stupid questions and answers as facebook announces a new questions and answers application.

Anonymity can be one of the bad things about the internet. Not only does it reduce the cultural importance of authorship, but it also encourages trolling. People are not held accountable to what they say, and they are rarely punished or penalized for their online bullying. YouTube pseudonyms are easy to create and recreate for the purpose of posting mean comments on videos. Although there are a lot of stupid videos, it's stupider to watch them and then be mean about it! On a site like SecondLife people won't be as mean because the pseudonym comes with developed personality that isn't as disposable. It requires a lot of work to recreate.

This leads to one of the good things about the internet: online communities. For example, fan forums allow fans to communicate with one another about a shared obsession. These sites use online pseudonyms; however, they come with personalities and the people get to know each other. They are not fragments of people. Like Lanier said about the printing press, it “is not the mechanism, but the authors” who are important. The people make the forum (not the software). The software creates the opportunity, but people run and participate in the forum.

Lanier's ideas resonate with me. A number of years ago, during a special time for discussion among Harry Potter fans while we waited for the next book, I was involved with a Harry Potter fan site and forum. There were very few trolls there. I got to know people by their avatar, their username, and eventually, their REAL name. There needs to be more opportunity for this kind of interaction online. While anonymity is important for safety, too much of it gives people the freedom to let out their inner troll.
Facebook is a place where trolling has repercussions. People have to constantly manage their online reputations. After an in-class conversation about employers facebook creeping potential employees, it's clear that companies want employees who represent them well in public. In the past, this included the workplace only, and it didn't matter what employees did in their private lives as long as they did their jobs. However, many people have accepted that the online world is in the public domain. If it's online, it's not private anymore.