Created by Stephen 'Friz' Frizzle

Last week I attended two lectures which had a number of similarities between them. The first was Studio Unbound – presented by Lauren ‘Redjotter’ Currie in Dundee and (through the use of skype) Kate Andrews in London. The second was part of the University of Dundee’s renowned Saturday Night Lecture Series, “Is Privacy Dead in the Digital Age?” by Professor Anne Anderson – Professor at University of Dundee specialising in Human Computer Interaction.

Studio Unbound: Social Networking and Design Education
(video of full presentation available here)

This presentation focused primarily on the positive effects of social networking, with a number of examples from both Currie and Andrews as to how they gained quite a reputation though blogging their thoughts, ideas and research.

Both of them now have quite a following writing for a number of well know blogs including inhabitat and mindapples. This has allowed them to talk to the world, to share and publicise information and to meet people from many countries. Both Lauren and Kate explained how feedback they received on their blogs from designers and strangers led to many insights that have been very useful. Lauren explained how she managed to portray her own brand through her blog which has allowed her to be recognised not only beyond the digital world but in another country!

With regard to us as design students, both presenters described how blogging can be a very beneficial tool to develop our own skills. It allows us to more openly express what we think and build up confidence. It allows us to explore and improve our writing style and develop a brand allowing us to become more accessible in the Design World. Although the point was raised that “does more communication equal better communication?”

This point was discussed afterwards in a Q and A session. “with online content continually growing – where does it end?” Understanding who you are communicating with and for what reason is a key factor in social networking. Many people are not fully aware just how public sites such as facebook and myspace are. Knowing what information we share online and who we may share it with does not allow for total security. This brings me to the second lecture.

“Is Privacy Dead in the Digital Age?

Professor Anderson began her talk looking at peoples developing perceptions of privacy. In the 1890′s people feared that the handheld camera was an invasion of privacy, a far cry from today where is it hard to walk though a town centre not to be spotted by a CCTV camera. The amount of data gathered by CCTV is enormous and it is for this reason that they are not particularly effecting in reducing crime, with only a 4% proven success rate. Professor Anderson raised the point “is this worth the loss of our civil liberties?”

She went on to look at the implications of Social Networking on privacy. People tend to think that when they post photos of themselves drunk with their friend on a ‘great’ night out then it will only be seen by their peer group, this is not the case. Professor Anderson told a story of student’s facebook pages being brought up on screen during a lecture to prove a point about privacy, much to the students embarrassment! She also explained how in exactly the same way many prospective employers could easily go online and look at somebodies facebook to decide whether or not to employ them. This is where she raised the points of privacy policies and ethical principles.

Is it right that people can be judged by what they post on a social networking site? is this different from their own personality? Is it ethical that an employer should use this information to come to a conclusion?

I raised the point “what is the effect of instantaneous messaging sites such as twitter where people are willing to share what they are doing thought the day?” Unfortunately Professor Anderson was only able to provide a vague answer as this form of behaviour is a very new social phenomenon that we do not understand the full effects of. the Key point she said though was that by broadcasting what we do all the time, are we invading our own privacy?

On a wider scale she raised points such as when can we make exceptions to invasions of privacy? Would it be right to do so when preventing crime and terrorism? Are ID cards and invasion of privacy?

The importance of trust and values in a society is essential as it is degrading to consider all people criminals – a possible impact of so many CCTV cameras. So why do we put up with it?

In summing up Professor Anderson raised these final points:

• The boundaries between virtual/public/private are blurring.
• We have a role in stimulating debate on the implications/costs/benefits.
• we also have individual responsibilities.
• we can develop privacy conventions.
• we can also design & implement technologies with privacy in mind.

Overall

Overall both these lecture raised important questions for and against Social Networking. with regard to privacy, i would like to end on a comparison by Professor Anderson.

It may seem that we are heading towards the world described in George Orwell’s classic “1984″ but with so many people blogging, photographing and recording what is going on it is clear that there is no singular ‘Big Brother’. Instead we all are, for better or worse we have all become Big Brother.

Further Thoughts:

Blogs posted by fellow student Paddy Stevenson on same lectures

http://unboxdesign.blogspot.com/2009/03/is-privacy-dead-in-age-of-digital.html

http://unboxdesign.blogspot.com/2009/03/studio-unbound-social-networking-and.html

Names are really an integral part of everything: people have a name, things have names. Names really do get into people’s heads, they become ingrained in their minds

Interesting interview from PingMag with Scott Milano, head of the Verbal Identity Department of Interbrand Japan. A year or so old now but what he mentions is still relevant. He talks about his background, what he does and how brand names can generate images and feelings within people. Here is a snippet:

…BRAVIA is a name I created. Then the project was initially to develop two brand names for two separate lines: one for the casual viewing, the feminine, more playful one. The other was for the high-end users. In the end we created about 3000 names for both projects, but ultimately it came down to one name and one brand.

If you hear the name BRAVIA you wouldn’t think of a flat screen in the first place…

Again, a lot of the ideas come up after the briefing. In this case it was about a stellar performer with super-high quality – something brave, beautiful, very natural and a very powerful, moving experience.

That’s why it sounds like Bravo?

Yes, in this case it’s the etymology. Unfortunately this name has been copied since in various ways. If you look at the TV sector now, a lot of the names have this style: they end in e, i, a, or they have similar constructs or similar sounds. That’s a form of flattery. At least in 2005 and 2006 it has helped turn SONY around globally, as it is one of their strongest brands.

Check out the rest of the article HERE

Everything right down to the packaging has been considered to allow for minimum waste and maximum health not just for you but also the environment.

a very nice idea and certainly a healthier option than ordering a pizza!

Thanks to mindapples.org

Sony Releases New Stupid Piece Of Shit That Doesn’t Fucking Work

Sony Releases New Stupid Piece Of Shit That Doesn’t Fucking Work
My PSP is a good example of this. It is ok but there are so many unnecessary icons and buttons within the software. not to mention alot of icons that don’t work. Pressing them will simply lead to a screen telling you that they dont work and then various reasons for them possibly not working. Seems somewhat redundant.

edit: youtube video not working. click on link for alternative video!

This video shows an example of modular robots, robots whose parts can act independantly and reform when broken. Remember the bad guy in Terminator 2 who could reform himself after being shot? same principle but not quite at the stage where robot domination is an issue. You will probably realise this too at the end of the video.