Copyleft is the action of owning content, but not charging for others to use it. Crowd Sourcing is the ability to create the base for something, but letting others add on to it so it can become amazing.

An example of a copyleft and crowd sourced  object is the Linux OS. It was created by a man who wanted everyone to have a great OS, but didn’t want to deal with the issues of paying for too much. He created the base product of Linux, but people continue to add and tweak it. Now, I’m not saying it’s perfect, but it is the ideal. There needs to be a thing where people can freely play with objects and make it their own. It’s how people find what they want to do in life. Now I’m decently good at computers, but a lot of people aren’t. This is where the real issue of Linux comes in: It’s not very simple to use. People would get confused and upset if they found something other than the windows or mac OS on their computer. It’s very unfamiliar and complicated to most. I wish people could learn how to just play around with the system, but I understand why they don’t try. They don’t want to break the computer completely (although you really can’t unless you hit it with a hammer or something), and then pay for it to get fixed. Maybe if we had classes that explained how computer technology works, we wouldn’t have this problem? But most people aren’t interested in that kind of stuff and get bored of it easily.

Anyways, if we all were open to the idea of adding and taking, free or charge or rude opinions, I think we would make this a better place for all of us.

In class we were talking about the issue of copyright and who it was really protecting. Copyright is the ability to own an object, and with that ability you are able to charge people to use and distribute your work. In the early years of copyright, the copyright licence would only last for fourteen years. Gradually, it increase. But were those increases really for the right reasons? Starting in the late 1920’s, Walt Disney created his famous character, Mickey Mouse. Back then, copyright only extended to 28 years, with a 28 year renewal. Once they had reached that threshold, Disney decided to push lawmakers to change it. At this point, Walt Disney was long dead, but the Disney company was thriving off of his work.

Now, copyright has been extended to a person’s lifetime plus 70 years. This is great for independent content creators who want to profit off of their work, but it seems unfair to have these big companies profit for so long, and basically have a stronghold in the industry. Maybe it’s just my anarchist in me speaking, but I believe that we should all share the wealth. All content creators should be treated equally, and they shouldn’t have to work for massive companies that steal all of their hard-earned money. Not only that, but these companies also control how politics work, and the inner workings of society. (That sounds very conspiracy theory, but let me explain myself: For example, Disney could sponsor a presidential candidate for a ton of money, this gets the candidate exposed to many people, giving them a greater chance to win the election, etc.) The copyright laws were originally put into place to protect content creators and their work. It was not supposed to protect empires. That is my biggest issue with how copyright has changed over time, and I honestly don’t really have an idea on how to fix it. It’s more of a systematic thing, where you realize the system is corrupt, but it’s so big that it has gotten out of control.

In class, we discussed the issue of Black Confederates and the Civil War. With this came the mass of confused information and made up reports. These made up reports were usually created to slander one side, or build up the reputation of the other. Because of this, the issue of “can we really trust this?” comes up. Back during the Civil War Era, many sources were from newspapers. Articles were written by journalists who claimed to be at the scene of the battle, but may not really have been. A good example was brought up by Professor O’Malley. Fredrick Douglas believed that Black soldiers fought for the confederate army. This is a claim that needs a primary source, which he believe that he had. Unfortunately, his primary source was not to be trusted either. This issue still continues today, especially with the rise in the internet.

Anyone can write a story and claim that they were there. There is no need for fact checking or citing sources, since most people will believe you anyway. Because of this, many people think they can just search an issue or topic and have all of the answers on this. Essentially, they think they have become an expert on the subject when they are not qualified to be one. This apparently upset a lot of scholars and professors, I don’t really blame them. If you worked so hard to be certified in a field of study just to be shot down by someone who read a Wikipedia article, you would be upset too. But there is a more positive way to look at this.

Many of these people are curious to learn, or find out about a particular subject. They show some interest in it, so they decide to look up facts about it. Although they mean well, they may get too cocky and try to become the expert of the subject just by doing multiple google searches. This is the stage where the person needs to be stopped by a real scholar, and told that they will not be able to prove that these articles are actually true. If people are stopped early, and told that they need to use critical thinking, and maybe work with some professionals, this “issue” could be stopped. But is it really and issue? And are some scholars really to be trusted? Especially since we all hold a bias depending on nationality, race, etc. I think that’s the bigger question to be explored.

In this past class, we discussed the Minstrel show, and it’s influence on popular culture in the early 20th century. Although this is a horrible but interesting topic, I would like to explore the idea that the image of the minstrel show hasn’t died out, it has just switched the way it is presented. In class, Professor O’Malley brought up the issue that black face is still alive and well, we just don’t realize it. Many modern artists try to put out a “tough” persona, seemingly how a black person would act. Not all black people act like this, and this type of thinking creates a hurtful stereotype. Media likes to portray black people as thuggish, rough, and almost animalistic, which is not true. I believe that our Professor used the example of 50 cent. He seems so rough and tough, but he usually cleans up and wears a suit, not a dirty old t shirt. This is considered black face because he is putting on a persona. It is not truly how he is, but it is how people think he should be. This is similar to the old show of black face; you dress up in a stereotypical outfit to portray a specific race.

Another issue that could be considered modern day black face is the issue of some white rappers and stealing their culture. Some rappers dress up to act rough and tough, but they can just stop that persona at the end of the day. They take from black culture and use slang that they do not know to perpetuate a stereotype. It’s very weird, and also racist.

Usually when we think of “The Cold War”, we think of the fear surrounding communism, and the policy of containment. The only technology we are shown is that of the nuclear bomb. In class, we are informed of the ENIAC. The ENIAC was the first digitized computer that could track and predict missile trajectories. It is made of 19000 vacuum tubes, and could only produce a small amount of power (less than a smartphone today). With the creation of the ENIAC and vacuum tubes, scientist were able to expend an create ways to get information back and forth from once source to another, without any interruption. To get this, scientist would have to develop a way to increase the strength of a vacuum tube, but without making it big and bulkier.

There were two major inventions: First the Audion (Lee Deforest), and then the Transistor. Bot of them were created to amplify the signal of the electricity generated in the vacuum tubes, so that no information would be dropped or lost.

The main reason for this blog post is to question why we don’t credit the Cold War as years of importance, and really the start of the technological boom? In school we just learned that the cold war was a nuclear issue, and that the government was trying to stop communism. No one ever mentioned how the start of computers, and even the internet, were essentially created at that time. Not only that, but we improved our road system, and came up with the GI Bill. Is it possible that people try to forget these things because of the turbulent and troubling past of the United States during that time? Maybe. But I’m glad I finally realized the importance of the Cold War.

In this post, I will be focusing on “The Loudness War” Video.  In the video, a track from the late 1980’s is played in it’s original state in volume. Notice that the drums are the loudest part of the song. This is to give it a punch when you listen to it in the speakers. The video editor then compresses the music to make all of the sounds reach the same point of loudness. At this point, it mught sound better, but the video editor lowers the volume. From this you can see the quality of the music is actually not that good at all, and it doesn’t have the same punch or dynamics as the original. Like the rest of the class, I’m asking “Why is this?” . The music, when listened to at a regular volume, does not sound good at all.

Is it possible that our generation have been ingrained with the idea that louder is better? I believe so. The reason why I think that this is an epidemic is because our generation tends to push limits and defy authority. When I was younger, my mom would constantly yell at how loud my music was, and how I would eventually go deaf. For some reason, I always thought the louder your music, the cooler you were. It gave you a sense of power; a thing we are all searching for. I mean, let’s be honest, how bad ass do you feel driving down the road with your favorite song blasting? It’s almost like nothing can stop you. Its kind of like a sense of power that we yearn for.

It’s possibly that the music industry taps into this illusion of power that we have. It’s a way to sell an idea to the public. “If this music is loud, it makes you feel powerful and happy!” And honestly, who wouldn’t want that?