The Digital Past

I have so many mixed feelings about this book, I am kind of stuck on where to start. My classmate and I were talking about how a book would not be THAT hard to read despite Professor O’Malley’s many, many warnings to us about how dense and difficult it was. I found myself getting distracted quite easily and I am not sure if that was because of the book OR (this had me thinking about earlier in the semester and distracted me even more) because of the ideas from our first book, “The Shallows” by Carr and my attention span is not good. I thought it was funny and ironic in a way that the ideas from one book were proven while trying to read another. I could not tell you or anyone how many times I read a page and came to the realization that I had no idea what I just read; my eyes read the words but my brain didn’t comprehend. There was so much information thrown at us and it was completely overwhelming. Overall, the book was awful and I never want to read again.

Our discussion in class however was much more stimulating. For me, as I’m sure it was for everyone else, the decerebrating of the cat was the most uncomfortable and disturbing part. It really stumps me when scientists and researchers think that cats were a form of communication. I know back then science was not as advanced as it is today but is that really an “excuse”? I even tried to get a visual of it by Googling images, but there was nothing (sort of relieved). The cat piano/organ was something that also caught my attention. Yes, not killing animals but they were still being abused. I was curious about how the cat piano work and came across an article that states the tails were pulled when a key was pressed. This worried me because cat’s tails contain nerves and if their tails are injured, it can cause permanent damage. But there was no evidence on the conditions of the cats.

In Chapter 6, Is Music Still A Thing?, the quote “Is music a thing? If it was, is it still?” caught my eye for a second. This brought me back to a discussion we had when Professor O’Malley was demonstrating how to use GarageBand. All sounds and instruments are now digitalized and not 100% natural which kind of ruins the purpose of creating music. There is no purpose in learning how to play a piano, saxophone, drums, etc. when one can just use their computer keyboard for a note. So, although music still exists, it also doesn’t. Music that is not pure and real can be considered fake, and it’s true value and quality is taken away.

I’ve grown up listening to the Rolling Stones, both by choice and against my will. My father is a hardcore 80’s rock guy and listens to it almost exclusively, so growing up, I would listen to them all the time. So it sparked my interest for a while since I actually was familiar with the artist, unlike James Brown. I looked deeper into the claim of the Stones being inspired by Chicago Blues and found some interesting results. I found a video on Youtube of the Rolling Stones and Muddy Waters performing in a nightclub a song called “Baby Please Don’t Go”. Though I have never heard the song, the song is straight up blues and groovy! I was easily drawn in by this video because I briefly talked about Muddy Waters’ life in my scavenger hunt post and how he was part of the making of rock and roll, and how he was collaborating with one of the greatest bands in rock history. It was the best of both worlds (or lessons). After watching the video, I listened to the Stones’ “Faraway Eyes” and other songs and could definitely hear the Chicago blues.

While reading Goodin’s “Why passwords have never been weaker – and crackers have never been stronger”. Just from the title, I was able to infer that our society is not very original and is quite frankly lazy when it comes to anything. And there would be no difference when creating passwords. A quote in the article states that an average American only uses 6.5 passwords for 20+ different accounts; which I believe is true. Personally, I have 2-3 passwords for all my social media, professional, etc. and am just realizing how unsafe that is. If someone were to get their hands to one of my passwords, they would have access to a majority of my accounts. George Mason requires student to change their passwords after every six months. Since this article was written and published in 2012, the technology for requiring others’ passwords is probably a lot stronger now and why cybersecurity is becoming a big and upcoming career these days.

“Kill the Password” is a very similar to the previous one. It mentions bank account and that’s true for me, one of my main passwords is my bank account password (was, I’m changing it now). I believe that is why those important accounts (bank, LinkedIn, phone services, etc.) asks for three personal questions.

One big data breach/hack that occurred around Northern Virginia was the hack of a website by the name of “Ashley Madison”. It is not exactly the most ethical website as it is a place where married people (mostly men) go to find someone to have an affair with. Many people will say different things such as “that is terrible!” or “they had it coming!” but in July and August of 2015, Ashley Madison was hacked and a list of users was released to the public. Some were smart enough not use ANY personal information but others were not so smart. Their names and other information were released.

It is definitely important to protect yourself and all your information out there. We live in a world where out whole lives is on the internet and we depend on the worldwide web. It’s barely an option anymore because most businesses have gone digital! With the breachers and hackers out there, it is critical to choose strong passwords or else you could be bankrupt.

This was such an interesting lecture for a topic that can be stereotyped as “boring”. I really enjoyed it and there were so many things that I found mind blowing. I have never had to have something copyrighted but I have seen others do it for their personal businesses so I do understand the basics and process.

The Happy Birthday song is known worldwide and is habit to sing on a birthday when someone is bringing out the cake. Personally, I hate when people sing it, especially on my birthday, which is why my family no longer does it when I turn a year older. One article I found really intriguing was “Surprise! You may soon….without being sued”. The article discusses that the tune was made by two men by the names of Warner and Chappell and how a lawsuit was put into play and it may be able to be used in films (won’t summarize an article we both read).  This made me think back to any TV episodes or movies about birthdays and remember if they sang a song. This brings me to a FRIENDS episode where Rachel is turning 30 and Joey starts singing “Happy Bir-” and they get caught off by another character. It is played off but I am wondering if the reason Joey did not sing it all is because the show could have been sued. Guess it is best that I make my family not sing it to me on my birthday!

I also enjoyed how we discussed how Disney renews the Mickey Mouse copyright occasionally for a period of years, as well as the ears symbol. My classmate also informed me that anyone could also technically make a very similar version of a Disney story as long as a few details are different, basically a parody. This also got me thinking about another example that I have seen in real life. When I was in middle school, there was a series called “Twilight” about vampires, etc. it was taking over! I remember walking through Target one day and looking at a book that was similar but also different. But the covers and aesthetic were almost identical. It was called “Nightlight” and they changed the name of the main characters.

I think it is important to copyright certain things but maybe not everything? I’m just saying that because I don’t want to be sued for singing happy birthday. But if I were to create something, I would not someone using it as they please without getting any credit. It’s a tricky subject and there are so many rules to it that people do not know about.

Since I could remember, all my teachers in elementary, middle, and high school have told me to never use Wikipedia. When I was younger, I questioned them and relied on Wikipedia anyways for information; still to this day I’ll use it when fact checking (but not for school papers, just my own personal use).

From what I know, anyone can edit and change information in a Wikipedia page. From the video shown, it is demonstrated that Wikipedia pages on constantly being edited. This is why teachers call it unreliable. BUT I also do know that Wikipedia has administrators/pending changing reviewers who review the changes made and will delete them if they are not true. To me, that seems like a tough job, considering how many edits are made and how many people are needed to fact check and change things. One thing I think that is important to mention is that Wikipedia is a non-profit organization. Every time you go on to look something up, they have a little advertisement stating that they believe information should be free and anyone can make changes and since they are a non-profit, they would like to receive donations to spruce up their website. So it makes sense why they let others make changes, but it hurts their reputation and credibility.

I also found it very interesting when Professor O’Malley said that design programs such as GIMP and Audacity were also products of crowd sourcing. The reason I say that is because I have used both of those programs and they are great for what they are and get the job done. Maybe not as easy as Adobe Photoshop or Garageband, but the fact they are free is the big difference. This motivated me to look into other forms of crowd sourcing.

Opinion seeking is a form and an example is SurveryMonkey.com and that is pretty self-explanatory. The one I really liked reading about was “content creation” which is what Audacity and GIMP would fall under. But it’s not related strictly to computer programs. The article uses an excellent example. Those Super Bowl commercials that are like “Send us a video and you could help us create our next commercial” is considered crowd sourcing and I thought that was pretty cool.

Overall, crowd sourcing is a cool way to get information from many different perspectives but it is not always the most reliable source and probably should not be used for formal or academic assignments.

For my scavenger hunt, I wanted to look into the origin of rock and roll and I found some interesting results. I wanted to find the earliest reference of rock and roll music and used the Google Ngram Viewer. From 1900 to about 1950, rock and roll music was barely a thing. I was lucky enough to come across a book called “Dancing in Your Head: Jazz, Blues, Rock, and Beyond” that was published in 1944. In the book, it is said that Chuck Berry is one of the Founding Fathers of Rock and Roll. I looked into that claim further and found the Berry actually started playing guitar and performing at night clubs in St. Louis. While searching for a record deal, Berry actually met famous artist Muddy Water who suggested he go to meet with a record label named “Chess Records” and boom, a legend was born. He recorded a single a few weeks later. It also says that genres like rock and roll and heavy metal were strictly “off-limits” to black people. That was interesting to me since there were many famous black artists such as Chuck Berry himself and also Ray Charles.

There were not many other results before 1950 but from 1953-1960, the trend started to rise. This was about the time Ray Charles, Elvis, and Buddy Holly started becoming big names. We have listened to a few Ray Charles songs in class and I would never have guessed that he was a “rock and roll” artist. He has a great voice but compared to what is considered rock and roll nowadays, they are just two very different things. Even compared to Elvis Presley, the KING of Rock and Roll, Charles has such a different sound. Everyone knows of Elvis, and though he is as great as everyone says he is, he kind of overshadows the others who contributed to rock and roll. Others including, but not limited to, Jerry Lee Lewis, Johnny Cash, and Bo Diddley. A lot of them “popped up” around the same time and made a name for themselves.

A question that came up from researching was the difference between “rock and roll” and “heavy metal”. While writing about Chuck Berry and Ray Charles, I listened to their music to see what 1950’s rock was like. It was very different than what I personally think is considered rock and roll but maybe it’s because I have been listening to heavy metal. Around the 1980’s, bands like Metallica, Black Sabbath, and Iron Maiden make their debut and they are considered heavy metal; other bands like Led Zepplin and Pink Floyd are rock and roll. I think these two genres are thrown together a lot and people constantly mistake what is rock and roll and what is heavy metal.

The American Civil War was ridiculous but definitely something I feel was inevitable (some historians may disagree with me). The Union fought to abolish slavery and the Confederacy was for it, obviously. But something I thought that was interesting in class that Professor O’Malley mentioned was that African Americans fought with the Confederacy. What? Really? That’s like a homosexual nowadays voting for Trump, right? Trump and his VP candidate is so against LGBT rights so why would anyone in their right minds vote for someone who is fighting against their rights; very frustrating. I never would have thought of African Americans fighting with the South but I guess it could have happened, and I’m sure it did. But why?

A thought I had on why Africans would fight with the South is because they were slaves and forced to fight. Maybe they didn’t want to but since they were property and owned, they had no other choice. Or maybe they joined intentionally and when it came to a battle against the North, they could escape away and join the Union. BUT since there was not much evidence of this, it is hard to come up with any outcomes as to why this happened. If they did fight to keep slavery, there is no other word to describe except self-hating.

While searching for photos (“African Americans Confederate”) on Google, I took a glance at a few articles written about the subject. One of the titles claimed that thousands of African Americans served in the Confederate Army, at least 750,000, maybe even 800,000. At first I was shocked that so many African Americans made up that much of the Confederate Army but read the article and saw that they only made up less than 1%. I feel that is something that is misconstrued and people could take differently than what the article had intended.

Something that also threw me off a little was when it was mentioned that Lincoln did not want the slaves to fight with the Union for their rights. Yes, he wanted to abolish slavery and that is seen in the Emancipation Proclamation and his famous Gettysburg Address “Four score and seven years ago…”, you know the story. We learned about it in 4th grade BUT again, we were not told that Lincoln did not want slaves to fight for their own rights. But why?

*AFTER GOOGLING AN ANSWER TO THE ABOVE QUESTION*

While searching for an answer, I came across an article called “5 Things You May Not Know About Lincoln, Slavery, and the Emancipation Proclamation (EP) ” by History.com. This is obviously one of the most well-known credible history resources so I trust what they say. I can’t speak for anyone else but I had always assumed Lincoln was all for equality and believed we should all live in harmony. But that’s not the case. It is said in the article that he did not believe black and white people should share the same rights, that he wasn’t an abolitionist (but believed it was “morally wrong”), and that the EP did not set all the slaves free. So I got my answer, and then some. Lincoln did not allow slaves to fight because they were black but also did not agree with the idea of slavery. What a confusing man.

On a side note, this is something that I still do believe happens in our society today. Or in a way. As an LGBT youth, there is so much prejudice within our culture and the standards of finding that perfect “someone”. Yes, we claim we are not racists because we don’t shoot black people just because of their skin color or because we have other black friends. BUT it is racist when we choose not to be involved with someone because they are black but claim it’s just a “preference”. Like what? If you’re intentionally not attracted to someone because they are black, it’s not a preference, it’s racism.

I thought this class discussion was very relevant to life now a days…for me at least. My friends and I all have very different tastes in music from country, to EDM, to pop, to rock, and so on. As someone who is 20 years old, I have never experienced what it is like to go into a record store and go straight to the “white people” section because it is not acceptable to shop in the “black” section. And yes, maybe we’re all allowed to be taught in the same schools, eat, sleep, sit anywhere we want, I still do believe there are unwritten standards that are followed.

Rap music is something that is known black people listen to; not all black people, but a lot. That’s a stereotype. You see it in the media. Just because they listen to rap music doesn’t mean they can’t also enjoy country or pop music. My friend, let’s call him Lucas, loves all types of music. Especially modern day rap music (which is trash, old school rap is 10x better). It is something that people find shocking is because he is white but goes against the social norm when it comes to his taste in music. He is an example of a person who does not follow the norms because of race. It’s just music…notes, beats, vocals…I do not get why there’s such a high standard and only certain people should listen to a certain type of genre.

The talk about beats today was something I really enjoyed and I’ll tell you why. I am a dancer and dance coach so I am constantly…CONSTANTLY…counting beats! Except I don’t do it in 4’s, I use 8’s so that is something I think is really interesting. I always thought it was natural to count in 8’s but now see that has been drilled into me for the past 6 years of my life.

This was one of the classes that pertained and sparked my interest. As cliche as it it, music is a big part of my life and I do not think I could live without it. I was all about the Lady Gaga part…but not the Meghan Trainor. I hate her. I really was not a fan of the PostModern Jukebox band, maybe I just don’t like the classy melody. I like exciting, something I can dance to. I think it is interesting in what people are involved in can affect their taste in music. For example, my grandparents are very calm and a little boring because all they do is read and drink tea….literally. And they listen to classical instrumental music, like the originals such as Beethoven. Me, I like instrumental music as well…but it’s more exciting(?) lack of a better word. Artists such as Thomas Bergerson…So it’s intersting to me.

I found this discussion to be quite uncomfortable. But I think that was the point.

It was said that apparently blackface was a thing and has been a common thing for years, but honestly I never knew how big it was until this class. Maybe it’s because of the generation I grew up in where we take every little thing, think about it, and decide if it’s something we should be offended by or not but I felt like the blackface movement or whatever you want to call it is completely racist. I was also shocked to learn the African-Americans such as Booker T. Washington even found it humorous and said a phrase where it was doing more than he could. I just did not understand why he had thought that. Yes, it was for entertainment but at what cost?

Looking at the advertisements for minstrel shows were probably the most unpleasing part. The faces the models made as if being black was a gross, unappealing thing. They just stare into your eyes and….maybe the fact that it was blown up on a projector too didn’t help.

Either way I am glad we are progressing. Do not get me wrong, there is still race issues all the time in the entertainment business. Something I can think of that happened recently was when the next installment of Star Wars came out, the creators of the movie poster made the white female character as the main object and the black male character smaller. Not sure if I would personally accuse them of being racist since the movie wanted to emphasize the strong female lead, but man did people lose their minds on social media.