Second Life

I cannot believe this second life site that Lisa posted about. People basically make up their own online virtual lives and live them out on this site. I think this site is crazy. People basically make their life into a cartoon and live out their fantasies on it. It is probably a lot of fun but at the same time i think that it is a little creepy. You never know who you are really talking to. I definitely have mixed feelings about this site. I don’t really know what to think.

-Melissa Ninni

Add a comment October 3, 2007

Group 1′s chat

I thought that all the chats made good points and brought up interesting topics. But one specific thing i liked a lot….

11:16 AM: pennyp: We are only stealing if we don’t have permision. But from what I’ve seen there are sites like darcy said tht make you pay. Any way who wants to go out and buy a ten/ twenty year old album. In those cases it should be free. I can go to the library and get for free.

- I completely agree with this statement. If you can go to the library and get it for free, then why can’t you just download it for free. I also feel that there is no point in buying an album if you only like one song on it. Downloading music should be okay. The artists of the songs already have a lot of money from music videos, t.v. shows, or concerts. Downloading a few songs isnt going to hurt any of them too badly. Once people download one or two songs from the album they can see if they like it and then go and buy th cd. Usually if a person knows they like an artist they will just go buy the cd and not spend all their time downloading the entire album.

-Melissa Ninni

Add a comment October 3, 2007

response to chats

Lara Skolnik

Something i read in group 2′s chat really stood out to me.  someone compared stealing a research paper and stealing music from a site like napster by saying “i think there is a difference between stealing music and stealing papers…. both are forms of expression, but when others steal papers, hey are passing it off as their own.”  I never thought of it this way, and now that i do think about it, i see how different the two situations are.  I beleive that when a paper is plagarized, the author would get mad because they are not getting credit for their work. However, when music is “stolen”, the artist is not getting money for his work. it all depends on the popularity of the person who created the work, whether it is music or literature.  No one is going to try to pass off a piece by a popular, well known author or a song by a well known band as their own.  So if someone “steals” their work and tries to pass it off as their own, the creater would most likely be concerned with being paid than that someone is getting credit for something they did not make.  However, if the creator is less known, they are most likely concerned with gaining popularity, therefore tehy want to get credit for their work whenever it is used, instead of someone who “steals” it getting credit. 

Add a comment October 3, 2007