User talk:Wecandobetter

The beauty of lighting and faces
Maybe not most of the people that go to the theatre know that behind one of the most visionary director of our time Alejandro González iñárritu, famous for film like "Birdman, "Babel", "Amores Perros" or his latest "The Revenant" there is one of the greatest cinematographer of our generation and possibly one of the best in the film history, Emmanuel Lubezki, or how he likes to be called "El Chivo" that if my Spanish is good enough means the Goat. He already have two Academy Awards for best cinematography on his name, and right now is running for the third, and if he will win he would be the third person to have three Academy Awards in the history of cinema and the first one to win this precious awards three years in a row. Beside his mastering of working with the light and especially with the natural light as a person he is quite shy and really private with his personal life, he doesn't have any major social network and he rarely release interview where he speaks about his work and his personal Life; the only popular social network that he uses quite often is Instagram, where he shows and share his photos and some behind the scenes of the film that is working on. El Chivo's Instagram page

From the link you can see some of his amazing pictures, especially the excellent use of a wide lens with an open aperture that emphasize the light and the faces of the native American that took part in "the Revenant" that bring to the view a natural blending of the sublime environment where they filmed the movie and the particular faces that the American Indian naturally have. But I think the most important thing is that follow him via Instagram make you feel closer to one of the greatest cinematographer of our time, and doing so can inspire new talent and people that really love photography and cinema.Wecandobetter (discuss • contribs) 12:08, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Comment

 * this post needed to have been much more closely aligned with the assessment brief. It reads a little too personal and does not really speak to the themes and concerns of the module. It would have been useful to try to feed this exercise explicitly into the themes and concerns of the module, and you haven’t really engaged with this part of the brief at all (always, always, pay close attention to what the brief is asking you to do e.g. you could have discussed this in the context of blogging culture and persona, or online communities and film blogging/review videos etc.). There are also a few grammatical slips throughout, and you need to address this for assessed work.


 * A post of this standard roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor:
 * Poor. Among other things, poor entries may just offer links without real comment or apparent point. They may offer nothing more than poor-quality synopsis or description of material of dubious relevance. They may have serious clarity problems (including dead links, random graphics) which affect comprehension (or even worse, admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement). They might be off-topic, private trivia, or of unclear relevance. The wiki markup formatting will be of a poor standard.

RE: Comments on others’ work

 * These are absent. You have not adhered to the brief. Remember that your comments on other people's work is weighted as heavily as your own post when it comes to grades. Not completing this part of the exercise means that, effectively you are halving your mark. GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 13:33, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Why do you think less people go to the theatre these days compared to 10 years ago? Gvg00001 (discuss • contribs) 12:14, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I thought the cinematography in the Revenant was good but the angles for basic dialogue scenes too close! What would you do differently or wouldn't you??? Rocketpunch7 (discuss • contribs) 12:23, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I think El Chivo definitely deserves an Oscar this year as the cinematography in The Revenant is some of the most visceral I've ever seen. However I'm worried that this will not translate well to smaller screens, as it is a film that works so well in the cinema, what are your thoughts? --Idkun (discuss • contribs) 16:34, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Finally someone is bringing up the importance of cinematography! I always feel like it is an underrated aspect of filmmaking but if makes out so much! I heard of El Chivo before, and I really liked the cinematography in Amores Perros, but I didn't know he had an Instagram account, so I took a look at it and got quite stunned. Always when I look at such rich images I feel almost gripped by them. Images can have so much power and varying uses of lights and lenses can bring out so starkly different aspects of a face. I myself like to use my analog camera, a reflex one I got from a friend recently. I have the impression that a good light intensive lens, and the fact that the image is really physically directly hitting the film, captures an impression so much better. Even if it costs extra, the images coming out of it are so worth it! Rosane linde (discuss • contribs) 17:23, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Assignment Group Members
Hiya, I hope I'm not too quick about this, but I made a list of all our group member's usernames, so it's easier to find each other. You can find it on Rosi's talk page. Have a nice evening -- Chickpeanut (discuss • contribs) 21:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

My use of Social Media and Online Footprint
I do not know if I am odd or weird person for my generation but I do not really use social networks, I have just an account Facebook that I use only to contact friends or other people, so I can meet them in the real world, I have never changed my profile pictures and I have never upload any photo or status on my page, and I think in three years of Facebook life I pressed like for a post or for a page maybe ten times, and if I think about it I did it not really because I liked their post or status but just because it was the easiest way to let them know the fact that I have read their post. I don't really understand why people share stuff on any social network; Internet should be used to extend your real life and not to create a new life in a different platform; I don't care how do you feel today or what have you eaten, and if I care and know is because I met you face to face and not via Facebook or other social media; a while ago, Andy Warhol, one of the most important artist of the Pop Art said: “In the future everyone will be world-famous for 15 minutes” and he was right, thanks to the social media we have the opportunity to let the other person know everything about our life, we are the most famous persons on platform where everybody is a star who speaks and shares opinions or status that nobody is listening cause is to busy thinking about his minutes of fame.

Even if I try to be less active possible I know that every social media at the end is like a video game, when you register yourself you are in this game, in this different reality, and everything you do is recorded, and you leave your Online Footprint behind you, and even if I have never posted any pictures on Facebook or any other social media just from the photos where I am tagged on you can easily recreate my past three years of life; in what cities I lived, when I went back home for holiday, and where, with who and doing what I spent my time here in Stirling. to conclude in my opinion does not really matter how you use your social media or how is your online visibility and your footprint, the only thing that matter is the approach that you have; you need to be free from the machine and control it, you can't be used and live for it, otherwise one day Morpheus will wake you up saying “welcome to the real world, everything that you lived was fake” Wecandobetter (discuss • contribs) 02:12, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments
As you said, every social platform is like a videogame but more generally I think that the videogame starts when you are given a controller... a smartphone, so not necessarily an app like Facebook. Consider for example how phones now are fitted with GPS and movement tracking technology and therefore are easily located. That means leaving a footprint too and further reducing the individual's privacy. Initially I was like you, with minimal interaction in the social media world and not owning a smartphone until quite recently, as I was not interested in those minutes of fame and could not understand the excitement in being in everyone's reach and available for tracking 24/7. I must admit I have, unlike you, given in into this system recently, becoming a more present figure on social platforms. At the same time though I am still sceptic on relying on the digital, and privacy is a concern, meaning that I move through a relatively limited web of apps (at least when compared to most of people my age). This does not mean I do not take advantage of the digital era, au contraire, just that I try to pay attention to how much of myself I put out there. Even though, doesn't our footprint really start when our birth is registered? Juliabutgiulia (discuss • contribs) 20:57, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I can relate to your social media habits a lot. I do use Facebook quite frequently but have not bothered to venture out any further. I think its interesting what you say about people searching for their '15 minutes of fame', and although I agree with this to an extent, I think it is good that there are platforms whereby people can get their opinions across to a wide audience. I think Twitter in particular is a good platform for online activism as it mobilises movements that would otherwise be highly fragmented and allows them to hold politicians, public figures and corporations to account if they are dishonest, deceitful or corrupt. I realise that real-life activism has seen a slump recently, especially in universities, but I don't think social media is to blame for this. Ted 95 (discuss • contribs) 00:23, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi, don't you think the acceleration of life that Warhol predicted is exactly what the people want? It allows to create an identity that is less fluid and more standardized. GABRIEL9 (discuss • contribs) 11:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I use social media in much the same way that you do, although I used to be a lot more active and have a lot more profiles. But you say, "I don't really understand why people share stuff on any social network", which I understand the sentiment behind but disagree with. I've known a lot of people dealing with issues both big and small, who have shared what was going on with them, found other people who are going through something similar, and found a network to support them. I think perhaps the depth of what is shared varies from site to site; for example, Facebook is often seen as the most public network and most people won't share anything more revealing than what they had for lunch, which is why photos of meals seem to be so common. On the other hand, networks like tumblr are much more anonymous (although not always completely) and therefore the kind of deeper sharing and support I've witnessed is more likely to be found there. --EmLouBrough (discuss • contribs) 15:06, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3: Information Overload!
--Wecandobetter (discuss • contribs) 12:26, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

In my every day life I never felt “distracted” by the unlimited information that you can find online. But I can easily understand the feeling that some people may have, we are flooded by a huge number of input on the web, and especially now with mobile device, social networks and instant messaging software the number of data have grown immensely, and of course the work behind this data have grown too, and for some people may cause issue, like being distracted or being stressed.

And even if you think that the overcome of information may be not a big problem for the society, New York Time blog did an article where they researched how the issue of dealing with a lot of information on internet, especially dealing with e-mail and instant messaging might cause a drag on the nation economy, and how the time lost on the web can generate bigger problems than just your procrastination for your essay due in a day or two.

It quite interesting what Sherry Turkle reflects on “Alone together: why we expect more from technology and less from each other”, in the book she says how from the 80s until now the number of distraction that children have during their homework have grown by just the television or a video game to all the activity that we can find online, and how the multitasking skills is almost crucial for a successful life.

Personally I don't think the problem is internet but the nature of the human being, even before the web people had problem of distraction and dealing with real life, being online just provided us a new way to escape. In my opinion the best contributing factors on dealing with this problems of abundance on information online is living an interesting life, at the end from my point of view I am not distracted by the web when I am doing something that I really care, and you can see how was my day by checking my attendance on Facebook; but it quite interesting what Clay Shirky says that is not a problem of info overloading but a filter failure, and how sorting your filter out may help your "problem" to get smaller and less effective on you. In conclusion I think that may be more interesting to ask our self how much of the “Important” information on the web are we really using?, and how much it's just garbage that feed us just because we are bored or not interested in what we are doing. Wecandobetter (discuss • contribs) 01:24, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments
I think you have a pretty interesting point of view on the usage of information especially online. I liked your argument that people always had the problem of distraction and just have more opportunities now. But on the other hand I think that the more opportunities you have, the more you're about to do something you prefer instead of e.g. homework. That is supported by the fact that online content is created for us in a way that catches our attention. The article you linked is really interesting and fits well to your argumentation. SimonBrinkmann (discuss • contribs) 21:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Wecandobetter, some really good points about how it can be us and not what's online to fault. however i do believe that what's online can be hard to filter due to the amount of rubbish that's on there. i was also wondering how you find information? for example a essay as it can be quite difficult sometimes to find the right sources when there are that many online which. also totally agree with the fact that that people need to live there life i don't even think it has to be interesting but interactions with people and the world instead of what's on a screen as it dehumanizes our views or reality and life.Lubo95 (discuss • contribs) 11:21, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise 4 - Wikibook Project Reflective Account
The Wikibooks project in my opinion was really interesting, because it was a big and difficult challenge to face, and a vast project to work on from an individual point of view and a group prospective too. As I am going to explain better during this post one of the most difficult but at the same time intriguing of all the Wikibooks was the challenge of being an individual mind that works for a specific goal and a group mind that works for the same goal but in a larger way, and whatever you do during your work will influence maybe drastically the group and final result, and in the same time whatever the others and the group of work do to you or your segment will change your prospective on your duties and on your decisions and the final result; the hardest task of this Wikibooks project was to balance in a good way the individual and the group, because if one of the two parts would have taken over the other even for bit, it would have caused a big risk towards the final Wikibook page and the final goal.

One of the biggest problem that I faced during this project, as I said before was the interaction between the one and the group; because I was quite busy with other works and duties for the university I started working on the Wikibooks project later than the others, and when I looked at the discussion page on Wikibook it was already full of ideas and content towards the actual page, and most of the big decisions were already been taken, I had quite a few problems even just to understand or interact with the discussion page because this vastness of never ending content kept me away form a proper interaction, especially towards the big decision giving me a few problem because I could express my opinion on something because it was a bit too late, or I couldn't choose the topic that I though was the most interesting for myself and for my culture because as I said before the group had already taken a decision and I arrived a bit too late; but I was mostly my fault so I started working on the something that maybe was not the best for me but was what the group needed towards the final result. Other than that all of the work during the Wikibooks project without any major problem and in the end I think the me as an individual, my seminar group and the big group made a good job overall covering in the best way possible our topic and achieving and I thing was the task of this project.

In the end during this Wikibooks project I learned a lot on how to work alone and together at the same time, and I learned quite a lot of information on what is really the Cyber Terrorism, his history and the most important terrorist attacks that have made this topic really interesting especially in these days, I gained a lot of information of “Hacktivist” in his general term, and about all the history of Anonymous, on how they started and their most important hack like: Operation Payback and WikiLeaks, or the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street; doing so I contributed on my small part of the project but at the same time I have been part of something bigger for a bigger goal that could have been achieved just from multiple individual working together for the same project and goal. Wecandobetter (discuss • contribs) 10:25, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Comments
Wecandobetter (discuss • contribs) 10:24, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

I think you make some good points here about autonomy in the project. I also found it difficult at times to keep up with the discussion page as without a notification system it was very easy to miss long interactions if you did not check the page even for just a few hours, do you think there would be a way to bypass this problem in the future?--Idkun (discuss • contribs) 11:27, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
You made a number of significant contributions to chapter content (particularly in relation to sections on cyberterrorism, as well as case studies on Arab Spring/Occupy, Estonia and Anonymous, for which you appear to be a key contributor). All edits are very well written, with interwiki and external links, cited scholarship and a wide range of sources both academic and topical used to inform discussion of concepts and phenomena, although a little more criticality and a little less description would have helped. The progression made during the wiki exercises shows a clear learning curve and development of skills, thinking and research. A pity you came in very late to the discussion.

Wiki Exercises


 * Good. Among other things, good entries will make a clear point in a clear way. They will relate concepts to original examples in a straightforward fashion. They will make effective use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons). They may also demonstrate a broader understanding of the module's themes and concerns, and are likely to show evidence of reading and thinking about the subject material. The wiki markup formatting will be very clear.

Content (weighted 20%)

 * Your contribution to the book page gives an excellent brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is an excellent range of concepts associated with your subject, and the effort to deliver critical definitions, drawing from relevant literature and scholarship, and your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is very much in evidence. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover an excellent range and depth of subject matter.

Understanding (weighted 30%)

 * Reading and research:
 * evidence of critical engagement with set materials, although some ideas and procedures more securely grasped than others
 * evidence of independent reading of somewhat circumscribed range of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material
 * Argument and analysis:
 * well-articulated and well-supported argument featuring variable depth of understanding
 * satisfactory level of evidence of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position in discussion);
 * satisfactory level of evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections in discussion);
 * evidence of variable independent critical ability

Engagement (weighted 50%)

 * Evidence from contributions to both editing and discussion of content to a variable standard (i.e. volume and breadth of activity as evidenced through contribs)
 * Satisfactory engagement with and learning from other Wikipedians about the task of writing/editing content for a Wikibook
 * Reflexive, creative and fairly well-managed use of discussion pages using deployment of somewhat limited judgement relating to key issues, concepts or procedures

Overall Mark % available on Succeed

FMSU9A4marker (discuss • contribs) 15:00, 3 May 2016 (UTC)