Sunday, April 29, 2007

Boxing aint for PUNKs



Boxing is a very popular sport viewed widely across the world. It has transformed itself from a brutal massacre to a highly organized institution of physical agility, strength and technique. Boxing originated in the early 18th century in England. At this time boxing was very different from what it is today. The word boxing had not been developed yet it was actually called bare knuckle fights or fisticuffs.

The bare knuckle fights had no rules and no referee or time limit, so participants would fight until they couldn’t go anymore or someone gave up. Sometimes a fight could go on for hours and no tactic was excluded, so this meant anything went such as choking, kicking, wrestling etc. For many years no one paid any attention to the weight of each participant regardless of who was fighting. Furthermore, professional fighting was only including middle and upper class at the time. This method was also another way to settle any quarrels. As this type of sport blossomed people began to sponsor fighters with money as prizes, some built small arenas and opened schools to teach the “art of self- defense.”

The first boxing champion was James Figg in the year of 1719. Figg was the reason that this sport became so popular due to all of his sparring while traveling around England. In the year 1740 James Figg had died and his protégé would then follow in his footsteps, George Taylor. Before Figg died, in 1734 Jack Broughton had devised a set of rules called the “Broughton Rules”. These rules just explained that it was illegal to eye gouge and hit an opponent while his was on the ground. When Broughton died a lot of these rules were not enforced therefore it became known as the era of “The Double Crosses”.

The next important person in the history of boxing is Daniel Mendoza. The reason why he is so important is because he actually designed a system that focused on both physical and mental strength. This combined things like guarding, sidestepping and using an appropriate left jab. This regained the public’s affection towards the sport. Since he was relying on this system, he won the British championship in 1791.

Bill Richmond, “The Black Terror“, was the first black boxer who crossed over to Britain. He was victorious over several top heavy weights but unfortunately was knocked out by the previous champion Tom Cribb in 1805. Tom Cribb was challenged twice more by another black fighter, Tom Molineaux, in 1810 and 1811 but still won. The only difference was that Molineaux was the first American to challenge a British title. The first American champion was Tom Hyer in February of 1849. This actually took place in America while using the “English prize ring rules”. And finally the first world champion was John C. Heenan in April of 1860. This fight lasted for 37 gruesome rounds.

John L. Sullivan became the next heavy weight champion and remained that way for the following 10 years. Some thought of him as “American’s first true sports hero”.He expertly earned $900,000 during his 10 year career.

The fight that dethroned Sullivan from his 10yr winning streak was with James J Corbett. This fight took place in 1892. It was fought with gloves, prohibited wrestling and the rounds lasted 3 minutes. These rules were called the “Marquise of Queensbury Rules”. These rules are the basis for today’s boxing.

The fisticuff matches of today has had plenty of fighters in and out of the rings. Winning and losing by forfeits, knockouts, and judges watching how many punches are thrown and how many are actually landed. Boxing is now comprised of many different rules. Some examples of these rules are, first, that it only lasts twelve rounds; you cannot wrestle nor strike your opponent in the back of his head; it is open to all those who can win, no matter your “class”. Boxing is separated into sections of weight and there is a league for woman as well.

Boxing has come a long way. Good fighters get paid very well for doing this. It takes a lot of training, the best agility and the fastest speed. Boxing is not just a gruesome fight that never ends anymore. It is considered a sport that has rules and gives many rewards. Many in today’s society enjoy watching and taking part in these fights. It gives entertainment to many and fulfillment to the fighters.

This Lead to the boxing we see on TV now, with some of the greatest fighters like, Roy Jones Jr., Bernard Hopkins, Mike Tyson, and Floyd "Pretty Boy" Mayweather.


Just thought I'd talk about something totally different, Everyone have a great summer ;-)
References-
Early Boxing, (01 July 2004)
Hickoksports, 29 April 2007, from
Boxing, (12 August 2001), 29 August 2007, from
Early Boxing, Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia, 29 August 2007, from

Friday, April 13, 2007

Go play with yourself and STOP worrying about Network Neutrality


Network Neutrality?
Network neutrality (equivalently "net neutrality", "internet neutrality" or "NN") refers to a principle applied to residential broadband networks, and potentially to all broadband networks. Precise definitions vary, but a broadband network free of restrictions on the kinds of equipment attached and the modes of communication allowed would be considered neutral by most advocates, provided it met additional tests relating to the degradation of various communication streams by others. Arguably, no network is completely neutral, hence neutrality represents for some an ideal condition toward which networks and their operators may strive.

In other words......
Network Neutrality is the guiding principle that preserves the free and open Internet. Net Neutrality ensures that all users can access the content or run the applications and devices of their choice. With Net Neutrality, the network's only job is to move data, not choose which data to privilege with higher quality service. Net Neutrality prevents the companies that control the wires from discriminating against content based on its source or ownership. Net Neutrality is the reason why the Internet has driven economic innovation, democratic participation, and free speech online. It's why the Internet has become an unrivaled environment for open communications, civic involvement and free speech.
What's at Stake?
Before long, all media such as, TV, phone and the Web will come to your home via the same broadband connection. The dispute over Net Neutrality is about who'll control access to new and emerging technologies. With the internet everyone has the right to access any information, services and application that are available. But without Network Neutrality, the Internet will look more like cable TV. Network owners will decide which channels, content and applications are available; consumers will have to choose from their menu. Without Net Neutrality, decisions now made collectively by millions of users will be made in corporate boardrooms. The choice we face now is whether we can choose the content and services we want, or whether the broadband barons will choose for us. Do internet users really want someone we don't no with a business suit to decide what is appropriate for us to see? Are we kids that need to be watched and have decisions made for us?


Small business Vs. Big Corporations
Small business owners benefit from an Internet that allows them to compete directly, not one where they can't afford the price of entry. Net Neutrality ensures that innovators can start small and dream big about being the next EBay or Google without facing insurmountable hurdles. Without Net Neutrality, start ups and entrepreneurs will be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay for a top spot on the Web. There would be no competition, big corporations has the most money so they would basically be buying everything and leaving nothing for the small businesses. The creators of EBay and Google at least had the opportunity to create something new and everyone uses it. Why take away the dreams of other small businesses? Maybe they can create something better than EBay and Google. Taking away Network Neutrality is like taking away life and hope for small businesses.


Who wants to Destroy Network Neutrality
The nation's largest telephone and cable companies, including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner, wants to have control of the internet. They want to decide what Websites should be allowed to access and what shouldn't. They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data. They want to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video, while slowing down or blocking their competitors. These companies have a new vision for the Internet. Instead of an even playing field, they want to reserve express lanes for their own content and services, or those from big corporations that can afford the steep tolls, and leave the rest of us on a winding dirt road. Some telecommunications executives have argued that they should be able to prioritize information from sources paying higher fees or serving higher purposes. A prioritized system, which would create an Internet fast lane for higher-paying content providers, would help fund network improvements, according to Internet service providers


Trying to keep Network Neutrality Alive
SavetheInternet.com is one of the main sites that are made up of hundreds of groups that are trying to save Network Neutrality. Their are other supporters such as such as Amazon.com, Earthlink, EBay, Google, Intel, Microsoft, Skype, Vonage and Yahoo. If anyone other than these networks would like to help they as that people should sign the savetheinternet.com petition or call congress and demand them to allow Network Neutrality to continue. In the article by K.C. Jones, she says Net neutrality opponents, including President Bill Clinton's former press secretary Mike McCurry, also argue that Internet service providers should be able to direct heavy traffic and screen out some material, like viruses and spam. They say some content, like medical information, is more important -- and therefore should take priority over -- other information. They argue that innovative applications in medicine and other fields will spring from improved services levels guaranteed through higher premiums and government regulation would kill the freedom that has allowed the Internet to flourish.
Extra Info
The Internet has become a vital engine for democratic participation, economic innovation and free speech. As the Internet becomes our public square and economic marketplace, Internet access must be regarded as a civil right for all Americans. The attempt by some to act as Internet gatekeepers imperils the social and economic promise that the Internet holds for our future. Congress and other public officials have a vital role to play in preserving Internet freedom and ensuring that America's communications infrastructure benefits the common good.


My Opinion
Wow, I definitely wouldn't want congress to take away Network Neutrality. I love being able to access information and services that I want. I don't want a company to decide whether something is good or bad for my eyes. I'm not a lab rat. I'm tired of big corporations trying to take over everything just so they can make a profit and try to beat out other companies. Why should internet users be punished just because some dumb corporation wants to control the all websites and the world. That's not how it works, its freedom to see what I want to see. As long as its not breaking any laws then whats the problem? Internet users are not little babies that need to be nurished and shown what to do. We have a mind of our own and we don't need people in high places trying to turn us into robots and make us do what they say. They should not take away our internet freedom. Its Violating the first Amendment of the internet. Its bad enough that their are internet police that can see my emails and instant messages. And now they want to control everything I see and do. This isn't China where they can hide Tiananmen Square protests from their internet users. China should be a huge example because the U.S. complained to Google for allowing them to hide information from the Chinese citizens eyes, but now these corporations want to control us the same way China controls their people. Why complain when someone else does it if they are trying to do the same thing? The internet has improved throughout the years and its one of the best ways for open communication, accessing information and free speech. Why take that away from people just because certain corporations want to have control of everything. They are expecting us to PAY for certain information in order to have High speed on it. That's just crazy, why pay when its already free. Network Neutrality also helps people decide certain political issues. Although the internet has its flaws, it gives people access to the truth and other views about many political issues. Why watch a station like FOXNEWS that is basically in favor of Republicans when i can just go online and see what others has to say and there issues wont be biased. You can get information so much faster online then having to go buy a newspaper. We have the right to write what we want, when we want. Why take that away? Why should a company make decisions on what is seen and unseen? The internet is great the way it is. Why don't these big corporations go help and donate some money to Hurricane Katrina victims instead of worrying about the Network Neutrality. The internet is fine the way it is, so LEAVE IT ALONE.

Go play with yourselves Dumbazz
References-
Network Neutrality, Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia, 13 April 2007, from
Save the Internet.com, Join the Fight for the Internet, 13 April 2007, from
K.C. Jones, Net Neutrality Debate Remains Contentious, 16 March 2007
Information week, 13 April 2007, from
Ublearns

Friday, April 6, 2007

Real vs. Virtual


Real life Vs. Virtual Economy
Real life can be a controversial term. Some people use it as a value judgement to describe "productive" activities, specifically jobs or the support of one's family. In this case, activities described as real life are seen as "better" than other activities, such as playing video games or surfing the internet. However, many speakers use the phrase in an ironic sense to describe an alternative to their own activities, which may be valued as more important.
A Virtual economy (or sometimes synthetic economy) is an emergent economy existing in a virtual persistent world, usually in the context of an Internet game. People enter these virtual economies recreationally rather than by necessity; however, some people do interact with them for "real" economic benefit.

Intersection of real life and virtual economy
The internet has evolved tremendously throughout the years. It has also lead to the creation of virtual economies. So many people has joined these virtual economies such as second life and they enjoy it. People are actually spending many ours out of their daily lives to attend to these virtual economies. But these virtual economies aren't just games anymore, they are someone what looked at as "real Life." Virtual economies actually involves real money, and people tend to do exactly what they would do in their daily lives online. People buy houses as they would in real life. People go shopping, as they would in real life. People has jobs, families, food, and go have fun, as they would in real life. It then leaves the question, is virtual economies the new life? In my opinion, I would have to say yes and no. Yes because people are really spending their own money and actually making money back. People can actually build friendships and relationships. There was actually a case where two people from an economy actually got married in real life. But everything has its flaws. Although you can do similar things online as in real life, there are some exaggerations. In the real world a person with an average salary would not spend so much money on shopping and partying on a daily basis. Also people on virtual economies tend to do a lot of vicious things to others because they know they will not be punished for it as they would be in real life. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I'm pretty sure a lot of people may argue that its real and other may say its just dumb and fake. But I just see it as people making time out of their day to live another life or in other words, a FAKE life.

Defining Open economy and Closed economy
An open economy is an economy in which people, including businesses, can trade in goods and services with other people and businesses in the international community at large. But a
closed economy cannot make international trades.


Open Economy
Entropia Universe is an online virtual universe designed by Swedish software company MindArk. It advertises a unique "Real Cash Economy (RCE)" in which Entropia Universe currency (PED - Project Entropia Dollars) can be redeemed back into real world funds at a fixed exchange rate with the U.S. dollar, where 10 PED = $1 U.S. dollar. This means that virtual items acquired inside Entropia Universe have a real cash value, and a participant may, at any time, withdraw their accumulated PEDs back into real world currencies according to the fixed exchange rate. The Entropia online community claims to have over 563000 registered participants from over 220 countries, with the average number of players online at any one time previously stated to be around 600 (as of August 2005). The community has produced several real world marriages as well as creating a multitude of cross-border friendships.
The Entropia Universe entered the Guinness World Book of Records in 2004 for the most expensive virtual item ever sold.


Closed economy
EverQuest II (commonly abbreviated as EQ2), based upon the popular EverQuest, is a fantasy massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) developed by Sony Online Entertainment (SOE) . It features graphics and gameplay vastly updated from its predecessor as well as NPCs that use audio for speech. In the game, players explore a fantasy world of sword and sorcery, fighting monsters and enemies for treasure and experience points and interacting with other players. As they progress, players advance in level, gaining power, prestige and abilities. Players can also procure powerful items for their characters in a variety of ways: through slaying monsters (and then looting the remains), doing "quests" (tasks and adventures given by non-player characters ( NPCs) in which a reward is given upon success), or by gathering raw materials and then fashioning them, via numerous trade skills such as tailoring or blacksmithing, into useful (or not-so-useful, but nevertheless fun) items.

Differences and Similarities
With Entropia Universe, people are basically living a fake life. They go spend there money on business trades and other things. its mostly about spending money and living a daily life. But Everquest II, does not involve people spending their real money in a virtual game, it focuses more on people interacting and joining together to kill monsters and facing certain challenges with a one another, going from one quest to another.
Although there goals are different, both games help people interact with others and build friendships and sometimes close relationships. Another similarity is the labor hours involved. Both games involves people putting in a lot of hours to accomplish things. Both games also involves human activity and has its benefits.
Real money into virtual worlds
Although it may seem fun to spend use real money in virtual economies, it still has its flaws. People can lose their money very easy through virtual communities. Other players may cause you to lose your money so they can benefit from it. Also people may hack into your system and steal your money. Unlike the game monopoly, people would really get angry if they lost their money. This can also lead to an addiction. People may get very addicted and constantly put their own money into it hoping to receive more. It can turn into a gambling problem that is uncontrollable.

My Opinion
People are always saying that they wish they could change themselves or live another life. Virtual economies allows them to do that. It helps them live a life that they dream and hope for. But what people don't realize is that its just a dream, its not reality.
References-
Edward Castronova, Virtual Worlds, Virtual Economies, 1 May 2006
Business Weekly online, 6 April 2007, from
Entropia Universe, Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia, 6 April 2007, from
Everquest 2, Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia, 6 April 2007, from
Real life, Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia, 6 April 2007, from
Virtual economies, Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia, 6 April 2007, from
Open and Closed Economy, Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia, 6 April 2207, from
Life's a Game, News Feature, 4 January 2007
Nature publishing group, 6 April 2007, from
UBLearns