Friday, March 27, 2009

Crowdsourcing Legal Goldfarming?

When I learned about goldfarming in my own research for our tech talk in group 5, and after hearing Annie’s lecture about it in class, it got me thinking about crowdsourcing as well. To me these are two very interesting topics regarding the usage of technology and people. In my mind, I automatically think the crowdsourcing is good and legal, and that godlfarming is bad an illegal. Through my research both inside and outside of class I have come to a conclusion that this is not always the case.

As we know crowdsourcing is when a company or person needs to find a solution or get something done, so they post their problem to several people who do the research to try to find the answer, and a reward (usually money) is given to the person who gets it right. To me this sounds like a god idea. People search for others to do research for them and they get paid at the end. But this could easily be used to take advantage of people. One instance of old-school crowdsourcing comes to mind is in Huckle Berry Finn where he has to paint a fence, but gets others to do it for him. This would have been ok if he gave the people a reward who worked for him instead of just left them with nothing. This could easily be done today. A company could refuse to pay someone, or if the company is small enough, just take the solution, money, and run. Crowdsourcing is a great idea and can get a lot of stuff done, but like everything else, there are ways of getting around it, and people who will try to cheat others out of money.

Goldfarming isn’t always a bad thing. Lets look at one specific type of goldfarming, videogames. First off its cheating for the person to sell their character online to someone else to do the dirty work for them. The whole point of a game is to play it, and if you are paying someone else to play it, what’s the point? Why do you even have the game? But on another standpoint, when people sell their character to someone, they are providing a job for that person, and in many cases they are getting paid more working on someone’s character than they would if they had another job. Although the gamer doesn’t want to play certain parts of a game, they are giving other people money to play the game for them which is not only giving a source of income to the goldfarmer, but also opportunities to play the game. Although people are cheating because they are paying others to play the game for them, it’s their choice how they want to play the game. Just like crowdsourcing there are ways that people will get cheated out of their money. Sellers might not pay with a sufficient account, or the goldfarmer might not give the character back without receiving more money. A ransom if you will.

To me, I see goldfarming and crwodsourcing as something very similar. Both want to have a solution to a problem (or in the case of videogames, want to level up their character but either don’t have time, or don’t want to do the tedious job off leveling up) and pay others to find the solution to their problem. Likewise both crowdsourcing and goldfarming require many people to work on a solution for the seller. I think that in time crowdsourcing will become the best and most cost efficient way to get a solution to a problem a company has, and goldfarming will be very similar to crowdsourcing, where people pay others to do a tedious task for them where normally they wouldn’t have the time or the desire to do it themselves.

Here I have found a link to a video where a gamer has claimed how to get lost of gold very fast in the World of Warcraft. This eliminates the argument that paying someone real money to get you lots of gold is cheating, but does beating the system (by using the methods this person displays on their video) make it ok if you are doing it yourself for your character?
http://www.wowgoldfarmingguide.com/WoW/Gold-Farming-Guide/index.php

3 comments:

  1. I'm happy to see someone with relatively similar thoughts to my own regarding gold farming and crowdsourcing.

    One thing I'd like your opinion on is the exploitation of crowdsourcing. While there are ways of cheating the system for money, I think that even when the system is working as the crowdsourcers intend it to, the public suffers. The reason for crowdsourcing (as we discussed in class) is to save money. While I am a strong advocate for community involvement and general good will towards others, I see crowdsourcing as we discussed in class as exploitation. For instance, with the threadless tshirt company example, threadless has no need to pay expensive tshirt designers, instead they save a large amount of money by only paying their *designers* a relatively miniscule bounty. While on one hand, this is a market driven society, is this really fair? The company is taking money from potential designers and returning a tiny portion of it to a few people who are rich with time.

    While I think that this sort of imaginative influence is great for society, I believe the overall effect is a detriment to society. Society thrives through specialization, and once specialists start losing their jobs to the general public, it would seem society would start driving in reverse. Would you agree that there is some fundamental detriment to society through the use of crowdsourcing for economic benefit?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought it was interesting what you said about goldfarming and crowdsourcing. I agree with you that they both have a future in our busy world, and it seems that people do not have enough time in their days to get stuff done or figure certain things out.

    I think that crowdsourcing and goldfarming are not necessarily bad, but they can become a problem. I think that both of these things when used in excess can become a quick easy solution to our problems we face like passing a certain level in a game so that we can enjoy it, or finding the answer to a question through the use of other peoples knowledge. I think that if these two models are used too much we will strip ourselves of being able to think about things differently and figuring things out on our own. It may not seem like anyone is being harmed, and it can be very beneficial to ourselves and others; but we also need to consider what these models could be doing for our own personal well being as well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I completely agree with you about crowdsourcing possibly being deceptive. I mean it wouldn't be that difficutlt to just not pay someone.
    I don't agree with goldfarming at all! I mean are people really that lazy that they have to hire someone to play for them. I am not an avid gamer so maybe I am just missing something. I understand those playing the games get paid but it doesn't seem like they can make enough to support themselves or their families. I can't understand paying someone so while your working your fictional character and be getting ahead in a game. It's similar to when people use real money to buy virtual things. I am a member of facebook and sometimes play the games they have like Vampire Wars. To win more favor points, which are used to buy things in the game, players can use their actual credit card to buy those favor points. I'm sorry but I like to be ahead and win games but I draw the line at using real money to buy something I don't even actually use.
    I like your last paragraph where you compare goldfarming and crowdsourcing. Never ahd a realized how closely they are related. I agee that crowdsourcing, if done correctly, will be used more and will become effective for many companies looking to figure out just what their customers want.

    ReplyDelete