Group items tagged

This seems like it could be really useful, in theory. While the video demonstrated that the program works really well with a well-enunciating woman with a fairly moderate American English accent, I would be curious to see how the program recognizes accents. I know it says that it attunes itself to individual voices, but whether that works in practice is not really apparent on the site. I guess it reminds me of that episode in IT Crowd, when Roy convinces his boss that he can converse with his computer. But still cool!

I'd suggest we take a closer look at this article toward the end of the term (specifically week 9), as we consider the multiple opportunities for "publishing" in the digital era; blogs have begun to end up as research tools in a number of ways, and this article will push us toward larger debates about academic communication/publishing that are raging all around...

I know the owner of Savage Minds if we want to talk with him. Please let me know.

Blogging affords a saoln-like place of exploration - sure. I was underwhelmed by this piece - but the context is probably helpful. The piece is a review. In that it is treating blogging seriously by performing a review in a respectable journal, I appreciate it. However, I want to poke at the edge what tools are acceptable - blogs seem respectable here. That's great, and very professional. But when I want a tool that will help me think through something, I'd rather use something that is less polished. Also a way to engage non-anthropologists - but are academic blogs engaging? Some are - I'm interested in how to create a non-boring academic blog. The end of the review gets at this problem - the author hopes the official AAA blog will use the format to spark debate and create interesting writing; but the status of it as an official blog makes that difficult. The front page is here http://blog.aaanet.org/ I would be interested in what folks think of it in light of this piece.

It is interesting how this article brings in the important aspect of collaboration and peer reviews, when analyzing and ethnographic work. The participation of readers and contributors in these blogs range from professional anthropologist to just interested readers, which causes an unbalance on what traditionally has been a seen as peer review work. The multi-directional and multilevel dialogue on these blogs create that malleability of the boundaries of the uses, effects and design of the ethnographic work. This act of participatory input from "multiple voices" makes the presentation of the ethnographic/anthropological work as another "subject" to be studied and analyze, it becomes an auto-reflection of the methodological design of the ethnographic work itself. Presenting the ethnographic work in a blogging format brings more levels of analyzing the data and the interpretation of this data.

Pretty good list! Thin annotations, but the websites for the tools tell all. Some tools I use regularly in the archives and some I've heard about but not really investigated, like Omeka. From Omeka website: "Museums need systems that allow them to engage their publics and build communities around objects." I may do a toolplay on this. Outcome: Omeka offers museums, libraries, and archives easy ways to push content to their online visitors through feeds and rotating featured items and exhibits on the homepage, while also giving visitors opportunities to contribute content to a museum's digital collections, comment on items, or share museum object data with a visitor's personal social networks.

Oh wow! This is a much better (and more comprehensive) list of digital tools than the one I just posted... Awesome find!