Skip to main content

Home/ Net 308/508 Internet Collaboration and Organisation S1 2012/ Group items tagged sensing

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Jarrad Long

Sell Your Experiences: A Market Mechanism based Incentive for Participatory Sensing - 14 views

http://www.csee.usf.edu/~labrador/Share/PapersToRead/GameTheory/Incentive%20participation.pdf (I'm doing mobile phone crowd-sourcing) Beyond the technological challenges that face participatory s...

Net308_508 collaboration crowd-sourcing participatory sensing

started by Jarrad Long on 24 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
theresia sandjaja

Why do people write for Wikipedia? Incentives to contribute to open-content publishing. - 45 views

This paper discusses the reasons why people would voluntarily share their knowledge to the online community. In the first section of the paper, the author uses theory based on the scientific commun...

Net308_508 Wikipedia Contribution publishing

Velia Torres

Open content systems achieve high quality - 10 views

The Wall Street Journal (2012). Open Source Code Quality On Par with Proprietary Code in 2011 Coverity Scan Report. Retrieved on March 18, 2012 from http://www.marketwatch.com/story/open-source-cod...

OpenSource Net308_508 community quality Linux WoC

started by Velia Torres on 24 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Jarrad Long

Nericell: Rich Monitoring of Road and Traffic Conditions using Mobile Smartphones - 5 views

http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/78568/Nericell-Sensys2008.pdf (I'm doing mobile phone crowd-sourcing) Written by three researchers from Microsoft Research India, this article explores the idea...

Net308_508 collaboration crowd-sourcing participatory sensing

started by Jarrad Long on 24 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Jarrad Long

Become a Citizen Scientist - 10 views

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/imagine/20110506_DMI/index.php?startid=10 (I'm doing mobile phone crowd-sourcing) This article describes a suite of participatory sensing apps developed at UCLA th...

Net308_508 collaboration crowd-sourcing participatory sensing

started by Jarrad Long on 24 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Mitchell Houwen

Review of Lazy Virtues: teaching writing in the edge of Wikipedia. - 22 views

I think it is very astute of Potts to refer to the different generations as 'digital natives' and 'digital immigrants'. We (I include myself in the younger generation) have grown up in a world of c...

Net308_508 Wikipedia Educatin

Dean Strautins

Internet Based Collaboration and Organisation in Education Institutions - 20 views

I will post not much to try to draw these papers to the top of the list in an attempt to attract comment as it now is listed as 85 of 86 posts.

Collaboration in Higher Education

Jarrad Long

TxtEagle Raises $8.5 Million To Give 2.1 Billion a Voice - 7 views

http://techcrunch.com/2011/04/12/txteagle-raises-8-5-million/ (I'm doing mobile phone crowd-sourcing) While most people would associate mobile crowd-sourcing with the developed world (after all,...

Net308_508 crowd-sourcing participatory sensing collaboration

started by Jarrad Long on 24 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Sian Cooper

To use or not to use web 2.0 in higher education? - 11 views

Grossek, G. (2009). To use or not to use web 2.0 in higher education? Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences. Pp478-482. Retrieved 21st March 2012 from http://webpages.csus.edu/~sac43949/pdfs/to%...

Net308_508 web 2.0 wikis education

started by Sian Cooper on 21 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
Dean Strautins

Good collaboration - The result of structured fighting - 22 views

Structured Fighting. Clay made it clear that the Internet on it's own is not going to bring World Peace. The more people get together the more they can disagree and fight. By applying a structure f...

Linux Shirky OpenSource Collaboration structure OpenedSystems StackOverflow StackExchange

Victoria Jobling

The Revolutions Were Tweeted: Information Flows during the 2011 Tunisian and Egyptian R... - 4 views

  •  
    Lotan, G., Graeff, E., Ananny, M., Gaffney, D., Pearce, I., & boyd, d. (2011). The Revolutions Were Tweeted: Information Flows during the 2011 Tunisian and Egyptian Revolutions. International Journal of Communications, 5, 1375-1405. Retrieved March 24, 2012, from http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1246/643 This article investigates how information was disseminated via Twitter during the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. It is clear that there were advantages in relying upon Twitter and social media during this time, because these sites provided real-time updates that mainstream media could not convey, due to the limitations of the platform, or censorship (Grossman, 2009; p.1399). The use of hashtags or key words assisted in the organisation of information, such as #sidibouzid and #Tunisia (p. 1376; p. 1395). However, the constant and rapid flow of content made it difficult to determine what is false and what is legitimate information - Twitter's strength and weakness in this situation. It is essential to understand how information can be organised and filtered through the positions of 'actor types' (classification of users in this study), making this article valuable to the study of political protests. There were many different actors mentioned but the most important contributors to the dissemination of content were journalists, bloggers, and activists. These actors had a tendency to retweet information from the same actor type or amongst the three aforementioned categories, to essentially create a sense of reliable organisation to the Twitter chaos (p. 1393). The study also concluded that individuals, rather than organisations, were considered more reliable during the uprising (p. 1398). This appears to demonstrate the scepticism associated with mainstream media in a society that no longer wishes to be talked 'at', but rather invo
  •  
    This article relates my topic in its discussion of Twitter usage in online activism. The online activist group Anonymous (my topic of choice) also performed activist activities surrounding Egypt and Tunisia. Much of Anonymous' activities were organised through the use of Twitter making this article quite relevant. As suggested in the article, Anonymous did appear to have certain high powered actors who highlighted information of particular relevance to the operations, affecting the flow of information through the Twitter network. The article is published in a peer-reviewed journal making it a highly reliable source. It is also quite recent, written in 2011, which is a huge asset given the rate at which social networking technology progresses. The article is also perfectly relevant to the discussion of Twitter usage in political protests. The way that information flows and is determined critical or irrelevant through various actors' retweets is an important topic. I found the article quite useful as the topic is closely related to the online activism performed by the Anonymous group. This article contributes a great deal of value to this collaborative resource development project on a whole, as it is a reliable source, is very recent and it is highly relevant, dealing with Twitter as a collaboration and organisation tool.
michelangelo magasic

STEAL THIS FILM - 2 views

  •  
    Steal this Film is a documentary about bittorrent culture centred around the story of the Swedish torrent tracking website The Pirate Bay. In telling their story, the Pirate Bay members relate quite early on that they are not only a filesharing website but also an organisation for free speech. We see bittorrent organisations as situated within the wider context of media piracy and filesharing networks as clandestine organisations that must be diffuse in order to evade detection by anti p2p groups. The Pirate Bay's struggle against media outlets is elevated to a battle against American cultural hegemony. Within this context Kent's (2011) reading of the swarm as a simulacra of group identity can be seen as a defence - a tactic - as deCerteau (1984) puts it for the weak to re-appropriate the power of the strong. Filesharing is a form of protest. By publicising their struggle, The Pirate Bay build a bridge between physical and virtual communities. The film features spontaneous interviews with people on the street."The internet is too big, you can't fight it, (27mins)" says a girl with blue hair. Is she referring to the network of computers which make up the internet, or the strength of communities which practice filesharing, the linkages and solidarity of people across the world? This footage awakens the reader's conceptions of a link between physical and virtual activities, online collaboration breeds a solidarity between users which can echo beyond the activities of the swarm. We see bittorrent used not solely as a method for obtaining entertainment but as a vehicle for ideological struggle. The faces in the movie are conspicuously youthful and one sees that they collaborate not only in terms of files but also in ideas and viewpoints. We see bittorrent as a tool for worldwide collaboration/change. References Certeau, M. (1984), The Practice of Everyday Life. University of California Press, Berkeley. Kent M (2011), 'Strangers in the Sw
  • ...3 more comments...
  •  
    There is no escaping the debate about copyright when studying the Internet. This however is refreshing point of few surrounding the topic. The reliability of the source is sound as long as a viewer is wary of any bias as it is solely from the Pirate Bay point of view. There is a strong representation of a youth culture also. The youth appear tired of being force fed the institutionalized approach to media that had previously existed. As the interviewees comment, the raid on Pirate Bay was clearly a political power play and one that backfired. There is defiance towards America in particular as the documentary presents evidence of its attempt to pressure Sweden into sabotaging those who are 'threatening' Hollywood industries. Copyright laws do not translate across international boarders and for the first time, thanks to this documentary, I could actually see how this might play out in the real world. This is both valuable and useful in the overall understanding of the Bit torrent topic. Of particular importance to me was the statement made by one of the Piratbyran creators, Rasmus Fleischer, stated that they are 'our basic principle is not about building empires' (The League of Noble Peers, 2006). This is the most crucial difference between the Hollywood approach to copyright and the P2P approach to copyright. Just because media is made available for free consumption does not mean that it will not translate into sales on any level. I went away from this documentary feeling that industry producers and distributors need to get creative with their content, listen to their consumers and create a shared experience of shared benefit to both sides of the argument.
  •  
    This roughly thirty minute long documentary, while being a very "copy-left" focussed, helps to place BitTorrent within the context of global politics. It is about "ThePirateBay", one of the biggest BitTorrent trackers in history. ThePirateBay's servers are physically located in Sweden, and this documentary shows how Swedish law has interacted with American and international laws about copyright and file sharing. It uses various clips from many different interviews, including the people central to ThePirateBay but also Swedish citizens seemingly randomly interviewed on the street. It is interesting to note that many of them do seem to have some knowledge about ThePirateBay and also express their support for the site. This sense of community surrounding BitTorrent reminds me of the Australian youths in the "BitTorrents and Family Guy: teenage peer group interactions around a peer-to-peer Internet download community" paper. This documentary highlights the feeling of oppression and resistance to control of media which seems to underlie the communities who use BitTorrent. Combined with the copyright laws, these are worth thinking about because of how they influence the way people use BitTorrent to collaborate, and also how people collaborate to support file-sharing, including by demonstration as seen in the documentary.
  •  
    This film provides various aspects of online file sharing, particularly, in relation to music and movies. The topics discussed in the film include: the difference in copyright laws between America and Sweden, how online file sharing changed the nature of networking within society. The film also presented the contrast of perspectives of online file sharing held by younger consumers as opposed to those of the older producers. In America, major music and film industries regard peer-to-peer file sharing as an infringement to copyright, while in Sweden there is no copyright law for film and music productions that are available in bittorent. A Swedish user disputed that American copyright law should not intervene in other countries because there is no geographical limitation in the Internet. The age gap also highlighted different perspectives, for example, younger users believe in the right to public access while the older producers believe in that commodities (such as music and films) cannot be given to people for free. To argue this, the market of music and film industry cannot outlaw social change. Lastly, the activity of file sharing through bittorent has changed how the way society collaborates to exchange ideas and information. For example, the support to use bittorent is not documented in a fixed website but only transferred through online forums where users collaborate as social groups. This film relates well to the resources I had about Youtube in terms of different perspective based on age. Young people tend to use online media fluently and do not see copyright implications. The movements towards file sharing has become even more apparent, this is shown by social online collaboration is the current method to consume popular media, how the consumer recreate this media and contribute to the mass again.
  •  
    Steal this Film, is a short 30-minute documentary that looks at the social politics and debate about file sharing and the bit torrent client, focusing on Swedish torrent tracking website The Pirate Bay. The documentary outlines how file sharing and copyright is a touchy subject within American laws, and through the documentary we are able to hear differing opinions on who is right and who wrong. The various people that are interviewed who are involved with the Pirate Bay take a 'us against the world' approach and make it clear that technically they aren't doing anything wrong, and through the power of free speech they are making their voice heard. Numerous youths are also interviewed and each seem to be of the copyleft opinion that what they are doing is almost some sort of activism, and believe that these torrent communities are un-able to be stopped. I would also have to agree with this as a 'Pirate' myself and also through the learning that I have undertaken while at university, that this excuse by the Movie/Music industry that they aren't being hurt through piracy is totally utterly false and I think as one of the speakers in the video says "We aren't going to wake up one day and find that all music artists have died because of Piracy". In fact I would go as far to say that because of this cry-baby outlook by these industries that the bit torrent and file-sharing communities have been strengthened because of it.
  •  
    I was taken aback when I went to download 'Steal This Film' and it popped up as a torrent file in BitTorrent. I suppose I wasn't used to, what I perceived as, 'legitimate' content being provided in the form of a torrent. The film stated, "right now ten million people are using BitTorrent" and indeed, at the time of watching, I was also using BitTorrent. One of the things I found admirable, and also a little surprising, was the resilience of the Pirate Bay founders. Even after being raided and shut down by the authorities, their belief in what they were doing, and their advocacy of free speech, was too strong to just let go. I also found the film interesting in its depiction of the various anti piracy campaigns created by Hollywood film studios juxtaposed with the interviews of young people claiming that the amount of money made by Hollywood is "absurd". Even if crew members and writers are suffering at the hands of film piracy, like the people interviewed, I find it difficult to sympathise with Hollywood's view point when you can safely assume that the largest chunk of proceeds made from any film go to the 'talent' and not those people working so hard behind the scenes. Perhaps Hollywood losing money could be considered a positive outcome, as so many subpar films probably should never have been made in the first place. Perhaps having less money to fund any film on a whim will lead film studios to choose their projects more carefully, resulting in the delivery of quality rather than quantity to film consumers.
owen_davies

Influences on Cooperation in BitTorrent Communities - 16 views

Andrade, N., Mowbray, M., Lima, A., Wagner, G., & Ripeanu, M. (2005) Influences on Cooperation in BitTorrent Communities Retrieved from http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~matei/PAPERS/p2pecon.05.pd...

Net308_508 technology Bit Torrent community collaboration Cooperation

started by owen_davies on 23 Mar 12 no follow-up yet
jessica_mann

How to cheat BitTorrent and why nobody does - 19 views

Personally I use BitTorrent for the following reasons: I find it incredibly simple to use, the program loads quickly and doesn't seem to use much hardware resource and it isn't laced with advertise...

Net308_508 collaboration community BitTorrent

theresia sandjaja

Intellectual Property and the Cultures of BitTorrent Communities - 14 views

This reading emphasises that Intellect Property has now evolved from the issue of law, ethics and polities to the issue of culture. The shift of cultural model in consuming media online affects the...

Net308_508 collaboration BitTorrent

Tamlin Dobrich

Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? - 8 views

  •  
    Manjoo, F. (2009, September 28). Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? Time Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? is an article which suggests Wikipedia's achievement level has reached its peak and eventually will see its downfall. The article looks in depth at the potential causes for Wikipedia's slowing growth and how these elements could possibly lead to the community's eventual failure. It suggests one reason for Wikipedia's decelerating growth rate is simply that "the site has hit the natural limit of knowledge expansion" and the only possible remaining contributions are obscure topics and "janitorial" editing job such as formatting and fixing grammar. The article claims "Wikipedia's natural resource is emotion" and editors are motivated by the "rush of joy" they receive when contributing their unique wisdom to an audience of 300 million people. What this means is that as the need for significant edits diminishes, so too does participation enthusiasm. Additionally, as Wikipedia has grown, so too has the bureaucracy and complex laws of Wikipedia, resulting in a community that has become unwelcoming to novice Wikipedians. The article discusses how Wikipedia editors are made up of a narrow class of participants dominated by young males from wealthy countries and academic backgrounds. The Wikipedia author-base is not as broad and diverse as first thought and it seems "the encyclopedia is missing the voices of people in developing countries, women and experts in various specialties that have traditionally been divorced from tech". This too is given as a reason for Wikipedia's imminent downfall.
  • ...5 more comments...
  •  
    An interesting topic of diminishing contributors and a conclusion I had already theorised must be happening for the exact theories stated in the article. I think this article will be good to reflect on in future years. Maybe a future article will be on If You Do Not Innovate Then You Die. I see Wikipedia only having to start including a genealogy aspect where everyone can geo tag relatives grave sites and stories about then and their relatives and what they achieved in their life to see a boom in contributors and tie all the history in Wikipedia to real every day people. So when I read in Wikipedia about a civil war or history of a country I can also choose to see who's firends relatives were there at that time etc. Later DNA results can further be added. So I do not see Wikipedia dying if it Innovates.
  •  
    Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success? is an interesting article, as it suggests that since 2007, the number of people contributing to Wikipedia has decreased (Manjoo, 2009, para. 2). This is further reinforced by the following graph from the Wikipedia website (http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMFArticlesVsContrib.png), which also shows that the number of contributors is plateauing (Bridgestone Partners, 2009). Farhad Manjoo's explanation for this - that the encyclopedia has "hit the natural limit of knowledge expansion" and the only editing jobs left are 'janitorial' - seems plausible (Manjoo, 2009, para. 6). Personally, this is what I have found through my own use of Wikipedia, that while there are areas which need some work, they are generally topics and jobs which are rather mundane. The success of collaborative projects does rest on ensuring the contributors are enthusiastic about what they are doing, in order for them to continue to produce quality contributions (Anthony, Smith & Williamson, 2007). One of the resources I chose for this assignment further reinforces this. Katherine Ehmann, Andrew Large and Jamshid Beheshti in Collaboration in Context: Comparing Article Evolution among Subject Disciplines in Wikipedia find that through their research, an average of 90.3 percent of the initial Wikipedia article text remained over time (Ehmann et al., 2008, para. 40). Therefore, it seems that contributors are less inclined to change a great deal of the original entry, and if Manjoo's suggestions are correct, and Wikipedia does already cover the majority of the topics required by users, there is less chance that contributors will continue to go back and edit these existing entries. As Dean Strautins suggests in the comment above, Wikipedia may need to look into new ways of continuing to engage their contribu
  •  
    References Anthony, D., Smith, S.W., & Williamson, T. (2007) The Quality of Open Source Production: Zealots and Good Samaritans in the Case of Wikipedia. Dartmouth Computer Science Technical Report TR2007-606. Retrieved from http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/reports/TR2007-606.pdf Bridgestone Partners. (2009). File: WMFArticlesVsContrib.png. Retrieved from http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WMFArticlesVsContrib.png Ehmann, K., Large, A., & Beheshti, J. (2008). Collaboration in Context: Comparing Article Evolution among Subject Disciplines in Wikipedia. First Monday, 13(10). Retrieved from: http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2217/2034 Manjoo, F. (2009, September 28). Is Wikipedia a Victim of Its Own Success?. Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1924492,00.html
  •  
    This article is related to my topic and starts with a brief summary of Wikipedia's start. Wikipedia started its work in 2001 and allowed Wikipedians to contribute and share their articles with others through it. Wikipedia increased its article slowly, in 2008 there were about 2200 articles being added to the Wikipedia every day and in 2009 Wikipedia had about 3 million articles in English. So, Wikipedia broken the record held by Chinese Yongle encyclopedia, which was the famous encyclopedia. The article mentioned, there are thousands of active volunteers who are editing articles or publishing new articles, volunteers check articles to correct them and make them more valid. In addition, in Wikipedia some topics absorb large number of people, for example, subject like "Barack Obama" has large number of viewers, however, other articles which are about other ordinary people do not have that much viewers, and this is a big hole for Wikipedia, because it needs to update these kind of subjects too. The article mentions, In Wikipedia's early days volunteers could be easily be staff of Wikipedia and editing or publishing the articles was not hard, but now volunteers should obey some rules and volunteers must gather some credit to get permission from Wikipedia to publish their articles, so, volunteers may think why should they contribute in Wikipedia and these rsule may decrease the volunteers of Wikipedia.
  •  
    The change in the rate of publishing material does not determine the success of a project such as Wikipedia. New material will be sourced for Wikipedia because the world is constantly evolving. Wikipedia's only downfall is the amount of people that contribute. When Wikipedia articles are monitored by users the mediators can control their own page which they see as perfection because they have written majority of it. This is the exact reason why people have begun to shy away from adding or editing Wikipedia pages. Does this mean however that Wikipedia will fail at some point? I believe nothing could be further from the truth. I think Wikipedia will simply run in cycles as new topics are generated therefore new experts will be required to moderate and new people needed to add subject matter. As more people begin to collaborate on these pages more and more people will feel confident to edit themselves. Think of the Wikipedia cycle as one that is constantly changing with both highs and lows of activity. This current inactive period will not last long. This unit looks at the collaborative process that is being undertaken throughout the web and it is important to understand that without people adding their own pieces the puzzle is never going to be finished. Will Wikipedia run the cycle as my theory predicts?
  •  
    This article brings up a very interesting idea: the concept of an endpoint for Web 2.0 communities. As the author relates it, this would occur as a Malthusian collapse. Whilst at first glance this seems unfeasible given the infinite expanse of virtual pastures, the article makes some interesting points for consideration: the number of contributors on Wikipedia is dropping and it seems the we have run out of topics to write. It is interesting to compare the Wikipedia community to that of Bittorrent which has found renewed growth, and purpose, in the context of its struggle against copyright laws. Wikipedia has been hailed as a revolutionary form of knowledge democratisation, it is hard to imagine that wikipedians don't share a sense of purpose in their collaboration, and, perhaps even harder to imagine that we are running out of things to write about. Whilst this article is from a highly reputable source, its bias might be considered in following that of the conservative media toward copyleft, this is highlighted by phrases like 'Wikipedia's joyride' which suggests the growth of the site as frivolous. Considering the data it presents, the article is certainly very relevant to an understanding of online collaboration and thought provoking. I cannot help but think that there are still multitudes of topics to be written about, how many contributors, for example, have penned a page for themselves? Whilst ostensibly trivial, this might be the kind of interaction that sees renewed interest in the site and attracts the minority demographics which Gardner says the site needs to make its community richer (p.2). Perhaps the flagging interest in the site comes from the reason that the site is moving too close to the status quo, that as the BitTorrent community has seen, it needs to reminded of its position in an ideological shift.
  •  
    This article starts with a brief summary of Wikipedia's start. Wikipedia started its work in 2001 and allowed Wikipedia's to contribute and share their articles with others through it. Wikipedia increased its article slowly, in 2008 there were about 2200 articles being added to the Wikipedia every day and in 2009 Wikipedia had about 3 million articles in English. So, Wikipedia broken the record held by Chinese Yongle encyclopedia, which was the famous encyclopedia (Manjoo, 2009). According to my own studies, Wikipedia has different level of articles; they divided to low-, medium- and high quality and different people must play different roles, such as linking, editing and writing. For example, cleaning up other editor's mistake is a very important part, because some people do not add valuable information and some editors must come to increase articles quality and maybe the article needs another editor to correct the article again and this process may need to continue many times to increase quality of that article. However, that does not mean casual users work is not worthy, because, they can absorb more well-rounded contributors to make more valuable articles. To help contributors, University of Arizona suggested Wiki software, which guides contributors to know what should they do, for example, they will aware the article needs more link, references or it needs more editing and writing (Conger, 2010). Conger, C. (2010). Who writes Wikipedia articles? Retrieved from http://news.discovery.com/human/wikipedia-community-articles.html
Jarrad Long

Reips, U-D & Garaizar, P. (2011) Mining Twitter: A source for psychological wisdom of t... - 10 views

This article discusses the usefulness of Twitter as a tool for research. Researcher Pablo Garaizar suggests that monitoring large volumes of tweets and identifying trends in what users are saying -...

Net308_508 collaboration Crowd participatory

theresia sandjaja

YouTube as a participatory culture - 1 views

  •  
    The introduction of this chapter captivated me because it defined that Youtube is not just a media space for user to consume media but it acts as a platform that provides social networking framework which enable young people to create and share original content while making social connection virtually. This article explains how Youtube has created a participatory culture within young people. The easy and interactive features in Youtube have enabled young people to be pro-active within the online community. By collaborating online through Youtube, young people can express their identity through their creativity, seek support from peers (either from family, close friend or even strangers who have similar interest), learn new skills by watching other people tutorial and engage in public space.  To understand how Youtube enables participatory culture, this article provides thorough explanations on how the framework is supported. There are five different characteristics that form participatory culture in Youtube, these are: low barrier of artistic expression and civic engagement, strong support for creating and sharing project, informal setting of mentorship, belief of the importance of contributions and a sense of social connection. These characteristics illustrate how Youtube users especially young people engage to communicate and exchange ideas with other users virtually. 
  •  
    Source: Chau, C. (2010), YouTube as a participatory culture. New Directions for Youth Development, 2010: 65-74. Available online at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/yd.376/pdf
  •  
    I found the statistical information in this article very revealing and insightful. But I did find it hard to place within the overall topic. The ability for youth to 'explore identity' and 'acquire new skills' as the article states, are themes that seem to be synonymous when youth cultures are in focus. With this in mind I would assume that this article has relevance to the Knowledge Production and Higher Education topic. I was particularly interested when the article explained the affects that commenting on videos and video view counts can have on video production. As they highlight 'feedback interactions' are crucial to motivating users to create new content. This could either be a new video or increasing circulation of a video with in the community. Just recently there has been a lot of focus on adolescent users of you tube in the media (3 high school girls suspended due to a video they uploaded to youTube). It is no wonder that the participatory nature, or non- participatory (viewing but not creating or commenting) nature of youTube appeals so much to a youth culture. YouTube simply provides a non-confrontation space where youth can determine their own level of participation enabling it to be used as tools for knowledge production and Higher Education. However as the ability for videos to go viral increases and the frontiers of social media expand, I worry the 'empowerment' of youthTubers isn't being backed up by public broadcasting education and as with all higher education, there needs to be a basic level of knowledge already in place and a set of standards.
Chin Sing Wong

Resisting free-riding behavior in BitTorrent - 17 views

This is another article that talk about resist/prevent free-rider behaviors in BitTorrent file sharing network. This paper more analyse from a technical standpoint, propose a quota-based encrypted ...

Net308_508 collaboration BitTorrent Torrent

1 - 19 of 19
Showing 20 items per page