Group items tagged

I'm interested in the idea of digital privacy (or lack thereof). It seems nobody is particularly worried about their privacy online, and I'd like to learn a little more about this

Um, I can't think of a more bone-chilling phrase than "cyberwar."

Steig Larsson made hacking look pretty cool. But it's interesting to think about how much is possible in the hacking world that we tend to forget about since our everyday use of technology has been so woven into our routines. Just saw this article and I found interesting to see the many sides of hacking: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/jun/06/hackers-how-and-why-they-hack I always make fun of my dad for being a computer hypochondriac -- he always thinks that someone is hacking into his computer, so he has a million anti-virus and security programs (a combination which I think is actually destroying his computer). But it is a valid concern, though I think you have to just find a balance for your privacy since in extreme cases, your privacy can be a bit restricting.

In one of the videos we watched last week, Wesch mentioned how students can look at the discussion page for any article on Wikipedia to get a sense of how information is being interactively constructed and contested. This article discusses the issue of self-governance in online communities with a focus on how Wikipedia is edited and the community politics behind it. I think this article makes a really useful contribution to a discussion about authority and knowledge production on the Internet. There is also a related article about the relationship between Wikipedia contributions and identity construction here.

I read (part of) an ethnography of Wikipedia last semester that was really interesting. http://reagle.org/joseph/2010/gfc/ Good Faith Collaboration by Joseph Reagle "Wikipedia's style of collaborative production has been lauded, lambasted, and satirized. Despite unease over its implications for the character (and quality) of knowledge, Wikipedia has brought us closer than ever to a realization of the century-old pursuit of a universal encyclopedia. Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia is a rich ethnographic portrayal of Wikipedia's historical roots, collaborative culture, and much debated legacy. "

Without accusing certain authors in the field of elitism, I think that Wikipedia works as it should, by serving the needs of people in the way they want it. If someone needs to look up the habits of Pokemon or William Shatner's favorite food, who are we to question their information needs?

Has anyone read this book? I started it a few days ago. Noticed that reviews, like the one I linked to, were skeptical. Basically, Carr, who is a journalist, not a scientist, cites studies on brain plasticity and research that the brain changes in response to actions to conclude that the way we read and synthesize information online has changed the way we think (for the worse). I like how the NYT review puts new technology in a historical perspective.

Well, if I had to take a guess, I think she did it since one of her main points is that media isn't an external force outside of our control -- we can shape it, caring about it enough to respond and filter it. With a graphic novel, the images draw you in because they're abstract; the reader plays an active role by seeing themselves in the images and connecting all the images/words together to make it make sense. It engages so many of our senses at once. I love what Scott McCloud has to say about this, and the following talk that he gave actually relates more to how comics have been impacted by technology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXYckRgsdjI

The idea that media has the potential to shape how we reason reminds me of Neil Postman and Marshall McLuhan. As an undergrad, I was basically obsessed with Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" and the idea that some forms of media -Postman was especially thinking about TV- are inherently shallower than other forms and that the predominant medium tends to set the standard of what makes a good argument. Anyway, I wanted to find a YouTube video of Postman but instead found a really good video of Mike Wesch talking about Postman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09gR6VPVrpw&feature=related

Really great working paper on trolling in a feminist forum -- what do communities do when outsiders attempt to derail conversation by intentionally trying to start arguements and cause rifts in the community.  A case study of two incidents within the same message board.

Oh rad! I was thinking about focusing on trolling specifically for my project. I've actually done a little research on Anonymous/4chan too if you ever want to share sources!

Started laughing when I saw that they did a study on trolling, so I had to read the article. Really interesting piece on technology and gender.

Another article found in my search for information about the "global digital divide." According to the article, last week, the United Nations released a report that "argued that disconnecting individuals from the Internet is a violation of human rights and goes against international law" and that all States should seek to ensure there is "as little restriction to online content as possible." The Atlantic points out, following Wired's Threat Level blog, that the UN report came "the same day that a monitoring firm found two-thirds of Syria's Internet access has been shut down without notice." While access isn't the only factor in the digital divide on a global or a national scale (disparities in information or new media literacy is also a huge factor, for example), I agree that the availability of unfettered access as a matter of government policy is the bare minimum.

It confuses me that it can be considered a basic human right if, for a portion of the population, it's hard to access and at times, can be unreachable. Even though I know it's more what Tom said about it being a negative right, the phrasing just doesn't sit right. Either way, this is a great thing and I'm surprised it didn;t happen sooner.

I had come across this article as well in our group project research, Maggie, and I think that the UN is taking steps to bring the conversation on the right to freedom of opinion and expression into the digital age, as Tom mentions. Article 19 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, in place since 1948, states: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." So in the context of the recent shutdown of ISPs by Syria, more generally the use of the Internet as a means of civic and political dissidence, and even the debate around net neutrality in this country, I agree with Maggie that the UN's approach seems to clarify and reiterate unfettered access to information.

I am a big pop music/culture nut. Always have been...probably always will be. So, when I really started thinking about social media and all its uses, I began to wonder...who out there uses social media to it's fullest potential. The answer was obvious. Lady Gaga! When I did a quick search on Lady Gaga and social media, I got a lot of hits. But I wasn't surprised. She is the master when it comes to sites like Facebook and Twitter. Yes, she is out there wearing meat dresses and making fun songs, but it's her presence on social networking sites that I feel has really catapulted her to super stardom. What do you all think?

hmm. is it gaga or her p/r team creating the image? Is her voice really hers? How do we know?

I am sure it is more her "team" then her herself. But, still...it's rather impressive.

love common craft videos...this one breaks down the concept of social media, explained using the metaphor of ice cream. both helpful & delicious. so social media is always interactive, while digital media doesn't necessarily have user-generated content? trying to get my definitions set as i do more searching...

It does get a little confusing and this was a great way to simplify social media tools!

I definitely have to agree with the way common craft breaks down concepts and makes it understandable for the average Joe. When I'm trying to figure new techie things out or I'm trying to explain it to others, I often refer to this type of tool.

An app that uses your info and location to show you that strangers around you could share interests and could be possible friends. Really? Come on, now. We need this? It's like a funny little trust-detector. I can see how it could be cool, but I just don't know about this one. Our whole idea of and interaction with 'strangers' these days is pretty interesting -- something I've been looking into as a result of this course, which led me to this article!

It sounds like Sonar is going to help us come up with "appropriate" opening lines. I think this is interesting because there seems to be a perceived fear that increased online interaction has a negative impact on our ability to interact in a face-to-face social setting. Sonar seems to be an example of technology that becomes marketable as it will assist and support human to human interaction. Kind of creepy in definite "big brother" fashion, but something that might be attractive to people who feel they (or their child/family member) have lost their ability to socialize in person. Although having an app do it for you...is that really helping?

I never realized there were so many categories of games. Check out the video about the piano staircase, designed to get more people to take the stairs. It's an example of gamification, creating a game that encourages people to buy a product or to behave in a particular way.

Using this definition, "serious games" are the types that we would use in schools to teach a particular concept, while "gamification" is turning anything into a game. It seems to me that many of is in this class would be more interested in the idea of "serious games", unless we were trying to do some sort of public relations effort in our library, which might bring more of "gamification" into play.

I've been having some technical problems starting a new link to a US Depart. of State sponsored Serious Games Conference, so here it is: http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2011/05/164134.htm Further down the page is a link to live streaming of the conference. It really is starting to look like serious business..!

So while this *is* a humor article and not necessarily safe for work, I thought it would be good to share because it specifically talks about how social media and consumer computer technology affects people's sense of well-being.

Now I know why the 21st century was making me miserable! I sure could use some more annoying people in my life. This article really points out the downside of technology-enhanced socialization!

I would have called it "7 reasons the 21st century is making us more xenophobic and intolerant."

Why Google should be afraid of Facebook -- what I really got out of this article was that Google guesses what people like / want / need based on what they search -- Facebook knows because the user enters it, from people posting on each other's pages to what "like" buttons they click (making interests pages instead of just search terms was a huge change since now companies that own a product people like can now interact with their users on a way more personal basis.)

I'm not sure about this either, Amanda, Isn't the internet big enough for both types of companies (and many more).

The internet is big enough for all sorts of companies, but in a competition to figure out your customer base as quickly and as detailed as possible, Facebook definitely has an edge that Google is lacking right now. Well, outside of scanning your Gmail for keywords to apply to the ads they show you...haha

I swear I just posted this to the group but it didn't show up, so apologies for a potential duplicate. This blogger observes the fact that a traditional mass media (think Nightly News with Walter Cronkite) doesn't really exist anymore, thanks to social news sites, YouTube, and the explosion of TV channels.

i always wonder about this...if the nightly news will ever "die out." i think about how older people (like my parents and grandparents) still turn the tv on to watch the news every single night, no matter what. personally i hope the nightly news sticks around. i find myself overwhelmed by online content. the news program gives me a summary of some issues...and if i want to do addition research on my own online, i can (don't have to trust them as the only 'authority'). maybe it's lazy that i want them to choose for me. but i like watching regular news programs...especially because i know those stories will come up on the daily show/colbert report :)

I took a class called "Internet and Democracy" at the UT school of journalism last year. It was fascinating to see how the journalism folks are getting used to social media. A lot of the same questions as LIS, but really working from a different model.

Interesting perspective on the benefits of having a smartphone. I still haven't committed to getting one yet, but I can see his point. It's also interesting to think about his 4th point about always having answers after having read the JSB essays. Is it actually limiting us? Also, as Kelly pointed out, if fire is an external stomach, would the smartphone/computer be the external mind? Maybe he said that in there and I missed it, but having an external mind is pretty useful.

I am still getting used to my iPhone; the main thing I feel that I get from it when I'm delayed or away from a computer, I can do small tasks, which is mostly check email and Facebook, use Notes if I want to jot down a few thoughts related to school/work. Small stuff, but it makes me feel more productive. I'm not a big app user yet, but I do think I have to get that public restroom one.

I really enjoyed reading this article because I'm not yet a smartphone user... which I guess means that I still get lost and I still waste time. It was a little scary though, as if the smartphone makes you a little closer to being perfect...

Building an online community and culture around words, phrases, and tropes -> looks at twitter hashtags, 

Hey, sorry I didn't see this comment sooner! I'm on a few google groups about memes so I get a lot of articles through them, as well as following twitter accounts of academics studying the lulz. This one, I think I just found it on google scholar while looking for sources for my final project.

Jay Smooth nails the "no homo" meme (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7nCB8aiXD4)....and explains that as fun as it is to "play the game," just don't do it.

another way to use social media: social networks as support groups. this article describes the author's attempts to quit smoking, and how she used twitter to hold herself accountable and receive praise from followers, which motivated her.

Part of me completely understand the solidarity and support that social media can offer- the other part of me still finds it extremely odd. I'm still trying to put my finger on what exactly makes me think that using Twitter and Facebook to update and get support is strange. Perhaps its just a persona; preference for live interactions...

I see this as a very productive use of twitter.

Social informatics is not explicitly mentioned in this article. However, I think it gives us direct insight into crafting our own definition of the term and its application. Bates looks at the overall domain of information science, and how we, as members of that discipline, can break free of the idea (which may have changed a bit since its writing in 1999) that there's no content to LIS education and practice, just structure (i.e., the core of our profession is to organize other discipline's information). Most applicable to our discussion, at least in this point of the semester, seems this excerpt: "In comparison to other social and behavioral science fields, we are always looking for the red thread of information in the social texture of people's lives. When we study people we do so with the purpose of understanding information creation, seeking, and use. We do not just study people in general. The rest of the social sciences do various forms of that. Sometimes this can be a very fine distinction; other times it is very easy to see. In communications research, a cousin to our field, the emphasis is on the communication process and its effects on people; in information science we study that process in service of information transfer. For another example, there are social scientists today who are observing people doing collaborative work through new types of networked systems in the field of computer-supported co-operative work (CSCW) . The sociologist or social psychologist identifies and describes the network of relationships and the social hierarchy that develops under these circumstances. They may examine the impact of technology on those social relationships and on the work of the individuals involved. The information scientist, on the other hand, follows the information the way Woodward and Bernstein "followed the money" in their Watergate investigations. That's the red thread in the social tapestry. When we look at that social hierarchy, we ar

I often get frustrated by my 77 year old mother, who recently got a nice new computer (under much pressure from her daughters), but has a lot of reluctance about using it. This journal (iJETS) had many articles such as this one, that I believe could shed light on tactics to motivate this segment of society.

I really enjoyed this article, because my 63 year old mother in law is very computer-resistant, and I find it very frustrating. She wants to talk to me on the phone, but I really only want to use email. A generation difference really can make a technology difference.

My mom is also not online and no interest in the iPad. She often comments how the newspaper in her city is getting thinner and thinner so I often wonder if her view of the world and events if filtered by the fact that she's not online, and so much news and opinion is. Conversely, I met up with an old friend from high school last week who told me he refuses to really activate his Facebook account because his 70-something mom is on it and very active. I also know 30 year olds who only use computers and email at work because they have to and eschew everything else. Generalizations aside, I'm not convinced it's physical age, but more of a state of mind when it comes to new technology.

Very recent Q&A with Sherry Turkle on "Alone Together" about our plugged in lives making people more lonely and distant. Interesting passage about teenage culture midway through

This really highlights one of the bad ways that technology impacts us; texting and checking Facebook are gaining precedence over socializing with people in the same room. It's depressing to think of how widespread it is.

I loved this article! I see customers at my work (a restaurant in a hotel) checking their phones all the time. One of my coworkers told me a few weeks ago that he was working when a big game was on tv. He was bartending and his bar was packed. Instead of having their eyes on the screen during the crucial moments of the game, many of his customers were sitting right in front of those tvs and ignoring them while their eyes and fingers stayed glued to their tiny phone screens, playing Angry Birds for all he knew. It was just odd, but sadly this way of life has been becoming more of the rule.

Is technology promoting free speech or helping dissidents in controlled countries? "We see more and more people around the globe using the Internet, mobile phones and other technologies to make their voices heard as they protest against injustice and seek to realize their aspirations," Mrs. Clinton said. "There is a historic opportunity to effect positive change, change America supports," she said. "So we're focused on helping them do that, on helping them talk to each other, to their communities, to their governments and to the world."

An interesting case of the big three search engines striking an agreement on structured markup data on web pages. If you really pay attention, you can watch the Internet evolve before your very eyes. (Internet Evolution sounds like a nice topic, huh?)

Here's a couple or articles/op-eds on the announcement of Schema.org. One posits it may be a movement toward monopolization of markup data by Google: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/is_schemaorg_really_a_google_land_grab.php ; the other that it's a boost for structured data: http://www.mkbergman.com/962/structured-web-gets-massive-boost/.

Thanks, Rebecca. The first document you listed made my head spin a little bit. I wasn't totally familiar with the importance of a competitor to W3C markup data (I just assumed that Google et al.'s innovation would mean progress), but the polemical suggestions of "land grabs" made me think... wow, this is something to really pay attention to. Now that I'm reading Amanda's latest posts on Google vs. Facebook in a business context, I'm wondering if the big three move to Schema.org represents something like a defensive strategy (maybe even a land grab!) against Facebook jumping into the market. Maybe social media can do a better job of searching the web for relevant documents - an operation, as I'm beginning to understand, depends so much on markup standards (it's news to me that so many different options exist). I'm not sure I really understand what's going on here... but thanks for pointing out the complexities!