Search results for twitter

enlightenment cave

In the beginning, there was nature. And in spite of the obvious lack of humans to give names to the animals and to categorize the trees, it all basically looked and felt like it does now: Leaves were green and rocks were heavy. Over time, humans (those natural tool makers!) developed a plethora of explanatory concepts and ways of knowing that gave their universe a discernable order. At different times and in different regions of the world, the universe took on vastly different shapes and personalities. There were the four humors, animism, Feng shui and by the mid 1660s some white guys had developed something called experimental philosophy. Today we just call it the scientific method. One of those white guys, Robert Boyle, was particularly vocal about the benefits of the scientific method and objective observation.[1] He believed deeply that if enough men[2] of reputable repute watched something happen, you could call it true. No monarch or bishop required. Thomas Hobbes was skeptical. Not because he believed truth had to come from an authority figure, but because he was, among other concerns, suspicious that by observing effects one could derive the underlying physical causes. While both men had strong and informed opinions about society and the natural world, today we remember Hobbes as a political philosopher and Boyle as one of the first modern scientists. The separation of society and nature didn’t have to look the way it does, but historical and social circumstances encourage us to separate these two realms. more...

carr

Apologies for the typos and the general lack of editing of this piece, I’m hurriedly tapping this out right before putting on the Theorizing the Web conference in a couple of hours.

Nicholas Carr chose a great lead photo for his post yesterday critiquing the anti-digital-dualism argument put forth by myself and others on this blog. The image of a remote landscape evokes “wilderness”; well, it doesn’t “evoke”, it literally says “wilderness” right on it and the filename was “wilderness.jpg”. I think this image might be a fun way to illustrate one very fundamental disagreement Carr and I have. But before we can get there, I should spend some time replying to the various points in his post. Since Carr’s rebuttal to the digital dualism argument gets the digital dualism argument I have made wrong in some very fundamental ways, I’ll have to spend much of this post simply clarifying that; which is fine, reiterating things is a useful task. Though, what’s more fun than restating what’s already been said is jumping off into new directions, and hopefully we can do a little of that here, too, finishing with that lead photo.  more...

Dorothy Santos – “The Distant Gaze and Contemporary Notions of Perception: Re-examining the New Aesthetic Movement through an Analysis of Satellite Technologies in New Media and Digital Arts”

Panel: You Are What You Post

Within our ocular centric culture, the immediacy of photography gratifies our sense of connection yet the distant gaze of satellite photography catapults us into the foreign and surreal. For this reason, satellite photography and conceptually driven works from artists such as Trevor Paglen and Rachele Riley include an inherent discussion of the social and political implications of orbiting satellites on our vision and perception. Within new media and digital arts, the New Aesthetic movement’s agenda seems to include a harkening back to technologies combining the idea of two-dimensional and organic works through the pixelation and distortion of the image.

more...

Gina Neff and Brittany Fiore-Silfvast – “Pictures of health: Does the future of wellness need us?”

Panel: Bodies and Bits

As part of our project on health hacking—technological disruption and the meaning and metrics of care—one of us (Gina) attended The MIT Future of Health and Wellness conference. The conference, organized by MIT’s Industrial Liaison Program, was part of an on-going series to connect MIT faculty and industry, and it brought together policy, science, social media, medicine, economics and wellness. In other words, it perfectly captured the current buzz about technology-driven health and wellness, or “Health 2.0,” that is happening at conferences like TedMed, mHealth Summit, and Stanford’s Medicine X. Underlying these conversations is the hope that new forms of data can transform clinical care and motivate people to be healthier.

more...

TtW13_long1
Fellow Cyborgologist Whitney Erin Boesel (@phenatypical) and I are working on understanding the Quantified Self movement from a theoretical perspective. My presentation at this year’s #TtW2013 is a first attempt at such theorizing.
 While self-tracking is becoming increasingly popular, and the term “quantified self” is coming into increasingly broad use, this paper will focus specifically on the “self-knowledge through numbers” group Quantified Self (capitalized). Started in 2007 by Gary Wolf and Kevin Kelly (both alumni of Wired magazine), the first Quantified Self meeting was a group of people who met at Kelly’s Silicon Valley home to discuss their mutual interest in self-tracking. Quantified Self gained national attention in 2010 following the publication of Wolf’s essay “The Data-Driven Life,” and is now a rapidly expanding network of “meetup” groups (which are regularly occurring “show and tell” sessions organized through the social networking website Meetup.com) in 78 cities across 30 countries. Although what QSers track (and how they track it) varies widely, the general premise of Quantified Self is that self-tracking empowers individuals by allowing them to become “experts of themselves.” Self-trackers gather at Quantified Self conferences and meetups to share knowledge and experience, to present findings from their experiments, to market self-tracking related devices, and learn about new practices and products that can help their self-track efforts.

liqsurvThis post expounds on just one section of Liquid Surveillance and should not be considered a proper “review” as such, though I have completed a full review for a journal [read it here]. Further, one of the co-authors of this book, David Lyon, is giving the keynote to the Theorizing the Web conference this Saturday in New York City [more info].

In Liquid Surveillance, the theorist of liquidity, Zygmunt Bauman, and the perhaps the preeminent theorist of surveillance, David Lyon, apply their unique perspectives to social media. I’ve already written a general review of the entire book, submitted to a journal; here, I’m expanding on one specific section of the book that was too much for the general review and deserves its own treatment. In any case, this post has more of my own ideas than would be appropriate for a journal review.
more...

Catfish is Jerry Springer for the social media age

Let’s face it: panic about ‘people’ not pairing off is really panic about women not pairing off

the idea that technology comes from us, people, is something we are reluctant to accept

Stop Calling It ‘Digital Humanities’

temporary photography is doing something very interesting with time

I don’t oppose the MOOC any more than I oppose online classes, or three-hundred-person-lectures, or Wikipedia

the way that the Harlem Shake meme seems perfectly designed for the workplace

Everybody in the industry wants to see Spotify succeed

Who hates free speech? The powerful and the powerlessmore...

rousseau spiderman

Just about every one of our contributing authors has written a piece that challenges or refutes the claims made by tech journalists, industry pundits, or fellow academics. Part of the problem is technological determinism- the notion that technology has a unidirectional impact on society. (i.e. Google makes us stupid, cell phones make us lonely.) Popular discussions of digital technologies take on a very particular flavor of technological determinism, wherein the author makes the claim that social activity on/in/through Friendster/New MySpace/ Google+/ Snapchat/ Bing is inherently separate from the physical world. Nathan Jurgenson has given a name to this fallacy: digital dualism. Ever since Nathan posted Digital dualism versus augmented reality I have been preoccupied with a singular question: where did this thinking come from? Its too pervasive and readily accepted as truth to be a trendy idea or even a generational divide. Every one of Cyborgology’s regular contributors (and some of our guest authors) hear digital dualist rhetoric coming from their students. The so-called “digital natives” lament their peers’ neglect of “the real world.” Digital dualism’s roots run deep and can be found at the very core of modern thought.  Indeed, digital dualism seems to predate the very technologies that it inaccurately portrays. more...

promote friends

In October, Facebook began offering a paid promotion option to its users. This gave users the opportunity to pay money for their pictures and status updates to gain greater visibility. Now, Facebook expands this option further by offering the opportunity for users to pay to promote their Friend’s posts.

Fist, this reminds us that Facebook is a for-profit company, currently struggling to project an external image of profitability. The introduction of pay-to-use features, including promoted posts and “Facebook gifts” has been less than lucrative for the company. *True confession: I don’t even know how to give someone a Facebook Gift, nor am I inclined to figure it out.*  Facebook is supposed to be free, and while users continue to pay in abstract ways with their prosumptive activities in general, and their personal data in particular, they do not seem keen to pay in the direct, credit card-with-expiration-date-and-3-digit-security-code, manner.

Using the Power of Sociology, however, I predict that this may change with the introduction of the new pay-to-promote feature for Friend’s posts. I say this because the new feature rectifies a particular problematic niche that continues to trouble social media users on a social-psychological level. To talk about the function of the new feature, I must begin with two competing presentational tensions within the social media landscape: The attention economy, and visible identity work. more...

Facebook has certainly taken notice of the desire for impermanence

It’s interesting that we now create things specifically to forget

networks can be far more tyrannical, opaque, and anti-democratic than hierarchies

Snapchat subverts the affordances of networked publics…the technology now—not the recipient—is the trusted object

using the magic word “MOOC,” the privatization disappears in a puff of euphemism. We are instead “expanding access”

Just as CafePress can sell you a customized T-Shirt, why shouldn’t OKCupid aspire to sell you a customized partner?

use online connectivity not to try to define ourselves perfectly but to undo ourselves over and over

social media seem to intersect interpersonal sociality and corporate monetization

they all took snapshots and movies of each other out of fear of experiencing the meaninglessness of their existence

Nathan is on Twitter [@nathanjurgenson] and Tumblr [nathanjurgenson.com]. more...