Sunday, October 2nd, 2016
Leave a comment on paragraph 1 0
Leave a comment on paragraph 2 0
I created a GitHub repository where we can add links to readings (and do more, if so inclined).
Leave a comment on paragraph 3 0
Feel free to contribute to this! It’s good practice if you’re interested in learning more about git, GitHub, and markdown.
You can follow any comments on this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site.
Hey Tom thanks for this, super thoughtful!
Leave a comment on the whole Post
Leave a comment on paragraph 1
Leave a comment on paragraph 2
Leave a comment on paragraph 3
Mail (will not be published)
Additional comments powered byBackType
October 5, 2016 at 2:37 pm
See in context
February 8, 2017 at 8:29 pm
This proposal has come a long way since your first proposal, Jenna, and in a very good way. I will withhold my comments until after class today. However, I would challenge the group to look at other kinds of projects that create similar types of resources (the Modernist Journal Project, for example) to think about potential features, use cases, and pitfalls. You might want to talk a little bit about the collections you’re working with in your proposal and in your presentation tonight–as the materials may offer some of your class colleagues a personal stake in the project. How well do you know the people around the table? Are there collections that you could start with, or that you could point people to look at an existing list of potential zines, that may make working on your project personally and academically relevant? Another thing to consider as you move ahead is what you think the “workflow” might be from 2 perspectives: 1.) adding and curating records and 2.) information retrieval and use. Perhaps in conversation with folks tonight, you could ask them for some feedback about sites/tools/resources they use regularly and what makes the workflow (think the library catalogue, amazon, google) either appealing or frustrating. Perhaps tonight you can also use people in the class to help brainstorm where there are workshops, tutorials, or other ways of learning skills that no one around the table has at this moment.
Looking forward to hearing more about the conversation and to reading other class colleagues comments here over the coming week.
January 12, 2017 at 9:23 am
thank you very much for your comment and sorry for my late reply.
My intention was to discover the relation between the original text and the tweets: by analizing the tweets content, I would like to define the trends followed by users to participate to a project like this. Your suggestion about word frequencies between the original text and the tweets sounds fascinating: maybe I will develop it for a paper in the future.
I agree about the participation rate data: it is very interesting, and it could be much more interesting to understand if this dropping was due to the kind of text chosen or not.
Thank you very much again, and I hope to see you again during next semester.
December 25, 2016 at 7:45 pm
I’m excited about this project!
It sounds similar to, but way more sophisticated than something I was part of a while ago http://radicalreference.info/readyref. The creators being librarians, the “ready reference” resources were more like online subject guides or structured, annotated bibliographies than syllabi. I wonder if research guides could be adjunct to the syllabi? Or a module? I wonder what other modules there could be to syllabi?
December 22, 2016 at 11:32 pm
Eduard, these are important questions you are raising. Correct me if I misunderstood your intent, but I think that “almost entirely digital” sources is less about where the information comes from more about the shifting mode of documenting, circulating and analyzing history. But I do agree with your concern in that certain entities (e.g. government, corporate) hold more power in creating these data, which come in forms that are easier to use. But I also think this was the case in traditional research as well. So in addition to digital v traditional, we could also draw the line between state-provided v other sources of information. But this still is also not a comprehensive distinction, because everyone is outputting data and everywhere new boundaries are drawn—which I suppose is the challenge of history in a digital age.
Your project about lynching (and the non-abundance of lynching-related data) made me think of Mimi Onuoha’s Missing Datasets project (http://mimionuoha.com/thoughts/), where she explains: “Calling something ‘missing’ automatically implies that it should exist. . . . For every dataset where there’s an impetus for someone not to collect, there’s a group of people who would benefit from its presence.” Put another way, how can we take into account the source of the historical information, and how can we create and preserve data that powerful institutions care less about?
December 22, 2016 at 8:56 pm
Hi Gregory, you may know about this but just throwing in a link to Lang-8, a “language-exchange social network” as they define themselves: http://lang-8.com/
December 22, 2016 at 8:42 pm
Hi Carolyn, I enjoyed your follow-up. Looking at the Library of Resistance list (and formatting rules) being compiled in real time is very interesting! On one hand I feel that a familiar, shared document platform like Google Docs can serve its purpose in an immediate context. On the other hand, as this list is already over 300 items long and spreads over 12 pages only after 3 days, I can definitely see the value of your proposal. Perhaps a public Zotero group is a slightly better option as the list grows? Negotiating timeliness and robust organization seems like an important issue here.
A few things popped into my mind as I was reading, so here goes (although you are probably aware of many of this):
The Open Syllabus Project. Your focus on social mission might make OSP too comprehensive for your use, but the related texts that come below a search result in OSP’s Explorer (http://explorer.opensyllabusproject.org/) could be useful in certain ways. If they open up their API soon enough, it might also be something to explore.
Social bookmarks services could serve as proof of concept for the putting-together-and-sharing part. The design you showed us last time reminded me of are.na specifically:
Also, throwing in another reading list by Francis Tseng in the collection: http://speculatingfutures.club/
December 22, 2016 at 7:42 pm
Hi Iuri, nice work! The idea of using Twitter as a participatory reading platform is fascinating. Personally, I find that platforms offering collaborative annotations like the one used for Debates in the DH (http://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/) or Medium (https://medium.com) help me get to the point more easily. TwLetteratura seems to be somewhere in the middle ground of such platforms and live conference tweets.
I wonder if the participatory mode of reading also impacts the content of the created text. For example, do the word frequencies in the tweets differ from the word frequencies in the original text? If so, I also wonder how it would be different from a single person’s review—although single person review may not exist, and this is perhaps way out of your project’s scope.
Also, it was interesting to see the participation rate dropping; something to bear in mind when conducting a digital project.
December 12, 2016 at 9:10 pm
@tlewek thanks for the feedback and sorry for the late reply.
I do think that as you pointed out, the materiality of data is sometimes overlooked. And that can be a way of distinguishing between the human subject and data—the technological artifact. But perhaps the distinction is not as obvious as one might think; as human beings with flesh we might be closer to our data than, say, a reality(us)-representation(data) relationship. Because the tools used to operate on data, are increasingly the same as tools that operate on actual human beings.
An artwork in view at the Glass Room (https://theglassroomnyc.org/) exhibition seems relevant. Heather Dewey-Hagborg (http://deweyhagborg.com/) is an artist who works with, among other fields, bioengineering and computation; a number of her projects engage with DNA forensics. There exist companies that provide computational predictions for someone’s appearance based on their DNA, for example (https://snapshot.parabon-nanolabs.com/). One of Dewey-Hagborg’s project, Invisible (http://biogenfutur.es/) provides an open source toolkit for erasing the user’s DNA trace. I find the parallels and merging between physical and digital interesting (bio surveillance and data surveillance; digital traces and DNA traces; statistical analysis and prediction in both cases), and perhaps revealing that the two are not that different—at least in the context of technological development.
Dewey-Hagborg’s article provides more critical context about her take on bioengineering technology (that is applied in social contexts), and many of her points strikingly resonate with critiques of big data / AI:
Sci-Fi Crime Drama With a Strong Black Lead, on the New Inquiry http://thenewinquiry.com/sci-fi-crime-drama-with-a-strong-black-lead/
December 5, 2016 at 2:19 am
Thanks for your feedback, Dr. Brier! I hadn’t seen the articles you linked to, so thank you. In terms of the final project, I will be moving on to something else. I do hope to continue to explore this issue, but at this point I want to do so by taking action rather than continuing to reinforce the issue of gender gaps in the data of which many are already aware. I haven’t been able to attend any edit-a-thons yet, but I hope to do so at the next opportunity as well as do some editing on my own and contribute to linked data-focused Wikipedia efforts. Perhaps at a later point I can redo my queries to see how things have changed. I do like Mandiberg’s statement in the New Yorker article regarding community and empowerment, though. I agree that taking action on these issues can bring about additional good in the world that perhaps cannot be captured by data.
Enter the destination URL
Or link to existing content
This site is part of the CUNY Academic Commons, an academic social network for the entire 24-campus CUNY system.
Unless otherwise stated, all content on the CUNY Academic Commons is licensed under a Creative Commons license.
Built with WordPress |
Protected by Akismet |
Powered by CUNY