Posted on

Lifestream Blog – Final Summary

My lifestream blog contains a blend of sourced and composed resources that reflect the key themes of Education and Digital Cultures. To fully explore each theme I conducted a series of practical exercises to gain insight from both an institutional and individual perspective. The content of my blog highlights many different points of view on each theme and is reinforced by experimentation that ultimately allowed me to construct knowledge of each topic through experience.

I was intrigued by cybercultures and the concept of posthumanism. It would appear that the human race is no longer satisfied with colonising digital territories and now seeks to infuse technology with our minds and bodies. I learned of an ethos that digital is better and that mechanical intervention will inevitably lead to progress whilst acknowledging the antithesis and realising that this may not always be the case.

The political and economic factors (Lister et al 2009) influencing digital education also intrigued me. This was most evident in my micro-ethnography where economic gain was the driving force of the MOOC in which I participated. My micro-ethnography would suggest that there are indeed limitations within a LMS that contribute to the perception of online community cultures, but that they only exaggerate circumstances that often originate out-with digital spaces.

As with most scenarios where the physical and digital worlds intersect there are inevitably ethical considerations to acknowledge. I noticed that ethics was a recurring theme throughout each block of the course, be it the ethics surrounding cyborgs, online communities, and analytics and big data. I learned that that no matter how great and efficient digital cultures make us, we are still human beings with qualities and principles that cannot be expressed digitally – ethics and responsibility being the two most relevant to the course.

Throughout the course I have questioned if, as human beings, we are supposed to benefit as individuals from digitisation – particularly when studying algorithmic cultures. In studying my own performance and analytical data from an online learning activity, I gained experience of the impact that exposure to learning statistics has on students. I realised that whilst big data and analytics support the notion that digital is better, within education this may only ring true for the institution and not the individual. This was an invaluable experience in connecting my understanding of the course themes to the content of my lifestream blog.

My lifestream blog shows the ubiquity of digital cultures in business, politics, education and everyday life. Our internet browsing trends, shopping habits, and social media interactions are being shaped and influenced by digital trends set by computer interpretation of our behaviours and actions. Education is merely another strand of life that is being made more efficient, accessible and available by digital intervention.

On conclusion, one could also observe a shift in digital culture over time. In the early stages the purpose of digitisation was to assist humans to do basic tasks. This gradually evolved into doing machines performing complex tasks and exceeding the limitations of human form. In the present, we are using technology as an alternative form of intelligence and as a tool for efficiency and predicting the future. Certainly, if transhumanism and cyberpunk ideologies come to pass, then the human form will play a lesser role in both education and the wider society.

References

Lister, M., Dovey, J., Giddings, S., Kelly, K. (2009). Networks, users and economics. In New media: a critical introduction. M. Lister (Eds.) (London, Routledge): pp. 163-236.

Posted on

Week 7 – Weekly Synthesis

It has been a relatively quiet week on my Lifestream Blog this week as I found myself ploughing my efforts into my micro-ethnography.

However, I would name the theme of the content that I had managed to get up as motivation. Following on from last week’s themes of “backstage” and factors that influence the development of community cultures, this week I have been considering how MOOC participants react to these factors and if their individual motivation for enrolling on a course can influence how well a community develops.

The YouTube video entitled Global Digital Culture: Cultural Differences and the Internet suggests that online spaces aren’t neutral and that they mirror the values of both those who enter these spaces and those who design them. I felt that this video was consistent with the findings of my micro-ethnography in that the scale and wide range of motivators within a MOOC can make community building a difficult task.

I was wary that I may have made a bad choice in deciding on the Internet of Things MOOC for my micro-ethnography and that my experience of the course may influence my decision to attempt another in the future. Therefore the rest of my Lifestream content is comprised of my comments and interactions within the MSCEDC community to draw further conclusions. I am pleased that it certainly appears MOOCs are enjoyable, meaningful and social places if the main motivator is learning.

Posted on

Liked on YouTube: Global Digital Culture: Cultural Differences and the Internet

I stumbled across this video and in my opinion it is like watching a documentary version of the Lister et al (2009) reading. The themes, story, facts and issues are exactly the same.

References

Lister, M., Dovey, J., Giddings, S., Kelly, K. (2009). Networks, users and economics. In New media: a critical introduction. M. Lister (Eds.) (London, Routledge): pp. 163-236.

YouTube description:

Global Digital Culture: Cultural Differences and the Internet
Now, from portraits of individuals painted on canvato that vast virtual image of modern society that is the Internet,journalist Alexs Krotoski looks into the evolving face of the web,to find out what it says about who we are.

The founders of the web had a dream: they imagined the global cyber-utopia founded on the ethos of free information for all. But the problem with this vision is that it assumes that we’re all one people with the same shared ideals. But we’re not. The web isn´t neutral.It mirrors the values of those of us who go online and it reflects the ideologies of the people who design and build the services.

Jimmy Wales of Wikipedia believes shared information promotes democracy. Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, says privacy is dead. And Larry Page and Sergey Brin from Google have decided that the most valuable information should be determined and filtered by the crowd. These are profoundly political positions, immersed in western democratic ideas. The web that the majority of us recognise and use, here in the English speaking western world, has characteristics of our ideological and cultural values, but the Internet centre of gravity is quickly shifting away from the West.

A new Internet world is coming online. Of the 2 billion Internet users, 272 million are in North America: that´s more than three quarters of their population. But China has 485 million Internet users, the biggest number of any country. And that´s still only a third of its population. This burgeoning and colossal online community does not access the western web but it’s developed its own home grown websites like Baidu, Tencent and Sina Weibo. But perhaps the greatest difference, at least from our western perspective, is the degree to which China´s Internet is controlled by government censorship, referred to as “The Great Firewall”. It´s the perfect example of how technology can be imbued with an ideology, in this case of top-down control.
That perception of censorship…How aware are the Chinese people of this?
via YouTube https://youtu.be/UNwnQkGpKPE

Posted on

Cyberculture in Song

Song 1 – Joe Walsh – Analog Man (2012)

Joe Walsh’s song ‘Analogue Man‘ can loosely be related to Sterne’s ‘Histiography of Cyberculture’ and the shift from analog to digital that he describes.

The lyrics of this song tell of a man who is struggling keeping up with the pace of the digital world in which he finds himself. The inspiration for the lyrics were derived from the artist, Joe Walsh, who noticed a significant change in technology between recording his previous album in the late 1980’s and releasing this song in 2012.

The artist is quoted as saying “”There’s a whole new world now that’s digital, and a whole new technology I’ve really had to pay attention to recording this album. “It’s my first real shot at trying to do it all digital. I just say that it’s a whole new world, and it’s virtual, which means it doesn’t really exist. It’s an illusion that’s computer-generated, and it seems to me that we are all spending more and more time in there, while our bodies sit in chairs, waiting for our minds to come back. It’s great.”

“I’m not saying analog’s better,” he continued. “I’m just saying those of us who did the bulk of our recording and songwriting in the analog world have had to make some adjustments, and I’m not sure really if it’s working for us or if we’re working for it. Technology is going so fast. I do know that it ate the record business, and I know that it ate intellectual property. I hope it doesn’t eat me!

References

Songfacts.com. (2012). Analog Man. Retrieved: 31 January 2017. http://www.songfacts.com/detail.php?id=26420

Posted on

Robots could help solve social care crisis, say academics #mscedc https://t.co/xSfwoXJybH

During the second informal Togethertube session, my peers and I were discussing whether or not machines programmed with compassion and manners can have a positive influence on people they engage with. Therefore  I can’t say that I was surprised to read about the possibility of robots being introduced to the social care setting.

Nor was I surprised to read of Japanese influence in this project considering there has been a reported surge in robotic companionship from Japan’s technology manufacturers.

from http://twitter.com/learntechstu
via IFTTT

Posted on

Week 2 – Lifestream Synthesis

This week I have been continuing making my way through the reading list for Block 1 and further exploring cybercultures.

I enjoyed our second group session on Togethertube and initially I found the viewings a little harder to make sense of compared to last week. However, after watching them a few times I noticed some similarities between them. The majority of clips demonstrated machines/robots communicating in a human like manner and being capable of humanlike independent thought – certainty far more advanced then the binary operation usually associated with them.

I’ve also spend some more time in thinking about the impact technology has had on life and culture. I’ve been considering old ways of life and how they have been modernised by use of technology. Some tasks have been made more efficient, some quicker, some cheaper, some have replaced people all together.

I have been giving some attention to virtual reality and how our senses can be manipulated to have better than life experiences. This was inspired by the Sterne reading and his example of sound being overlooked in favour of virtual artefacts in the creation of virtual worlds.

Furthermore, I have been reflecting on some of the issues surrounding equality and inequality as a result of cyberculture. It is quite overwhelming to think of the influence technology has had over just about everything and scary to realise some problems we have created in pursuit of digital excellence.

 

Posted on

Who really benefits from cybercultures?

I have recently finished reading Hand’s ‘Hardware to everyware: Narratives of promise and threat’ and once again I am mind-boggled at the impact that technological advances have had not only on the individual, but on a global scale. It feels as though my thoughts and feelings are now finely balanced on a see-saw as I am unable to decide on who cyberculture (as we know it now) ultimately benefits.

To quote Hand (2008):

“Power in digital culture indexes an increasing tendency toward the total surveillance and administration of society, now conducted through globally gathered and sorted information. The results of this will paradoxically be greater insecurity, an intense amplification of existing social divisions, and the consumerization of democratic citizenship” (Hand, 2008, p 39)

On one hand (excuse the pun), I am excited and optimistic about the opportunities that digital cultures will provide people with. It is truly thrilling that technology allows us to connect with people across the world that we would never have been able to without it. From this arises empowerment of the human race to achieve what may at one point have been unthinkable. As I have acknowledged in my previous blog posts it is almost impossible to imagine any real barriers to what can be achieved.

On the other hand, however, there are real threats and dangers that have arisen from our craving to introduce technology into everything. Similar to the real and physical world there are some negative and counteractive influences over digital cultures. An example of such would be the so-called “Dark Web” in which, metaphorically speaking, can be considered the digital equivalent of the underworld. Having conducted some brief research of the Dark Web, I learned that it can be summarised as an encrypted version of the internet where people can mask their true identities and locations to engage in online activity that would be considered inappropriate (if not illegal) in normal circumstances.

Hand would suggest that digital influence merely exaggerates and amplifies the characteristics of society. If true, then inevitably we will have to look beyond the romantic notion of technology as an enhancement to everything and consider the possibility that there may be unwanted implications too. I noted that Hand also made reference to global inequalities and the effect that digitisation has on widening gaps that exist between existing cultures. I was reminded of a personal experience from a few years ago when I was sat at a bar on the island of Boracay, Philippines. On one side of the bar sat a young English family whose 6 year old boy was entertaining himself by playing on an iPad. On the opposite side of the bar was a Filipino boy of a similar age who was trying to make money for his family by selling handmade personalised bracelets. It was a sobering experience to witness such inequality between to boys whose only main difference was the culture in which they grew up. Until now I hadn’t considered the role that technology played in creating this inequality.

I guess that I am concluding that as long as there is human influence in cybercultures then it is difficult to determine who ultimately benefits. Perhaps there is no sole beneficiary but instead a new set of opportunities and problems for everyone. And everything.

References

Hand, M. (2008). Hardware to everywhere: narratives of promise and threat. In Making digital cultures: access, interactivity and authenticity. (Aldershot, Ashgate): pp. 15-42.