RR 8

the institute, ieee news source http://theinstitute.ieee.org/briefings/business/new-policy-aims-to-curb-plagiarism

In an interesting look at how social media affects collaboration in groups, Clay Shirky, Professor of New Media at New York University,  gives us the dark side of group work in an interview conducted by Michael Chui for McKinsey & Company, a management and consulting firm (2014) . This so-called “wake” that new technologies like social media, editable content sites like Wikipedia, and even the printing press leave behind as Shirky says, can have both positive and negative effects. In an example given by Shirky about a small “maker-bot” that wasn’t quite as useful as it could have been that was uploaded by its user, the “penumbra” as he calls it, which a partial illumination or a partial shadow,  is an implied space of knowledge, but an incomplete one. His word choice to describe the sheer amount of data that obscures the real finds, is both interesting and apt because “you don’t have to have someone who can do everything…you can start having a division of labor…” (par. 6) partially because there will be someone out there that can complete the project with their ideas.

So… how could this really be a bad thing? If there is someone out there willing to collaborate on your project and become a part of your worker hive, where every little worker bee contributes just enough for a substantial colony, that sounds ideal, but as Shirkey puts it, sometimes “abundance breaks more things than scarcity” (par. 9).  When we have a scarcity of product or even information, professions are developed, and pricing models are created. So when something is so available that it appears anyone can do it, pricing models tank, and things lose value. As a new version appears, old models die, which in Shirky’s opinion makes us lose the ability to “course correct” (par. 15.) because we’ve lost the original plan, and likely who was responsible for the original plan, and the subsequent ones. When there are so many voices, sometimes the conversation is less of a dialogue, and more of a cacophony.

Ultimately, Shirky is probably right, at least in the areas of plan management, and the ownership of certain ideas. As we learned in “Žižek, Plagiarism and the Lowering of Expectations”  by Hollis Phelps, Professor of Religion at University of Mount Olive (2014) sometimes an idea can verge into the territory of plagiarism and intense disappointment. While Phelps gives some leeway regarding plagiarism to Žižek, a Slovenian philosopher, due to his busy schedule and the scholarship of others, this much is clear, even the smartest of the bunch can find themselves in a pickle of plagiarism, which questions their credibility, integrity and scholarly work.

Regardless of how it happened or why Phelps says, the wake left behind after a finding of plagiarism is substantial. Even just proper citing and resource choices as Phelps says could have saved him from this debacle (par. 9), or proper evaluation of secondary sources like the ones found on group editing sites such as Wikipedia. Phelps does a good job of evaluation what exactly is “Scholarly” work, and how we should work to not assume validity (par. 10), but he also encourages people to lower their expectations regarding what we do in a scholarly realm, and not believe everything we read. While it is easy to agree that we are mortals, and prone to mistakes, the real question to be asked is what the intent was. If the intent was to cut corners and fast forward, it is doubtful that is acceptable to most. Regardless, the question of sloppy work or evaluations vs outright plagiarism is a good conversation to have.

Phelps, H. (2014, July 17). Žižek, plagiarism and the lowering of expectations (essay) @insidehighered. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2014/07/17/%C5%BEi%C5%BEek-plagiarism-and-lowering-expectations-essay

Shirky, C., & Chui, M. (2014, March). The disruptive power of collaboration: An interview with Clay Shirky. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/high_tech_telecoms_internet/the_disruptive_power_of_collaboration_an_interview_with_clay_shirky

“Copy Cat” http://www.wix.com

Literature Review

Introduction

Are we in the midst of creating a lost generation of recipe illiterates? Only a generation ago, people still saved and passed down family recipes full of culture, memory and family significance. In today’s age of printing everything off of the internet and rarely saving recipes, how will we keep track of the cultural and familial memory we’re creating? Personal Digital Archiving could assist in keeping historical and family recipes, but there are some challenges to curating a useful and meaningful archive.

Literature Review

Cookbooks: Then and Now, a Cultural and Historical Perspective.

                Hillary Davis, Bjorn Nansen and Frank Vetere from Information Systems at University of Melbourne, Toni Robertson and Margot Brereton  from Information Systems at the University of Technology Sydney, and Jeanette Durick and Kate Vaisuitis of the Queensland University of Technology published an article (2014) during the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems that outlines some new technologies that could update existing cooking traditions, and familial recipe sharing and recipe keeping practices. Davis, et al identify homemade cookbooks and recipes as significant cultural artifacts and folklore due to both content, historical significance. Davis, et al seek to illuminate ways that technology can step up to identify opportunities to augment recipes to make them more useful to the reader.

Even in a New York Times Article from 22 years ago, New ‘Lost Generation’: The Cooking Illiterate (1992), Trish Hall, Opinion Editor of the New York Times, warns of a new generation of people that don’t know how to cook and can’t even follow a recipe. While this article is more than two decades old, it is surprisingly adept at explaining much of America’s current culinary ability. Could this be due to the loss of home cooking and recipe keeping?

When traditional cookbooks are compiled by local women, they can be as a part of the cultural history as any new technology. Jill Nussel’s Heating Up the Sources: Using Community Cookbooks in Historical Inquiry (2006) effectively demonstrates the need for family cookbooks and recipes. Nussel, a professor of History with a focus on Food History at Indiana Purdue University at Fort Wayne, believes cookbooks are of historical benefit to the community, because cookbooks show how women defined their place in their homes and the community. Women would likely have never been published formally, and because of keeping these recipe collections, they have become historical artifacts and time capsules of a long forgotten time. Nussel illuminates the need to preserve cookbooks by exemplifying the cultural significance of them.

Personal Archiving: The Digital Future, Technology Heirlooms and Hard Copies

Mike Ashenfelder (2013) a digital preservation specialist for the Library of Congress, outlines the reason for personal digital archiving, citing that the general public “is the largest group of digital-file stakeholders in the world… unaware of what digital preservation or personal digital archiving is, or why they should care.” In Heidi Glenn’s similar article on NPR (2013), the same point could be made regarding family photo albums. Glenn’s vision into the future of a truly digital age is a combination of hard copy and digital. Glenn seeks to answer the question, how do we best preserve our memories when they are scattered and ephemeral? While our lives may be fragmented between the digital mediums, we have become addicted to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Flickr, etc – according to Glenn, we have already found a way to meet in the middle.

Available Technology Resources and Challenges to Personal Digital Archiving

Through the Library of Congress, the general public has access to local libraries which are creating events and outreach programs to educate and assist with managing their digital presence (Ashenfelder, 2013).  In David Weinberger’s Everything is Miscellaneous: The Power of the New Digital Disorder (2008), Weinberger works to find new ways of organizing data, and moving past the frustration that many people feel when attempting digital archiving. Weinberger, who is the Senior Researcher at the Harvard Berkman Center for Internet & Society,  advocates for a much richer way of organizing digital data, and raging against structured searches and the same old way of utilizing digital data.  The computer needs to be able to alphabetize but also by miscellaneous ways like ingredient, taste, situation, allergy, event or need. If PC’s are supposed to be the new cookbooks as Weinberger points out, why haven’t they achieved this goal?

As Ashenfelder (2013) laments, many people do not even know what Personal Digital Archiving is, or why they should even care what it is. But Glenn (2013) points out, the sheer amount of work it would take to effectively and perfectly curate a digital archive or scrapbook is daunting for the average person. Because of this, a combination of digital and hard copy is more feasible.  In William Odom, Richard Banks, Richard Harper, David Kirk, Sian Lindley and Abigail Sellen’s research paper on technology heirlooms (2012), Odom et al explain that not only is it pertinent to keep historical records and personal artifacts, but to also keep working models and true versions of old technology. They advocate for not only keeping historical documents, but to also create a digital record of the data created in so-called “old” technology. However, this idea of keeping old technology like floppy disks and drives with photos starts to feel cumbersome and redundant after a time, and the reader is left wondering if anyone will do this at all. Odom et all believe that with the advent of all of this new incredible technology in the future that we will have the ability to save more and more, because these new technologies will theoretically take up much less room. Ultimately, they believe these digital “things” should be passed down to the next generation in the same way physical things are.

References

Ashenfelder, M. (2013). Personal digital archiving. Retrieved from http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/documents/lc-digital-preservation.pdf

Davis, H., Nansen, B., Vetere, F., Robertson, T., Brereton, M., Durick, J., & Vaisutis, K. (2014). Homemade cookbooks: A recipe for sharing. Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 73-82. doi: 2598510.2598590

D’Oratzio, D. (2014, January 7). Whirlpool imagines a kitchen of the future with a touchscreen stovetop. Retrieved from http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/7/5285250/whirlpool-touchscreen-stovetop-concept

Garde- Hansen, J. (2009). My memories?: Personal digital archive fever and Facebook. Save As… Digital Memories. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 135-150. Retrieved October 28, 2014, from http://ds.haverford.edu/fortherecord/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Garde-Hansen.pdf

Glenn, H. (2013, July 30). In the digital age, the family photo album fades away. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/25/205425676/preserving-family-photos-in-digital-age

Hall, T. (1992, January 14). New ‘lost generation’: The cooking illiterate. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/15/garden/new-lost-generation-the-cooking-illiterate.html

Kirk, D. S., & Sellen, A. (2010). On human remains. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 17(3), 1-43.

Laroche, R. (2014). The Recipes Project. Retrieved from http://recipes.hypotheses.org/

Marhsall, C. C. (2008, March/April). Rethinking personal digital archiving part 1: Four challenges from the field. Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march08/marshall/03marshall-pt1.html

Nussel, J. (2006). Heating up the sources: Using community cookbooks in historical inquiry. History Compass, 4(5), 956-961. doi: 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2006.00342.x

Odom, W., Banks, R., Harper, R., Kirk, D., Lindley, S., & Sellen, A. (2012). Technology heirlooms? Considerations for passing down and inheriting digital materials. Retrieved from http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/asellen/techeirloomschi.pdf

Weinberger, D. (2008). Everything is miscellaneous: The power of the new digital disorder. New York: Times Books.
Thanks to Professor C and Professor P for their edits and encouragement

RR7: Set A: Privacy and Technology.

protect.iu.edu

In the Backstory Episode titled Keeping Tabs, Ed Ayers, Brian Balgoh and Peter Onuf examine the historical practices of accumulating data on Americans for both necessary and also somewhat invasive ways. Here, the Backstory History Guys showcase how earlier generations balanced the need for accumulation of data, and the useful data that people have provided history, and what past generation’s expectation of privacy was. One of the History Guys, Brian Balgoh, interviews Helen Roundtree, a cultural Anthropologist who studies Virginia Indian tribes, and is a Professor Emerita of Cultural Anthropology at Old Dominion University in Norfolk, Virginia.

Roundtree illuminates the past practices of keeping so- called “racial purity” data on mixed race Virginians via the Bureau of Vital Statistics, which houses things like birth certificates and other vital records. The person responsible for a majority of this record keeping was Walter Pecker, a Virginia Doctor who was the head of the Bureau of Vital Statistics. But Pecker did not use this data for run-of-the-mill purposes. Instead, Pecker used the data gained through his official position at the Bureau of Vital Statistics to spread racially charged pamphlets as a part of a white supremacy movement. Not only would Pecker use data provided to the Vital Statistics, the Census, and other public documents available in the county courthouse, but he would also welcome “tips” from people in his network to uncover other mixed race citizens. What makes this so remarkable to me, and to the guys at Backstory is that all this went on during World War II. To add salt to the wound, Pecker also utilized these documents to get a list of Free blacks in the early 1800 to find out if a person had African ancestry. Pecker’s work did not stop at finding out who was mixed race- but he also worked to get these people removed from schools, and generally made their lives more awful.

Evan Selinger, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the Rochester Institute of Technology, wrote the 2014 article, Why Its Too Easy To Dismiss Technology Critics: Or, The Fallacies Leading A Reviewer To Call Nicholas Carr Paranoid,  Selinger makes a case against being paranoid about new technology and privacy practices, citing Nicholas Carr’s conclusions in his recently published book The Glass Cage: Automation and US. We previously met Carr when taking a look at his article “Is Google making us stupid?”. Selinger argues that by virtue of not allowing skeptical inquiry into new technology, it oversimplifies the issue at hand (p. 1). We can’t be blind to new technology or resources, but we can’t exactly blindly follow them either. We need the whole story.

A large majority of Selinger’s article has to do with Carr’s evaluation of continued uptick in automation in medical areas. Increasingly, computers store and process large amounts of medical data, and we have seen gains in efficiency and have greater ability to check vast medical records and according to Selinger, “should lower costs and free up resources that can be used to provide better patient care” (p. 2). While much of the new wave of automation’s hype has worn off, Carr notes that instead of being more efficient, and streamlined, some patients actually experienced inflated medical bills because the automated system assumed more charges.  Additionally, Carr cites the fact that due to the expanded use of computers with patients, Doctors are much more likely to have to multi-task and  task switch, instead of have meaningful interactions with patients (p. 2).

Selinger ends his article with a note on the “Superhero fallacy” (p. 4), which states that people generally feel like they’re the “master of their own domain”, but in reality- there are so many things helping us just get by, no one works alone. As we become more proficient with certain technologies, the less proficient we become in their non-technology version.  Selinger cites the advent of spell check in word processors and smart phones for the decline in real spelling ability. This dependence on an app or type of technology creates a gap in knowledge, and the same theory could be applied here. Selinger cautions the reader not to ignore or bypass new technology, and to find out what is a benefit to the user, and what is not.

In Kate Murphy’s 2014 article We Want Privacy, but Can’t Stop Sharing, Murphy encourages us to imagine “a world suddenly devoid of doors” (par. 1). This leads the reader to a creepy vision of people spying on us in transparent dressing rooms, restrooms and more. Why has Murphy made us all feel icky? Because according to “the controlling authorities… if you aren’t doing anything wrong, then you shouldn’t mind.” (par. 1). This is exactly the platform that the “controlling authorities” take when regarding the Internet. Surveillance and non-privacy on the internet are as commonplace as an ad, and we have all changed our patterns to accommodate it. While mostly everyone would agree that privacy is important to them, no one seems to truly be able to stay away from social media, or Google. Murphy believes that perhaps this is because there’s no real understanding, or even agreement regarding what exactly is “Privacy” (par. 4). Murphy cites that  our “loose history” of privacy states that if you’re especially wealthy, you have better privacy. If you are healthy or older, you have a little more privacy than some. However, if you are young, poor, or a criminal, you have very little privacy (par. 6).

So when we know that lack of privacy results in “low self-esteem, depression and anxiety” and “results in less individuality and creativity” (par. 7) aren’t we doing more to protect our privacy? Murphy points to the fact that people continue to participate in social media because they fear being left out. While congress hasn’t done much to regulate these digital data grabs that online media companies make at our expense, Murphy says we have already started to see the adverse effect of low privacy, as “people are beginning to exercise a bit more reserve online, and are otherwise engaging in subversive tactics to thwart data miners” (par. 18). While these might seem mischievous or even humorous, they’re an effort to make tracking more difficult for these companies mining personal data.

As we saw in the Backstory piece on historical medical data mining for white supremacy, in Selinger’s piece on automation and the purpose of skeptical inquiry in technology, and again in Murphy’s article on privacy, there are a couple commonalities that are glaring. The first is that people do not know how other people, agencies or companies are using their data- either historically or at present. This fact is remarkable, and really makes one think about the true impact we have just by virtue of being. The second is that we do not know what the definition of privacy is yesterday, today or the future. It is only through the careful consideration and observation of the general public that we can even seek to understand it better. While my mother’s version of privacy may be different than my own, it will be important for us both to continue the conversation of our expectations, and share those expectations with our chosen social media platforms (or move away from them), or even with our legislative bodies. This ongoing discussion of technology and privacy is just that, ongoing, and we should all be a part of the conversation.

References

Ayers, E., Balogh, B., & Onuf, P. (Writers). (2013, July 19). Keeping tabs [Transcript, Radio series episode]. In Backstory with The American History Guys. Virginia: Virginia Foundation for the Humanities.

Murphy, K. (2014, October 4). We want privacy, but can’t stop sharing. The New York Times. Retrieved from nyt.com

Selinger, E. (2014, September 19). Why it’s too easy to dismiss critics: Or, the fallacies leading a reviewer to call Nicholas Carr paranoid. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/

Lucille wants some privacy, and doesn’t trust you either. wifflegif.com

Updated Annotated Bibliography

References

Ashenfelder, M. (2013). Personal digital archiving. Retrieved from http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/documents/lc-digital-preservation.pdf
Mike Ashenfelder, digital preservation specialist for the Library of Congress outlines the reason for personal digital archiving in the very first paragraph of the chapter. The general public is “The largest group of digital-file stakeholders in the world… unaware of what digital preservation or personal digital archiving is or why they should care.” the risk of losing these digital files that we haphazardly place online, is very high, and in a generation that can’t even remember to back up their computers regularly, that risk is two fold. Through the Library of Congress’ digital archiving department, the Library of Congress is reaching out to local libraries and creating events and plans for the general public to manage their digital presence. No longer is it safe to back up data on one source, due to obsolescence, error, handling issues and lack of durability of current technology. Ashenfelder shines a light on just how fragile the current system of archiving truly is.

Davis, H., Nansen, B., Vetere, F., Robertson, T., Brereton, M., Durick, J., & Vaisutis, K. (2014). Homemade cookbooks: A recipe for sharing. Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 73-82. doi: 2598510.2598590
Identify the opportunities for designing technologies that could update existing cooking traditions and in particular familial recipe sharing practices. Using ethnographic techniques, we identify the homemade cookbook as a significant material and cultural artifact in the family kitchen due to cultural significance Design considerations for digitally augmenting homemade cookbooks.

D’Oratzio, D. (2014, January 7). Whirlpool imagines a kitchen of the future with a touchscreen stovetop. Retrieved from http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/7/5285250/whirlpool-touchscreen-stovetop-concept
In this article the possibilities for future kitchens is explored. Recipes projected onto a smart counter that is cooking, measuring and inventorying ingredients so that the user can be the most successful. What technologies already exist, and what is Whirlpool working on? This relates to the paper topic because this new technology incorporates old family recipes and integrates it into the platforms used.

Garde- Hansen, J. (2009). My memories?: Personal digital archive fever and Facebook. Save As… Digital Memories. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 135-150. Retrieved October 28, 2014, from http://ds.haverford.edu/fortherecord/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Garde-Hansen.pdf
Integrating memory in personal and collective ways. how Facebook and personal memories intersect. Creating mini archives of photos, life events, events and more.

Glenn, H. (2013, July 30). In the digital age, the family photo album fades away. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/25/205425676/preserving-family-photos-in-digital-age
Heidi Glenn’s article offers a dynamic look into what the future will look like in the truly digital age. Glenn poses the question “How do we best preserve the memories of our kids’ childhoods when our digital lives are scattered and ephemeral?” in a time when our personal digital presence is truly hard to define. What makes Glenn’s article so interesting to me is her correlation between the physical wants of today, and tomorrow’s fleeting digital presence. How will we reconcile these two worlds? We’re in a remarkable time where we have a few types of technologies colliding in a singular purpose. In this generation, Not only do we still have traditional photography, but also advancements on traditional photography like Polaroids, and the advent of digital photography. So our digital lives are currently fragmented between traditional mediums of hard copy photos and scrap books, and the online mediums of digital photography and social media sites. Glenn reports that many believe that the want for physical versions of these memories will fade once the technologies available come up with a way to streamline the online presence. this is a truly bold statement, and it becomes bolder the older you are. Glenn offers a multi step process for archiving yesterday’s hard copies and today’s digital presence, and it is daunting. who has time for this?

Hall, T. (1992, January 14). New ‘lost generation’: The cooking illiterate. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/15/garden/new-lost-generation-the-cooking-illiterate.html
Though cooking skills in America have declined, Americans still have a longing to cook and make dishes for their families. But when marketing companies have spent the years since the 1950s encouraging women in particular to purchase prepared foods, we have lost the knowledge and ability to successfully make a meal from scratch.

Kirk, D. S., & Sellen, A. (2010). On human remains. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 17(3), 1-43.
Kirk and Sellen are taking a look at the reasons behind archiving of family objects, and how it relates to the digital realm as people start to create personal digital archives of family herilooms and memories. Kirk and Sellen also surmise as to why we keep certain types of records, and where, and how archiving satisfies a personal and cultural need.

Laroche, R. (2014). The Recipes Project. Retrieved from http://recipes.hypotheses.org/
The Recipes Project is a collective of archival recipes that aim to explain, explore and sometimes poke fun at the often bizarre recipes of olden times. The purpose of the project is to get an understanding of these dishes in a historical context.

Marhsall, C. C. (2008, March/April). Rethinking personal digital archiving part 1: Four challenges from the field. Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march08/marshall/03marshall-pt1.html
How are we archiving yesterday and today’s digital material? There is a concern that we’re not doing enough to preserve our current online presence. When technologies change, how do we transfer over this data, and make it continually usable?

Nussel, J. (2006). Heating up the sources: Using community cookbooks in historical inquiry. History Compass, 4(5), 956-961. doi: 10.1111/j.1478-0542.2006.00342.x
Community cookbooks are a compilation of recipes provided by community members to benefit their church, right? Well there may be some historical benefit to keeping community cookbooks. These cookbooks show how women defined their place in society and their homes, and also included tips and moral teachings. These women would likely have never been published formally, and because of keeping these recipes, they are historical artifacts, or time capsules from a long forgotten time.

Odom, W., Banks, R., Harper, R., Kirk, D., Lindley, S., & Sellen, A. (2012). Technology heirlooms? Considerations for passing down and inheriting digital materials. Retrieved from http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/asellen/techeirloomschi.pdf
In Microsoft researchers’ Odom, Banks, Harper, Kirk, Lindley and Sellen’s paper on Technology Heirlooms, Odom et all examine the need to keep not only the past technology, but also pass down past data and family histories to the next generation. Not only are material artifact such as old family photos, medals of honor, or even recipes important to pass down to the next generation, but so are the digital records we have created in new technology. Odom et all suggest that because we live “more of our lives “online”, it is interesting to ask how digital content will find its place among these physical collections of things that connect us to the past.” Odom et all also believe that with the advent of all of these new incredible technologies we will have the ability to save more and more, because these new digital pieces take up so much less room, and pose the question, “Will these digital things be passed down the same way as physical things are?”

Weinberger, D. (2008). Everything is miscellaneous: The power of the new digital disorder. New York: Times Books.
As we work to find new ways of organizing our data- a feeling of frustration abounds. Not only does a computer need to be able to alphabetize- but technology should be able to make miscellaneous searches possible- search by ingredient, taste, situation, allergy and need. If PCs were supposed to be the new cook books- have they achieved this goal?

RR6, Privacy and Presence on The Internet

http://marketingland.com/make-love-not-evil-the-new-google-motto-9506

Did you know that Google’s slogan is “Don’t be evil”? While Google isn’t really on the top of my list of most evil companies (this could be simply because their google maps app has saved me from being lost more times than I’d like to admit) Google does know a frighteningly large amount about me. It knows my preferences for completing errands online, it knows I’m always shopping for food service small wares and equipment and hosts a litany of online trade articles that mention me by name and where I work – and that’s just the stuff I know it knows about me! In Ian Bogost’s 2013 Atlantic Monthly article “What Is ‘Evil’ to Google?” Bogost works to unpack the ideas behind Google’s slogan: “Don’t be evil.” So what, according to Google is “evil”? The Definition of the word evil as provided by Google itself is “1. Profoundly immoral and malevolent or profound immorality, wickedness and depravity, especially when regarding a supernatural force.” While Google may be powerful, it is certainly not supernatural, and I doubt many would consider its acts wicked or depraved. Bogost believes that Google’s version of “evil”  is strictly tied to customer experience, and that evil is “the disruption of its brand of (computational) progress.” (par. 3)

So if Google’s corporate code of conduct is tied so intrinsically with the hyper simple “Don’t be evil”, is it effective in its goal of not being “evil?” Bogost argues that while Google as an entity is passing jugement on evil, and whether or not they are exploiting customers or not- is all relative! So if these moral codes are relative- then it would suit Google just fine to redefine evil as anything that prevents progress, or prevents the advancement of technology (par. 7-9) – but at what expense, and whose? Bogost is under the impression that Google would prefer to be viewed as being magnanimous (i.e generous or forgiving of someone less powerful than yourself) rather than controlling or spying (par. 17) to best benefit their customers. Bogost could hardly agree less with Google’s platform, and says that the most nefarious thing of all, is that in Google’s quest to do no evil, they changed the meaning of “evil” to suit their own needs (par. 21), and that in itself is kinda creepy and evil.

In Kieron O’Hara’s “Are we getting privacy the wrong way round?”  for IEEE Internet Computing (2013) O’Hara asks the question – what is privacy anyway? It could very well be that this ever-evolving term, privacy, changes before we can change with it, or even recognize the change. O’Hara cites Mark Zukkerburg, Facebook CEO on privacy, stating that their users have gotten so comfortable with sharing information online that the “social norm is just something that has evolved over time” (p. 90). While it’s both convenient and beneficial for Facebook’s CEO to just blame users for the privacy change, they are not as passive in this conversation as they would like to be viewed. If people “aren’t really interested in it (privacy) any more” (p. 90) as O’Hara claims, why are we still talking about it like it’s important?

Ultimately, O’Hara believes seriously that Aldous Huxley’s Brave New

http://antonk.com/july-in-history/july-26-on-this-day-in-history/

World – where no one is an individual or autonomous, and nothing is private, but O’Hara also believes that “Loss of autonomy might be compensated for by increased control over identify and self-preservation” (p. 91). But is personalization just another form of restriction? O’Hara believes so, as the more data a company has on you, the more easily they can classify you, and control your experience (p. 91).  A bigger worry that O’Hara has is that people will be less creative, innovative or less likely to express themselves freely (p. 92), and that is a great concern of mine as well, because in this world of no new ideas, when you have a new one, you want people to know it was you that had it. As people become more and more aware of how their data is used in the common ground of the internet, it would be a shame to see innovation depressed, and cynicism running rampant.  This is also why both O’Hara and Bogost advocate for knowing the paths that we create, and understanding our own unique responsibilities in the realm of digital or online privacy. As O’Hara put it- “This can’t be a matter of regulation, but rather depends on us all taking our responsibilities seriously.” (p. 92).

References

Bogost, I. (2013, October 15). What is ‘evil’ to Google? Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/10/what-is-evil-to-google/280573/?single_page=true

Google. “Evil – Google Search.” Evil – Google Search. Google, n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2014.

 O’Hara, K. (2013, July/August). Are we getting privacy the wrong way round? Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?reload=true&tp=&arnumber=6547595

https://www.grc.com/cookies/cookies.htm

RR5- Does Digital Scholarship Have a Future?

Emory digital scholarship lab\

In President Ayers’ 2013 article, Ayers tries to answer the question Does digital scholarship have a future? Ayers points to the fact that scholars and academics generally don’t believe that new digital works are “not valuable or important” to them (par. 4), yet in the last 20 years, technology, and the sheer amount of information that has become available has been astronomical. Ayers describes the concept of “Digital Scholarship” as the “discipline-based scholarship produced with digital tools and presented in digital form” (Par. 7). The purpose of digital scholarship is clearly the ability to innovate and rise to the occasion of need and current trends, but in that lies a challenge. According to Ayers, digital scholarship needs a better sense of identity, and move beyond the concept of it being an “experiment” or even just a trend (Par. 17). Because traditional forms of scholarship are often presented as these cumbersome, and often outdated texts, true digital scholarship could result in an “era of boundlessness, an era of ubiquity.” (Par. 16) I like the idea of “boundlessness” because it hearkens to the idea itself of a traditional bound book. The limitlessness of the internet, and digital technology is not only exciting, but unfathomable, so perhaps this concept, and the matter of change itself is worrisome for traditional scholars.

Ayers points to the lack of academics that are willing to participate and commit to digital scholarship as a key reason why digital scholarship has not sunk its teeth into academia the way that it could. According to Ayers, innovation and aggressive change is key to real success (par. 17). I particularly liked when Ayers said “They do not imagine other forms in which scholarship might live in a time when our audiences can be far more vast and varied than in previous generations” (Par. 16), and this reminded me of a discussion we had in class. A while back, there was a general push to close the patent office, because all of the truly great ideas and inventions were already created. Just because they couldn’t think of it, they believed these new ideas could not and did not exist. But aren’t we glad that true thoughtfulness prevailed, because many more exciting and out of this world innovations have been created since then. I think where President Ayers is truly successful in his thesis is how he explains how digital scholarship can grow. He does it with a “boundless” energy and challenges both scholars and people alike to think outside the book in this case, and challenge ourselves to have greater and larger perspectives (Par. 18). In a way, we are at the frontier of digital scholarship, and Ayers is helping to lead the charge with the ideas of energy and possibility. The encouragement of lifelong learning, and approaching an old idea anew, this idea of “generative scholarship”  (par 19)  – a building effect of ongoing digital scholarship) is how digital scholarship truly grows- and is pretty exciting! If only people will get on board.

Ayers, E. L. (2013, August 5). Does digital scholarship have a future? Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/does-digital-scholarship-have-future

A picture from a project on University of Richmond’s Digital Scholarship Lab “Atlas of the Historical Geography of the United States” http://dsl.richmond.edu/historicalatlas/

Big Data Book review

http://www.dataart.com

In Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Kenneth Cukier’s Big Data (2014) a change is coming. Looming around the edges of society, every second of every day, data is collected. Millions of pieces of data on you, your habits and your life are analyzed, or at minimum, just collected and stored. This idea of “BIG DATA” is believed to help shape and change how our current generation behaves and moves through the world. While Schönberger and Cukier spend a lot of time in the book discussing the endless utility and possibilities that companies can use the big data collected to better serve you, but there is a larger issue of privacy protection that sits like a giant elephant in the room. How will we, as consumers be better served and taken care of if we don’t release and allow companies to use our “private” data? The truth is, the companies don’t always need our permission to gather data on us to make suggestions for ads or sales or “likes.” By virtue of cookies and internet history, companies know a lot about us already, and that makes our lives easier and more curated every day… If only a little creepy sometimes. Big data is often slow moving, and full of lots of techy terms that slow down the reader, and often overwhelm. Like Big Data itself- the book explains a true litany of possibilities, but underscores the research aspect. In a way Schönberger and Cukier imply that research may not be needed anymore, since big data can provide the insights in less time.

In Tim Harford’s Big data: are we making a big mistake? (2014), Harford shines the spotlight on just how vague companies are being when they tell us how they are collecting the data, and how they are using it. When companies, and sometimes the government is obsessed with every move we make on the internet, does it truly benefit us, or the companies? Like Schönberger and Cukier, Harford also cites google’s “flu trends”  – used to get quick update on where the flu was currently trending in America, except that google’s flu trend mapping was entirely free of real data. While the algorithm may be correct, there was no proof to back it up. Harford urges the use of temperance when making BIG DATA claims, because statistically, there are errors. “Google Flu Trends” misreported flu outbreaks by a factor of 2, and because they just followed the numbers, doesn’t mean google was right. Harford cautions that because Big Data is so new, the insights and patterns we find in it should be suspect.

During the recent New Yorker Festival,  Jane Meyer of The New Yorker interviews Edward Snowden, Freedom Fighter/ NSA Whistle Blower or Notorious Hacker, Spy & Public Enemy #1- depending on who you ask, Snowden discusses the idea of “privacy” in the modern age, and in many ways it relates to the onslaught of information that Big Data provides.  In order to operate truly privately in this day and age, he recommends getting rid of Drop Box, Facebook… and yes, GOOGLE! In a remote interview, Snowden called for reform of governmental policies on privacy, and encouraged the people at large to get to know what their rights are, and how they are being violated. While Snowden did not imply that Big Data was violating any laws, there is a touch on the idea of what is privacy exactly? And what are our own expectations of it? Ultimately, the topic of Big Data is an interesting and intriguing one, and it has a lot of possibilities for menu engineering, food mapping, food trending and seeing just how our food culture is rapidly changing. While I don’t believe anything could replace true research, the combination of Big Data and real, true research is an interesting combination. Possibly like peanut butter and chocolate, Big Data and Research could be better together.

http://www.slideshare.net/ramakantg/big-data-future-big-data-analytics-cloud-sdn-internet-of-things

References

Harford, T. (2014, March 3). Big data: Are we making a big mistake? Retrieved from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/21a6e7d8-b479-11e3-a09a-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2ziUgQIoH

Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work, and think. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

The New Yorker. (2014, October 11). The Virtual Interview: Edward Snowden. Retrieved from http://www.newyorker.com/new-yorker-festival/live-stream-edward-snowden

Knowledge Management midterm Prospectus

Knowledge Management midterm Prospectus

Personal Digital Archiving: How are we keeping track of our family recipes in the digital age?

Are we in the midst of creating a lost generation of recipe illiterates? Only a generation ago, people still saved and passed down family recipes full of culture, memory and family significance. In today’s age of printing everything off of the internet and never saving recipes, how will we keep track of the cultural and familial memory we’re creating through food-ways and experiences? Do we need to spend time archiving and keeping family recipes for our personal histories?  What, if anything, is being done to approach this topic already? For my Fall 2014 research paper I will explore how recipes have been kept and handed down in the past, how we are preserving these family histories currently, and how technology could assist in curating a digital archive for personal records such as recipes.  The thesis I intend to develop so far is as follows

  1. Introduction
    1. How recipe archiving ties in to cultural memory
  2. How have people historically saved and passed down recipes?
    1. Examining past record keeping for recipes
    2. Family memory, tangible vs intangible
  3. How are people currently saving, keeping or archiving recipes currently
    1. What apps or software exist?
    2. Is the task of archiving too vast?
    3. What resources are currently or historically available in personal archiving?
  4. What future ways could be possible?
    1. What will digital archiving in the future look like?
    2. Futuristic kitchens and the place for digital recipes
    3. Successful curation of a digital archive of recipes

Working Bibliography

References

Ashenfelder, M. (2013). Personal digital archiving. Retrieved from http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/documents/lc-digital-preservation.pdf
Mike Ashenfelder, digital preservation specialist for the Library of Congress outlines the reason for personal digital archiving in the very first paragraph of the chapter. The general public is “The largest group of digital-file stakeholders in the world… unaware of what digital preservation or personal digital archiving is or why they should care.” the risk of losing these digital files that we haphazardly place online, is very high, and in a generation that can’t even remember to back up their computers regularly, that risk is twofold. Through the Library of Congress’ digital archiving department, the Library of Congress is reaching out to local libraries and creating events and plans for the general public to manage their digital presence. No longer is it safe to back up data on one source, due to obsolescence, error, handling issues and lack of durability of current technology. Ashenfelder shines a light on just how fragile the current system of archiving truly is.

D’Oratzio, D. (2014, January 7). Whirlpool imagines a kitchen of the future with a touchscreen stovetop. Retrieved from http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/7/5285250/whirlpool-touchscreen-stovetop-concept

In this article the possibilities for future kitchens is explored. Recipes projected onto a smart counter that is cooking, measuring and inventorying ingredients so that the user can be the most successful. What technologies already exist, and what is Whirlpool working on?

Glenn, H. (2013, July 30). In the digital age, the family photo album fades away. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/25/205425676/preserving-family-photos-in-digital-age

We’re currently in the midst of a paper to digital phenomenon, and firmly stuck in the middle. When we have so many different types of media and memories spread out between so many different types of platforms from flicker, to Facebook, Instagram and snapfish, how do we successfully keep and curate a modern family photo album? What does digital preservation look like for the future, and how are we keeping our digital presence organized? We aren’t! … and that might be ok. Part of the fun of leafing through an old shoebox of pictures are the discoveries, and in this NPR piece, that will be part of the digital fun for the future archives.

Glenn, H. (2013, July 30). In the digital age, the family photo album fades away. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/25/205425676/preserving-family-photos-in-digital-age
Heidi Glenn’s article offers a dynamic look into what the future will look like in the truly digital age. Glenn poses the question “How do we best preserve the memories of our kids’ childhoods when our digital lives are scattered and ephemeral?” in a time when our personal digital presence is truly hard to define. What makes Glenn’s article so interesting to me is her correlation between the physical wants of today, and tomorrow’s fleeting digital presence. How will we reconcile these two worlds? We’re in a remarkable time where we have a few types of technologies colliding in a singular purpose. In this generation, Not only do we still have traditional photography, but also advancements on traditional photography like Polaroids, and the advent of digital photography. So our digital lives are currently fragmented between traditional mediums of hard copy photos and scrap books, and the online mediums of digital photography and social media sites. Glenn reports that many believe that the want for physical versions of these memories will fade once the technologies available come up with a way to streamline the online presence. this is a truly bold statement, and it becomes bolder the older you are. Glenn offers a multi step process for archiving yesterday’s hard copies and today’s digital presence, and it is daunting. who has time for this?

Hall, T. (1992, January 14). New ‘lost generation’: The cooking illiterate. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/15/garden/new-lost-generation-the-cooking-illiterate.html
Though cooking skills in America have declined, Americans still have a longing to cook and make dishes for their families. But when marketing companies have spent the years since the  1950s encouraging women in particular to purchase prepared foods, we have lost the knowledge and ability to successfully make a meal from scratch.

Kirk, D. S., & Sellen, A. (2010). On human remains. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 17(3), 1-43.
Kirk and Sellen are taking a look at the reasons behind archiving of family objects, and how it relates to the digital realm as people start to create personal digital archives of family herilooms and memories. Kirk and Sellen also surmise as to why we keep certain types of records, and where, and how archiving satisfies a personal and cultural need.

Laroche, R. (2014). The Recipes Project. Retrieved from http://recipes.hypotheses.org/

The Recipes Project is a collective of archival recipes that aim to explain, explore and sometimes poke fun at the often bizarre recipes of olden times. The purpose of the project is to get an understanding of these dishes in a historical context.

Odom, W., Banks, R., Harper, R., Kirk, D., Lindley, S., & Sellen, A. (2012). Technology heirlooms? Considerations for passing down and inheriting digital materials. Retrieved from http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/asellen/techeirloomschi.pdf
In Microsoft researchers’ Odom, Banks, Harper, Kirk, Lindley and Sellen’s paper on Technology Heirlooms, Odom et all examine the need to keep not only the past technology, but also pass down past data and family histories to the next generation. Not only are material artifact such as old family photos, medals of honor, or even recipes important to pass down to the next generation, but so are the digital records we have created in new technology. Odom et all suggest that because we live “more of our lives “online”, it is interesting to ask how digital content will find its place among these physical collections of things that connect us to the past.” Odom et all also believe that with the advent of all of these new incredible technologies we will have the ability to save more and more, because these new digital pieces take up so much less room, and pose the question, “Will these digital things be passed down the same way as physical things are?”

Annotated Seed Articles

References

Ashenfelder, M. (2013). Personal digital archiving. Retrieved from http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/documents/lc-digital-preservation.pdf
Mike Ashenfelder, digital preservation specialist for the Library of Congress outlines the reason for personal digital archiving in the very first paragraph of the chapter. The general public is “The largest group of digital-file stakeholders in the world… unaware of what digital preservation or personal digital archiving is or why they should care.” the risk of losing these digital files that we haphazardly place online, is very high, and in a generation that can’t even remember to back up their computers regularly, that risk is two fold. Through the Library of Congress’ digital archiving department, the Library of Congress is reaching out to local libraries and creating events and plans for the general public to manage their digital presence. No longer is it safe to back up data on one source, due to obsolescence, error, handling issues and lack of durability of current technology. Ashenfelder shines a light on just how fragile the current system of archiving truly is.

Glenn, H. (2013, July 30). In the digital age, the family photo album fades away. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/07/25/205425676/preserving-family-photos-in-digital-age
Heidi Glenn’s article offers a dynamic look into what the future will look like in the truly digital age. Glenn poses the question “How do we best preserve the memories of our kids’ childhoods when our digital lives are scattered and ephemeral?” in a time when our personal digital presence is truly hard to define. What makes Glenn’s article so interesting to me is her correlation between the physical wants of today, and tomorrow’s fleeting digital presence. How will we reconcile these two worlds? We’re in a remarkable time where we have a few types of technologies colliding in a singular purpose. In this generation, Not only do we still have traditional photography, but also advancements on traditional photography like Polaroids, and the advent of digital photography. So our digital lives are currently fragmented between traditional mediums of hard copy photos and scrap books, and the online mediums of digital photography and social media sites. Glenn reports that many believe that the want for physical versions of these memories will fade once the technologies available come up with a way to streamline the online presence. this is a truly bold statement, and it becomes bolder the older you are. Glenn offers a multi step process for archiving yesterday’s hard copies and today’s digital presence, and it is daunting. who has time for this?

Kirk, D. S., & Sellen, A. (2010). On human remains. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 17(3), 1-43.
Kirk and Sellen are taking a look at the reasons behind archiving of family objects, and how it relates to the digital realm as people start to create personal digital archives of family herilooms and memories. Kirk and Sellen also surmise as to why we keep certain types of records, and where, and how archiving satisfies a personal and cultural need.

Odom, W., Banks, R., Harper, R., Kirk, D., Lindley, S., & Sellen, A. (2012). Technology heirlooms? Considerations for passing down and inheriting digital materials. Retrieved from http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/asellen/techeirloomschi.pdf
In Microsoft researchers’ Odom, Banks, Harper, Kirk, Lindley and Sellen’s paper on Technology Heirlooms, Odom et all examine the need to keep not only the past technology, but also pass down past data and family histories to the next generation. Not only are material artifact such as old family photos, medals of honor, or even recipes important to pass down to the next generation, but so are the digital records we have created in new technology. Odom et all suggest that because we live “more of our lives “online”, it is interesting to ask how digital content will find its place among these physical collections of things that connect us to the past.” Odom et all also believe that with the advent of all of these new incredible technologies we will have the ability to save more and more, because these new digital pieces take up so much less room, and pose the question, “Will these digital things be passed down the same way as physical things are?”

RR4, Recipes as a part of personal home archiving

In David S. Kirk and Abigail Sellen’s 2010 article  “On Human Remains” an article on home archiving for Microsoft Research UK, Kirk and Sellen argue for home personal archives, including recipes. Abigail Sellen, who was also a contributor to a previous article, “Technology Heirlooms” for Microsoft Corporation has a clear understanding of how recipes keep us tied to the past, and keep the memories of our past loved ones alive. In “On Human Remains”  Kirk and Sellen give an overview of a woman participating in their study on Computer and Human interaction. The woman is particularly fond of a book of jam recipes that her grandmother has given to her. The woman in the study feels closer to her deceased grandmother, and she enjoys reading through the comments on the pages, and seeing her grandmother’s handwriting correcting certain recipes and techniques (p. 20, fig. 12), and feels compelled to add her own writing to the pages, and add her own recipes, continuing the dialogue (par. 4).

Kirk and Sellen point out that it isn’t the object itself that carries such a deep meaning, but rather the connection the reader feels with the personal touches left by past family members because “In this way and in conjunction with the ready access to objects of common association… such materials were used to foster a connection amongst family members to a shared family history…such objects may in fact have no connection to events in the past that anyone in the household can actually remember. Yet they symbolize a heritage and history of things that must have been, creating a new shared awareness of their importance in the present.” (p. 20-21)

Beyond the personal, familial and social history that recipes that recipes often entail, there is a significant cultural history attached as well. Fortunately, people often feel compelled to keep and maintain a family’s personal artifacts after the person maintaining it passes. Kirk and Sellen point out that families often have an informal point person that is tasked with family archiving, but even in the cases where this point person does not exist, that people feel a duty to preserve family history for others citing that “for many people (those responsible in family homes for the construction and maintenance of the archive) there is a sense in which we understand that artifacts which might me important need to be dealt with in some meaningful way” (p. 26).

There is another aspect to this family record keeping that is intensely more worrisome in Kirk and Sellen’s opinion, and that is the idea of “Forgetting” (p.27). This “underlying motivation” as Kirk and Sellen call it, is what compels us as humans to persevere, even when maintaining, or altering personal family archives seems daunting. Posing the question of “WHY” we are saving certain contents, Kirk and Sellen believe that there is a truly palpable sense of connection and honesty in remembering properly (p. 28-29). Even when we keep the recipes that didn’t work, or were terrible; it speaks to the person themselves.

In one instance during Kirk and Sellen’s project, they account of a person who removed an apple tart that her mother made before moving her mother to an assisted living facility. The person moved the apple tart from her mother’s freezer, and into her home freezer, where it stayed until her mother died. She didn’t get rid of It because it would have made her feel guilty p. 28). According to Kirk and Sellen, we have no version of this action or instance in the digital realm- where “artefacts (sic) were kept but deliberately hidden.” This speaks to the truly personal nature of food, and recipes, and points out a fracture between digital and tangible artifacts like recipes.

Kirk, D. S., & Sellen, A. (2010). On human remains. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 17(3), 1-43. doi: 10.1145/1806923.1806924