The New Digital Divide

Marcia Stepanek’s The New Digital Divide explained how Google, Facebook, data aggregators, and social networking sites use personalization filters to customize what we see on the Web. In addition Marcia Stepanek raised numerous issues regarding how the Web divides certain races and groups because we stay within our “self imposed comfort zones.” Marcia also suggested that this division was bad for civic engagement within a democracy.

While I agree with most of Marcia’s point regarding how the Web divides us, I do think that it also brings us together to perform acts of civic engagement within a democracy. Marcia made two points about civic engagement toward the end of her article. The first assertion was that “we must stop assuming that civic engagement will occur online on its own,” and the second assertion was that “the Net can be a force for civic engagement.” The assertions she offered made it seem as though we are a society that is loosing a sense of civic engagement, and that we are incapable of creating civic engagement opportunities on the web. In contrast to her views, I find the web to be the perfect forum to unite people of all different races, backgrounds, and cultures to perform civic engagement activities. One specific example of web-related civic engagement would be through community service efforts for Japan. Sony Music Entertainment teamed with Universal Music to create Songs for Japan which is an album sold on itunes, and the proceeds go to the Japan Red Cross to support the disaster relief efforts (http://www.3news.co.nz/Songs-for-Japan-album-goes-straight-to-1/tabid/418/articleID/204458/Default.aspx). Another online community service example is the “Hands for Japan” fundraiser on www.crowdrise.com/handsforjapan which uses social networking sites (such as Facebook, Twitter, and Groupon) to raise awareness about Japan’s disaster and to collect money from people all over the world. Ultimately, the list goes on and on. So, I think there is a huge effort for community service activities online, and like Ethan Zuckerman stated, “the Net changes things in the long-term by creating a new public space, one that in most closed societies around the world is not available any other way.” Since the net creates this new public space to unite people from all over the world, I think it amalgamates us rather than segregates us online.

Do you think there is more civic engagement online or offline? Do you think civic engagement (such as community service efforts) unites us more online or offline?

Augmented Reality Application

Dorian Benkoil’s “How The New York Times, Others Are Experimenting with Augmented Reality,” discussed Augmented Reality as “layering digital information onto the physical world” (Young, 1). Augmented Reality (or AR) is most common on the iPhone, Android, and other handheld devices that use built in GPS locators, compasses, graphics, and text.

Dorian Benkoil gave several examples on how the AR device could be useful, and from his suggestions I found the U.S. Postal Service AR and real estate AR to be practical. I am always shipping things to my hometown in California, and I am constantly wondering what box to choose to ship my things. With the AR application you can hold up your handheld device to an object, and the app will tell you what size of box you will need. They should also include shipping costs for the destination you want to send your box to on the AR application. The real estate application is also useful because you can walk up to an apartment complex or house with the AR application, and the AR will notify you of apartments or homes for sale. I think these two specific AR applications are useful because you can just scan the object you want to send or scan the home or apartment. This eliminates the time I waste going back and forth to the post office, or can eliminate the time I spend looking for a place to live. The AR app basically allows you to go to the source and find your information right there.

Summary/Response 2: Neuromancer

The backdrop to William Gibson’s novel Neuromancer, takes place in both real life and cyberspace. Case was once the best console cowboy (computer hacker) in the Sprawl, until Case stole data from his employers. As punishment for his theft, his nervous system was damaged with mycotoxin to prevent him from accessing cyberspace. Out of desperation to connect with cyberspace again, Case searches the “black clinics” in Chiba City, China for a cure. Molly, a modified headhunter is contracted by Armitage to find Case, and force him to join his team. In exchange for Case’s hacking abilities, Armitage repaired his nervous system, but in the course he also installed a slowly dissolving poison near his pancreas to blackmail him into doing missions. Case and Molly run Armitage’s first mission to steal the personality ROM construct of McCoy Pauley (Case’s former mentor) at a media conglomerate called Sense/Net. The ROM, nicknamed “The Dixie Flatline,” is important to Armitage because he needs the Flatline’s hacking expertise. While preparing for the run, a street gang named the “Panther Moderns” is hired to create a terrorist attack on Sense/Net. This distraction allows Molly to infiltrate the building and steal the ROM. The ROM cassette replicated “a dead man’s skills, obsessions, and knee-jerk responses” (74). Case and Molly discover that Armitage’s former identity was Colonel Willis Corto. Corto was the only surviving member of Screaming Fist, which was an operation to disrupt Soviet computer systems in Russia. The team attacked the Soviet computer center, and the team was defenseless against the Soviet lasers. The only member that survived was Corto. Corto felt betrayed by his Russian military because they conducted Screaming Fist, while knowing Corto and his team would be defeated. Corto disappeared into the criminal underworld. Case and Molly also learned that Armitage was backed by Wintermute, a Swiss AI owned by Tessier-Ashpool. After learning about Armitage and obtaining the Flatline construct, Case, Molly and Armitage head to Istanbul to recruit Peter Riviera. Riviera is an artist, thief, sociopath and drug addict who is able to create holograms with the force of his mind. Armitage orders Molly, Case, and Riviera to travel to Freeside, which is owned by Tessier-Ashpool. Winertermute’s nature is revealed when Case is in cyberspace at Freeside. Wintermute tells Case, “this is all coming to you courtesy of the simstim unit wired into your deck” (117). Wintermute was programmed by Tessier-Ashpool to merge with Neuromancer, the other AI. However, Wintermute could not do this without the help of Armitage’s crew. Case was supplied with a high-grade Chinese military icebreaker that he launched after Wintermute killed the Turing police who arrested Case for involvement in the “conspiracy to augment an artificial intelligence” (154). While Case uses the icebreaker, Riviera goes to Villa Straylight (residence of Tessier-Ashpool) to obtain the password to the Turing lock from Lady 3Jane, one of the 20 clones of John Ashpool and Marie-France Tessier. Molly also goes to the Villa, but upon entering 3Jane’s private cave, Riviera injures Molly’s leg. Case and Maelcum decide to go after Molly. Before they arrive, Case is sucked into an alternate reality in cyberspace by Neuromancer, who tries to stop their mission. Case rejects Neuromancer when “he turned and walked away” (236). Case and Maelcum find Molly, 3Jane, and Riviera. 3Jane has Riviera killed, and with the 3Jane’s password they drive the icebreaker into the Tessier-Ashpool core. Wintermute and Neuromancer unite, and together they were “the matrix…the sum total of the works, the whole show” (259). After the run, Case spent his Swiss account on a new pancreas, liver, and ticket back to the Sprawl. Molly leaves him forever, and Case continues to live his life. One night when he is in cyberspace, Wintermute-Neuromancer contacts Case to tell him that he located another AI transmitting the Alpha Centauri system. The novel ends with the sound of inhuman laughter, a trait associated with McCoy Pauley during Cases’s work with the ROM construct.

After Neuromancer, I was left to conceptualize the idea that humans integrate and modify themselves with technology to be more “machine like,” while the machines want to alter themselves to be something greater (or maybe something greater than humans). Although this is not much different than today, the humans of Neuromancer receive implants to modify themselves. The difference lies within the fact that today we modify ourselves through plastic surgery to aim for “the perfect beauty,” while humans of Neuromancer modify themselves to become “technologically beautiful.” For example, Molly augmented herself with cybernetic modifications that include a retractable, 4 centimeter double-edged blade under her fingernails, an enhanced reflex system, and implanted mirror lenses in her eyes. Peter Riviera also had implants put in to project holographic images that he sees through someone’s memory. Another example is Corto, who was terribly injured in Screaming Fist, received “eyes, legs, and extensive cosmetic work” (80). The humans of Neuromancer, just like us not only have an addiction to modifying themselves, but they also are addicted to integrating with technology. Today we have our addictions to facebook, while the humans of Neuromancer have an extreme addiction to cyberspace. When Case looses his ability to connect with cyberspace he became depressed and “the arc of self-destruction [is] glaringly obvious” (8). Gibson seems to show the humans’ dependencies of technology throughout their lives as goal for humans to be technologically advanced or modified. Gibson also highlights the opposing side where an AI named Wintermute tries to become a “superintelligence.” Both humans and the AI tried to achieve to be something greater. In the end Wintermute is unsuccessful in merging with Neuromancer to become the superintelligence that it wanted to be, while humans successfully modify themselves with technology, but never actually become “one” with technology. This may suggest that humans and AI’s can never fully achieve their image of perfection, but will always aim for those tendencies.

Individual Presentation of SARTRE -- Safe Road Trains for the Environment

After asking everyone in the class whether they would trust this system, I was surprised that the majority of the class would not trust the SARTRE system. Although the SARTRE system is not completely developed, many car manufacturers such as Lexus already adapted a similar system in their own cars. For example, the Lexus LS 460 was unvelied at the 2006 Detroit's International Auto Show to exhibit the ability to parallel park itself without any help from a human. And that was a long time ago! Since then Ford, Lincoln, Toyota, and BMW jumped on the bandwagon to create a parallel parking system like the one used on the LS 460 and in the SARTRE system. Thus, with the system already existing it was surprising to me that people still would not trust it. Some of you might own a self parking car! So I am curious...if you have one do you still self park it or trust the car just enough to self park?

I think the main problem with distrust in the SARTRE system is that we are not ready to let technology take over every aspect of our lives. We also cannot trust a computerized system to make judgment calls on whether or not to swerve left or right if debris falls onto the road. For this reason, I can understand why some people may distrust the SARTRE system. Again its the issue of man v machine.

Neuromancer Chapter 4

Chapter 4 got me interested in Neuromancer. In this chapter Molly and Case work together to penetrate the Sense/Net in Atlanta to steal a flatline construct. Molly keeps her cover discrete by dressing as a gum-chomping tourist wearing oversized sunglasses, pink raincoat, and mesh top. Case also assists Molly in the heist by connecting with her mind. Case is linked to Molly through a broadcast network created by the Panther Moders. Thus, Case can experience the world from inside Molly’s body without leaving cyberspace. Molly eventually steals the construct, but injures her leg.

(Side note: Who injures Molly’s leg? How does Molly injure her leg? Molly stated, “Little problem with the natives. Think one of them broke my leg” (63). So who are the natives?)

Molly is a fascinating character because she represents the shrewd hacker who is a tough-girl. She is independent and fearless. I also found it interesting that she led the heist on foot, while Case experienced the heist through her mind. She seems tougher than Case, but it makes me wonder if she will survive another heist if she puts herself in vulnerable situations (such as almost not making it out of Sense/Net with her broken leg).

Another interesting device in this chapter was the Hosaka. Hmmm Hosaka seems like Qwiki! The Hosaka tells you what it knows vocally, and the answer is given in multimedia form. For example, Case enters his topic, “Panther Moderns” (57), and the Hosaka “accessed its array of libraries, journals, and news services” (57) to tell Case about the Panther Moderns. In one instance the Hosaka explains the Panther Modern through an image of a boy who represented the Panther Modern (“dark eyes, epicanthic folds…an angry dusting of acne across pale narrow cheeks” (57). In another instance, it explains what Dr. Virginia Rambali has to say about Panther Moderns. Sounds like a modernized qwiki to me. 

Transcultural Confusion

In James Brown’s, Evil Bert Laden: ViRaL Texts, Community, and Collision, he explained how globalized web technologies welcomed great “transcultural confusion.” “Transcultural confusion” is a symptom of the web that has created “a new and heightened level of interaction between cultures” (Poster), and has “radically altered the old limits on the size sophistication, and scope of unsupervised effort” (Shirky). With the unsupervised environment surrounding the web, it is easy to understand why different cultures would be offended by certain content. Brown used the Bert Laden image and the Spice Girl concert as an example of “transcultural confusion,” by explaining that Asadullah and other Muslims felt the encroachment of Western popular culture on their Muslim values. Muslims want their “cultures, traditions and religious, and societal standards to be respected” (Brown), but how do we (by we I mean everyone on Earth) go about respecting every culture when the web openly displays everything and anything in an unsupervised environment?

Everyday, I encounter numerous political cartoons, fail blogs, and other seemingly comedic web articles, and realized that they are meant to be edgy and funny. However, I am sure there is a community (as discussed in Brown’s article) that would take offense to those. For example, the Bert Laden image was considered to be a joke by Dennis Pozniak’s standards, but to the Sesame Street producers, the image was “unfortunate” and “distasteful.” According to Brown, “The producers of Sesame Street made an immediate attempt to control their intellectual property.” Ultimately, with a free-for-all unsupervised web environment, and a lack of international intellectual property laws, the web will continue to cause “transcultural confusion.”

…..Unless you live in China, Iran, UAE, Morocco, Thailand, Turkey, Iraq, Brazil, Victoria in Australia, and India (http://mashable.com/2007/05/30/youtube-bans/). Brown stated, “The degree of autonomy of each culture to significantly reduce as a consequence of the global information network.” However, many countries like the ones I listed above, have taken government efforts to control the unsupervised and culturally offensive web technologies. For example, Morocco banned youtube because of videos that mocked the Moroccan king as well as some pro-Western Sahara clips. China has also banned facebook and twitter since 2009 (http://www.chinaeconomicreview.com/cer/2011_02/Open_book.html). And in addition to those bans, China’s government banned microblogging on Sina Weibo because people were comparing Cairo’s Tahrir Square to Tiananmen Square (http://www.hindustantimes.com/Cairo-protests-make-Chinese-censors-nervous/Article1-657400.aspx). Even if you tried searching for “Egypt” on a google search engine in China, you would find this statement “according to relevant laws, regulations and policies, the search results are not shown” (Patil).

Does government censorship of web technologies help the “transcultural confusion?”

Again we see the tensions from Convergence Culture take shape through Brown’s article. The web created an unsupervised environment, so the tension lies between a community that has learned how to rhetorically deal with web technologies (including offensive material), and a community that works against the new web media (censorship).

SR 1: "Convergence Culture" by Henry Jenkins

Henry Jenkin’s Convergence Culture Where Old and New Media Collide documented the cultural transition where old and new media interlock, as prosumers are urged to seek new knowledge, and make connections across an array of media platforms. Jenkins designates us as part of a convergence and participatory culture. Convergence is “the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behavior of media audiences who will go almost anywhere in search of the kinds of entertainment experiences they want” (2). Participatory culture “contrasts with older notions of passive media spectatorship…who interact with each other according to a new set of rules that none of us fully understand” (3). Jenkins described the potential for our convergence culture through Pierre Lévy’s “achievable utopia,” where “people from fundamentally different perspectives see a value in talking and listening to one another, and such deliberations form the basis for mutual respect and trust” (246). Ultimately, Lévy suggests that when everyone has greater access to information and new media platforms, companies alter the way companies market their products. Jenkins expresses this evolving nature and changing roles of communication through the Survivor case study where an emotional relationship was fostered between the brand and the consumer. Jenkins explained how this evolvement in communication spills into politics when he stated, “As we saw in looking at Campaign 2004, what we learn through spoiling Survivor…may quickly get applied to political activism or education in the workplace” (257). Jenkins shows that through each project of transmedia storytelling, a “distinctive and valuable contribution to the whole” is offered in return. Through this evolvement in communication which stimulates new ideas and new knowledge, Jenkins is hopeful that these new social structures will further create more “democratic citizenship

Henry Jenkins introduced Pierre Lévy’s idea of an “achievable utopia.” Everyday we strive to reach Lévy’s “achievable utopia” by communicating more freely and becoming more democratic. Although Jenkins and Lévy do not state if we will reach this utopia, I think that we specifically aim for this utopia through politics. For instance, the knowledge communities of Survivor Sucks, could be paralleled to the political knowledge communities of Wikileaks. WikiLeaks, like “Survivor Sucks,” has their own knowledge community, but instead of Survivor fans, WikiLeak’s knowledge community consists of 800 worldwide anonymous news sources and high-powered people. Wikileaks also stated that that their goal is to “break down the divisions and suspicions that currently shape international relations” (29). Thus, the goal of Wikileaks can be seen as a tactic to reach the utopia by allowing for free communication and being more “democratic” (in their eyes). In another instance, we are using Facebook videos instead of traditional media platforms (CNN, Fox, etc.) to get our news about the revolt in Egypt from young revolutionaries in “Cairo’s Facebook Flat” (http://video.nytimes.com/video/2011/02/08/world/middleeast/1248069622796/cairos-facebook-flat.html). This is yet another example of how our convergence culture is using the skills acquired in entertainment environments such as Survivor Sucks, Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, among others, for political purposes. Ultimately, we have not reached Lévy’s utopia, but we are in an “apprenticeship phase” where “we are learning what it is like to operate within a knowledge culture…[and] we are still debating and resolving core principles that will define our interactions with each other” (249). Our active knowledge communities will continue to play a role through media platforms to reach the utopia by exposing all knowledge and democratizing.