May 2004 - Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Re: first post (An Internet Without Space)
by Michele White 01 Nov '04

01 Nov '04

Dear Colleagues, Thanks for the interesting posts on space. One of my concerns is the ways that the concept of Internet space often leads to the idea that there are people on the screen or inside the interface. While there are certainly people engaging through varied technologies and they are very invested in their connections, the mediated aspects of engagement and the deeply constructed interfaces and identity representations are sometimes not addressed. This mediation significantly shapes what we see and experience. With increasing computer processing speed and connectivity, ubiquitous computing, and more detailed simulations it becomes easier and we are often encouraged to forget the technologies and representations. My hope is that we can address both user interests and the ways that traditional ideas of age, class, gender, race, and sexuality (which are conveyed through visual and textual representations) are reinscribed through technologies, practices, and depictions. I know that Ulla has asked me about alternative terminology and I often try to model this in my writing. I employ such terms as "setting" instead of space. Admittedly, sometimes thinking through our ways of speaking the Internet removes further words from my vocabulary and leads to a spluttering or form of unspeaking. As I researcher, I believe that one of my responsibilities is to consider the ways that individuals view and speak about Internet settings, contemporary technologies, and other social experiences and to suggest the problems, promises, and (as Ulla prompts) the other ways that individuals and societies can represent and produce these technologies and cultural practices. I sometimes rework a vocabulary from the humanitiesparticularly film and media studies, photography theory, literary studies, and art history to write about such depictions as the rectangular or body-shaped images of synchronous graphical settings or the photo-like images of webcams. We might also look to writings about past technologies to understand our representations of the Internet. Television and other media have been understood as live, alive, and a space. Thomas Hutchinson indicated, that with television "the outside world can be brought into the home" (ix) and Charles Siepmann argued that television was a way of "'going places' without even the expenditure of movement" (340). More recently, Rhona J. Berenstein has noted that television also had the reputation of "being a medium of immediacy: an apparatus that, more than film, offers its viewers live access to the world around them and hence it was assumed, to reality " and that television resonates "in spatial terms, suggesting a physical proximity between the viewer and the performance rendered" (26). In any case, it seems to me that each vocabulary and way of understanding the Internet produces a set of cultural perceptions that shape our understanding of these technologies and social practices, what they are, and what they can be. All my best, Michele Rhona J. Berenstein, "Acting Live: TV Performance, Intimacy, and Immediacy," Reality Squared: Televisual Discourse on the Real, ed. James Friedman. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2002. Thomas H Hutchinson, Here Is Television, Your Window on the World. New York: Hastings House, 1948. Charles Siepmann, Radio, Television, and Society. New York: Oxford University Press, 1950.

8 7

Question on reputation studies (professional reputation)
by Jan Hauser 31 May '04

31 May '04

Hello All, I am looking for a person, group, or collection of research or researchers that focus on reputation as it applies to a ~individual as a professional~. This can be in the role of employee, consultant, advisor, or other professional role. I am aware of the Reputation Research Network hosted by Paul Resnick et.al. at the University of Michigan: http://web.si.umich.edu/reputations/ http://web.si.umich.edu/reputations/bib/bib.html Can anyone provide me with additional leads? I am a newcomer to this list so please excuse me if there was a previous body of traffic in the past that answered my question. Thanks - Jan Jan Hauser Email jan(a)janhauser.com WWW http://www.janhauser.com

1 0

new reviews in cyberculture studies (june 2004)
by david silver 31 May '04

31 May '04

New reviews (found at http://www.com.washington.edu/rccs/) include: Caterina Davinio, Tecno-Poesia e Realta Virtuali: Storia, Teoria, Esperienze tra Scrittura, Visualita e Nuovi Media (Editoriale Sometti, 2002). Reviewed by Jorge Luiz Antonio Nanette Gottlieb and Mark McLelland, eds., Japanese Cybercultures (Routledge, 2003). Reviewed by Leslie M. Tkach-Kawasaki Darren Tofts, Annemarie Jonson, and Alessio Cavallaro, eds., Prefiguring Cyberculture: An Intellectual History (MIT Press, 2003). Reviewed by Nick Mercer david silver The September Project on the net --> http://www.theseptemberproject.org on the map --> http://www.com.washington.edu/september/map.asp

1 0

Re: [Air-l] Educational System and Information Society
by Robert Hassan 28 May '04

28 May '04

Hi Julio, You could also have a look at my own humble effort: The Chronoscopic Society: Globalization and Knowledge in the Networked Economy (2003) New York: Lang. Good luck Robert Hassan >>> jmenesesn(a)uoc.edu 05/25/04 9:33 AM >>> Dear all, I'm looking for some literature about the evolution of Educational Systems at the Network or Information Society. All the bibliography usually available on Education and Information Age is concerning about how multimedia and new ICTs are modifying the learning process at online environments (for example Distance Universities). However, I need to find some references about the evolution of the whole Educational System when it gets into the Information Age, maybe seen from a systemic point of view. Any hints? Any reference or place to start looking for are very welcome. Thank you very much in advance! _________________________________________________________ Julio Meneses Naranjo Investigador del IN3 Doctorando del Programa de Sociedad de la Información del IN3 Universitat Oberta de Catalunya Estudis de Psicologia i Ciències de l'Educació Avinguda Tibidabo 39-43 08035 Barcelona (Spain) jmenesesn(a)uoc.edu

2 1

Call for Participation: Mobile HCI 2004/Convergent Media Workshop
by A.C.Roibas＠bton.ac.uk 28 May '04

28 May '04

Deadline extended to 7 June 2004: Call for Participation: Mobile HCI 2004 Site: http://www.handheldusability.com/mobilehci2004 Design for Convergent Media is a full day Workshop for the Mobile HCI 2004 conference in Glasgow, Scotland. The workshop will be held on 13 September 2004. Abstract The workshop intends to explore and analyse crucial issues in the design of the interaction in scenarios of ubiquitous communication. Mobile telephone handsets, still and video cameras, music play, walkie talkie features, and television programming will all be considered. Theme and Interest of Topic The recent developments in communication technologies (3G, iTV, broadband, etc) will strongly enhance and extend communication possibilities in ubiquitous contexts. In this sense, convergent media is becoming one of the main relevant HCI issues. Therefore, new design approaches, HF (Human Factors) studies, behavioural theories and evaluation techniques must arise in order to be able to design interactive mobile products that provide the user with a positive experience. Objectives Development of a HF research agenda for this specific issue, to identify and extend the research community in this topic. Moreover, to sensitise designers to the unique interaction design issues for convergent communication scenarios (learning models, interface evaluation, etc.). Duration and Organization The workshop is designed for one full day of activity with relevant theoretical discussion, ending with a poster design session. After the presentations and discussion, participants will be invited to choose a format of interactive service for ubiquitous contexts and hypothesise a suitable scenario of use that will enhance users' interactive experience with several devices. Each team will be asked to summarize its findings with a poster presentation. Agenda and Schedule The workshops will run from 9am until 5pm on Monday 13th September (the only workshop day). Duration Activity 1:30 Introductions & Paper presentations 0:30 Project discussion & break into groups 1:00 Participatory design and paper prototyping 1:00 User testing and redesign 1:00 Group presentations 1:00 Documentation and Poster preparation 1:00 Poster presentations and group discussion Expected Outcomes This workshop will evaluate the evolution of HCI for convergent media and discuss new challenges for the industry in this field. Posters will summarize findings from groups' works. Results of the Workshop will also be made available on the Workshop's Web site. Authors' Names, Affiliations and Backgrounds Full bios are on http://www.handheldusability.com/mobilehci2004 Dr. Anxo Cereijo Roibás Senior lecturer, School of Computing & Mathematical Sciences University of Brighton. Professor of Interaction Design and Multimedia Strategies Faculty of Design, Politecnico di Milano University a.c.roibas(a)brighton.ac.uk Scott Weiss Principal, Usable Products Company Chair, Usability SIG of the New York Software Industry Association Author, "Handheld Usability" (Wiley: 2002) sweiss(a)usableproducts.com Deadline for submissions: 7 June 2004 Site: http://www.handheldusability.com/mobilehci2004 ----------------------------------------------------

1 0

RE: Re: [Air-l] Educational System and Information Society
by Julio Meneses Naranjo 27 May '04

27 May '04

Thank you very much Robert Like, Robert Hassan, Fernando and Irene for your great suggestions that are very appreciated. Cheers, *You might want to look at a paper I presented at AoIR 3.0 *or *in the AoIR Research Annual, "The Effects of New *Communication and Information Technologies on Academic *REsearch Paradigms" _________________________________________________________ Julio Meneses Knowledge Society Program Ph D. Candidate Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3 - UOC) Research Staff Project Internet Catalonia (PIC) - School on the Network Society (http://www.uoc.edu/in3/pic/)

1 0

Re: [Air-l] ethnography and ethics
by Jonathan Marshall 27 May '04

27 May '04

> >Thomas writes: > > > > > "Perception" and "convention" are two different things. Those domains of > > > the Internet that I mentioned below, are public by convention, however any > > > single individual perceives them. The technique that makes the data on > > > www/usenet available does not allow for effectively concealing the data > > > from the general public, once a URI has been published or a posting has > > > been posted. > > > >That is simply not the case. > > How can you say that? What, if I have a different perception of hiddeness? > (scnr) Indeed, that is the point. These things are uncertain, and you do have a different idea of what is public to some other people :) > >Much stuff can be hidden. > > "Being hidden" and "having been concealed" are two different things. There > is, of course, lots of hidden material on the www, but that material has > not been intentionally concealed. I'm not what this does, other than emphasise my point that the web is not always unambiguously public. > >As i was arguing ethical tropes are not inherently persuasive, but depend > >on rehetorical and personal factors. Ethics are ultimately undecideable. > >That you don't find the arguments i said more or less persuased me, is not > >inherently surprising, and indeed I know of know way to make those ethical > >arguments persuasive. > > That's terrible. Does Mr. Habermas know that? Does his idea of > communicative rationality not have enough problems already? It certainly has serious problems if taken as a description of reality, rather than as an ideal prescription. > Seriously: If > you argue that on a purely philophical basis, ethical arguments cannot be > ultimately decided, then that is a truism. Not for everyone. Besides quite a few people object to the idea. And if it *is* a truism, why don't you appear to accept that ethics is uncertain? > That does not mean that ethics > are merely a matter of taste, or that all arguments are equally > persuasive. I have not argued that that because things are uncertain, every argument is equally valid. However what this implies for me is that ethics are an ethnographic question and cannot be assumed in advance by the researcher applying their own standards. It also implies that ethics is a matter of argument, and that persuasiveness is a socially based phenomena. As a minor point, I'm not sure why taste, should be dismissed as a 'merely'. Taste is not something which seems to have been satisfactorarily explained - even by Bourdieu :) By the by you might like to prove your point about ethics being a matter of taste, by suggesting an ethical position in research which could never be ethically approved by anyone, anywhere, in any situation. > > If some people think their blogs or usenet discussion enjoy privacy > > protection, they are mistaken, their *perception* does not reflect the > > actual technical and institutional arrangements. > > > >Again, because you can shoot people does not make it always ethical - even > >if the law allows it. > > That's besides the point. I am not arguing here that the way the Usenet and > the www works is morally good, I am merely describing that communication on > these parts of the internet is publicly available. you seem to be arguing here: 1) The arrangement of usenet and the www is not necessarily morally good and 2) making use of this arrangement for research is morally good. > That is a falsifiable > hypothesis that seems pretty hard to refute to me. So, I challenge you to > falsify it. Well i've just spent some time trying to search for usenet comments by myself under various addresses and identities, and have failed in general. Although occasionally i found posts by me quoted by others :) It is of course difficult for me to prove that many other texts i don't know about are generally unaccesbile. Besides as i keep saying, I'm not disagreeing that that much of usenet is accessible, what i am disagreeing with is the argument that this automatically makes any use of the texts found there by researchers ethical. > >However, perceptions, do reflect social facts and processes, as such they > >cannot be assumed, and it may not be ethical to violate them by fiat. > > Perceptions are certainly not a isomorph reflection of social reality, you > don't have to read Marx (->false class consciousness) to figure that out. Again that I argue that perceptions are a product of social processes does not mean that I argue that they "isomorphically" reflect social reality. But what does that have to do with ethics? > How do you "violate" perceptions? By treating them as stupid or obviously false, and making use of the person's different perception. > > > If you just fell off Mars and would not know, what kind of technique TV [snip] > >If I was studying martians I would find this interesting, and not > >something to dismiss as ignorance or stupidity. > > No offense, but I think that the ETs will become my friends, because I will > be glad to explain them their mistake. If every time you tell someone they have made a mistake, by exploiting that mistake, then they have become your friends, you have lived in a different world to me :) Informing someone they were wrong, is not the same as making use of, or drawing attention to their error by using it for your own research. Hackers who crack computer systems to show how insecure they are are not always appreciated. > > There may be different concepts, about what *belongs* into the public > > realm, but as long as you are making any distinction between public and > > private, it will be hard to make an argument that Usenet and www are *not* > > public(ly available). > > > >This sounds like you believe that humans are consitantly rational or > >something, > > I don't understand, how you get the idea that I would argue here that > "humans are consitantly rational". Largely because you seem to be implying that given the nature of the facts, only one reasonable conclusion can be drawn consistantly by humans (and martians for that matter). > >I was trying to argue that law and ethics are not the same thing. Because > >you can legally do something does not mean that it is ethical. > > Of course not, but in democratic polities, law is IMO a pretty > good decider for ethical questions. That is an ethical position and debateable :) > > > >who is is making these assumptions? > > > > > > Common sense? The actual technical configuration and its nstitutional > > > underpinnings, if you'd prefer the fancy answer. > > > >Common sense, is something to be investigated not assumed. > > I did investigate it and found that common sense, for once, made sense. So before this debate on this list you have never found anyone who's common sense about what consitutes a public domain differed from yours? > > The technical configurations have nothing necessarily to do with social > > conceptions and conventions - they may have, they may not. > > In this particular case, they do have something to do with each other: When > I publish my webpages on the WWW the technical configurations make it > feasible that you access these pages for any computer that is connected to > the Internet. In fact, my employer had the conception that I should make > material available for public use, and, voila, it is. Obviously that is your place of work's convention :) Do you have internal web pages which are not supposed to be accessible by outisders? > > > If they are password protected or the relevant URIs have not been > > > published, that's a different story. In fact, if there are no links to > > > your private website parts, it is debatable, if they are even part > > > of the www. > > > >That is the point is it not: "it is debatable"! > > Yes, it depends on your definition of the www. A definition that would > exclude such pages, seems reasonable to me, just as one that would include > them might be a possibilty. In sociology, I would prefer the former > definition, in engineering the latter. So we agree ? > >Not "it is certain" to me the investigator. > > Once, we have agreed on a definition of what exactly constitutes the www, > it is certain for all practical purposes, that is, leaving some ephemeral > philosphical musings aside. who is this 'we'? How do we know that everyone argees to be defined as we? Again this argument implies some fixed kind of consistant rationality to me. > [to be continued] cool... jon -- UTS CRICOS Provider Code: 00099F DISCLAIMER: This email message and any accompanying attachments may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender expressly, and with authority, states them to be the views the University of Technology Sydney. Before opening any attachments, please check them for viruses and defects.

1 0

Re: [Air-l] Re: Data
by ren＠aldermangroup.com 26 May '04

26 May '04

elijah wrote: >regular old ISPs do exactly the same thing - to some extent, the >university is just another ISP which can peer with whatever will lower its >total costs for bandwidth and data line leases. Indeed. The internet is essentially a group of islands (Autonomous Systems) and the way that packets move about is by hopping form island to island. A Peering arrangement is effectively a bridge between two islands in (almost) exactly the same way a Transit arrangement is – the difference being that in Peering the traffic is roughly the same in both directions so money does not change hands, whereas in Transit the bigger player sells to the smaller one. So hand- off to a peer reduces overall cost. Though I’m not sure it impacts data line lease as the traffic from people’s computers to ‘the net’ i.e. the peering point, is the same. Peering does effect network topology as packets generally like to take the lest number of hops – in many cases the shorted route will be via the most connected island i.e. the most peered network, so flow will go along these lines and you will see big peaks at major connection points e.g. MAE West - this does not really impact the original question (on the source side) as data still comes from someone’s computer that is geographically sat somewhere, it does impact destinations, as these are predominantly hosting centres which tend to be clustered around interconnection points. Ren ---- Original message ---- >Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 21:00:12 -0500 (CDT) >From: elijah wright <elw(a)stderr.org> >Subject: Re: [Air-l] Re: Data >To: air-l(a)aoir.org > > >> Ok, not to jump in with an irrelevant conversation, but when I talked to >> a former CIO of a big university, he pointed out that the strength of >> internet-2 was in peering, that the biggest uni's who join the I2 >> network will be factoring in a peering factor when their universities >> are charged for internet access. > >regular old ISPs do exactly the same thing - to some extent, the >university is just another ISP which can peer with whatever will lower its >total costs for bandwidth and data line leases. > > >elijah > >> So hypothetical only, charges would disappear and couldn't be tracked, >> although traffic would of course not disappear (isn't that the truth). >> >> Denise > > >_______________________________________________ >Air-l mailing list >Air-l(a)aoir.org >http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l

3 2

Re: [Air-l] Educational System and Information Society
by Irene Berkowitz 26 May '04

26 May '04

You might want to look at a paper I presented at AoIR 3.0 or in the AoIR Research Annual, "The Effects of New Communication and Information Technologies on Academic REsearch Paradigms" ---- Original message ---- >Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 01:33:12 +0200 >From: Julio Meneses Naranjo <jmenesesn(a)uoc.edu> >Subject: [Air-l] Educational System and Information Society >To: "air-l(a)aoir.org" <air-l(a)aoir.org> > >Dear all, > >I'm looking for some literature about the evolution of Educational >Systems at the Network or Information Society. All the bibliography >usually available on Education and Information Age is concerning >about how multimedia and new ICTs are modifying the learning >process at online environments (for example Distance Universities). >However, I need to find some references about the evolution of the >whole Educational System when it gets into the Information Age, >maybe seen from a systemic point of view. Any hints? > >Any reference or place to start looking for are very welcome. Thank >you very much in advance! > >_________________________________________________________ > >Julio Meneses Naranjo >Investigador del IN3 >Doctorando del Programa de Sociedad de la Informaci�n del IN3 > >Universitat Oberta de Catalunya >Estudis de Psicologia i Ci�ncies de l'Educaci� >Avinguda Tibidabo 39-43 >08035 Barcelona (Spain) > >jmenesesn(a)uoc.edu Irene Berkowitz Director of Curricular Publications Temple University Office of the Vice Provost 215-204-7596 Please note my new email address below and update your address records accordingly. irene.berkowitz(a)temple.edu

1 0

research chair at Ryerson University
by Greg Elmer 26 May '04

26 May '04

Hi folks, Please feel free to circulate this ad. We're looking for a Full, Assoc, or possibly an advanced assistant prof. to fill this research chair -- though please interpret the job description broadly, we will likely revise it later this summer. We will be accepting applications until the position is filled. Please email me offlist if you have any questions. Greg Elmer Velma Rogers Graham Research Chair in News Media and Technology School of Journalism The Faculty of Communication & Design at Ryerson University is seeking candidates for the newly created Velma Rogers Graham Research Chair in News Media and Technology. The establishment of this prestigious Chair, one of two Chairs endowed by Ted and Loretta Rogers, reflects their commitment to support interdisciplinary media research and innovative graduate programming in the communications field. The appointment is intended to contribute to the Faculty’s objective of expanding the scope of its research in journalism practice and media analysis. To this end, the Chair is expected to bring to the University an outstanding research program that addresses the relationship of journalism and news gathering to new and evolving communication and information technologies and the new economic models emerging from them. We seek an individual who will build upon a record of published research to produce studies that examine the impact of emerging new electronic technologies on our understanding of what news is and how it is gathered and transmitted. Relevant research areas in this context might include ownership of and access to intellectual property; censorship and the control of information; the Canadian news industry and infrastructure; the impact of technology on news gathering and dissemination; technology trends in the Canadian news industry; privacy and related legal issues affected by the new technologies; and the transforming influence of technology and media convergence on newspaper opera tion, international reportage and journalistic investigation. It is expected that in the course of this research the Chair will develop linkages with other research initiatives. The Chair, appointed for a five-year renewable term, carries with it a permanent full-time position in the School of Journalism and is viewed as an integral component of current and future graduate programs housed within the . The Chair will acquire external funding to conduct innovative research, spearhead interdisciplinary research initiatives and supervise graduate students in addition to teaching a one-term undergraduate and one-term graduate course annually. Qualifications The successful candidate will have a strong national or international research profile and a demonstrated ability to promote research activity, attract research funding and mentor other researchers. Preferred qualifications include experience in postgraduate teaching and supervision and a background in either journalism or social sciences. A background in journalism would include professional experience as a journalist, research in journalism or related professions/disciplines, or a thorough knowledge of journalism as a discipline and profession. Candidates will normally possess a Ph.D. in a suitable discipline (e.g., Journalism, Economics, Social Science, History, etc.) and academic qualifications and research accomplishments commensurate with appointment at the rank of Associate or Full Professor. Applications will include: * a curriculum vitae, * copies of a minimum of 3 peer-reviewed publications that represent the candidate’s most significant lifetime research contributions, * a letter outlining a proposed research plan, * and the name sand contact information of 5 individuals familiar with the candidate’s previous research accomplishments. Correspond to the: Office of the Dean, Faculty of Communication & Design, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5B 2K3 Tel: 416-97 9-5012. Review of applications is ongoing and will continue until the position is filled. Ryerson University has an employment equity program and encourages applications from all qualified individuals, including Aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities, members of visible minorities and women. Members of designated groups are encouraged to self-identify. All qualified candidates are encouraged to apply; however, Canadians and permanent residents will be given priority. Greg Elmer, PhD Bell Globemedia Research Chair Rogers Communications Centre/School of Radio-TV Arts Ryerson University 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, Ontario Canada M5B 2K3 _______________________________________________ Co-Editor, Space and Culture: An International Journal of Social Spaces http://www.carleton.ca/space/

1 0