(Apologies for second post)
Can you believe that autocorrect is that aggressive??
Sorry! Thanks for looking .... The new book on negative online behaviour is
a review of academic literature, accompanied by empirical research in the
field.
Best,
Paula
www.extrememean.com
Adrienne,
I think you just fulfilled your first campaign promise: To help grow the
AoIR community through more interaction:
I’d like AoIR to continue its role as welcoming place for new internet
scholars. However, I’d like it to grow into a space that also as provides
mentorship, community, and networking possibilities for individuals at all
stages of their careers. Now that internet research is fully ensconced as a
legitimate field, it would be nice to continue broadening our concerns into
policy, ethics, and things like open source publishing, etc. I know that
AoIR folks have already done a fabulous job of starting this conversation -
I’d just like to see us continue them."
I second your nomination!
* * *
And I have a question: If you have extensive online research, legal,
policy, media and teaching experience (eg. digital media professor,
journalist, free speech advocate, Internet researcher), and a graduate
degree (JD, law) but aren't yet accepted into a PhD program (though working
toward that), do you have a chance of serving AOIR? Or is membership and
leadership restricted to PhD students and postdocs? I am relatively new,
too, having just met AOIR members in person in Korea.
Thanks,
Paula
PAULA TODD, B.A., LL.B. (JD)
Toronto, Ontario
*www.extrememean.com <http://www.extrememean.com>*
*PAULA TODD, B.A., LL.B.*
Mobile: 647-466-7778
Office: 905-640-6006
Twitter: @paula_todd
*paulatoddmedia(a)gmail.com* <paulatoddmedia(a)gmail.com>
*PAULA TODD, B.A., LL.B.*
Mobile: 647-466-7778
Office: 905-640-6006
Twitter: @paula_todd
*paulatoddmedia(a)gmail.com* <paulatoddmedia(a)gmail.com>
On Tue, May 5, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Jeremy Hunsinger <jhuns(a)vt.edu> wrote:
> Hi Paula,
>
> i just tried to go to your www.extrememean.org site listed in your
> signature... it seems to be inaccessible:(
>
> jeremy
>
Dear all,
It’s well established that what people post on social media can influence their future job prospects (see for example Bohnert, D., & Ross, W. H. (2010). The influence of social networking web sites on the evaluation of job candidates. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(3), 341-347. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2009.0193). Has anyone from, for example, the field of Human Resources Management, come up with some kind of “employability index” one could use to measure the extent of positive and negative employability factors in someone’s public social media profiles? The idea would be to try to “score” people’s social media profiles eg from +5 (“I’d be much more likely to hire this person because of what I just read about them online) to -5 ("this person’s online profile makes them impossible to hire”).
Regards,
David
--
Dr David Brake, Professor of Journalism, Humber College, School of Media Studies & Information Technology, Toronto, ON, Canada Office: +1 416 675 3111 x79323 Cell: 289 400 4525
@drbrake http://davidbrake.org/ skype:davidbrake
Dear AoIRists,
Please distribute the following call to potentially interested participants.
Many thanks in advance,
- charles ess
Professor in Media Studies
Department of Media and Communication
University of Oslo
==
Call for Papers: TRANSOR workshop, “The Significance of Simulation”
University of Southern Denmark, Kolding Campus. June 18-19, 2015.
Sponsored by the Research Network TRANSOR (Transdisciplinary Studies in
Social Robotics - <www.transor.org>).
Keynote Address: John Sullins (Sonoma State University, California),
“Building Artificial Phronesis: A New Approach?” (provisional title)
Background / rationale
As social robots continue their rapid development and deployment,
“simulation” has emerged as a key focus in a number of ways. For example,
robots are currently incapable of experiencing emotions as conscious and
embodied beings: in many examples, however, “artificial emotions” can be
emulated and expressed by social robots in diverse ways that suffice to
persuade their human interactors that the robot in fact feels a basic
emotion such as care. Building in artificial emotions is critical for,
e.g., the therapeutic roles of carebots such as Paro; at the same time,
however, there are important ethical considerations as to whether or not
artificial emotions thereby qualify as an unethical form of simulation or
trickery.
We invite papers and presentations from any relevant discipline, including
philosophy, anthropology, education, linguistics, cognitive science,
computer science, and so on that address the workshop theme of “simulation”
in conjunction with the design, development, and deployment of social
robots.
Papers and presentations will be organized as follows:
Phronesis and stimulation. Virtue ethics foregrounds phronesis as a
reflective form of judgment critical to both ethical decision-making and
the larger pursuit of good lives marked by love, friendship, and
flourishing. Phronesis, along with analogical reasoning, is argued to be
computationally intractable (e.g., Gerdes 2014; Ess 2015). Insofar as this
might be true, what strategies might be developed for “artificial
phronesis” (Sullins 2014) and what are broader implications of these for
social robots and their interactions with human beings?
Kick-off paper/presentation: Charles Ess, “What’s Love Got to Do with It?
Robots, sexuality, and the arts of being human”
“’As-if’ and simulation. The Kantian “as-if” has come to the foreground
more and more in recent approaches to social robotics; e.g., Seibt 2014:
“Varieties of the “As if”: Five Ways to Simulate an Action”. Several
studies highlight ways in which humans bond with social robots (Turkle
2010; Dautenhahn 2007; Schärfe et al 2011; Carpenter 2013; Bartneck, 2007).
Moreover, In trying to clarify our interactions with social robots, some
(e.g. Gunkel 2012; Coeckelbergh 2012) suggests we need to address what is
at stake in the relation, per se, rather than framing the discussion around
a basic distinction between a person versus a machine. Consequently, it
makes good sense to explore, whether, and under which circumstances,
human-robot interactions can qualify as instances of social interactions.
Kick-off paper/presentation: Anne Gerdes, “Robot Unicorn Attack – Does it
Make Sense to Ascribe Morality to Robots?”
Works in Progress. This will be an open session in which participants will
offer relatively brief overviews of their current work, including key
difficulties, challenges, and (hoped-for) developments and resolutions.
Roundtable discussion: Pressing Directions for Research, Current and Future?
Submission requirements, deadlines
Abstract of 200-500 words must be received by the workshop co-organizers –
Charles Ess, University of Oslo: c.m.ess(a)media.uio.no
Anne Gerdes, University of Southern Denmark:
- no later than Monday, May 18, 2015.
In your abstract, be sure to indicate which section the proposed
presentation will contribute to.
Abstract authors will be notified of acceptance / rejection no later than
Friday, May 22, 2015.
Conference fees – will be announced soon, and will be primarily to cover
catering costs.
Workshop location
University of Southern Denmark, Campus Kolding, Universitetsparken 1, 6000
Kolding in room 31.43
Travel information
<
http://www.sdu.dk/en/Om_SDU/Institutter_centre/Idk/Arrangementer/IIEMCA/How…
>
Accommodations
The workshop hotel is First Hotel Kolding
<
http://www.firsthotels.com/Our-hotels/Hotels-in-Denmark/Kolding/First-Hotel…
>
BOOKING SHOULD BE DONE BY EMAIL. Please use/refer to the University of
Southern Denmark discount code: 16SYDD180615
email: kolding(a)firsthotels.dk <mailto:kolding@firsthotels.dk>
