1,056 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. YouTube playlist of my classes' Student Production Award winning projects from the Ohio Valley chapter of the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (the organization behind the Emmy awards).

    1. This is a discussion of informal learning that focuses on ensuring that incidences of informal learning are recognized. This discussion portrays it has happening through casual conversations, online discussions, or social media. The page is easy enough to read though it does not try to be comprehensive. rating 2/5

    1. Understanding Monetary Premiums in Programmable Value Networks

      The TLDR is: Zuller proposes that social capital and financial capital form a virtuous circle for cryptonetworks, allowing first movers such as ethereum to gain a decisive advantage against competitors. Ethereum's accumulated social and financial capital make it difficult for a challenger to emerge as a general-purpose decentralised smart contract platform.

      My thought is Zuller's analysis of social capital ignores the long established body of work on on the topic, and this analysis could be better applied in the case of ethereum. I also think bitcoin is an interesting study in the effects of social capital and the viability of a decentral crypto network.

    2. DFINITY, Near, Polkadot

      These projects are all funded or founded by individuals with significant social and financial capital. They are therefore well positioned to challenge ethereum's dominance.

      By contrast, consider Satoshi Nakamoto's launch of the bitcoin network. As a pseudonymous persona with no history attached to it, Nakamoto had no social capital to speak of. This social capital had to be bootstrapped through a corpus of communications on the cryptography mailing list, and other fora.

      So bitcoin was launched with minimal social capital, by contrast to ethereum.

  2. Mar 2019
    1. Proyecto extensión y de responsabilidad social en CTe

      Un proyecto de apropiación (ver arriba) puede responder a ese ítem y, si se hace en conjunto con una institución, también es posible registrarlo en este campo. Suma en dos lugares a la vez.

    2. sponsabilidad

      Responsabilidad social empresarial.

    1. Crucial to understanding the workings of power is an understandingof the nature of power in the fullness of its materiality. To restrict power’sproductivity to the limited domain of the “social,” for example, or tofigure matter as merely an end product rather than an active factor infurther materializations, is to cheat matter out of the fullness of its capacity.

      The nature of power is material as well as social.

    1. But that post-digital lens asks us to look beyond the “twitter is a cesspool” argument.

      This is important because even well meaning and thoughtful platforms like micro.blog could have bad actors once they reach scale. Working on this separate and broader issue can mitigate those eventualities.

    2. Social media is not a thing that needs to be fixed. People connecting with people is a thing. Jerks are a thing. Jerks are not a digital problem. Jerks are a real-world problem that has been around for a long time. We need to get past the digital and fix our real-world jerk problem. And, as we go along, we have to think about how our systems help create those jerks.
  3. Feb 2019
    1. But I actually think stock and flow is a useful metaphor for media in the 21st century. Here’s what I mean: Flow is the feed. It’s the posts and the tweets. It’s the stream of daily and sub-daily updates that reminds people you exist. Stock is the durable stuff. It’s the content you produce that’s as interesting in two months (or two years) as it is today. It’s what people discover via search. It’s what spreads slowly but surely, building fans over time.
    1. The combination of state surveillance and its capitalist counterpart means that digital technology is separating the citizens in all societies into two groups: the watchers (invisible, unknown and unaccountable) and the watched. This has profound consequences for democracy because asymmetry of knowledge translates into asymmetries of power.
    1. There’s also a robust ecosystem of tools to follow users, monitor site annotations etc.

      Wait? What!? I've been wanting to be able to follow users annotations and I'd love the ability to monitor site annotations!! (I've even suggested that they added Webmention before to do direct notifications for site annotations.)

      Where have you seen these things hiding Tom?

    1. Catch up by reading my last post of digital streams, campfires and gardens.

      I immediately thought of a post from Mike Caulfield (Hapgood). Interesting to see that Tom has already read and referenced it in his prior post.

    1. supported the aristocracy, from whom she benefited

      This bothers our modern sensibilities, yet the hirearchy of needs dictates that we don't dismantle social structures that help us survive. Ironically, it's the people who can survive without regard for those structures (i.e., the wealthy and powerful) who often do the dismantling. Or, as my father would say, "don't sh*t where you eat." Unless, of course, you can eat somewhere else...

    2. hierarchical social order

      We talked about this a lot in Rachel's class last semester -- how hierarchical institutions have played a role in social movements for equality. Examples include the Civil Rights movement, the Black Panthers, and Beyonce.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDZJPJV__bQ

    1. For instance, an aborigine who possesses all of our basic sensory-mental-motor capabilities, but does not possess our background of indirect knowledge and procedure, cannot organize the proper direct actions necessary to drive a car through traffic, request a book from the library, call a committee meeting to discuss a tentative plan, call someone on the telephone, or compose a letter on the typewriter.

      In other words: culture. I'm pretty sure that Engelbart would agree with the statement that someone who could order a book from a library would likely not know the best way to find a nearby water source, as the right kind of aborigine would know. Collective intelligence is a monotonically increasing store of knowledge that is maintained through social learning -- not just social learning, but teaching. Many species engage in social learning, but humans are the only primates with visible sclera -- the whites of our eyeballs -- which enables even infants to track where their teacher/parent is looking. I think this function of culture is what Engelbart would call "C work"

      A Activity: 'Business as Usual'. The organization's day to day core business activity, such as customer engagement and support, product development, R&D, marketing, sales, accounting, legal, manufacturing (if any), etc. Examples: Aerospace - all the activities involved in producing a plane; Congress - passing legislation; Medicine - researching a cure for disease; Education - teaching and mentoring students; Professional Societies - advancing a field or discipline; Initiatives or Nonprofits - advancing a cause.
      
      B Activity: Improving how we do that. Improving how A work is done, asking 'How can we do this better?' Examples: adopting a new tool(s) or technique(s) for how we go about working together, pursuing leads, conducting research, designing, planning, understanding the customer, coordinating efforts, tracking issues, managing budgets, delivering internal services. Could be an individual introducing a new technique gleaned from reading, conferences, or networking with peers, or an internal initiative tasked with improving core capability within or across various A Activities.
      
      C Activity: Improving how we improve. Improving how B work is done, asking 'How can we improve the way we improve?' Examples: improving effectiveness of B Activity teams in how they foster relations with their A Activity customers, collaborate to identify needs and opportunities, research, innovate, and implement available solutions, incorporate input, feedback, and lessons learned, run pilot projects, etc. Could be a B Activity individual learning about new techniques for innovation teams (reading, conferences, networking), or an initiative, innovation team or improvement community engaging with B Activity and other key stakeholders to implement new/improved capability for one or more B activities.
      

      In other words, human culture, using language, artifacts, methodology, and training, bootstrapped collective intelligence; what Engelbart proposed, then was to apply C work to culture's bootstrapping capabilities.

    1. If you would like to comment on this story or anything else you have seen on BBC Culture, head over to our Facebook page or message us on Twitter.

      So sad to see that they've abrogated their responsibility for comments on their site to Twitter and Facebook

  4. Jan 2019
    1. I mean they only had two when I joined Ether and Bitcoin, but they were pretty selective compared to a lot of exchanges and I heard some good things from other friends who had been using it. So I trusted that.
    2. And I realize that late. Um, but I still did get out at a reasonably okay time because I really like all my friends.Derek:00:59:32 I really use what my friends are saying on crypto
    3. ah, and I've heard from a lot of traders, like it definitely is an evolving process.
    4. So I followed that. I followed this one trader. He has 100,000 followers on twitter. He's just scalper uh, margin trader on Big Phoenix. Amazing. Gives amazing videos. Incredible. Uh, I follow him a lot. Um, I guess my style would be most closely to his, I think then definitely Rsi.
    5. Yeah, so I do not have a background in coding, uh, and on on trading view, they have like a social, I really like their community. It's definitely a big community of like higher tier
    6. eetups. I'm trying to really go to meetups and meet other people and I feel like during the bear market, the quality of the meetups really increases because the people that are actually really interested not just for the price before everything else are showing up.
    7. Twitter is my go to and people post a news articles from like ccn from what does it coined, ask a bunch of these crypto news things and they're great. Uh, you know, I take them with a grain of salt because whatever, there's a lot of like fake news.
    8. Um, yeah, it was definitely a on twitter before I really understood what ta was. And I would see people post all these charts and I would always just be taking their word for it. And you know, people post different types of charts and different layouts.

      discovered coinagy through social media

    9. Uh, I'm on definitely on twitter, all scrolling through and guys and people post interesting theories.
    10. uh, Discord is the best and telegram. Those two. Sometimes people will do their own members area by using like click funnels or something like that. Discord is the easiest because you can separate channels. Um, and it's free. Uh telegram. I've like specific groups just because they've built in functionality that usually triggers by phone or at least more as from an notification standpoint. Where sometimes it gets lost in Discord
    11. Um, three commas had been tested by another people that I guess I was kind of following the social proof justification that enough people were in it so that made me more confident in using it.
    12. I don't personally like blindly entering trades that...
    13. will basically want to follow along with why they're notating that as a potential trade board or following it just to see how it plays out, uh, to basically use it as a learning
    14. Most of it is based around talking to people who are more competent or just more comfortable in a specific trading strategy.
    15. or that we're looking out for. Would need us to watch after a trade or to be looking out for a trade. Some of them have signals, like targets for traditional markets. They might have just mentioned, hey, if someone's running the group, they might've mentioned, hey, this is a point where I'm looking to enter short. Uh, so tell where they're looking to essentially place to stop, um, crypto groups Okay. Okay. Yeah, yeah. Okay. Uh, either injured but stop here. And then yourself targets are one, two, three, but it's less structured traditionally.
    16. Uh, yeah, I'm in a few groups. There's a couple of the crypto focused, uh, the also have been just, I wouldn't say [inaudible], but have put more emphasis on, you know, since we're technical traders, there's a reason not to take advantage of, uh, the market opportunities and traditional as they pop up. So we've been focused mainly on just very few inverse etfs to short the s&p to short some major Chinese stocks, um, doing some stuff with, uh, oil, gas. And then there's some groups that I'm in that are specifically focused on just traditional, uh, that are broken up or categorized by what they're trading.
    1. “It seems like everything used to be something else, yes?”

      Everything used to be something else, just like everything that is to come will have been something else first. This is one of the biggest proponents to knowledge being a social act. Every idea you have was sparked by something that you observed outside of yourself.

    1. #快如科技2019发布会# 聊天给钱、看新闻给钱、买东西给钱、玩游戏给钱……在聊天宝,几乎干啥都给钱。

      <big>评:</big><br/><br/> 这一次,罗永浩的发布会上有一张幻灯片如是写道: <br/><br/> 「为什么 Facebook 挣到的钱大部分进了马克扎克伯格的口袋?」 <br/><br/> 对于上述设问,想必罗永浩早已得出自己的答案。但从此次推出的聊天软件「聊天宝」来看,他似乎一直在刻意强调「激励机制」的作用,而这点也被许多内容公链方拿来借势营销了一把。「拿出部分利润来回报用户参与」看似要革老平台的命,实则只是刺激流量的运营手段,同那些鼓励用户主动观看广告以换取游戏道具的手游并无本质差异,而这与区块链社交的设计蓝图相差甚远——社交产品最重要的激励凭证不是金钱,而是人际关系,更何况你我都同处在「『关系』等同于金钱」的社会大环境里。当我们谈论区块链社交产品时,我们应首先关注新秩序下人际关系网的重塑,其次才是利益的重新分配。 <br/><br/> 或许可以说,驾驭产品,就是驾驭那些随时随地能满足的欲望,包括匹配得很精准的欲望,但欲望并不等同于需求,亦或是利益。当产品经理试图深刻地理解人性时,我们就应当往更深处去进化自己的人性。经理可以钻研产品之道,但我们要当魔。

    1. Seneca stresses the point: the practice of the self involves reading, for one could not draw everything from ones own stock or arm oneself by oneself with the principles of reason that are indispensable for self-conduct: guide or example, the help of others is necessary

      This made me think of David Bartholomae's piece, "Inventing the University." One cannot just know things and be able to write about them unless they are introduced to by some outside force. And, one cannot attempt to find new meaning unless you have prior meaning you can debunk or build upon. https://wac.colostate.edu/jbw/v5n1/bartholomae.pdf

    1. Do we want technology to keep giving more people a voice, or will traditional gatekeepers control what ideas can be expressed?

      Part of the unstated problem here is that Facebook has supplanted the "traditional gatekeepers" and their black box feed algorithm is now the gatekeeper which decides what people in the network either see or don't see. Things that crazy people used to decry to a non-listening crowd in the town commons are now blasted from the rooftops, spread far and wide by Facebook's algorithm, and can potentially say major elections.

      I hope they talk about this.

    1. “I’m always genuinely happy to interact with listeners,” he said, “and since some prefer social media, I use it. But my (thus far only modestly effective) strategy has been to try and produce enduring content and let it speak for itself, rather than posting ephemera on Facebook and Twitter at regular intervals.”

      I love his use of the word "ephemera" in relation to social media, particularly as he references his podcast about ancient history.

    1. This distinction enlightens the reading of thegrowing social media and mass emergency lit-erature for three reasons. First, without it, thisnew literature risks undoing decades of work bysocial scientists who have dismantled the mythsof disaster, with a dominant discourse thatincludes panic and unlawful behavior by victims.But in disasters arising from natural hazards, weknow such behaviors are not typical. Massemergencies arising from criminal behavior canhave a much wider range of collective behaviorbecause the source of the hazard is unknown,unpredictable and perhaps more imminentlydangerous

      Palen and Hughes raise concern about boundaries and classification in mass emergency research. They define crisis as an overarching term that incorrectly generalizes sociobehavioral phenomena during natural and criminal events.

    2. Misinforma-tion arising from natural hazards or exogenousevents might be greater in kind, but less inimpact, with fewer in-common readers as it tra-verses a network that can move a little slowerthan it might in criminal mass emergency events.Because the problem-solving tends to be morediffuse in exogenous events, the same messagemight not reach enough people; in other words,the misinformation might also be thinly diffused.Misinformation in such events is more likely toage out, or not be relevant to enough locations topose a big threat—in other words, all informationin thefirst place is less likely to be categoricallycorrect or incorrect, and as such, it is hard tofindas much value in pursuing the threat of misin-formation in such situations.

      Not sure I entriely agree with this argument that misinformation in natural disaster/exogenous events.

      Mis/Dis-information definitely matters for those affected. (see Neal, 1997 and Phillips work on phases of response for minority groups).

      What about misinformation campaigns during mass migration or other politically-tinged humanitarian crises where the exogenous factor (long-standing war, religious conflict/persecution, colonialism, etc.) is far removed from the immediate crisis? (Think 2015 migration crisis in Europe, Rohingya genocide in Myanmar implications for Bangaldesh).

      Is there a middle ground between endogenous and exogenous hazards?

    3. Wefindendogeneityandexogeneityof haz-ards to be a meaningful distinction in socialmedia in mass emergencies research, one thatreadily clarifies for a range of researchers andreaders who are outside the social science disci-pline. Just as events that arise from exogenousand endogenous hazards differently impact legal,political, health, and other societal systems, so dothey differently impact social media behavior.8With exogenous events, the culprit is beyondreach, and unstoppable. With endogenous agents,the suspect lies within. Therefore, organizingfeatures of the communication are distinctlydifferent, because the source(s) of the problem(s),the nature of their solutions,and the ability forthe perception of the collective control of theoutcomeare different. Online participation focu-ses on in-common salient problems when theyare present; when the problems are lessin-common and must be addressed in parallel, thecrowd organizes in many smaller groupings and,often endogeneity and exogeneity of hazardspredicts this (Palen & Anderson,2016).

      Describes differences in social media response between 2012 Hurricane Sandy (exogenous) and 2013 Boston Bombing (endogenous) mass emergencies.

    4. We make this point because we worrythat the very idea of“social media”flattens themany meanings of“crisis”and“emergency”forwhich social sciencefields have worked to pro-vide insight. For example, because Twitter orFacebook are available for use in any kind ofcrises, it is easy to make these applications thesalient concern, and ask“Is Twitter or Facebookbetter in emergency response?,”rather thanquestion how the very nature of emergencyresponse might beg for different forms of infor-mation seeking and reporting. We refer to thisflattening of communication medium and hazardas thesocial media and crisis confound.

      Definition of social media and crisis confound

    1. Our extensions also have implications for theories ontrust.

      Bookmarked section for later consideration of proposal studies on how time interacts with trust in time- and safety-critical social coordination.

    2. Therefore, training should focus on learning how toquickly recognize volunteers’ volition in participating inan emergent group, the tasks they might engage in, andthe support they might need to carry out those tasks.Such training could also help people to recognize thebenefits and dangers of generalized trust. It could alsohelp people to quickly evolve a coordination mecha-nism that does not rely on what people know, but oncompiling and communicating a narrative of the actionsthat volunteers take, so that others are able to assess forthemselves what actions they could take to help.

      Majchrzak et al continue to suggest that emergent response training could reconceptualize a new role for emergency management professionals, aside from the default coordination/management. Further, they suggest that citizens could be trained to participate.

    3. ur examination suggests that by expandingthe context in which TMS theory is applied to includeemergent response groups, insights can be gained intotheir internal dynamics. The three indicators of the levelof development of a TMS provide a useful frameworkfor organizing these insights in the exhibit.

    4. The urgency of time may make it too onerous forthe extra effort of articulating actions as they are beingperformed, yet most emergency response requires somecommunication.

      Interaction of time (tempo/pace) and breakdowns in articulation work.

    5. Explicitly articulated narratives mayalso make clearer that multiple sequences of actions maybe occurring simultaneously, thus resolving role conflictsby allowing multiple ways to accomplish a task

      Evokes Schmidt and Bannon's articulation work in CSCW.

    6. Emergent response groups may also use a mechanismof creating a community narrative (Boland and Tenkasi1995), which is a running narrative of the actions takenand not taken, the decisions made, and the theories inuse. Narratives do not represent a single shared under-standing of a domain; rather they represent the mul-tiplicity of events and actions a community is taking,as members are taking them. Narratives may be articu-lated explicitly or understood implicitly.

      SBTF after-action report, as an example. But who is the audience for this narrative?

    7. Whenemergent response groups first come together, membersare likely not to ask one another about who knows what;instead, they are likely to ask about what is knownabout the situation and about the actions taken thus far(Dyer and Shafer 2003, Hale et al. 2005). The cogni-tive structure that they develop for the group centersnot around people, but on action-based scenarios thateither have been or might be carried out. These scenariosinclude decisions, actions, knowledge, events, and feed-back (Vera and Crossan 2005).

      Suggested extensions for TMS theory:

      "1. Tailor the Role of Expertise"

      "2. "Replacing Credibility in Expertise with Trust Through Action"

      "3. "Coordinating Knowledge Processes Without a Shared Metastructure"

    8. On the surface, the lack of sta-ble membership suggests that a shared mental modelmay not be viable or even desired in emergent responsegroups. Time may be too precious to seek consensus onevents and actions, and agreements may make the groupless flexible to accommodate to changing inputs.

      Evokes pluritemporal concerns about tempo, pace and synchronization.

    9. hus, we believe challenges occur in all three indica-tors of the level of development of a TMS—expertisespecialization, credibility, and expertise coordination—requiring a need to consider extending theorizing abouteach indicator for emergent response groups.

      Ways to extend TMS to emergent groups:

      "1. Reconceptualize the Role of Expertise Specialization as a Basis for Task Assignment"

      "2. Assessing Credibility in Emergent Response Groups"

      "3. Expertise Coordination in Emergent Response Groups"

      These extensions evoke boundary objects and invisibility

    10. Moreland and Argote(2003) suggest that the dynamic conditions under whichthese groups form and work together are likely to havenegative effects on the development of transactive mem-ory.

      Are there workflow or technology breakdowns that could help ameliorate the negative effects?

    11. Research on TMS has identified three indicators of thelevel of development of a TMS (Lewis 2003, Morelandand Argote 2003):1.Memory (or expertise) specialization:the tendencyfor groups to delegate responsibility and to specialize indifferent aspects of the task;2.Credibility:beliefs about the reliability of mem-bers’ expertise; and3.Task (or expertise) coordination:the ability of teammembers to coordinate their work efficiently based ontheir knowledge of who knows what in the group.The greater the presence of each indicator, the more de-veloped the TMS and the more valuable the TMS is forefficiently coordinating the actions of group members.

      Three indicators of the level of sophistication of the system:

      • Memory specialization (think trauma/hospital care CSCW studies)

      • Credibility

      • Task coordination

    12. A TMS can be thoughtof as a network of interconnected individual memorysystems and the transfer of knowledge among them(Wegner 1995). Individuals who are part of a TMSassume responsibility for different knowledge domains,and rely on one another to access each other’s expertiseacross domains. Expertise is defined in the TMS litera-ture to broadly include the know-what, know-how, andknow-why of a knowledge domain (Quinn et al. 1996),what Blackler (1995) refers to as embodied competen-cies. Expertise specialization, then, reduces the cognitiveload of each individual and the amount of redundantknowledge in the group, while collectively providingthe dyad or group access to a larger pool of knowl-edge. What makes transactive memory transactive arethe communications (called transactions) among individ-uals that make possible the codifying, storing, retrieving,and updating of information from individual memorysystems. For transactive memory to function effectively,individuals must have a shared conceptualization of whoknows what in the group.

      Majchrzak et al describe how TMS is oeprationalized as a network.

    13. TMS theory, a theoryof group-level cognition, explains how people in collec-tives learn, store, use, and coordinate their knowledge toaccomplish individual, group, and organizational goals.It is a theory about how people in relationships, groups,and organizations learn who knows what, and use thatknowledge to decide who will do what, resulting in moreefficient and effective individual and collective perfor-mance.

      Definition of transactive memory systems theory -- used in org studies to understand how knowledge is coordinated among groups.

    14. The urgency of the situation meansthat the objective of coordination is to achieve minimallyacceptable and timely action, even when more effec-tive responses may be feasible—but would take longerand use more resources.

      temporal issues related to emergent response: pace and timeliness

    15. hese characteristics require thatemergent response groups adopt specific approaches forknowledge coordination. One such approach commonlydocumented in studies of such groups is their use ofa learn-by-doing (versus decision making) action-basedmodel of coordinated problem solving, in which sensemaking and improvisation are the norm rather than theexception

      Evokes LPP, sensemaking, and improvised coordination.

    16. isaster researchers havedefinedemergent response groupsas collectives of indi-viduals who use nonroutine resources and activities toapply to nonroutine domains and tasks, using nonroutineorganizational arrangements (Bigley and Roberts 2001,Drabek et al. 1981, Drabek 1986, Drabek and McEntire2003, Kreps 1984, Tierney et al. 2001).

      Definition of emergent response groups

    17. Disasters have wideimplications for expertise coordination because the pre-conditions known to facilitate expertise coordination arelimited or nonexistent in disaster response. Such precon-ditions include but are not limited to, a shared goal; aclear reward structure; known group membership, exper-tise, and skills to accomplish the task; and time to sharewho knows what.

      Implications for org studies research.

      At least as of 2007 (publication date), the internal dynamics of emergent orgs were still relatively unknown.

      The dynamics of professional-emergent disaster response is under-studied.

    18. Although the con-ventional indicators of efficient coordination—expertisespecialization, credibility in expertise, and coordinationof expertise—are relevant in disaster response, disasterspresent a unique operational environment. Disasters are“events, observable in time and space, in which societiesor their subunits (e.g., communities, regions) incur phys-ical damages and losses and/or disruption of their routine

      "Disasters represent a unique operational environment."

    1. Experimentation, the third affordance, refers to theuse of technology to encourage participants to try outnovel ideas.

      Definition of experimentation.

      Describes the use of comment/feedback boxes, ratings, polls, etc. to generate ideas for new coordination workflows, design ideas, workarounds, etc.

    2. Recombinability refers to forms of technology-enabled action where individual contributors build oneach others’ contributions.

      Definition of recombinability.

      Cites Lessig in describing recombinability "as both a technology design issue and a community governance principle" for reusing/remixing/recombining knowledge

    3. Reviewability refers to the enactment of technology-enabled new forms of working in which participantsare better able to view and manage the content offront and back narratives over time (West and Lakhani2008). By allowing participants to easily and collab-oratively review a range of ideas, technology-affordedreviewability helps the community respond to tensionsin disembodied ideas, because the reviews can provideimportant contextual information for building on others’ideas.

      Definition of reviewability.

      Faraj et al offer the example of Wikipedia edit log to track changes.

    4. Technology platforms used by OCs can providea number of affordances for knowledge collabora-tion, three of which we mention here: reviewability,recombinability, and experimentation. These affordancesevolve as new participants provide new ways to use thetechnologies, new social norms are developed around thetechnology affordances, and new needs for fresh affor-dances are identified.

      Ways that technology affordances can influence/motivate change in social coordination practices.

    5. Given the fluid nature of OCsand their rapidly evolving technology platforms, and inline with calls to avoid dualistic thinking about tech-nology (Leonardi and Barley 2008, Markus and Silver2008, Orlikowski and Scott 2008), we suggest technol-ogy affordance as a generative response, one that viewstechnology, action, and roles as emergent, inseparable,and coevolving. Technology affordances offer a relationalperspective on human action, where neither the technol-ogy nor the actor is dominant in the sense that the tech-nology does not define what is possible for the actor todo, nor is the actor free from the limitations of the tech-nological environment. Instead, possibilities for actionemerge from the reciprocal interaction between actor andartifact (Gibson 1979, Zammuto et al. 2007). Thus, anaffordance perspective focuses on the organizing actionsthat are afforded by technology artifacts.

      Interesting perspective on how technology affordances are a generative response to coordination tensions.

    6. third response to manage tensions is to promoteknowledge collaboration by enacting dynamic bound-aries. In social sciences, although boundaries divide anddisintegrate collectives, they also coordinate and inte-grate social action (Bowker and Star 1999, Lamont andMolnár 2002). Fluidity brings the need for flexible andpermeable boundaries, but it is not only the propertiesof the boundaries but also their dynamicity that helpmanage tensions.

      Cites Bowker and Star

      Good examples of how boundaries co-evolve and take on new meanings follow this paragraph.

    7. We have observed in OCs that no single narrative isable to keep participants informed about the current stateof the OC with respect to each tension. These commu-nities seem to develop two different types of narratives.Borrowing from Goffman (1959), we label the two nar-ratives the “front” and the “back” narratives.

      Cites Goffman and the performative vs invisible aspects of social coordination work.

    8. Based on our collective research on to date, we haveidentified that as tensions ebb and flow, OCs use (or,more precisely, participants engage in) any of the fourtypes of responses that seem to help the OC be gen-erative. The first generative response is labeledEngen-dering Roles in the Moment. In this response, membersenact specific roles that help turn the potentially negativeconsequences of a tension into positive consequences.The second generative response is labeledChannelingParticipation. In this response, members create a nar-rative that helps keep fluid participants informed ofthe state of the knowledge, with this narrative havinga necessary duality between a front narrative for gen-eral public consumption and a back narrative to airthe differences and emotions created by the tensions.The third generative response is labeledDynamicallyChanging Boundaries. In this response, OCs changetheir boundaries in ways that discourage or encouragecertain resources into and out of the communities at cer-tain times, depending on the nature of the tension. Thefourth generative response is labeledEvolving Technol-ogy Affordances. In this response, OCs iteratively evolvetheir technologies in use in ways that are embedded by,and become embedded into, iteratively enhanced socialnorms. These iterations help the OC to socially and tech-nically automate responses to tensions so that the com-munity does not unravel.

      Productive responses to experienced tensions.

      Evokes boundary objects (dynamically changing boundaries) and design affordances/heuristics (evolving technology affordances)

    9. Tension 5: Positive and Negative Consequences ofTemporary ConvergenceThe classic models of knowledge collaboration in groupsgive particular weight to the need for convergence. Con-vergence around a single goal, direction, criterion, pro-cess, or solution helps counterbalance the forces ofdivergence, allowing diverse ideas to be framed, ana-lyzed, and coalesced into a single solution (Couger 1996,Isaksen and Treffinger 1985, Osborn 1953, Woodmanet al. 1993). In fluid OCs, convergence is still likelyto exist during knowledge collaboration, but the conver-gence is likely to be temporary and incomplete, oftenimplicit, and is situated among subsets of actors in thecommunity rather than the entire community.

      Positive consequences: The temporary nature can advance creative uses of the knowledge without hewing to structures, norms or histories of online collaboration.

      Negative consequences: Lack of P2P feedback may lead to withdrawal from the group. Pace of knowledge building can be slow and frustrating due to temporary, fleeting convergence dynamics of the group.

    10. ension 2: Positive and Negative Consequencesof TimeA second tension is between the positive and negativeconsequences of the time that people spend contribut-ing to the OC. Knowledge collaboration requires thatindividuals spend time contributing to the OC’s virtualworkspace (Fleming and Waguespack 2007, Lakhani andvon Hippel 2003, Rafaeli and Ariel 2008). Time has apositive consequence for knowledge collaboration. Themore time people spend evolving others’ contributedideas and responding to others’ comments on thoseideas, the more the ideas can evolve

      Positive consequences: Attention helps to advance the reuse/remix/recombination of knowledge

      Negative consequences: "Old-timers" crowd out newcomers

      Tension can lead to "unpredictable fluctuations in the collaborative process" such as labor shortages, lack of fresh ideas, in-balance between positive/negative consequences that catalyzes healthy fluidity

      Need to consider other possibilities for time/temporal consequences. These examples seem lacking.

    11. We argue that it is the fluidity, the tensions that flu-idity creates, and the dynamics in how the OC respondsto these tensions that make knowledge collaboration inOCs fundamentally different from knowledge collabora-tion in teams or other traditional organization structures.

      Faraj et al identify 5 tensions that have received little attention in the literature (doesn't mean these are the only tensions):

      passion, time, socially ambiguous identities, social disembodiment of ideas, and temporary convergence.

    12. As fluctuations in resource endowments arise overtime because of the fluidity in the OC, these fluctua-tions in resources create fluctuations in tensions, makingsimple structural tactics for managing tensions such ascross-functional teams or divergent opinions (Sheremata2000) inadequate for fostering knowledge collaboration.As complex as these tension fluctuations are for the com-munity, it is precisely these tensions that provide thecatalyst for knowledge collaboration. Communities thatthen respond to these tensions generatively (rather thanin restrictive ways) will be able to realize this potential.Thus, it is not the simple presence of resources that fos-ter knowledge collaboration, but rather the presence ofongoing dynamic tensions within the OC that spur thecollaboration. We describe these tensions in the follow-ing section

      Tension as a catalyst for knowledge work/collaboration

    13. Fluidity requires us to look at the dynamics—i.e., thecontinuous and rapid changes in resources—rather thanthe presence or the structural form of the resources.Resources may flow from outside the OC (e.g., pas-sion) or be internally generated (e.g., convergence), sub-sequently influencing and influenced by action (Feldman2004). Resources come with the baggage of having bothpositive and negative consequences for knowledge col-laboration, creating a tension within the community inhow to manage the positive and negative consequencesin a manner similar to the one faced by ambidextrousorganizations (O’Reilly and Tushman 2004).

      Fluidity vs material resources

    14. However, failure to examine the critical roleof even the inactive participants in the functioning of thecommunity is to ignore that passive (and invisible) par-ticipation may be a step toward greater participation, aswhen individuals use passivity as a way to learn aboutthe collective in a form of peripheral legitimate partici-pation (Lave and Wenger 1991, Yeow et al. 2006).

      Evokes LPP

    15. Fluidity recognizes the highly flexible or permeableboundaries of OCs, where it is hard to figure out whois in the community and who is outside (Preece et al.2004) at any point in time, let alone over time. Theyare adaptive in that they change as the attention, actions,and interests of the collective of participants change overtime. Many individuals in an OC are at various stagesof exit and entry that change fluidly over time.

      Evokes boundary objects and boundary infrastructures.

    16. We argue that fluid-ity is a fundamental characteristic of OCs that makesknowledge collaboration in such settings possible. Assimply depicted in Figure 1, we envision OCs as fluidorganizational objects that are simultaneously morphingand yet retaining a recognizable shape (de Laet and Mol2000, Law 2002, Mol and Law 1994).

      Definition of fluidity: "Fluid OCs are ones where boundaries, norms, participants, artifacts, interactions, and foci continually change over time..."

      Faraj et al argue that OCs extend the definition of fluid objects in the existing literature.

    17. a growing consensus on factors that moti-vate people to make contributions to these communities,including motivational factors based on self-interest (e.g.,Lakhani and von Hippel 2003, Lerner and Tirole 2002,von Hippel and von Krogh 2003), identity (Bagozzi andDholakia 2006, Blanchard and Markus 2004, Ma andAgarwal 2007, Ren et al. 2007, Stewart and Gosain2006), social capital (Nambisan and Baron 2010; Waskoand Faraj 2000, 2005; Wasko et al. 2009), and socialexchange (Faraj and Johnson 2011).

      Motivations include: self-interest, identity, social capital, and social exchange, per org studies researchers.

      Strange that Benkler, Kittur, Kraut and others' work is not cited here.

    18. For instance, knowledge collaboration in OCscan occur without the structural mechanisms tradition-ally associated with knowledge collaboration in orga-nizational teams: stable membership, convergence afterdivergence, repeated people-to-people interactions, goal-sharing, and feelings of interdependence among groupmembers (Boland et al. 1994, Carlile 2002, Dougherty1992, Schrage 1995, Tsoukas 2009).

      Differences between offline and online knowledge work

      Online communities operate with fewer constraints from "social conventions, ownership, and hierarchies." Further, the ability to remix/reuse/recombine information into new, innovative forms of knowledge are easier to generate through collaborative technologies and ICT.

    19. Knowledge collaboration is defined broadly as thesharing, transfer, accumulation, transformation, andcocreation of knowledge. In an OC, knowledge collab-oration involves individual acts of offering knowledgeto others as well as adding to, recombining, modify-ing, and integrating knowledge that others have con-tributed. Knowledge collaboration is a critical elementof the sustainability of OCs as individuals share andcombine their knowledge in ways that benefit them per-sonally, while contributing to the community’s greaterworth (Blanchard and Markus 2004, Jeppesen andFredericksen 2006, Murray and O’Mahoney 2007, vonHippel and von Krogh 2006, Wasko and Faraj 2000).

      Definition of knowledge work

    20. Online communities (OCs) are open collectives of dis-persed individuals with members who are not necessarilyknown or identifiable and who share common inter-ests, and these communities attend to both their indi-vidual and their collective welfare (Sproull and Arriaga2007).

      Definition of online communities

    1. The situated and emergent nature of coordinationdoes not imply that practices are completely uniqueand novel. On the one hand, they vary accordingto the logic of the situation and the actors present.On the other hand, as seen in our categorizationof dialogic coordination, they follow a recognizablelogic and are only partially improvised. This tensionbetween familiarity and uniqueness of response is atthe core of a practice view of work (Orlikowski 2002).

      This is an important and relevant point for SBTF/DHN work. Each activation is situated and emergent but there are similarities -- even though the workflows tend to change for reasons unknown.

      Cites Orlikowski

    2. Recently, Brown and Duguid (2001, p. 208) sug-gested that coordination of organizational knowledgeis likely to be more challenging than coordination ofroutine work, principally because the “elements to becoordinated are not just individuals but communitiesand the practices they foster.” As we found in ourinvestigation of coordination at the boundary, signif-icant epistemic differences exist and must be recog-nized. As the dialogic practices enacted in responseto problematic trajectories show, the epistemic dif-ferences reflect different perspectives or prioritiesand cannot be bridged through better knowledge

      Need to think more about how subgroups in SBTF (Core Team/Coords, GIS, locals/diaspora, experienced vols, new vols, etc.) act as communities of practice. How does this influence sensemaking, epistemic decisions, synchronization, contention, negotiation around boundaries, etc.?

    3. nature point to the limitations of a structuralist viewof coordination. In the same way that an organi-zational routine may unfold differently each timebecause it cannot be fully specified (Feldman andPentland 2003), coordination will vary each time.Independent of embraced rules and programs, therewill always be an element of bricolage reflecting thenecessity of patching together working solutions withthe knowledge and resources at hand (Weick 1993).Actors and the generative schemes that propel theiractions under pressure make up an important com-ponent of coordination’s modus operandi (Bourdieu1990, Emirbayer and Mische 1998).

      Evokes the improvisation of synchronization efforts found in coordination of knowledge work in a pluritemporal setting

    4. These practices are highly situated, emer-gent, and contextualized and thus cannot be prespec-ified the way traditional coordination mechanismscan be. Thus, recent efforts based on an information-processing view to develop typologies of coordina-tion mechanisms (e.g., Malone et al. 1999) may be tooformal to allow organizations to mount an effectiveresponse to events characterized by urgency, novelty,surprise, and different interpretations.

      More design challenges

    5. Our findings also point to a broader divide in coor-dination research. Much of the power of traditionalcoordination models resides in their information-processing basis and their focus on the design issuessurrounding work unit differentiation and integra-tion. This design-centric view with its emphasis onrules,structures,andmodalitiesofcoordinationislessuseful for studying knowledge work.

      The high-tempo, non-routine, highly situated knowledge work of SBTF definitely falls into this category. Design systems/workarounds is challenging.

    6. Boundarywork requires the ability to see perspectives devel-oped by people immersed in a different commu-nity of knowing (Boland and Tenkasi 1995, Star andGriesemer 1989). Often, particular disciplinary focilead to differences in opinion regarding what stepsto take next in treating the patient.

      Differences in boundary work can lead to contentiousness.

    7. The termdialogic—as opposed to monologic—recognizes dif-ferences and emphasizes the existence of epistemicboundaries, different understandings of events, andthe existence of boundary objects (e.g., the diagnosisor the treatment plan). A dialogic approach to coordi-nation is the recognition that action, communication,and cognition are essentially relational and highlysituated. We use the concept of trajectory (Bourdieu1990, Strauss 1993) to recognize that treatment pro-gressions are not always linear or positive.

      Cites Star (boundary objects) and Strauss, Bourdieu (trajectory)

    8. A dialogic coordination practice differs from moregeneral expertise coordination processes in that itis highly situated in the specifics of the unfoldingevent, is urgent and high-staked, and occurs at theboundary between communities of practice. Becausecognition is distributed, responsibility is shared, andepistemic differences are present, interactions can becontentious and conflict laden.

      Differences between expertise and dialogic coordination processes.

    9. xpertisecoordination refers to processes that manage knowl-edge and skill interdependencies

    10. we describe two categories ofcoordination practices that ensure effective work out-comes. The first category, which we callexpertise coor-dination practices, represents processes that make itpossible to manage knowledge and skill interdepen-dencies. These processes bring about fast response,superior reconfiguration, efficient knowledge shar-ing, and expertise vetting. Second, because of therapidlyunfoldingtempooftreatmentandthestochas-tic nature of the treatment trajectory,dialogic coordina-tion practicesare used as contextually and temporallysituated responses to occasional trajectory deviation,errors, and general threats to the patient. These dia-logic coordination practices are crucial for ensuringeffective coordination but often require contentiousinteractions across communities of practice. Figure 1presents a coordination-focused model of patienttreatment and describes the circumstances underwhich dialogic coordination practices are called for.

    11. We found that coordination in a trauma settingentails two specific practices.

      "1. expertise coordination practices"

      "2. dialogic coordination practices"

      What would be the SBTF equivalent here?

    12. Based on a practice view, we suggest the followingdefinition ofcoordination: a temporally unfolding andcontextualized process of input regulation and inter-action articulation to realize a collective performance.

      Faraj and Xiao offer two important points: Context and trajectories "First, the definition emphasizes the temporal unfolding and contextually situated nature of work processes. It recognizes that coordinated actions are enacted within a specific context, among a specific set of actors, and following a history of previous actions and interactions that necessarily constrain future action."

      "Second, following Strauss (1993), we emphasize trajectories to describe sequences of actions toward a goal with an emphasis on contingencies and interactions among actors. Trajectories differ from routines in their emphasis on progression toward a goal and attention to deviation from that goal. Routines merely emphasize sequences of steps and, thus, are difficult to specify in work situations characterized by novelty, unpredictability, and ever-changing combinations of tasks, actors, and resources. Trajectories emphasize both the unfolding of action as well as the interactions that shape it. A trajectory-centric view of coordination recognizes the stochastic aspect of unfolding events and the possibility that combinations of inputs or interactions can lead to trajectories with dreadful outcomes—the Apollo 13 “Houston, we have a problem” scenario. In such moments, coordination is more about dealing with the “situation” than about formal organizational arrangements."

    13. Theprimarygoalispatientstabilizationandini-tiating atreatment trajectory—a temporally unfolding

      Full quote (page break)

      "The primary goal is patient stabilization and initiating a treatment trajectory—a temporally unfolding sequence of events, actions, and interactions—aimed at ensuring patient medical recovery"

      Knowledge trajectory is a good description of SBTF's work product/goal

    14. rauma centersare representative of organizational entities that arefaced with unpredictable environmental demands,complexsetsoftechnologies,highcoordinationloads,and the paradoxical need to achieve high reliabilitywhile maintaining efficient operations.

      Also a good description of digital humanitarian work

    15. We sug-gest that for environments where knowledge work isinterdisciplinary and highly contextualized, the rele-vant lens is one of practice. Practices emerge from anongoing stream of activities and are enacted throughthe contextualized actions of individuals (Orlikowski2000). These practices are driven by a practical logic,thatis,arecognitionofnoveltaskdemands,emergentsituations,andtheunpredictabilityofevolvingaction.Bourdieu (1990, p. 12) definespracticesas generativeformulas reflecting the modus operandi (manner ofworking) in contrast to the opus operatum (finishedwork).

      Definition and background on practice.

      Cites Bourdieu

    16. In knowledge work, several related factors sug-gest the need to reconceptualize coordination.

      Complex knowledge work coordination demands attention to how coordination is managed, as well as what (content) and when (temporality).

      "This distinction becomes increasingly important in complex knowledge work where there is less reliance on formal structure, interdependence is changing, and work is primarily performed in teams."

      Traditional theories of coordination are not entirely relevant to fast-response teams who are more flexible, less formally configured and use more improvised decision making mechanisms.

      These more flexible groups also are more multi-disciplinary communities of practice with different epistemic standards, work practices, and contexts.

      "Thus, because of differences in perspectives and interests, it becomes necessary to provide support for cross-boundary knowledge transformation (Carlile 2002)."

      Evokes boundary objects/boundary infrastructure issues.

    17. Usinga practice lens (Brown and Duguid 2001, Orlikowski2000), we suggest that in settings where work iscontextualized and nonroutine, traditional models ofcoordination are insufficient to explain coordinationas it occurs in practice. First, because expertise is dis-tributed and work highly contextualized, expertisecoordination is required to manage knowledge andskill interdependencies. Second, to avoid error andto ensure that the patient remains on a recoveringtrajectory, fast-response cross-boundary coordinationpractices are enacted. Because of the epistemic dis-tance between specialists organized in communitiesofpractice,theselattercoordinationpracticesmagnifyknowledge differences and are partly contentious.

      Faraj and Xiao contend that coordination practices of fast-response organizations differ from typical groups' structures, decision-making processes and cultures.

      1) Expertise is distributed 2) Coordination practices are cross-boundary 3) Knowledge differences are magnified

    18. In this paper, we focus on the collective perfor-manceaspectofcoordinationandemphasizethetem-poral unfolding and situated nature of coordinativeaction. We address how knowledge work is coor-dinated in organizations where decisions must bemade rapidly and where errors can be fatal.

      Summary of paper focus

    1. Also, with disaster research having strong theoretical ties with the study of collective behavior(Wenger 1987), and with the field of collective behavior often looking at issues related to social change {e.g., riots, social move­ments), another link between disasters and social change has implicitly

      Neal connects concerns about disaster-driven social change and the natural desire for people to respond via some collective action impulse.

      Nice segue into SBTF as collection action motivated by social change

    2. Cross-cultural disaster research may also provide further insights regard­ing disaster phases.

      Evokes feminist, critical and post-colonial theory, as well as multi- and inter-disciplinary research methods/perspectives, e.g., anthropology, etc.

      These points of view may also provide insights on how disaster phases interact with wholly different notions of social time.

    3. As the field of collective behavior highlights, individuals in social settings have different perceptions of reality-social settings are not homogeneous (e.g., Turner and Killian I 987).' Thus, to tap further the mutually inclusive, multidimen­sional and social-time aspects of disaster phases, researchers should draw upon multiple publics and their definition of disaster phases.

      Neal suggests avoiding the disaster phase terminology when interviewing various stakeholders (emergency mgt, disaster-affected people, government agencies) in order to "draw upon various groups' language to describe phases" instead of the National Governors Assn phases.

    4. Consid� e�g the redefinition of disaster phases based on social time may help us WJtb the broader and more important struggle of defining disaster.

      What happened with this call to arms? Did Neal or others in the emergency management research community follow up?

      http://ijmed.org/articles/624/download/ <-- Neal's 2013 paper on "Social Time and Disaster"

    5. Consid� e�g the redefinition of disaster phases based on social time may help us WJtb the broader and more important struggle of defining disaster

      Neal wrote a more recent 2013 paper discussing the topic of social time and disaster.

      http://ijmed.org/articles/624/download/

    6. D!saster and hazard researchers have recognized the social time aspect of disasters. Dynes_ (1970) alludes to social time regarding the social consequences of a disaster. Dynes observes that social time: is important because the activities of every community vary over a period of time duri�� �e day, the week, the month, and the year. S�c� patterned acuv1nes have implications for potential damage within thecommurnty, for preventative activity within the commu­�ty, for the inventory of the meaning of the disaster, for the rmm�?1ate tasks necessary within the community, and for the mobilizanon of community effort. (Dynes 1970, p. 63)

      As early as 1970 (pre-Zerubavel, Adam, Nowotny, and Giddens), Dynes suggested that social time be taken into account for disaster response.

      ** Get this paper. What social time work did he cite?

    7. The Phases Should Reflect Social Rather Than Objective Time Giddens (I 987), although not the first, makes an important theoretical distinction between social and objective time. Giddens defines clock time as the use of quantified units. Clock time represents "day-to-day" structured activities. Typically, studies refer to disaster phases with hours, days, weeks, or years. Social time, however, is contingent upon the needs or opportunities of a society.

      Cites Giddens here to describe differences between social time (sturcturation) and clock time.

    1. The technology that favored democracy is changing, and as artificial intelligence develops, it might change further.

      i would like to see arguments around this as i further read.

    1. What social media did was to transform discovery into a passive rather than an active process.

      Nicely put observation on how social media changed the way in which we discover information.

  5. Dec 2018
    1. Newport is an academic — he makes his primary living teaching computer science at a university, so he already has a built-in network and a self-contained world with clear moves towards achievement.

      This is one of the key reasons people look to social media--for the connections and the network they don't have via non-digital means. Most of the people I've seen with large blogs or well-traveled websites have simply done a much better job of connecting and interacting with their audience and personal networks. To a great extent this is because they've built up a large email list to send people content directly. Those people then read their material and comment on their blogs.

      This is something the IndieWeb can help people work toward in a better fashion, particularly with better independent functioning feed readers.

    2. One must always be beware of the advice-giver’s context.
    1. One is to imagine that culture is a self-contained "super-organic" reality with forces and purposes of its own; that is, to reify it. Another is to claim that it consists in the brute pattern of behavioral events we observe in fact to occur in some identifiable community or other; that is, to reduce it.

      Geertz warns about the danger of reducing or reifying culture. While this may have been a debate in anthropology in 1973 (hopefully resolved), it still seems to resonate in HCI today between the factions of technological determinism and social constructionism

    1. Two key constituencies for social movements are also early adopters: activists and journalists
    2. movements, among other things, are attempts to intervene in the public sphere through collective, coordinated action. A social movement is both a type of (counter)public itself and a claim made to a public that a wrong should be righted or a change should be made.13 Regardless of whether movements are attempt-ing to change people’s minds, a set of policies, or even a government, they strive to reach and intervene in public life, which is centered on the public sphere of their time.

      a solid definition of what a movement is

    1. His dream is to put a live Web server with easy-to-edit pages on every person's desktop, then connect them all in a robust network that feeds off itself and informs other media.

      An early statement of what would eventually become all of social media.

    2. The Weblog community is basically a whole bunch of expert witnesses who increase their expertise constantly through a sort of reputation engine."

      The trouble is how is this "reputation engine" built? What metrics does it include? Can it be gamed? Social media has gotten lots of this wrong and it has caused problems.

    3. While many blogs get dozens or hundreds of visitors, Searls' site attracts thousands. "I partly don't want to care what the number is," he says. "I used to work in broadcasting, where everyone was obsessed by that. I don't want an audience. I feel I'm writing stuff that's part of a conversation. Conversations don't have audiences."

      Social media has completely ignored this sort of sentiment and gamified and psychoanalyzed it's way into the polar opposite direction all for the sake of "engagement", clicks, data gathering, and advertising.

    4. Man, this is a beast that's hungry all the time."

      Mind you he's saying this in 2001 before the creation of more wide spread social networks.

    5. Regular readers of Gillmor's eJournal will recognize his commitment to user participation. "One of the things I'm sure about in journalism right now is that my readers know more than I do," he says. "To the extent that I can take advantage of that in a way that does something for everyone involved ó that strikes me as pretty cool." One fascinating aspect of Gillmor's Weblog is how he lifts the veil from the workings of the journalism profession. "There have been occasions where I put up a note saying, 'I'm working on the following and here's what I think I know,' and the invitation is for the reader to either tell me I'm on the right track, I'm wrong, or at the very least help me find the missing pieces," he says. "That's a pretty interesting thing. Many thousands more people read my column in the newspaper than online, but I do hear back from a fair number of people from the Weblog."

      Awesomely, this sounds almost exactly like something that David Fahrenthold would tell Jay Rosen about Twitter nearly 16 years later in an interview in The Correspondent.

      https://boffosocko.com/2017/11/27/pull-up-a-chair-1-jay-rosen-david-fahrenthold-the-correspondent/

    1. It is based on reciprocity and a level of trust that each party is actively seeking value-added information for the other.

      Seems like this is a critical assumption to examine for current media literacy/misinformation discussions. As networks become very large and very flat, does this assumption of reciprocity and good faith hold? (I'm thinking, here, of people whose expertise I trust in one domain but perhaps not in another, or the fact that sometimes I'm talking to one part of my network and not really "actively seeking information" for other parts.)

    1. On the net, you have public, or you have secrets. The private intermediate sphere, with its careful buffering. is shattered. E-mails are forwarded verbatim. IRC transcripts, with throwaway comments, are preserved forever. You talk to your friends online, you talk to the world.
    1. It’s the same old story – if you spend a lot of time trying to become famous, then you become famous, but you won’t have spent any time doing anything worth being famous for.
    1. Maybe during this Christmas break I will find the guts to do a purge but I know that it will be a "fake purge".

      I've been seeing a lot about (Japanes) minimalism this past year in relation to physical goods, but hadn't considered what a minimal social media presence would look like.

    1. I adopted a ‘horses for courses’ approach to keep it in check. I used Facebook primarily to keep in touch with family and real-world friends, I used Twitter for tech discussions and networking, I used LinkedIn sparingly, and I dropped any social media that didn’t fulfill a specific function for me.
    1. I’m absolutely positioning the Kindle to be a replacement habit for Facebook and Twitter. How much smarter would you be if you replaced half of your social media usage with reading?
    1. sir

      Mr. Heywood has a point regarding resort areas. Connecting this to modern day resorts, when these things pop up, the prices of everyday things are inflated. This results in the residents of the area not being able to afford to live there and become impoverished.

    2. "move in a circle"

      This phrase is often used in Austen's works, referring to the particular society or selected families a person interacts with, and which usually indicates a level of social class. In Pride and Prejudice, Mrs. Gardener says she "moved in different circles" from the Darcys, and in Emma, Mrs. Elton hopes to install Miss Fairfax as a governess in a better circle than she might be able to procure on her own.

    3. neither able to do or suggest anything

      This might be a genuine characerization of the wife or possibly a sarcastic comment on the stereotypes of women during the time.

    4. fancy themselves equal

      Highlights the slight strife between "old" and "new" money. Lady Denham's words seem reminiscent of Sir Walter Elliot's disdain for those who made their fortune instead of inheriting it in Persuasion.

    5. The mere trash

      Many people criticized circulating libraries in the 17th and 18th centuries due to the genre they gave access to--the novel. It was thought that the novel would ruin people's minds and give them false expectations of life. Source.

    6. rich people

      A powerful final line concluding the chapter, as it reflect's Austen's larger criticism of "rich people" who she believes often behave with distasteful and contemptible motivations. In this instance, Austen labels rich people as "sordid."

    7. seen romantically situated among wood on a high eminence at some little distance

      This description of a cottage reminds me of the contrast in Austen's Sense and Sensibility between how the upper classes and the landed gentry view cottages. The upper classes view cottages in a romantic way as cute, comfy homes, however the landed gentry know that cottages result out of a neccesity brough on by an oppresive and restrictive economic system.

      https://janeaustensworld.wordpress.com/tag/19th-century-cottages/

    8. Links to common words/themes throughout the annotations

    1. signal-boost

      another great description of the phenomenon

    2. Among the many phenomena we’d tentatively attribute, in large part, to the trend: the rise of sharebait (nee clickbait) and the general BuzzFeedification of traditional media; the Internet hoax-industrial complex, which only seems to be growing stronger; and the utter lack of intelligent online discourse around any remotely complicated, controversial topic.

      sharebait BuzzFeedification Internet hoax-industrial complex

      Priceless!

    1. Today, I had the privilege of speaking on a panel at the Comparative and International Education Society’s Annual Conference with representatives of two open education projects that depend on Creative Commons licenses to do their work. One is the OER publisher Siyavula, based in Cape Town, South Africa. Among other things, they publish textbooks for use in primary and secondary school in math and science. After high school students in the country protested about the conditions of their education – singling out textbook prices as a barrier to their learning – the South African government relied on the Creative Commons license used by Siyavula to print and distribute 10 million Siyavula textbooks to school children, some of whom had never had their own textbook before. The other are the related teacher education projects, TESSA, and TESS-India, which use the Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike license on teacher training materials. Created first in English, the projects and their teachers rely on the reuse rights granted by the Creative Commons license to translate and localize these training materials to make them authentic for teachers in the linguistically and culturally diverse settings of sub-Saharan Africa and India. (Both projects are linked to and supported by the Open University in the UK, http://www.open.ac.uk/, which uses Creative Commons-licensed materials as well.) If one wakes up hoping to feel that one’s work in the world is useful, then an experience like this makes it a good day.

      I think contextualizing Creative Commons material as a component in global justice and thinking of fair distribution of resources and knowledge as an antidote to imperialism is a provocative concept.This blog, infojusticeorg offers perspectives on social justice and Creative Commons by many authors.

    1. Where’s my next dashboard? I imagine a next-gen reader that brings me the open web and my social circles in a way that helps me attend to and manage all the flow. There are apps for that, a nice example being FlowReader, which has been around since 2013. I try these things hopefully but so far none has stuck.

      I'm currently hoping that the next wave of social readers based on Microsub and which also support Micropub will be a major part of the answer.

  6. Nov 2018
    1. Digital connectivity reshapes how movements connect, organize, and evolve during their lifespan.
    2. My goal in this book was above all to develop theories and to present a conceptual analysis of what digital technologies mean for how social move-ments, power and society interact, rather than provide a complete empirical descriptive account of any one movement.
    1. Facebook’s lofty aims were emblazoned even on securities filings: “Our mission is to make the world more open and connected.”

      Why not make Facebook more open and connected? This would fix some of the problems.

      As usual, I would say that they need to have a way to put some value on the "connections" that they're creating. Not all connections are equal. Some are actively bad, particularly for a productive and positive society.

    1. The opening section also lays out come key concepts for the book, including social movement capacities (“social movements’ abilities”) and signals (“their repertoire of protest, like marches, rallies, and occupations as signals of those capacities”) (xi), as well as the problem of tactical freeze (“the inability of these movements to adjust tactics, negotiate demands, and push for

      I believe this is an excellent way to share thoughts in a book club.

    1. As deepfakes make their way into social media, their spread will likely follow the same pattern as other fake news stories. In a MIT study investigating the diffusion of false content on Twitter published between 2006 and 2017, researchers found that “falsehood diffused significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than truth in all categories of information.” False stories were 70 percent more likely to be retweeted than the truth and reached 1,500 people six times more quickly than accurate articles.

      This sort of research should make it eaiser to find and stamp out from the social media side of things. We need regulations to actually make it happen however.

    1. But now it was all for the best: a law of nature, a chance for the monopolists to do good for the universe. The cheerer-in-chief for the monopoly form is Peter Thiel, author of Competition Is for Losers. Labeling the competitive economy a “relic of history” and a “trap,” he proclaimed that “only one thing can allow a business to transcend the daily brute struggle for survival: monopoly profits.”

      Sounds like a guy who is winning all of the spoils.

    2. In total, Facebook managed to string together 67 unchallenged acquisitions, which seems impressive, unless you consider that Amazon undertook 91 and Google got away with 214 (a few of which were conditioned). In this way, the tech industry became essentially composed of just a few giant trusts: Google for search and related industries, Facebook for social media, Amazon for online commerce. While competitors remained in the wings, their positions became marginalized with every passing day.
    3. When a dominant firm buys its a nascent challenger, alarm bells are supposed to ring. Yet both American and European regulators found themselves unable to find anything wrong with the takeover.
    1. ​BUT, our students will not (most) have the economic, cultural, historical provenances nor intention ... the reality of community college students is that most will not produce academic discourse but will eak through multiple courses with minimum academic writing (and if so, poorly) while they will continue their certain continued marginalized communities that are, per Bourdieu, decapitalized (lacking cultural capital)​, whereas critical rhetoric could address these systemics inegalitarianism.

    1. Entscheidend ist, dass sie Herren des Verfahrens bleiben - und eine Vision für das neue Maschinenzeitalter entwickeln.

      Es sieht für mich nicht eigentlich so aus als wären wir jemals die "Herren des Verfahrens" gewesen. Und auch darum geht es ja bei Marx. Denke ich.

    1. Instructional Design Strategies for Intensive Online Courses: An Objectivist-Constructivist Blended Approach

      This was an excellent article Chen (2007) in defining and laying out how a blended learning approach of objectivist and constructivist instructional strategies work well in online instruction and the use of an actual online course as a study example.

      RATING: 4/5 (rating based upon a score system 1 to 5, 1= lowest 5=highest in terms of content, veracity, easiness of use etc.)

    1. Learning Needs Analysis of Collaborative E-Classes in Semi-Formal Settings: The REVIT Example.

      This article explores the importance of analysis of instructional design which seems to be often downplayed particularly in distance learning. ADDIE, REVIT have been considered when evaluating whether the training was meaningful or not and from that a central report was extracted and may prove useful in the development of similar e-learning situations for adult learning.

      RATING: 4/5 (rating based upon a score system 1 to 5, 1= lowest 5=highest in terms of content, veracity, easiness of use etc.)

    1. They can spew hate amongst themselves for eternity, but without amplification it won’t thrive.

      This is a key point. Social media and the way it amplifies almost anything for the benefit of clicks towards advertising is one of its most toxic features. Too often the extreme voice draws the most attention instead of being moderated down by more civil and moderate society.

    1. My work, rooted in both theory and practice, reveals three things that are essential to bringing individuals into the circle of change: autonomy, guidance, and a sense of social community, or working toward a larger meaningful goal.
    1. Humans participate in social learning for a variety of adaptive reasons, such as reducing uncertainty (Kameda and Nakanishi, 2002), learning complex skills and knowledge that could not have been invented by a single individual alone (Richerson and Boyd, 2000; Tomasello, Kruger, and Ratner, 1993), and passing on beneficial cultural traits to offspring (Palmer, 2010). One proposed social-learning mechanism is prestige bias (Henrich and Gil-White, 2001), defined as the selective copying of certain “prestigious” individuals to whom others freely show deference or respect in orderto increase the amount and accuracy of information available to the learner.Prestige bias allows a learner in a novel environment to quickly and inexpensively choose from whom to learn, thus maximizing his or her chances of acquiring adaptive behavioral so lutions toa specific task or enterprisewit hout having to assess directly the adaptiveness of every potential model’s behavior.Learners provide deference to teachers in order to ingratiate themselves with a chosen model, thus gaining extended exposure to that model(Henrich and Gil-White, 2001).New learners can then use that information—who is paying attention to whom—to increase their likelihood of choosing a good teacher.

      Throughout this article are several highlighted passages that combine to form this annotation.

      This research study presents the idea that the social environment is a self-selected learning environment for adults. The idea of social prestige-bias learning is intriguing because it is derived from the student, not an institution nor instructor. The further idea of selecting whom to learn from based on prestige-bias also creates further questions that warrant a deeper understanding of the learner and the environment which s/he creates to gain knowledge.

      Using a previously conducted experiment on success-based learning and learning due to environmental change, this research further included the ideal of social prestige-biased learning.self-selected by the learner.

      In a study of 167 participants, three hypotheses were tested to see if learners would select individual learning, social learning, prestige-biased learning (also a social setting), or success-based learning. The experiment tested both an initial learning environment and a learning environment which experienced a change in the environment.

      Surprisingly, some participants selected social prestige-biased learning and some success learning and the percentages in each category did not change after the environmental change occurred.

      Questions that arise from the study:

      • Does social prestige, or someone who is deemed prestigious, equate to a knowledgeable teacher?
      • Does the social prestige-biased environment reflect wise choices?
      • If the student does not know what s/he does not know, will the social prestige-bias result in selecting the better teacher, or just in selecting a more highly recognized teacher?
      • Why did the environmental change have little impact on the selected learning environment?

      REFERENCE: Atkinson, C., O’Brien, M.J., & Mesoudi, A. (2012). Adult learners in a novel environment use prestige-biased social learning. Evolutionary Psychology, 10(3), 519-537. Retrieved from (Prestige-biased Learning )

      RATINGS content, 9/10 veracity, 8/10 easiness of use, 9/10 Overall Rating, 8.67/10

  7. Oct 2018
    1. Why do people troll? Eight factors are given, which might boil down to:

      • Perceived lack of consequences.
      • Online mob mentality.