20 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2017
    1. I have contributed to more than 30 digital projects

      Clearly a person who is open to digital humanities.

    1. I am also interested in the methodological implications of doing history digitally

      Moravec appears to be covering a lot of ground in her research with linguistics, digital humanities and feminism.

    1. If moved over, however, it would be an incredible resource!

      It appears from the readings so far that getting data online and shared with everyone is a process that takes a lot of time but would, for historians, be a good resource.

    1. The purposes of basic research in the humanities, however, often feel a bit more hidden from view, as do the purposes of learning in those fields.

      I agree with this. The purposes of studying in the field of humanities sometimes takes a bit of thought to articulate (maybe at times the reasons can be abstract). However, this article does a good job at listing a few purposes for studying in this field (see beginning of previous paragraph).

    1. This was the first I had heard of a print version.

      It would be interesting to see the differences in the print vs. online publications of this project (including the different amount of images). As something that wasn't meant to be in print I think that seeing how the online version compares to the print version could be an interesting example of how the internet can work in these types of projects.

    1. Rather than dozens of us all flying to Library and Archives Canada, taking our own photographic record of RCMP/CSIS records, say, wouldn’t it better if we cooperated more?

      This definitely seems to make sense it would save a lot of time and effort to share but I'm curious if may be there no way around doing everything separate.

    1. Open Notebook Science (ONS)

      This is a very good idea (allowing people to get a larger picture of the scientist's work) but this could also lead to having more information that needs to be sorted through to get the information one is looking for. So this would end up taking up a lot more time in the research process.

    1. So, the question is, when it takes 15 seconds instead of 15 hours to fact check a source do we think historians will start to write differently, or otherwise change how they do their work?

      It would make sense that fact checking becoming quicker would cause historians to do it more often but I don't think that anybody wants their work to be unreliable even without this. It could possibly be that fact checking made easier might allow historians to find facts they did think to look for before because they previously only wanted to do only as much as necessary to begin with.

    1. We wrote it in the open, inviting the world to contribute their edits, ideas, and advice for our final draft.

      I really like this idea and how it echos the way the internet is used - as a platform for people to be free in expressing their opinions and thoughts.

    1. As someone who deals with algorithms and large datasets, I desperately seek out those moments when really stupid algorithms wind up aligning with a research goal, rather than getting in the way of it.

      I'm not sure what make's a stupid algorithm if it works, I get the point that's made later but when another researcher tries to prove the point again it probably won't work in the same way and then they will have to reconsider accuracy.

    1. Of course, I said. Our community needs more venues to publish in, Digital Humanities has a commitment to open access, and having helped set up an online, peer reviewed, open access, Digital Humanities journal myself, I know how difficult it is to get any established scholars to support you in the early days.

      The internet has a lot of potential for the academic world and it can make researching a lot easier as people continue to use it for this type of thing.

    1. It helps its members learn more about digital work in the Arts, Humanities, and Cultural Heritage sectors; it acts to foster collaboration and cooperation across regions and economies; it coordinates research on and in support of the use of technology in these areas across the globe; and it advocates for a global perspective on work in this sector. By sharing expertise, resources, experiences, and problems, we all become better practitioners of our common discipline.

      I think that this is an important goal, the internet is very prevalent in the lives of a lot of people so it is good to expand the academic potential it has.

    1. But doing so runs into problems of selection and representativity. I’d be loath to say that any argument could be made from the satires that Isaac Cruikshank designed, but many differing and contradictory interpretations could be made depending on the hand curated corpus of prints that was chosen.

      This is something I need to keep in mind when doing research and proves to be something to keep in mind when reading other works on the subject. The representativity and interpretation is very important to consider.

    1. What struck me when I made the latter – which, I should add, was made before the former – was that I could not see any patterns because the stationers dominated the visual field.

      This example gives me a good understanding of how one might use data digitally but I wonder in what other ways digital data can be used in addition to this.

    1. In other words, the creation of new tools and bodies of data, have allowed us to 'read' this simple text and the underlying bureaucratic event that brought it into existence, and arguably some of the social experience of a single individual, in a series of new ways.

      I think that reach using these types of tools will allow for more subjects to be explored by historians in greater detail but also this may prove to be the begging of some change in what is expected in research (with all this available content).

    1. In our own time, many analysts are beginning to realise that in order to hold persuasive power, they need to condense big data in such a way that they can circulate among readers as a concise story that is easy to tell.

      The amount of information that is now online makes using digital data complex whether you are looking for something specific or looking to find something to specify (in terms of research). I think this statement certainly will prove true more and more as the internet gets saturated with data for every topic.

    1. As history becomes digitized in ever-increasing scales, historians without the ability to research both micro- and macroscopically may be in danger of becoming mired in evidence or lost in the noise.

      I have experienced this in other classes I've taken in history. This is one of the reasons why the title of this course got my attention.