22 Matching Annotations
  1. Jun 2019
    1. I first took a statistically significant sample of issues form my collection. I then helped design a program to overlay a grid onto each image of a newspaper page.

      A similar approach to laying down grids is used when design posters/ads. The grid is one of the most crucial tools used by graphic designers.

    2. National metropolises such as San Francisco, Baltimore, or Boston were surprisingly muted in the�Houston Daily Post�relative to their populations, especially in comparison to the midwestern cities of Chicago, St. Louis, and Kansas City

      I don't think this was a great idea only because information shoulndt be kept but rather spread to similar growing cities.

    3. The second period, 1894-1901, marked Houston’s final years as a minor commercial city before its ascension to the energy capital of the United States during the twentieth century.

      This is interesting because this was just around the time of the war, time when energy is most in need.

  2. May 2019
    1. Run through its various steps so that you end up with a json file of results

      not sure what this means? Json file of results?

    1. Crowdsourcing is becoming more widespread, and thus, it is important to understand exactly how, and if, it works. It is a viable and cost-effective strategy only if the task is well facilitated, and the institution or project leaders are able to build up a cohort of willing volunteers.

      This summer a colleague of mine and I are working on creating digital brushes for industrial design students. We have began to develop some brushes for specific platforms but the idea of creating a platform to crowdsource brushes is very unique. From a business standpoint this allows for a wider variety of brushes and expertise as designers would be able to post on the platform their brushes and potentially sell it. The platform would take royalty on each brush set sold similar to how shopify and amazon run. Relating back to the course this allows for the "true" goal to be achieved (in my case the ideal brush sets).

    2. In short, while Bentham’s manuscripts comprise material of potentially great significance for a wide range of disciplines, much of the collection – far from being even adequately studied – is virtually unknown.

      Referring back to one of the my previous annotations, T-level knowledge is key in todays work force. To see that Bentham's manuscripts cover a wide rang of disciplines is reassuring for our future approach to industrialization.

    3. Crowdsourcing is an increasingly popular and attractive option for archivists, librarians, scientists, and scholarly editors working with large collections in need of tagging, annotating, editing, or transcribing.

      This is interesting because a similar method of crowd sourcing was used with IBM developed an AI software to "argue with humans". This method is similar to some of the readings done in the last week where historians try and crowdsource their information to come closer to the truth.

    1. And some focused thinking about the ways we communicate with those publics is in order, I would suggest, because many of our fields are facing crises that we cannot solve on our own

      Thing in our world today require multiple sets of skill and knowledge. To start your own engineering consultancy you must be an engineer but you also must know how to run a business. It is because of this there are many fields getting more and more specialized within specific sectors and need an acquired set of skills. By open sourcing peoples work this form of skill share allows us to solve problems that we never could have on our own.

    1. The commodification of ideas as currency in academia means that writing is often concealed until publication, leaving the interim versions in the struggle towards a publishable version unseen.  These processes often leave the academic writer isolated. Writing in public counters this.

      This is worrying yet hopeful to read. In design, we are always taught to test and show your initial work, feedback is crucial to developing a good product that doesn't turn obsolete in a few months. At first no one wants to share their designs as we worry our concepts might get stolen but a bad stolen idea is still a bad idea. It is even more crucial writing becomes opened sourced soon so that the validity of information is more precise. It is good to read that things are changing though.

    1. As data management plans become mandatory components of research proposals, maybe we should start looking out for what historians will be doing with their notes and research data? It’d be a potential to really kickstart historical research, speed up some research, increase efficiency (time for me to duck), and help decrease PhD completion times. Not a magic bullet, but … maybe 10% of one?

      I found managing research notes and information was crucial when looking into for my 4th year capstone project. The initial phase of research was group based (i was in the water purification group) and all our information was presented in one file to keep track of any repetitive information being provide to our overall research. This shows that Milligan is open to the idea of "openness".

    1. Hyperlinks would not have solved the other weakness of Phillips’s notebook: its inability to track, at a fine-grained level, changes to a page or to his thinking over time. Digital notebooks, however, could overcome this challenge as well. The solution here is version control, a technology familiar to the open-source software world and embedded (behind the scenes) in many of the tools historians already use. Microsoft Word’s “track changes” feature is essentially a version of version control, a way of seeing precisely how a text has been modified at a particular moment of time. Wikipedia’s “history” pages provide a more powerful version of the same feature. And as Konrad Lawson has shown in a recent Profhacker series on Github, programs like Git provide the most powerful version control systems of all, allowing their users exceedingly fine-grained views of when and how files were changed.

      I found this entire paragraph interesting because it takes into account the method of checking, in this case "version control". Version control reminds me of micromanagement; the devil's in the detail. I think that is where the problem lies, because historian have so much data to synthesize, the ability to trace back sources for that information can be so difficult. By simplifying interfaces to help others help you (similar to how Microsoft word has done), this task of micromanaging your sources no longer exists allowing historians do what they do best which is tell our history.

    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 is clear that Owens is in favour of "openness". His idea of linking footnotes is a great way to get easy access to the sources to check the legitimacy of the content.

    2. How many people would retrace a historians footsteps through archives scattered around the world to double check each citation?

      I assume this question is a rhetorical one, although I don't believe that it should be with the technology we have today. With AI being able to understand discrepancies in hardware and software, the ease of validity should be at our finger tips by now. It is almost crucial to be able to do this with so much information on the internet.

    1. For those who made satirical prints, these contacts included suppliers of raw materials, individuals and businesses who could undertake out work, and groups whose trustworthiness could be guaranteed. Relationships within these networks were established and maintained by direct, indirect, environmental, and community ties.

      I find this interesting because it it similar to what we find today online with ecommerce sites. Shopify has bascially integrated all of the contacts/help needed for distribution and supply of the products you order.

    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 find this interesting because similar to the design process for developing products, it is important to look at the small goals (the detailed features in the products) and the large scale goals of the product far from when it is launched. It is only when both are taken into account when you can really come up with something legitimate.

    2. Microhistory involves the rigorous and in-depth study of a single story or moment in history, whereas macrohistory susses out long-term trends and eddies,

      I find this interesting because science in todays world is like the microhistory while science fiction in today's world is like macrohistory where we can see how far we can go in the future with the little we have now.

    3. good historians, like good detectives, test their merit through expansion: the ability to extract complex knowledge from the smallest crumbs of evidence that history has left behind. By tracing the trail of these breadcrumbs, a historian might weave together a narrative of the past.

      I think this is amazing and hope we can do some of this in the course. It is like solving a complicated real life puzzle.

    4. Often, macroscopes produce textual abstractions or data visualizations in lieu of direct images.[1]

      Not sure what they mean by "produce textual abstractions"

    1. The Digital Humanities—and by inclusion, Digital History—cannot be a playground for the privileged. Letting it become so will undo decades of important work done in the humanities to listen for and amplify the voices of those who are too often ignored. The instrument of the digital historian, a macroscope, is just as able to obscure the context of violence as it is to highlight that violence.

      Not too sure what they mean by privileged, is there a way to measure this?

    2. By not explicitly pointing out tools and approaches that embrace feminist values and diverse outlooks, we risk perpetuating incongruities, barriers, and biases in DH research

      I completely agree with this as you literally double the about of people researching one topic.

    3. We wrote it in the open, inviting the world to contribute their edits, ideas, and advice for our final draft. We engaged with our readers, and were heartened and encouraged when the Macroscope began appearing on syllabi; when students started leaving comments, we were overjoyed.

      This is great to read as user feedback can contribute a lot to user research when building or writing something catered towards a specific user.

    4. I find this line interesting because the once your remove the tangible product it immediately loses its ability to become obsolete. This allows us to make changes yes but from a perspective of valid information, this gives opportunity for biased information or wrong information to be published illegitimately.