Final Grade

I received an "A" for this course.

Week Nine Weblog

Indexes, Algorithms, Ranking, Oh my!

It is obvious to me, after reading Nissenbaum & Introna's article Shaping the Web: Why the Politics of Search Engines Matters that the only real way to ensure that the original vision of the internet as a democratizing force is to expose the methods and algorithms that are search engine foundations. This type of policy, which is suggested by the article itself, would allow users to have much more meaningful results when searching for information and/or work around/with the biases inherent to the search engine. More importantly, it would allow for an increase of types of algorithms and ranking systems that would be more representative of an author's social, political and moral persuasions. Understanding this would allow for a user to decide whether or not to continue using that particular system or to find/author a different one that is more aligned with his/her inquiries.

Suppose that this ideal exists and then try to imagine what it means as far as constructing broad social values. This task may not be so easy. Will these values manifest through users' habits? How will anyone commit to these values when they can easily find another system to represent opposing value system with a few clicks of the mouse? In other words, will the "truthful disclosure of the underlying rules (or algorithms) governing indexing, searching, and prioritizing" (Nissenbaum, p. 181) unleash anarchy within the internet that will become the end of any type of representation of a value system? I think that at first, yes. But over time, values would manifest through user habits and be committed to the same way they have been throughout history. The only downside is wading through the leftover algorithms that would, no doubt, have to be done by future generations of users.

Response Paper Four

The Challenge of Ontological Represention

The quest to represent an array of diverse knowledge communities within the realm of IT will never be complete. The fact alone that cultures and knowledge are not static is a basis for such a claim. Therefore, their ontological representation in any medium can never be fully realized. Also, any attempt at meta-analysis of a specific subject within a knowledge community, albeit to more accurately represent its ontology, might stimulate cultural transformation, thereby creating a recursive framework for all involved in the process of representation. When a community is engaged in such a representation it is essential that they understand (as well as those who might be assisting them with information systems technical support) culture is dynamic and that reflection upon their "digital" ontology can stimulate cultural change. Once this is understood, the community must then be willing to continually "update" their ontological representation throughout time. This will ensure an accurate cultural representation as interconnectivity and interoperability of multiple ontological representations are achieved.

The suggestion that culture is dynamic (not static) can be supported by historical and anthropological data beyond the scope of this paper. Within the discussion of ontological representation in information systems, specifically on the internet, "individuals within a given community attach different descriptions to shared phenomena, and they need to continue to describe the world differently" (Srinivasan, p. 13). Individual descriptions of shared phenomena create "contrasting and fluid ontologies" (Srinivasan, p.13) which act as competing memes (units of cultural information) to construct an encompassing community domain ontology. Any representation at a given time of a community's ontology, therefore, is a result of a synergy between individual descriptions of shared phenomena. These descriptions will change as shared phenomena change over time. The work of accurate ontological representation through IT is therefore neverending.

A community engaged in their ontological representation will be experiencing a new shared phenomenon that is self-reflective. Over time, the ability to view an ontology objectively (or even slightly objectively) can expose knowledge (the lack of) that was previously undetectable. Such a realization might be an impetus for those engaged to provide descriptions that would not have been brought forth without the ontological representation. These descriptions might then enter the realm of a type of critical cultural literacy, or meta-analysis of a subset of knowledge. As has been experienced through post-modern theory of culture in the West, critical cultural-literacy has proved to transform overall ontology and representation of ontologies (for example: Standardization, Objectivity, and User Focus: A Meta-Analysis of Subject Access Critiques by Olsen & Schlegl, 2001). If Indigenous groups around the world who are engaged in ontological representation experience a similar cultural literacy, it is unknown how they will change. Perhaps they will be able to strengthen their community and cultural identity through a multiplicity of descriptions. On the other hand, various fluid ontologies within a community may "fork" away from each other to create unique ontological representations. How this will play out is of concern in the same way previous introduction of foreign technology by ethnographers/anthropologists been shown to disrupt indigenous communities. Ontological representation through IT is a far cry from an introduction of simple tool; it is more aligned with the introduction of literacy to a primarily oral culture.

The introduction of communities knowledge into information systems is a never ending process and will have unforeseen results for those engaged. The increase of continual changing, merging, or splitting representation of various ontologies will provide an environment that will have the challenge of establishing interconnectivity and interoperability. The providers of IT into communities who wish to participate will have the burden of allowing each community to take their ontological representation to whatever ends they wish to. This may result in a strengthened or weakened cultural identity. Fluid community ontologies will ebb and flow throughout time as it always has through whatever medium it has in the past: from the Australian Aboriginal Dreamtime to the West's Postmodernism.

Week Eight Weblog

The first Postmaster General, in 1775, was Benjamin Franklin who signed both the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of the United States. He is perhaps one of the most revered figures in all of the US History. Only two years after the signing of the Constitution, the US’s first Post Office opened (1789). The fact that such a prominent leader in the formation of the nation was also involved in the inception of the USPO gives weight to the argument that this institution is essential to the preservation of the ideals of what the US stands for. The USPO was a part of the foundation of democracy in America.

The Post Office is an example of a US government agency that has been a direct victim of deregulation and privatization trends. The increase of Representative International Government Organizations (IGOs) and Non-Government Organizations (NGOs) after the formation of the US Post Office (USPO) is the direct cause of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970. Perhaps one of the most devestating blows to the fabric of democracy in America was the removal of the Postmaster General from the President's Cabinet. This Act also led to competition with an organization that is an essential pillar of the US infrastructure. The function of the USPO was to ensure the fair and efficient transmission of parcels, paper mail and telegraphs which, in turn, carries the ethos of democracy. Instead of depleting the power of the USPO, the US should have given it more breadth of influence and attention in the national debate of evolving communication technologies.

Response Paper Three

Music Will Never Be Caught in Any Net

The notion of copyright as it pertains to music deals with a very slippery area of intellectual property. Music was only recently recordable. In 1877, Thomas Edison recorded the first human voice and not long after did music begin to be a profitable business. In 1914 the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (ASCAP) was founded to "assure that music creators are fairly compensated for the public performance of their works, and that their rights are properly protected" in accordance with the 1914 Copyright Act. Live performances are the ethos of musical sound, whereas the record of music is the ethos of the music business. The notion that music is to be shared freely for the benefit of all society has always been, until recently, tied to the event of music; from ancient drum circle traditions to the Woodstock Music Festival of 1969. The freedom of access to recorded music through the internet though, combines that notion of freely sharing music to the record of music. Being as it is that music is shared freely and this notion is embedded within its very nature, it will never be fully tied down to any regulation of performance or recording.

The Napster affair brings out this very argument to life. Barlow argues that Napster represents the "real Internet" or one that "endows any acne-faced kid with a distributive power of Time Warner's" (page 1). In short, Napster allowed free sharing of recorded music (known as peer-to-peer sharing by use of MP3 files) that put the music business in jeopardy. But the business of music is not rooted in the manufacture and distribution of records of music as much as it is the performance of music. Therefore, it makes sense that freely shared records of music would only stimulate the music business further. As Barlow describes, the Grateful Dead were able to continue to sell out live performances as well as have studio albums go platinum based on the fact that their freely shared recordings of previous performances attracted new fans (pg. 2). Is it not surprising that "during the two years since MP3 music began flooding the Net, CD sales have risen 20 percent?" (Barlow, pg. 2).

Therefore, those concerned with the music copyright (such as ASCAP) should not be thinking that all is lost. Rather, they should embrace the fact that music is intended, by its nature, to be shared freely. If there is to be any new approach to the developed notion of copyright and music it should be to incorporate the understanding that it can be freely shared within both spheres of the event and the record. All the attempts to "no longer excuse personal use copying of digital works, either as fair use or under any other rationale" or develop sophisticated encryption technology (Cohen, p. 98) should be set aside. Any business of transaction that results in profit for the entrepreneurs of musical art should be considered a secondary benefit to the inherent patronage to music itself.