Now let's jump ahead to some electronic art activism.
This is the process we will start today and then finish with the Obadikes
Wednesday April 11th from 3-5pm BC142a (CEC- required) see me if you have a conflict.
DATA MAPPING AS ACTIVISM
1) CAPTURING
go out and capture plant life with your camera. We're concentrating on color so the
image can be blurry. The color of the plant life should take up as much of the image
area as possible. Be inspired. Look for a variety.
2) EXTRACTING
one image may have 10 different plant-life colors in it, so choose a color family or plant
feature to concentrate on (ie blue or a flower petal)
3) CODING
when you're done extracting all the colors you can, use Photoshop's eye dropper to
sample one of your colors. In the color picker drop down menu (here)
We'll be doing part one of a data mapping/coding/connection-making exercise
(Another coding step you could use is to download a free camera utility for your smartphone that lets you capture the hex code of what you're viewing)
------------
Activist Apps for your smartphone?
Pocket Congress
Free2work
Obscuracam
Hacktivist Augmented Reality
the leak in your hometown
BP LAYAR app by Mark Skwarek
AR Flashmob
-----------------------------------------------
HOMEWORK DUE MONDAY
Get the hex codes for your colors! (at least 10 codes)
HOMEWORK DUE THURSDAY
Please watch both of these and respond to both in one blog post.
What are the aspects of internet connectivity that Democracy could benefit from?
The potential for social media to assist Democracy
Is the isolation that comes with online filtering bad for Democracy?
Ted Talk
I agree that Government polling on online communities could be beneficial if the Government actually listened. However I think that the possibility of someone making multiple accounts to skew the results is highly likely and I'd like to see safety measures put in before it is enacted. I also have doubt that any Government would actually willingly use the software or listen to the results. In relation to censoring some people might not even find the pole, or only find certain poles if their previous searches created certain blockings. I understand the worry that personalizing searches and pages will lead to ones beliefs only ever being reinforced and not challenged or changed. I am not sure hos this can be fixed but information does yearn to be free as the saying goes and I believe we will over come it.
ReplyDeleteThe filtering that occurs on search engines and social networking sites greatly impacts internet users and can hinder them from truly learning the most they can from the internet. This isolation of information can be bad for our democracy. If the filters were more controlled by the users themselves, their searches could bring in more varied results and even invoke a change of opinion in the users. Politics and government being a part of social networking could be very beneficial for not only the government leaders but also the people. It is a chance to have the majority's opinions heard via the internet. The government benefits by being able to easily poll a large amount of voters at once over a popular social networking site.
ReplyDelete-Crissy Falkenberg
Online connection can benefit democracy by giving people a simpler way of participating in politics. More people could be heard and leaders could be more aware of the public view, whether they listen or not. The “filter bubble” is not positive for democracy because different people will be seeing different information. This gap in information is limiting democracy by deciding what people want to see without their knowledge. The isolation is negative because it doesn’t force people out of their comfort zones so that they can broaden their flow of information. I agree that information should be randomly shown to users based on the type/importance of information, not based on personal patterns.
ReplyDeleteIn the video with Anil Dash, he suggests that our government uses social media to gather the imput of our citizens. Facebook and Twitter can be used as a platform for collecting and interacting with the public domain. Dash gives the example of the White House asking a question on Twitter, to which constituents respond. This information is gathered, put into a record, and then incorporated into the decisions of our policymakers. My only concern would be that proper regulation is used to ensure those using the Internet to voice their opinion on policies are US citizens.
ReplyDeleteThe previous election is another example of internet connectivity with Democracy. President Obama was able to connect with the young population because he embraced social media in his campaign. These methods are able to captivate the audience since most people frequently use the Internet. However, I do not think the Internet should become the only way that our government connects with the opinions of the people.
Eli Pariser discusses internet filters in the TEDTalk video. He mentions that human gatekeepers are being replaced with algorithmic ones. This presents a problem when the user does not have the same ethics as a machine. If the algorithmic codes decide what I am searching for, there is the potential that I will not get a balanced result. I do not need anyone telling me what they think my personal preference is, no less a machine making those decisions. I find it annoying when you can not find what you are looking for because of the invisible filters.
Filtering can be good for the marketer, but bad for the consumer. The marketer can manipulate search results to persuade the consumer. The passive consumer will not receive other viewpoints or opportunities in a filtered search. To get the full perspective, you need to have a balance of all viewpoints. The general public can be deceived when the information they receive is only what they want to hear. Ultimately, online filters hinder a Democracy.
First off, I think that Government polling via social networking is a great idea. After all this is a democracy. That means the people should choose. America has fell into this system where we elect our leader... and what do we elect after that? WE put all of our trust into one person who BY THE WAY is ONLY human. One man can't make all the right decisions, I don't care who you are. Polling via social networks would allow the population to vote on more than just who makes the decisions. It would help our democracy be more of a democracy.
ReplyDeleteAs for these "filtering bubbles", I see this to be a very twisted situation. To me, it's like a form of mind control. It reminds me of a standard, American public school issued history book. It gives you everything you want to hear and leaves out everything else. For example, I remember learning about the Atom bombs being dropped. My history book AND teacher pretty much made it seem like this: "We were attacked and so we pulled out our secret weapon the A-BOMB and BOOM ended the war!" When in fact, it leaves out the whole scenario of how devastating it was not only to Japan, but how horrible it must have been to actually have to make a decision to unleash something so horrid. And that's exactly what this filtering bubble is doing. Its keeping everyone in their own little idealistic, tailor made little worlds. People don't realize it, but because they are in these bubbles, they are oblivious to real issues, and real things going on around them. AND, when a real issue pops up on their screen, it is uninteresting to them because it is not what they are used to. I really enjoyed the second video, I had no idea about this filtering bubble, and it really just opened my eyes towards a new way to spend my time on the net.
The Anil Dash video seems very naive and unrealistic to me. Maybe I'm too cynical after this past month of internet crackdowns and oppressive bills but it just doesn't work that way. They don't want our input, and the constant introduction of new bills to censor the internet shows they don't care about our input. If you're going to use social media to influence politics then why not go the extra step and just have a nation wide referendum for everything.
ReplyDeleteThe TED talk I'd seen quite a whole ago, and I've learned that the filtering is easily bypassed through third-party extensions. At this stage its very simple. With sites like YouTube and Amazon, they just show you things like what you've already clicked on. With sites like Google, information should be universal and the interpretation left to the audience.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/mafiaafire-gee-no-evil/
DeleteI agree with Chris, that I think the ideas presented in the Anil Dash video are unrealistic. I think that the internet can be a very helpful and at times influential tool but I don't think that the idea suggested is very practical. The whole point of having elected officials is that they are suposed to represent the people that have elected them.
ReplyDeleteI have noticed before watching this video that I would get different search results on google depend on if I was using my own computer or someone else's. I understand the concept of it but I don't really like that certain websites are doing this. It makes sense for a website where you buy products show you products that you might be interested in base off of previous purchases or searches. However, to me google and other search engines are things that I use to explore new ideas and try to look for something new. By customizing my search results like that, it seems they are somewhat confining your knowledge.
After the viewing of the first video Anil Dash about having the government using the social networking to communicate with the people would be a great idea i thought but, there will always be a but, it doesnt mean they will take it seriously and actually read the poles. But at the sametime there are only so many people out their that actually try to have the government hear their opinions while the other portion knows its not goign to happen or just dont care because they believe the system to already be screwed as is so what would be the piont. However, if the were able to use social networks they could find out if they were not alone with their opinions bringing a stronger front to the government. yet i am still skeptical on the whole idea even though it would be a nice jesture to have that type of support set up. The government already uses the internet for evil like spying, and tracking users so why not use it for good where it could actually benefit society rather than do harm.
ReplyDeleteThis issue i felt went along with the next video about algorithmic filtering the internet for each person. Originally the internet is used as another research, information resource where everything is ment to be an open book to us adn it was our choice on what we wanted to see or click on not some inanimate computer system. This just makes us as humans look even more lazy becuase we only are given certain things when we are ment to use our brain and decide for ourselves. Making the filter more transparent or eliminating them all together by our choice alone i feel would allow for a better more knowledgable experience on the web.