Given the fact that patients have been shamelessly and copiously sharing information on the web since, well, it first sprung up, it is nice to see that the medical establishment has gotten on board with the idea of collaboration. Medpedia is firmly an expert project (though it looks like anyone can provide suggestions) and I am not bothered by this limitation. What I do hope to see is a recognition of the controversies that abound in the realm of medicine (Lyme disease, fibromylagia, and a real hot rod issue = autism). There is much about diagnosis and therapy in medicine that exists in the “I am not sure (how to diagnose/treat” category and I wonder if this will be reflected in this new project. I certainly hope so.

The title of this book makes me realize how much a good and catchy title matters for a book. This one really caught my attention as I am fond of both irony and technics. Never thought of putting them together but someone surely has and it sounds like he has written a pretty nifty philosophical book on technology.

Ok, so I know many have come across this as it was featured on BB but I would like to archive it here so I can find it later. It was just so well done

In this age of bits and bytes, there are many virtual organizations and networks which produce all sorts of stuff we use on a daily basis. My two favorite institutions are Debian (not a surprise) and Wikipedia, not just because they oh-so-useful to me and many others, which they are, but because the social organizations behind these two entities are so (at times maddeningly) complex and full of nuance, they provide for endless analytical fascination.

One of my friends, Joe Reagle, who has recently graduated from my home department, is presenting is work on Wikipedia and I thought some local New York geeks might be interested. Information below:

All welcome

4:30 – 6:00 PM, Tuesday February 17
206 Vanderbilt Hall, 40 Wash. Sq. So.

Wikipedia: Nazis and Norms

Joseph Reagle, NYU Department of Media, Culture, and Communication

Abstract: In 1990 Mike Godwin coined his “Law of Nazi Analogies” to capture the common devolution of Usenet discourse into insulting comparisons with Nazis or Hitler. Eleven years later, Jimmy Wales wrote that it was important that the Wikipedia community “preserve and extend our culture of co-operation, with all of us standing as firmly as possible against the culture of conflict embodied in Usenet.” I argue Wikipedia is a realization — even if flawed — of a long-held vision for a universal encyclopedia: a technology inspired vision seeking to wed increased access to information with greater human accord. And I claim Wikipedia’s collaborative culture is a big factor for this success: the norms of “Neutral Point of View” ensures that the scattered pieces of what we think we know can be joined and good faith facilitates the actual practice of fitting them together.

Not so long ago, I was lamenting to some Debian developer about how LONG it took for me to write stuff, of any quality at least. And aside from my own slowish pace, the academic publishing process is slow as molasses. The two together make for a deadly combo. This friend reminded me that Debian took a heck of a long time to release and at the time, this reminder actually made me feel a lot better. Well, after years of toiling, updating, bug squashing, and lots of lots of arguing, Lenny is coming out and those of us in NYC are celebrating. Though this has been circulated on the Debina-nyc list, it never hurts to circulate a little wider, especially for this event.

Attention New York City Debianistas,

The astrological confluence of 1234567890[0], the impending release of
Lenny[1], and the odd sighting of a horned mythical beast that
cryptozoologists are calling a ‘new FTP-master-assistant/slave’ being
sighted in the mist off the shores of the East River[2] will result in
all emacs users to transcend and all vim users to be transponded to
their respective motherships, which are scheduled for near-orbit on that
night.

You will only be taken if you have a sip of beer on the 13th, before
6:31:30pm at the Pacific Standard[3].

If you come late, you may suffer nano for all eternity.

Micah

ps. All nano users will be Left Behind™ to tend to the servers that we
did not bring with us on the Rapture® rickshaw.

ps. lets keep the the post-apocalyptic space editor battle that will
erupt between the S.S. Church of Emacs, and the H.R.H VIMperator
mothership for later, and drink with revelry together now.

0. `date -d ‘@1234567890′`
1. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/02/msg00000.html
2. http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2009/01/msg00004.html
3. http://www.pacificstandardbrooklyn.com

This takes the cake as most ludicrious hacker representation….. It is like Blue Man Group, gone arctic and hackish at the same time.

In the next 11 months, I will be spending a significant amount of brain power and time writing a fairly long review article on digital media and ethnography which will assess the state of the literature and various trends. Since my expertise certainly lies in the west or global questions. I will be immersing myself in the literature that looks at various international, national, and regional contexts, which is exciting. It is nice to leave the well trodden path and venture into new lands.

There is a handy new site related to this topic, which some of you might be interested in: New Media Practices in International Contexts Blog Series. The entries are less blog-like and more article-like but that is was makes them great resources.

Welcome, Congress, to our generation’s electric sun.

Earlier, I had posted the Wikileaks link to these congressional reports with comments of my own but I thought I would pen down a few thoughts as I finally electronically leafed through some of them. These reports remind me a little bit of another set of reports that are publicly available, which are the Congressional Quarterly reports, which are an excellent resource for research. They are a bit dry but provide a wealth of information and perhaps more important, citations to law cases, journalist articles, and academic pieces (everything that journalistic pieces, in other words, do not do). It does 1/2 the research for you, as I like to think.

The few reports I have scanned from the leaks remind me, in fact, of the CQ reports, in content, style and tone. And while I thought CQ reports published on a wide range of topics, these semi-private reports are far more extensive in terms of topics and far more specific as well:

CRS: Humane Treatment of Farm Animals: Overview and Issues, December 10, 2008
CRS: FDA’s Authority to Ensure That Drugs Prescribed to Children Are Safe and Effective, December 2, 2008
CRS: African American Members of the United States Congress: 1870-2008, December 4, 2008
CRS: The Pigford Case: USDA Settlement of a Discrimination Suit by Black Farmers, January 13, 2009
CRS: Selected Legal and Policy Issues Related to Coalbed Methane Development, March 9, 2004

I look forward to hearing/learning more about how they are used (I can’t imagine that each report is read by many) and why exactly they were hidden away as they don’t seem to be the type of information that should be kept classified.

Geeks are creatures of the screen. Many, I have found, are also great lovers of books. I have peered into the homes and apartment of many and books usually adorn the walls and the tables. The exist in abundance. Though I am more or less paid to read for a living but these days, I don’t seem to the time to do extra reading and I often mourn the fact that I spend so much time getting scraps of stories and information from the net as opposed to delving into a great book, over the course of weeks and weeks (and as opposed to reading, often hurriedly but totally intensely, for class).
I do manage to get in some good articles and last night, I pushed through the heaviness of sleepiness to read a pretty interesting article People of the Screen by Christine Rosen.

Though a bit too alarmist for my taste, I enjoyed reading it, largely because it was written well and also brought some interesting questions and points to the table about the transition from a print culture to a digital one. One point, that I was not surprised to read, is the most avid of screen users (programmers, the digerati), are also avid readers. But among the less (economically) privileged, who have different educational relationships to books and who also may not have the time to read, reading in the traditional sense, is may soon be a more or less historical fact.

What I also enjoyed reading about and contemplating are the different material properties of the screen vs print book and the ways in which these affordances might create a different user/intellectual (almost existential, the author would argue) experience. For example, she argues that the emotional relationship to treeware books are more profound, or that reading a long novel (vs playing a video game) is about submitting your will–at least for a while–to the narrative and the story. I don’t agree with all of her assessments but I certainly agree that there are phenomenological differences between reading words on sheets of paper and the pages of a compact book, and then reading from the blue hue of a screen, often sitting upright, and whose text, at least for me, does not seem quite alive as it is when imprinted on bounded paper.

But I don’t think this necessarily has anything to do with some inherent properties of the screen. For example, writing on the screen does nothing but enliven text for me. When it comes to writing, I cannot imagine doing it any way but via the screen and the keyboard. I can play around with some words and erase with impunity. I can move around a whole paragraph here and there, split it into two or three and as such it feels dynamic and quite alive. I am sure I have lost, or there is something to lose, by not going straight from brain to pen but I never did all that much serious writing without the keyboard and so perhaps there was nothing to lose, no bodily transitional for me to undergo, and thus nothing to really mourn.

So, I suspect many readers of this blog are voracious writers and readers, on screen and off screen. Do you, can you read novels on the screen? If you love the printed book, why? Are you concerned about the loss of this medium? Or is there nothing to really worry about since technologists will eventually create a new digital medium that will surpass, in terms of a good user experience, the printed book?

Hi everyone,

So do people know of a relatively famous book (academic, fiction, non-fiction trade) published by a female author and under a Creative Commons license?