Comments on: Testing Out Four Philosophies of Technology on Twitter http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/10/testing-out-four-philosophies-of-technology-on-twitter/ Technology is Fast, but Redemption is Slow Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:23:41 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: eli http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/10/testing-out-four-philosophies-of-technology-on-twitter/#comment-6659 eli Sun, 08 Nov 2009 14:53:01 +0000 http://donteatthefruit.com/?p=469#comment-6659 this is a great article about the usefulness of twitter in the context of producing real news, written in the context of the Fort Hood shootings. think you might appreciate it. http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/07/nsfw-after-fort-hood-another-example-of-how-citizen-journalists-cant-handle-the-truth/ this is a great article about the usefulness of twitter in the context of producing real news, written in the context of the Fort Hood shootings.

think you might appreciate it.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/11/07/nsfw-after-fort-hood-another-example-of-how-citizen-journalists-cant-handle-the-truth/

]]> By: Rhett Smith http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/10/testing-out-four-philosophies-of-technology-on-twitter/#comment-6638 Rhett Smith Sun, 08 Nov 2009 05:31:36 +0000 http://donteatthefruit.com/?p=469#comment-6638 John, You know someone is posting great stuff when it's 11:30pm on a Saturday night and they are commenting.....i.e. ME. Really like seeing how you used the theories in a tool like Twitter. Really helps focus the practical use of our technological tools and how that might say something about what we believe. That is important because I think most of the time we come to these tools not knowing what we believe, but rather just jumping in cause it's the coolest new thing. Which is what I did with Twitter. And now that I'm 2 years into it, I'm just now asking myself some tough questions, and I'm finding out that I have less control of something than I thought I had. Rhett John,

You know someone is posting great stuff when it’s 11:30pm on a Saturday night and they are commenting…..i.e. ME.

Really like seeing how you used the theories in a tool like Twitter. Really helps focus the practical use of our technological tools and how that might say something about what we believe. That is important because I think most of the time we come to these tools not knowing what we believe, but rather just jumping in cause it’s the coolest new thing. Which is what I did with Twitter. And now that I’m 2 years into it, I’m just now asking myself some tough questions, and I’m finding out that I have less control of something than I thought I had.

Rhett

]]> By: Bill Buchanan http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/10/testing-out-four-philosophies-of-technology-on-twitter/#comment-6123 Bill Buchanan Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:10:35 +0000 http://donteatthefruit.com/?p=469#comment-6123 That was my first thought too. We have certainly become very efficient in killing people. Still, I wonder what actions the threat of such destruction (and even from other smaller yet still deadly tools) might have deterred? Obviously, we will never know and mankind still seems pretty willing to fight with each other. Yeah, I've been meaning to get to Postman's book but haven't made it there yet. I will also check out the one by Carr. That was my first thought too. We have certainly become very efficient in killing people. Still, I wonder what actions the threat of such destruction (and even from other smaller yet still deadly tools) might have deterred? Obviously, we will never know and mankind still seems pretty willing to fight with each other.

Yeah, I’ve been meaning to get to Postman’s book but haven’t made it there yet. I will also check out the one by Carr.

]]> By: John Dyer http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/10/testing-out-four-philosophies-of-technology-on-twitter/#comment-6106 John Dyer Wed, 28 Oct 2009 18:38:35 +0000 http://donteatthefruit.com/?p=469#comment-6106 Bill, Certainly, the nuclear bomb's invention and the ensuing Cold War was pretty bad, but many of the other areas are value judgments and in almost all cases there is some "good" and some "bad." As for books detailing this sort of thing, I would recommend, Neil Postman's <em>Amusing Ourselves to Death</em> which covers Television, and next year's release of <em>The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains</em> by Nicholas Carr looks to do the same for the Internet: http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2009/10/the_shallows_pu.php Bill,
Certainly, the nuclear bomb’s invention and the ensuing Cold War was pretty bad, but many of the other areas are value judgments and in almost all cases there is some “good” and some “bad.”

As for books detailing this sort of thing, I would recommend, Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death which covers Television, and next year’s release of The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains by Nicholas Carr looks to do the same for the Internet: http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2009/10/the_shallows_pu.php

]]> By: Bill Buchanan http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/10/testing-out-four-philosophies-of-technology-on-twitter/#comment-6102 Bill Buchanan Wed, 28 Oct 2009 17:00:25 +0000 http://donteatthefruit.com/?p=469#comment-6102 Random thought as I read back thru the post and comments - in what instances has technology had a negative effect on society/culture/whatnot? I can think of a few but I'm still running through them in my thoughts. Suggestions? Random thought as I read back thru the post and comments – in what instances has technology had a negative effect on society/culture/whatnot?

I can think of a few but I’m still running through them in my thoughts. Suggestions?

]]> By: John Dyer http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/10/testing-out-four-philosophies-of-technology-on-twitter/#comment-6062 John Dyer Wed, 28 Oct 2009 01:27:56 +0000 http://donteatthefruit.com/?p=469#comment-6062 Michael, so far I've just been working through the things he's post on his faculty page some of which are previously published academic articles and some seem to be summaries of his book-length works. Michael, so far I’ve just been working through the things he’s post on his faculty page some of which are previously published academic articles and some seem to be summaries of his book-length works.

]]> By: Eli http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/10/testing-out-four-philosophies-of-technology-on-twitter/#comment-6040 Eli Tue, 27 Oct 2009 18:15:21 +0000 http://donteatthefruit.com/?p=469#comment-6040 Twitter, like you said, is basically a way to broadcast a text message to the world and make it a little more permanent. That, in and of itself, is morally neutral. That empowerment it gives is touched by humans and immediately fallen though. Your opinion on that affected state is directly drawn out from your opinion on the state of man. A common theme among free software advocates is that information "wants" to be free and that people (as a large group, rather than as individuals) will subconsciously gravitate towards the means that offer them the greatest freedom to publish their thoughts. Twitter is, in my opinion, a very rudimentary manifestation of that principle. It is nearly impossible to control (just ask the authorities in Iran), and it makes no claims of being authoritative. It just "is," just like the thoughts in our heads. They may be right or wrong or grossly biased. The eventual consequence of this kind of freedom is, however, that those in charge of it will become corrupted. I was reading earlier about Google's response to the GoogleBomb phenomenon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_bomb#Google.27s_response), and it is interesting how they went from basically ignoring it and treating as part of the organic culture, much like a mole on your skin, to trying to "fix" it while maintaining their non-interfering integrity. If you look at the changes that have been made to ebay feedback, Wikipedia entries, really anything that encourages anonymous or semi-anonymous feedback, eventually those in power tighten it down. Wikileaks is next, I am sure. However, just like water will find a way through rock and Sharpie markers find their way into the hands of children, people's voices find their way through the most carefully crafted controls. What we lose is usually the archives of what went before. Say what you will about Geocities and Angelfire, they have people tools to post their (albeit vapid) thoughts to the masses in an unprecedented way. The archives of that information are now in the hands of equally corruptible bodies. Most of it is worthless as individual pieces of information, but together is amounts to the best record we have for what the heck we have been doing with our lives. Sanitize that, and you may never get it back. Twitter, like you said, is basically a way to broadcast a text message to the world and make it a little more permanent. That, in and of itself, is morally neutral. That empowerment it gives is touched by humans and immediately fallen though. Your opinion on that affected state is directly drawn out from your opinion on the state of man.
A common theme among free software advocates is that information “wants” to be free and that people (as a large group, rather than as individuals) will subconsciously gravitate towards the means that offer them the greatest freedom to publish their thoughts. Twitter is, in my opinion, a very rudimentary manifestation of that principle. It is nearly impossible to control (just ask the authorities in Iran), and it makes no claims of being authoritative. It just “is,” just like the thoughts in our heads. They may be right or wrong or grossly biased.
The eventual consequence of this kind of freedom is, however, that those in charge of it will become corrupted. I was reading earlier about Google’s response to the GoogleBomb phenomenon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_bomb#Google.27s_response), and it is interesting how they went from basically ignoring it and treating as part of the organic culture, much like a mole on your skin, to trying to “fix” it while maintaining their non-interfering integrity. If you look at the changes that have been made to ebay feedback, Wikipedia entries, really anything that encourages anonymous or semi-anonymous feedback, eventually those in power tighten it down. Wikileaks is next, I am sure.
However, just like water will find a way through rock and Sharpie markers find their way into the hands of children, people’s voices find their way through the most carefully crafted controls. What we lose is usually the archives of what went before. Say what you will about Geocities and Angelfire, they have people tools to post their (albeit vapid) thoughts to the masses in an unprecedented way. The archives of that information are now in the hands of equally corruptible bodies. Most of it is worthless as individual pieces of information, but together is amounts to the best record we have for what the heck we have been doing with our lives. Sanitize that, and you may never get it back.

]]> By: Michael http://donteatthefruit.com/2009/10/testing-out-four-philosophies-of-technology-on-twitter/#comment-6035 Michael Tue, 27 Oct 2009 16:26:17 +0000 http://donteatthefruit.com/?p=469#comment-6035 Great post, John. A great introduction to Feenberg, who sounds familiar but I'm pretty sure I haven't read (yet). What are you reading / studying by him? Great post, John. A great introduction to Feenberg, who sounds familiar but I’m pretty sure I haven’t read (yet). What are you reading / studying by him?

]]>