Daniel's E-learning and Digital Cultures Blog » Miscellaneous Techno Babble

Summary: Week 10

Daniel Griffin — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 21:54:43 +0000

A quick review of my lifestream will show that this has been somewhat of a disjointed week, due mostly to my inability to settle on a topic for the Posthuman Pedagogy assignment. I began the week confident in my decision that I wanted to focus on the idea of distributed consciousness (lifestream: 22:11.2011 #1, #2, #3 and #4) which first arose in the previous week. However as I dug deeper into this concept, it became clear to me that it would be difficult to single out a concrete learning task, given the fact that we could argue humans have always had a distributed consciousness, i.e. our tools shape our thought process and we have always been posthuman (lifestream: 19.11.2011 #1). I also spent a little time thinking about brain augmentation (lifestream: 21.11.2011 #6) and artificial minds (lifestream: 21.11.2011 #5), before finally settling on the idea of Augmented Reality (AR) as a perfect example (lifestream: 24.11.2011 #5, #6 and #7). AR has really come of age and it’s interesting to see how many popular applications are emerging (lifestream: 25.11.2011 #1). I’ve discovered two other great finds during the week; thanks firstly to a reminder from Jeremy (since I must have failed to follow up on reference to his work in earlier prescribed readings), of Steve Fuller. It’s proven difficult to find much of Fuller’s writing, but I have found some fascinating videos (lifestream: 25.11.11 #2), which have echoed deeply with my own thoughts . And secondly, the mind blowing and borderline psychedelic writing and artwork of Robert Pepperell which has influenced my thoughts on personalised realities in my Posthuman Pedagogy post.

Summary: Week 9

Daniel Griffin — Sun, 20 Nov 2011 14:57:36 +0000

I’ve spent a fascinating week considering what it means to be posthuman. This began with my post at the end of last week on the differences between the cyborg and the posthuman (lifestream: 13.11.2011 #1), in which I discuss the notion of a distributed consciousness; and this has since informed some thoughts on the emergence of a global “cognisphere” (lifestream: 20.11.2011 #1). Jeremy asked in the comments to that post whether language could be considered as a tool, and this question formed the basis for much of my lifestream content this week. I became very interested in the development of language itself as well as modern day enhancements such as the construction of symbolic languages for specific disciplines (lifestream 15.11.2011 #2, #3 and #4). It should come as no surprise that language has played a key role in the development of social groups and social organisation but it has also produced profound effects on the mind of the speaker. With the development of highly accurate symbolic languages, we have introduced the possibility for substantially more reliable transfer of meaning between individuals, as well as deeper understanding of concepts through enhanced reasoning and greater detail of mental constructs.

Such tools certainly give us greater powers and abilities but does that make us more than human, or are humans actually defined by their ability to adapt and improve themselves? Carol and I have have had an interesting running discussion on Twitter over the course of the week on the subject of human evolution and whether the prefix ‘post’ in posthuman is redundant, given that all life is in a state of constant evolution (lifestream: 17.11.2011 #3) and that humanity has always been defined by its adaptability. One interesting idea emerging from this discussion has been the notion that the evolutionary process is itself undergoing a change, and whether humanity’s integration with technology might be viewed as a type of natural development (lifestream: 19.11.2011 #1). Overall its been a very stimulating week; and so now begins the preparation for the posthuman pedagogy task and getting a concrete topic for my essay. Much to consider, as always.

On the differences between the cyborg and the posthuman

Daniel Griffin — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:19:51 +0000

We’ve seen that it is an over simplification to consider the cyborg as a fantastical techno-creature from our most outlandish fiction. For me personally the cyborg represents an enhancement to basic human function through the use of some prosthesis. And while many of today’s medical prosthesis are remarkable in their sophistication, they can rarely be said to improve human performance (one notable exception being the artificial legs of Olympic hopeful Oscar Pistorius)

Instead the contemporary cyborg is usually an attempt at repairing a damaged human, rather than an enhancement. Fictional cyborgs, and most likely real cyborgs in the very near future, are much more than this. Such cyborgs are truly more than human and achieve this status with the addition of prosthesis that give them abilities mere organic humans could never manage. These cyborgs are most definitely posthuman, but posthumans need not be cyborgs. I’ve argued (Sumamry: Week 8) that we are all in fact already posthuman, and that we have always been so since the invention of tools and social groups that modified our thought processes enough to make us more than individual entities. For me, the posthuman is a combination of the organic human and a set of external factors, tools or stimuli which endow us with powers and abilities we could never achieve in isolation. Certainly there is a closer coupling between the cyborg and its parts, but the posthuman is unbounded and free to match the appropriate tool to the task.

Summary: Week 8

Daniel Griffin — Sun, 13 Nov 2011 15:26:48 +0000

I began week eight by asking the question, are we already posthuman (lifestream: 07.11.2011, #1)? In many ways, we depend on tools like a mobile phone as a type of cognitive prosthesis, an extra layer of memory which grants us an increased ability or processing power than our (basic?) organic minds could otherwise achieve. I revisited Andy Clark and David Chambers fascinating paper The Extended Mind (lifestream: 08.11.2011 #7) in which they argue that external content could be viewed as a modifier to consciousness. The speed of retrieval for such information is usually offered as a counter argument to the point, however, one could certainly make the claim that if our consciousness is constructed and based on available stimuli, then the tools, connections and web services which we rely on to aid decision making are in fact part of a single suite – we already have a distributed consciousness. Indeed social constructionists would argue that much of our awareness of reality is defined by our interactions with others; thus making all cognition distributed to some degree. If this is true, then although digital tools are a new chapter in the story of human development, they continue the same theme and merely allow the same processes to take place at a more efficient and optimized pace. The caviat here of course is the danger of disconnection from these tools when we have come to rely on them. If we are unable to act independly, relying too much on external data streams for decision making, then loss of connection will result in a system crash, an unrecoverable input error disrupting our ability to function effectively. I am reminded of the protagonist character Manfred Macx in Chalres Stross’ spectacular transhumanist series, Accelerando (lifestream: 13.11.2011 #1). Maxc is reliant almost entirely on a pair of data glasses that feeds him with a continual data stream. After the loss of the glasses he loses much of his identity and wanders aimlessly trying to find a backup of his data/personality.

Much of the remainder of this week as been spent ploughing though the readings and cyborg concepts. I’ve added some new feeds to my lifestream and watched it fill out considerably. The readings this week are challenging and I am still coming to terms with much of the material. More to come on this in another post.

Posthumans, macro-organisms and DRM dangers

Daniel Griffin — Thu, 10 Nov 2011 22:52:57 +0000

Although the concept of posthumanism has many interpretations, it is primarily considered as an evolutionary change from the human condition to something similar but enhanced in some way. Generally this means enhancement through the application of some digital or mechanical prosthesis but it can also refer to genetic manipulation, chemical enhancement and various other methods of improving human performance. For noted futurist, chemist and computer scientist Joël de Rosnay, it is a far larger concept. De Rosnay believes that we are evolving as part of a super structure, or macro organism which is composed of humans as a elemental part, but also contains the systems and processes that we create, our infrastructure, economics and social structures. “The natural and the artificial, art and technology, culture and civilization are now joined together in a coherent whole”, (De Rosnay, 2000. The Symbiotic Man). Whilst I concur that we are experiencing a level of planetary connectivity never before witnessed, I am less optimistic for a Utopian outcome. Rather than coherence, we see an unbalanced and unfair world in which the powerful reap rewards that the weak may only dream of ever attaining.

The structure that De Rosney describes is not controlled but has in fact evolved out of the (sub)systems that we have created. De Rosney does warn us that such a system requires guidance and boundaries to its growth, but I find his solutions to be somewhat aspirational. Whilst I do not consider myself as a pessimist, I am fearful that such a system can more easily be used to control the population rather than liberate it.

If one thing has become clear in the history of technology it is that humanity strives to better itself. In this time of instant gratification and power hungry superstates, the limits of the human body can already be extended… and if they can be, we can be sure that they will be. Indeed the traditional concept of cyborgs can already be seen walking amongst us with all manor of prosthesis, from artificial limbs to implanted RFID chips. This process has already begun and can only result in a deeper connection between human and machine.

As heavily implanted cyborgs living inside, and as a part of a system like De Rosnays macro organism, humanity risks losing itself and losing its way if we do not see the larger picture. Through our bodily modifications we are giving up true control for the illusion of power. Super strength is nothing when the system controls how you use it. A modified consciousness is a sham when software rules sanction its use or determine what is an acceptable thought. Such fears may appear as hysterical and overly dramatic but we are already writing the rules that determine how the subsystems of the macro organism will operate. Unfortunately we are allowing commerce to dictate these rules rather than any legal body. In the words of Lawrence Lessig, the code is the law. If we are to become one with technology, we need to make sure that the code controlling our bodies is enlightened in its purpose and open sourced in its implantation.

Summary: Week 6

Daniel Griffin — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 17:15:22 +0000

Its hard to believe that we are already half way through the term. The life stream is a great way to review my journey through the course content and I really have the feeling that the content I’m pushing into it is becoming more focused each week. This week I continued my arrival story into the Diaspora network. In last weeks post I speculated that the arrival into a social network is more about making connections than something as simple as account creation, and I’ve definitely made some very interesting connections thus far. Of course my interactions are filtered by the hashtags that I’m following, and no doubt there exist other groups who follow different ideas within the overall Diaspora network. Indeed, since each user chooses to follow their own personal set of hastags, each belongs to an overlapping set of interest groups. But I still get the feeling that there is a common shared identity amongst Diaspora members, an identity characterised by politically and socially motivated (lifestream 26.10.11 #4), technically literate and (from my perspective at least), interesting people. The excellent quote in Bardzell & Odom (lifestream 24.10.11 #5) reminded me that if one member of a group likes film trivia while another prefers astronomy, any sharing that takes place between them is more meaningful that the actual content being shared.

As an aside to my own arrival story, I wanted to get a picture of Diasporas own arrival story (ie its inception) for use in my ethnography. The motivation to build the network followed Eben Moglens excellent Freedom in the Cloud lecture (lifestream #2, 21.10.11), something that also affected me very deeply on my first viewing. I also collected some other videos (lifestream #2, 21.10.11) on this subject as well as one interesting competitor.

Immersing myself in technical subjects and conversing with technical Diaspora members prompted me to do a little investigation of the software underlying the technology. This introduced me to Collaboration Graphs and the game, Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon (lifestream 24.10.11 #2) which reminds us that the real power of social networks and graph databases is the uncovering of connections we never imagined existing before.

Summary: Week 5

Daniel Griffin — Sun, 23 Oct 2011 13:31:26 +0000

Week five already and I am deep into the groundwork for the digital ethnographic study. I began this week by getting a good understanding of the practices involved in ethnographic research (lifestream 18.10.2011, #2, #3, #4 and #5). I noted with interest how ethnographic research has found its way out of academia and into the field of Internet marketing (lifestream 18.10.2011 #6) which prompted me to start thinking about the nature of communities, their rules (18.10.2011 #7) and how the bounds of group membership are actually defined (lifestream 19.10.2011 #4). The Bell text from this weeks reading helped to clarify that somewhat. I was introduced to the concepts of Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft (lifestream 20.10.2011 #4) and commented on a similar topic in the Holyrood Park discussion forum. After considering these ideas, my first impulse was to focus my study on an online Star Wars gaming community of several hundred active members. However this target community would be difficult to examine given the casual nature of membership and the ability for players that die to respawn with new identities. The fantasy element also presented a problem when I considered the definition of ethnography as participation given by Hammersley and Atkinson, quoted in Hine in the core readings for this week, that “the researcher does not just observe at close quarters, but interacts with the researched to ask questions and gain the insights into life that comes from doing as well as seeing” (Hine, 2000). Instead I settled on an newly launched social network named Diaspora which espouses choice, freedom and member ownership of data.

The Hine reading, as well as my personal study for the week got me thinking about the concept of arrival stories within ethnographic research and so I began considering what represents an arrival (and here) within a cyber-community. In the online community with a prescribed signup process, membership is a highly defined concept, i.e. if you have an account you are by definition a member. Group membership therefore is insufficient to define ones connection within an online community. Perhaps the missing element is the idea of reputation within the group, or a general acceptance that the new member is willing to work within the established community guidelines and participate in a productive way. If this is true then the “arrival” is the creation of connections within the group rather than mere membership.

I’m really looking forward to getting involved with Diaspora and developing these ideas further.

Summary: Week 2

Daniel Griffin — Sun, 02 Oct 2011 15:51:41 +0000

This week we’ve been considering the themes of Being Human and Other Worlds (lifestream 04.10.2011 #5). Being somewhat of a gamer and virtual reality hobbyist, the notion of Other Worlds holds particular interest for me and seems to tie in well with the readings and discussions from last week. However my ramblings across the web while considering this topic have started to get me thinking about the nature of this reality and how we experience it. If all of our neural impulses are prompted by nothing more than electrical signals from our nervous system, then we are each of us living inside our own heads. Each of us is experiencing their own virtual reality and no doubt colouring it with the emotional or experiential baggage that defines us. When considered thus, we can actually make the astonishing claim that there is no such thing as one absolute definition of reality. Indeed the very reality that we experience can never be truly shared because the sharing must take place via our nervous systems. It’s almost analogous to the idea of different game play experiences due to graphics card irregularities or broadband speeds amongst gamers.

Considering all this, and if we really are just brains in meat vats (lifestream 01.10.2011 #1), experiencing the world through our senses (plus the technological prosthesis we attach to them, i.e. networks, monitoring software, information systems, etc), how can we ever hope to share a common culture, digital or otherwise? How can we be sure that our interpretation of anything is close enough to that which is experienced by another? How can we be sure that there even are other people? The unavoidable conclusion is that we cannot. But to admit to such feels almost like fatalism, and perhaps the only recourse is to swallow the blue pill, and stubbornly carry on creating and sharing in this (hopefully) common culture.

Some videos that have informed this contemplation:

What is real?

Click here to view the embedded video.

There is no spoon.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Plato’s Allegory of the Cave.

Nuestro Bendito Machine

Daniel Griffin — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 22:16:10 +0000

I’ve been re-watching the excellent Bendito Machine and have decide to notionally “tag” sections of the piece with my own titles. You can read this either as my interpretation of the story or as a (tongue in cheek) political manifesto.

Opening Scene: The prophet considered as an early adopter.
@2:28 The dangers of mass media on the young.
@2:37 Advocates of technology worry more about its welfare than the damage it can cause.
@4:03 Version 1.1, now with added terror; (or, “Corrupt Download”).
@5:02 The system is broken; the people want control; a new prophet seeks the light…
@5:26 Version 1.2 “The Freedom Patch”.
@5:56 System Crash.

As to the actual title, Bendito (“blessed”) Machine, I would add one word: Nuestro. The system belongs to us as surely as does ones own faith. If we are to worship the system then we must be sure to debug it fully, or risk its collapse.

Reconnection

Daniel Griffin — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 20:48:05 +0000

Suffering from a sense of disconnection is one thing but actually being out of the digital loop is proving to be very awkward. As you may know, I’ve just moved to Dublin where I have only a few contacts, all of whom live some distance away. But the geographical disconnect hasn’t really bothered me too much because, until now at least, working freelance and from my home office, I have often gone days with my only communications being wrapped up in network protocols. So to be without a personal internet connection has been surprisingly frustrating. I’m aware that my class mates are actively pushing their lifestreams up onto the web but I haven’t been able to do the same. Ok so that’s sorted out now and I have a mobile broadband dongle thingie, flakey as it is. But the downtime has given me pause for thought. With so much of our social, business, political and practical interactions moving into the digital realm, to be disconnected for any length of time, or Tim help us, permanently, is becoming nothing short of cultural exclusion. Kevin raises a similar point in relation to the Hand chapter from this weeks reading, check it out. Plus I’ve just finished the Bell chapter and find echos of the same theme there… its interesting and important that we should preface the module with these ideas, because it would be all too easy to fall into the trap of thinking “always on” means “everyone always on”.