Midterm 1 (part 2)

Here is a Google Doc where I posted a tentative thesis statement and outline for my paper. If you choose to make comments directly on the Google Doc please do so in a different color. Thanks!

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C7elj3B7Hh9I11Ong47T-j3es7vk181U9LeGgAATIUc/edit?usp=sharing

Post on Conference

I just want to talk a little bit about how amazing conference was today. I don't know if we're supposed to already have started on our midterm, but I'll save that for Tuesday's post. Because honestly, I just can't wait to start talking about this!

The talks today were absolutely amazing. President Uchtdorf's blew me away, and President Holland's made me cry. I'm sure everybody will be wanting to talk about those talks, so I'm going to focus on one of the talks that everybody might not have noticed, but I really really enjoyed.

Edward Dube spoke in the morning session on Saturday (today). He spoke about never looking back upon what we've accomplished and instead focusing on what we have to do in the future. He told a story of when he was young and working in the fields with his mother. He would tell her over and over to look about how much work they had done. She ignored him, just continued to work. Eventually, after he'd repeated himself several times, she said, "Edward, never look back. We have much to do."

This struck me. Right down to my core. And, ironically enough, it struck me because of digital culture.

Now, I'm talking about culture, within the digital realm. When I get on the internet, I actively avoid any mention of the church. Because I know if I find mention of the LDS church online, I won't be able to help myself and I'll look at the comments.

This is never a good idea.

I have seen so many articles and read so many comments about people bashing the church. A common phrase I hear is one of, "haven't they asked enough?" I once read a comment on a Mormon article that accused the church of trying to get into heaven through "works" instead of "grace." He accused them (us) of trying to buy our way into heaven. I also get this feeling when I read comments that talk about, "Oh, I did everything I was supposed to do, I read my scriptures, said my prayers, attended meetings, did visiting/home teaching, and I just didn't feel anything/I'm still unhappy and so I don't believe in the church anymore."

Now, don't get me wrong. I understand how painful that could be for someone. A lot of people very close to me have gone through the exact same thing, and many have fallen away. "Haven't we done enough?" they seem to ask, "It's just not doing anything." I don't normally get this confession when I talk to people face to face, but I see and read it all the time when I'm online. I guess people just feel like they can tell the internet more than they feel like they can tell an individual. It's a chance for them to spout their frustration. I can respect that, I guess. But the reason I found Elder Dube's talk to be so profound is because for me, it addresses this exact question. Haven't we done enough? No. Look at how much more we have to do.

This isn't just in the gospel, though the gospel has a huge part in it, but life in general. Haven't we done enough? Well, are we dead yet? No! We're still going. We still have so much to do because that's what we WANT to do. Life would be horrible if it was easy all the time. Books upon books have been written about this. Without trials, without constantly trying to improve, life would seem meaningless. It would become a trial in and of itself. It's like that Spongebob episode where Squidward moves into the "perfect town":

(sorry it's the speed up version. It's the only one I could find.)

This talk held a lot of inspiration, and it talked about a lot of things, but this was what really struck with me, and something I think we should remember when we go online and feel like we need to complain about something. (I've done it, I'm sure you have too.) We have so much more to do. That doesn't negate the things we've done, that doesn't make it worthless or make us feel like we shouldn't be proud of those things, but we still have so much to do! And if we didn't, then, what would we do instead? 

I'm so thankful for conference. I can't wait for the next session. 

Midterm 1

What is it about the Digital Humanities that I find so fascinating? Let's take a look at my previous blog posts and see if I can figure that out:

• A Few Simple Things About Me: The title says it all. I introduce a few things about myself, but not too many because I'm still nervous about posting things on the internet about myself.
• Moby Dick--Way Better Than I Expected : I had expected Moby Dick to be very boring. I was pleasantly surprised by the first 84 pages. I loved Queequeg! Although later on I did not love the whaling chapters of the book, it was still a pleasant surprise and I rather enjoyed it.
• We'll Probably Be Considered a Bunch of Idiots Too... : This post was inspired from a conversation I overheard in class. It talks about the benefits of hindsight and the need for present-day humility.
• HTML vs. XML...HTML still wins, right? : I didn't fully understand the video from Professor Burton's blog. I thought it was about the grandiosity of XML and how it had saved us from the ancient HTML. I did some research via my husband, and wrote a blog post about what I'd discovered. HTML still wins.
• The White Whale of the Digital Humanities Will Never Be Caught: I was baffled by Melville's whaling chapters and couldn't understand what he was doing with them. Likewise, we can be baffled by the digital and wonder what it is doing in the humanities. This post shows me trying to grapple with these concepts.
• Why Create Something Free? : We had talked about crowdsourcing in class, and I wanted to know why someone would create something and then put it online for free use. I explore that in this post.
• The Written Word is Evolving and We are Evolving with It : I'd just heard of an all digital library in San Antonio, Texas. I'd also just read a book for another class about the way reading can shape us individually and as a culture. I explore what digital reading could do to us in this post.
• All Things in Moderation : Video games are good. Video games are bad. It's an old debate. Here's my attempt to say "You're both right and you're both wrong," to each side.
• The Humanity of Computers: This post was inspired by Dr. Wickman's "Machinery vs. Humanity" lecture. Someone mentioned that Amazon knew she was pregnant almost as soon as she did. I wondered how that could be, and researched how computers learn. That led me to a huge debate over privacy happening right now. The debate made me circle back to machinery vs. humanity and exploring whether we are the same or still different.
• I am DONE. : This is my celebration of Dr. Burton's ebook where he argues in chapter two for a new kind of scholarly essay that breaks traditional essay rules.
• I Prefer the Term "Opportunity in Disguise" : In this post I'm stepping out and saying, "I tried, I failed, but it's not over." I talk about how online collaboration can help me fulfill one of my biggest dreams.

 As I look over my previous blog posts, Google + posts from myself and from others that caught my attention, my classmate's blog posts, and class notes, I find that the biggest question I am always asking is "How?"And after that, "Why?" 

How do the whaling chapters in Moby Dick fit in with the story? Or, how does the story fit in with the whaling chapters? Why did Melville include either?

How do computers work? How are we related to them? Why do people create things for free?

How do we accept the changes? Why are we accepting or unnaccepting? How can these changes help me?

I think what I love to do is get at the heart of things. I want to understand how something works (like, really works. E.g. How do a bunch of 0's and 1's translate into something meaningful for a computer?) and then why that something even exists..and why it continues to exist. Yet sometimes, I really struggle to get to that understanding. Often times, while getting at the heart of something, I find that while I am figuring out one thing pretty well, there are other things that also went into the heart of a computer code, Melville's book, or social media, that I did not consider before. And that is why I am so grateful that I can view others' posts and learn more.

For example, I want to understand why Melville put in those extra whaling chapters when they don't appear to contribute to the plot, but I have had a hard time dissecting Moby Dick. I can sense that it has all of these larger ideas, purposes, lessons, but I can't really seem to get past that sense to an understanding. That is why I love reading posts by others who do understand the nuances of Moby Dick. Some of my favorites have been Moby Dick--A Story to Remember by Victoria and Fast Fish and Loose Fish by Paul. Brittany also wrote a great one about Moby Dick's Physiognomy. Posts like these have helped me put my own thoughts about the book together.

Moving forward with this semester, I think what I am most interested in exploring is the idea of meaning in machinery. I'd like to explore two big questions that will culminate into one big one: How do the individual components of the Digital work to form a unified whole that we can categorize (temporarily or permanently) as the Digital Humanities? Why is it significant that we can do that?

And finally, What do these hows and whys mean for present and future humanity?

Knowledge in Progress

After our last lecture, I'm attempting to branch out and find relevant information through connecting socially. I'm still searching for connections between Moby Dick and its popularity in WWI so this post will walk you through a little of my past hour and a half of exploring.

 I found Google's blog search feature (which I, prior to class, hadn't known existed), which was extremely helpful. So about an hour and a half later the only thing I really have to show for my "research" was finding the information below:

 

If you quickly read this paragraph that popped up on my google blog search, you'll see it's exactly what I'm looking for! Unfortunately, I had to buy a subscription to read the rest of this article… no thank you. But it has given me a great head start… "myth," "psychology," "disillusionment" sound great! Now that I have a couple topics to specify my search with, I can take it to the scholars since it doesn't seem to be a hot topic within the blogging world of Moby Dick.

So you're probably wondering what in the heavens I was doing for the rest of my time trying to research. Well, I started reading the blogs! I actually found some really neat ones!

I started out with this blog. I didn't find anything pertaining to my topic, but I thought it was interesting that the author referenced a contemporary author, Nathaniel Philbrick who wrote Why Read Moby Dick?

 

 

So I looked around and found that Philbrick is definitely popular in a lot of Moby Dick blogs. I quickly found the actual radio interview with the author talking about his book!

 

 

 

Then, of course, I had to know what people though of Philbrick's book! So, below is a snip of my favorite review.

 

 

Well as un-fascinating as this may seem, I kind of really liked this train of research thing. Although my productivity wasn't at its climax in regards to my topic (Moby Dick's popularity in WWI), I really learned some interesting things about Moby Dick and got some fresh perspectives - and I didn't even include all the blogs I read through!

We talked in class about documenting the research process - the good and the bad- and I'm really glad that this class is helping me better my academic research strategy.

Here's to my knowledge in progress.

I Prefer the Term "Opportunity in Disguise."

In class today we talked about collaboration on personal projects through social media. I'd like to give it a try.

In my introductory blog post, I mentioned that I had written a book and had submitted it to Deseret Book for publication. I told everyone that I would let you know what they said when they got back to me in October. They got back to me this morning.

They said no.

When I read the email telling me that they were "we are not in a position to pursue this project with you," I felt naturally disappointed. However, I did not feel defeated. "Every author deals with rejection," I told myself. This was my first time submitting a book manuscript for publication. Although it would have been nice for my manuscript to have been accepted on my first submission try, I know that that rarely happens. I am in good company.

I do not know why they rejected my manuscript; they did not say and they do not want me to ask because "the demands of our editorial workload prevent us from sending detailed comments about your work." Possibly they already have a project in the works just like it. Possibly it was because they did not feel there was an audience for it. Possibly it was the writing quality. I just don't know.

But I'm not going to give up. Rejected is such a harsh word. I prefer to think of it as being given an opportunity in disguise.

Because I believe in myself as a writer and more than that I believe in what I have written about, I'm going to keep pursuing ways to get my ideas out there.

So, now what? I'd actually like to get some input on my ideas about that. We talked about collaboration through blogging and other social media sites in class today, and although it goes against my every English major instinct to collaborate on a very personal project, I'd like to try it.

My goal for writing this book was to get a conversation started, in a comfortable setting, about coming home early from an LDS mission through no fault of the missionary's. It seems to be a conversation that is hushed up, partly because its a hard thing for the missionary to talk about, but also partly because it's something no one really knows what to say when it happens. I thought that the best way to get the conversation started would be to write a book about my own experience of coming home twelve months early for health reasons (I served in the Philippines and came home early after contracting two parasites and two lengthy hospital stays). The finished manuscript acts as both a narrative that tells my story and also as a self-help book to help those who are struggling with feelings of inadequacy, unworthiness, anger, guilt, and even depression. I draw largely from my own experiences in the book, although I do include some experiences from others that I obtained permission to share.

When I came home, I struggled so much with the above feelings. Satan works on you so hard. I thought that if I had only been a better missionary (harder-working, better able to roll with the punches, happier), the Lord would have healed me and I would still be on my mission. I heard stories all the time about miracles happening on missions. I must have done something wrong.

My mom found an article in LDS Living about coming home early. It helped some, but I wanted more of the story. I wanted someone to talk to me about coming home early, not to others about how to talk to me.  I wanted someone to say, "I know how you feel!" I wanted more depth. I searched for a book like the one I wrote but couldn't find it anywhere. So I resolved to write it. And I did. I submitted the 3rd draft to an LDS publisher. It was rejected.

But I'm not done! I'm going to try again. I have several options:

1) Submit to another LDS publisher. Because my book is such a niche LDS book, I want it to get the appropriate respect an LDS publisher will give it. This is probably the best route and I am leaning towards this one.

2) Self-publishing. The plus side of this is that I have already accepted my work for publication. The downside is the up-front cost. I used to think self-publishing was only for those who couldn't write well enough to get a publisher to publish their books. And maybe that is true to some extent, but the more I learn about self-publishing, the more I realize how false that first assumption is. Quality work is produced and self-published. Again though, it's the upfront cost of paying for a good editor, a good graphic designer, and the medium for publication (print, ebook, etc.), and marketing--things that a publishing house would pay for for me. It's the risk of getting a good return for all of that upfront cost.

3) Submit to a non-LDS publisher. I just am hesitant to go down that road though. Again, I want it represented in the best possible light.

4) Do more research. I'm not the only one who came home early. Visit forums. Become an expert. Repent of my "I'm too good for social media" attitude and blog about what I find. Get feedback. Join an author's group. Become a better writer. Collaborate. Then, go back to the drawing board. Write the book. And have that much more credentials.

And if somebody else already beat me to the punch and DB will publish that manuscript instead, maybe blogging really is the best way to go about this topic. I'd love to get a book published; it's one of my biggest dreams. But I care more about getting this topic talked about rather than seeing my name on a printed book.

If this book isn't ready to be published yet, I'm glad there at least other options for me to get the conversation going. That's the beauty of the digital world.

So, anyways, I'm just now venturing into the world of serious publication through a potentially nontraditional route. I'm in the middle of a process and I'd appreciate any feedback, pointers, collaboration, etc. I'm looking for new opportunities to lead me to other opportunities. There's more than one way to make a dream come true.

Moby Dick -- A Story to Remember

While reading Moby Dick, I can't imagine anyone having a particular affinity for Captain Ahab. Driven, mad, and intent upon only his revenge, he doesn't strike me as the most sympathetic character of the book. That title might go to Starbuck or Queequeg before it went to him. Yet, as I was doing a little research for this post, I found an article that talked about "The Tragic Meaning of Moby Dick" (written by Henry Myers and published by New England Quarterly Inc). I found the article interesting, because for the first time, someone was casting Ahab in a noble light. Myers was arguing that the story isn't the allegory that we all thought it was, but rather that it was the tale about a man finding the meaning of his own life.

Now, I don't think I'm qualified to say whether or not Myers was right. There seems to be plenty of allegory within the book as well, but I think it's interesting that he makes Ahab into a hero, or at least the heart of the story. In the last few chapters of the book, there seemed to be nothing but foreshadowing. In "The Hat" Chapter 130, a bird flies up to Ahab and "was before the old man's eyes, the long hooked bill at his head: with a scream, the black hawk darted away with his prize" (476). Before that there was a huge storm that rearranged all the compasses, they met with another boat that imploringly asked for their aid, and Ahab rejected them. All of them, one by one, warning the crew and their captain that what they were doing wasn't right, that they should head back and forget Moby Dick. But Captain Ahab continues, and by doing so, is the death of his entire crew.

(pezi.com) by Anthony Saxman 

But, Myers makes the argument that, "Melville felt that whatever essential meaning lies in Moby Dick could be found in the life of a living Ahab by an Ahab himself." (Myers 19). He argues that all of the meaning in the story comes from Ahab, rather than from the tiny allegorical notions that we've been finding so fascinating. 

I'm not sure I believe this, simply because Ahab had so many opportunities to turn back but refused to do so. If he is the hero of the story, then it is simply as a cautionary tail. We talked about how Moby Dick was like a machine, about how the long winded sections of the book help to make the single sentences of plot that much more meaningful. Maybe that's the way with Ahab as well. We went over how they killed the great whales over and over again, going into minute detail and talking about the drudgery of constantly having to squeeze the oil out of the whale's fat only to discard it and need to start again. But Ahab's death, the captain of the ship, the driver of the plot, only gets a few lines to describe his death, "the line ran through the groove; -- ran foul. Ahab stooped to clear it; he did clear it; but the flying turn caught him round the neck, and voicelessly as Turkish mutes bowstring their victim, he was shot out of the boat, ere the crew knew he was gone." (507). Hardly the death of a hero. 

Yet, as I went back looking for that quote, I came across another one, one that I had forgotten about. Moby Dick had just sunk the Pequod and Ahab shouts out in agaony, "Death-glorious ship! must ye then perish, and without me? Am I cut off from the last fond pride of meanest shipwrecked captains?" (507) I think, I hope, that this is the moment that Ahab realizes his mistake. That he realizes that there is more to life than hunting down lost pride. He lost all of it again, when Moby Dick sank his ship and he wasn't even there to be with her when she went down. 

Myers argues that the critics didn't understand the form of the story when they first read it, and that's why they go into allegory and try to understand the hidden meanings of what Melville might have been trying to say. That the story was just about Ahab and his obsession, that the whale was just a whale, the ship just a ship. I think I can agree with that to an extent. I think we could learn a lot from taking the story literally. We can learn the regret of a man who realized that he had made a mistake only moments before his death, and only after the most precious thing he'd been entrusted with had been destroyed. But I also think the story is a tad allegorical. Maybe not because Melville wanted it to be, but because we have decided it is. The machine that is Moby Dick, what it has been able to accomplish, has captivated audiences for over a hundred years. There's only so much you can say about a simple plot of revenge. There is a lot more you can say about the allegorical content of the whiteness of the whale. 

So what does that mean? 

Honestly? I think it means that Moby Dick was an exceptional piece. That there is no way to really understand it exactly the way the author meant it to be understood, or even exactly the way the person next to you understood it. It speaks to its audience in different ways, delivering different lessons that people can get together and talk about. It is something that has layers upon layers of dissection material, it will never get old because there will always be something to say, some new passage to interpret. And that is what makes it so interesting. I'm glad to have read it. 

I am DONE.

I am DONE. I am going on my fifth year of college and I am DONE with writing the traditional research paper for every single English class! I am DONE with only using "scholarly" sources even when a "non-scholarly" source would be better. And I am DONE with trying to figure out what the teacher wants me to say in order to get a good grade. I am DONE not being able to write in my own voice.

I want to talk about what I want to talk about the way I want to talk about it. I want to write my thoughts down, and not my professors' or the thoughts of their favorite scholars. Heck, I don't really want to be a scholar. Why? Because what they have to say is boring. Actually...that's not fair. What they have to say is not boring, but the way in which they present their stuff is boring. And I do not want to be boring. I went to school to become more interesting. I am DONE being shaped into something I am not.

The traditional research paper has begun to feel unnatural to me. It's begun to feel painful. I love to write, but I don't love writing them. In fact, I don't even like writing them--not even a little--unless I get to write about a topic that I am genuinely interested in. And how often does that happen in school? Even in a class where the subject matter is interesting? It may be an interesting class, but too often I find myself forced to write about a particular aspect I am not interested in. I'd like to be given the freedom to explore another idea, but that rarely happens.Sometimes you do get to choose what you write your analysis on, but there is still almost always a word-count our page requirement.  Too often, I could say something in a paragraph that I am required to write a page about and so concision gets thrown away. Or, I could say a lot more but am limited by page numbers and so depth gets thrown away. Wouldn't it be better if we got rid of those boundaries?

Dr. Burton seems to think so. At the risk of sounding like a kiss-up, I want to say that I am so grateful that there is a teacher out there who is interested in what I have to say and is willing to teach me how to say it well. I just finished reading the second chapter of Writing about Literature in the Digital Age, a book written by Dr. Burton and his students in a collaborative effort to produce something different. I appreciated reading a well-written chapter that was both academic and informal. Not only did it prove that those two motifs can work together well, but what he had to say was very persuasive and encouraging to someone like me who is DONE with traditionalism.

Of those teachers who persist in teaching students to write in the traditional manner (alone, about a particular subject, formal), Dr. Burton says that they are "endangering the literacy of their students. Rather than preparing them to communicate well within society, they actually prevent them from doing so at a time when it is both practical and profitable to interact with others." The more I have blogged the more I have begun to come into contact with the absolute wealth of information from others in sources other than the traditional scholarly article. Twitter and Google + alone are great information providers and they are way more exciting and current than any database I have ever encountered. I've been able to explore in ways never permitted to me before. It's been fun, exciting, and educational.

Furthermore, as we have not been told exactly what to write about but have been given complete freedom to explore whatever interests us as it pertains to the class, the more I have learned and retained. Not only that, but I have discovered more about myself than I have in any other literature class. Being forced to write two blogs each week has forced me to say, "Okay. What interested me about this class this week? What could I write about?"

Usually, I've found that I am not so interested in the traditional English stuff (the symbolism, forms, linguistics, writing styles of Moby Dick or even doing an analysis of social media sites). Rather, I am interested in how things work. I started off exploring how things work by blogging about the difference between XML and HTML. Then I went on to write about why people create things and then post them online free and then finally I wrote about how computers learn. That last one I'm particularly proud of because at the end of that post, I wrote about why it matters. And I wrote about the why because I actually wanted to write about the why! Furthermore, it's the first post that I wrote that actually felt academic, even though I didn't use one scholarly source.I have noticed that theme popping up again and again in my blog posts of trying to get inside the minds of people who create things: how they create them and why. And even though "how things work" has not been directly discussed in class, it's been okay for me to go off and explore it. I appreciate that.

It sounds like Dr. Burton is gearing up for blogging to get more challenging. When he first told us that he wanted our blogs to become more academic, I thought, "Oh great. Here goes the fun of this class." But after reading the second chapter of his book, I am excited for what he has to teach us. It sounds truly valuable. It sounds like I'm going to learn skills I'll actually walk away from this class with. It sounds like I'll be able to write about what I'm interested in. And it sounds like I'll be allowed to make my writing interesting: and that he'll help me make my writing more interesting. In other words, he'll help me make it better in a way that actually matters.

That's not to say blogging is the perfect medium for research or academic writing. It too has it's flaws--something Dr. Burton readily acknowledges in Chapter 2. But, it's the change necessary in this evolving age of digital culture.

So, thanks Dr. Burton. Thanks for being an Ishmael: for achieving "communion through communication" and for being willing to teach me, and others, to be Ishmael's as well. This class looks like it will be a challenge, but a useful, personal challenge. Thanks for that. I'm not DONE just yet.

Change "resume" to "essay." Wouldn't it be great if all that searching could actually be productive in every class?

Moby Dick's Physiognomy

In attempts to give depth to my study of Moby Dick, I would like to devote my next series of posts to connections between the text and socio-political conditions during the time in which Melville's book became popular. 

A piece of Melville's technology that is especially thought-provoking includes the discussion of physiognomy in Chapter 79. Physiognomy was an emerging science that gained popularity during the era of World War I. This field of study focused on physical features of human beings being connected with their intelligence and intellectual capacity. This particularly favored "true Americans" rather immigrants. An article entitled "American Blood and Immigrant Blood" by Dr. Edward Ross states the following:

In fact, the American identity was widely controversial due to the immigration movement. Who were "real" Americans? Dr. Ross distinctly places immigrants as inferior due to their mere physical features and biological make-up.

Although physiognomy seems absolutely absurd and even reminds us (with a shudder) of Hitler's ideal race, it was completely accepted. In fact, this article was published in October 1914 by an esteemed scholar who had a Ph.D.  Just as we commonly accept that being tall helps one's ability to play basketball, having a high brow (not one of those immigrant low brows) meant that your brain was larger with more capacity.

Picture from Charles Davenport's article "Heredity in Relation to Eugenics"

 
I think the science of physiognomy is the human attempt to creating meaning at its finest. This is where the great white whale comes into play.

So here we are learning physiognomy as Melville describes Moby Dick's grandeur: 

"But in the great Sperm Whale, this high and mighty god-like dignity inherent in the brow is so immensely amplified, that gazing on it in forcibly than in that full front view, you feel the Deity and the dread powers more forcibly than in beholding any other object in living nature" (311).

But Ishmael seems to have issued a hyperbole as he further continues, "[the sperm whale's] great genius is declared in his doing nothing particular to prove it." 

I believe the point Melville is trying ask whether meaning comes from merely having a brain or using it. 

Melville's intimated question was extremely applicable to the audience during which Moby Dick became popular. The people reading this book during its popularity were interested in eugenics and how to view immigration and how to view people in general during a world war setting.

As Moby Dick is characterized by Ishmael through physiognomy as being powerful yet dreadful, we can view a broader application of how eugenics and physiognomy proved a great yet terrible science that was relevant to the American audience of the 19-teens.

Ahab and Machinery

I love tying Moby Dick to the technological age and see how the same principles apply. In class today we were encouraged to not worry ourselves so much with what the whale symbolizes. I wanted to analyze the story more on my own in regards to Ahab and machinery, inspired by today’s class discussion.

In his “Approach to Moby-Dick,”  Stephen C. Ausband states that “several critics of Moby-Dick have suggested that Ahab’s chief sin is his separation from humanity.” We have talked a lot about the machinery and why they serve a purpose, but I also started to think of what the character of Ahab symbolizes and suggests in terms of machinery. 

I think that Ahab symbolizes the one who over-indulges in technology and digital culture. Kristen gave a great blog post last week of needing to do all things in moderation. Then Brittany also gave a wonderful blog post that discussed the benefits of playing video games and how they help us. For me, Ahab represents the person who ignores these bits of wisdom and allows himself to be succumbed into the digital world so much so, that he separates himself from humanity. 

He withdraws himself so deeply from human connection then he is left to his own thoughts and desire for more power that comes with machinery. It begins with his leg, which we’ve established in class that it represent Moby Dick and it shows the end result of using machinery. He also has his crew which labor for him and his self-serving will. He relies on bits of machinery such as the quadrant and compass that he even will rebuild to give him what he wants. Even the words that Melville chooses to describe Ahab throughout the novel suggest a tint of industrialization and lack of human quality in his inability to feel emotions or empathy. 

Does Ahab represent what could possibly happen when we are too deep into the digital culture? Will we lose the ability to relate and communicate with other humans on a personal level? Will we lose our deep thinking part of our brain? Will we slowly be shedding from ourselves our capacity of intellect and ethics?

I don’t think any of these things will happen so long as we do what was mentioned earlier, and that is to do all things in moderation and not let the digital culture swallow us up. But just like Ahab, if we let even one thing govern our lives, then we can end up dazed and lost. 

The Humanity of Computers

I love learning about how things work. And I loved today's discussion in my Digital Culture class about Meaning and Machinery, particularly the idea about machines as humans--or humans as machines. When one of my classmates said that Amazon knew she was pregnant before her mom knew, I was shocked. As I began to think about it though, I realized that many sites knew a lot about me: Facebook knows exactly how to advertise to me, Netflix recommends movies to me based on what it thinks my interests are, etc. How in the world does the computer know what I like--sometimes before even I know it?

This blog is going to discuss three things.
(1) How does the computer learn things about us?
(2) What is the controversy surrounding this learning?
(3) Machines as humans--or, humans as machines

How the Computer Learns

 

There is a buzzword that encapsulates how a computer learns about us: Big Data. Watch this short video to get a quick overview about big data and then I'll expound.

As the video introduced, Big Data is everything you do online. "Everything" meaning clicking a link, sharing information about yourself on a social networking website, what your friends "like" on Facebook, how long your mouse lingers over a picture, how often you check your email, or even what you say in that email.

Yes, the computer reads your emails. It reads your status updates. It recognizes faces of people in pictures because you once tagged yourself or others in those photos. It recognizes your voice because you uploaded a video of yourself speaking. It doesn't only know what you like. It knows who you are.

But how does it do all of that? Computers only work because of a bunch of zeros and ones, right? It should only be able to do whatever we directly tell it to do, right?

Right. And Wrong.

Computers learn things because they are told to learn things. They learn because they are told to store Big Data and then to infer things about people from that Big Data. We tell it to learn and to infer given certain parameters. Within those parameters, the computer then learns whatever it can. It does this through things as old as cookies to tracking users through screen resolution (no I'm not kidding).

Usually, your information is just sold to data brokers who then turn around and sell it to advertisers. But sometimes, things you'd rather not be exploited can be without your knowledge or permission.

 

The Privacy Debate

This leads us to talking about privacy debates. Should computers be allowed to do this? Well, they already are. Is there any way to stop them? And if not, should we be worried?

This XKCD comic summarizes the various views on internet privacy nicely:

http://xkcd.com/1269/

I'm a Sage. My husband, a computer engineer, is the Philospher/Crypto Nut. He likes to frequently bring up his suspicions regarding Big Data and I like to tease him about being paranoid.

Is he being paranoid? Or am I being too carefree?

88% of 865 Data Analysists (people that analyze Big Data for a living) think that "consumers should worry about privacy issues in the big data era, as more organizations stockpile personal--and often sensitive--information on all of us." Why? Well for one thing, there currently aren't any laws in the United States regulating Big Data. Some companies do put policies in place regarding Big Data that they collect (such as pharmaceutical companies), but they do not have to.

This has become a huge debate as far as the National Security Agency (NSA) and the public are concerned. There is something called the NSA PRISM. Author Al Mauer writes:

 "In the digital world of the 21^st century, all of our communications—other than face to face—are translated into a series of ones and zeroes, broken down into small groups called packets, disassembled,sent over a series of connected networks known collectively as 'the internet' and reassembled at the other end. Each of those little packets contains the routing information that allows the message to be reassembled and delivered . . . All of your communications go through gateways. . . Gmail, AT&T, AOL and many others . . .Using keyword searches, as Edward Snowden described, they can get to any information they have pretty quickly. They no longer have to capture and analyze the data as it comes in. They have it recorded and ready whenever they need it."

So...your medical history, your insurance information, your bank account locations, and more: the government now has access to all of this without a warrant which violates the 4th amendment to the Constitution. And in fact, the NSA has gathered this data without warrants from smartphones.

But, so what? If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear, right? In fact, it'll help us catch terrorists! The end justifies the means.

But really, how many times has the NSA caught a terrorist through PRISM? None, as far as I can tell. This guy agrees. Therefore they are using it for other reasons. 

These are the two sides of the big debate surrounding internet privacy, particularly regarding the NSA. I won't go anymore into it now, but if you'd like, I can write a longer blog post analyzing both sides later.

Humans and Machines

We, as humans,  have created machines to collect Big Data, analyze it, infer things from it, and give us results. We have taught it to do this because we want it to be a tool for us to use. Yet, the machine is learning on its own.

Now, I do not think that the machines are going to rise up against us like in I, Robot or The Terminator. But there are some similarities between us. Here is a very simple mathematical data graph:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graph_theory

There are three ways to interpret this graph:

1) As a Social Network. You are Circle 1. You are friends with Circles 2 and 5, who are also friends with each other. You are also connected to Circle 4 because Circle 5 is connected to Circle 4, even though you yourself are not connected to Circle 4. You are also connected to Circle 3. And Circle 6. All of these circles relate back to you because they are connected to you in some way.

2) As a Brain Network. The circle represent neurons. Neuron 1 fires off to neurons 5 and 2 which cna then fire off to 4 and 3. Neuron 4 can fire off to six. Neuron 4 can fire off to 3 and 5. Everything is connected to everything.

3) As a Neural Network. In other words, an artificial intelligence network (a computer's "brain"). Artificial Neuron 1 can fire off to artificial neuron 5 which can go to 4 and you get the point. This is a machine's intelligence. This is Big Data.

Machines think like humans. We learn from buzz words, collecting information on those buzzwords, analyzing, and then filling in the gaps. So do machines. You've heard that the brain is just like a big computer, right? We like to say that machines are inhuman because they lack common sense. Yet they don't. They infer things just like we do. I think I finally understand what the video "The Machine is Us/ing Us" from Dr. Burton's post is getting at.

Are humans essentially machines? Maybe. But I'm not so sure. Humans can feel emotions. Machines cannot. Humans can rebel. Machines do what they are told to do. Machines have elements of humanity and humans have elements of the machine, but we are still different. We are becoming more and more alike every day though.

Fascinating, isn't it?