User talk:Blackflagdog

This is my user talk page for the wikibook project.

Please leave feedback on this page.

Group page: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/An_Internet_of_Everything%3F/Public_and_Private_Spheres_in_the_Digital_Age

Blackflagdog (discuss • contribs) 16:20, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Wiki assignment #1 Screen time - Hot Rats
I was recently listening to the 1969 album 'Hot Rats' by artist Frank Zappa. His unnerving and freaktacular style had rarely been heard up until this point. Zappa's earlier foray into life as a solo musician hadn't had nearly the same level of impact, with 'Mothermania' not having the latent sense of rebellion and raw sexuality. What may have been essential to the impact of 'Hot Rats' was Zappa's departure from his former collaborators, The Mothers of Invention. Whilst Zappa and the Mothers had collaborated frequently with much mutual express, Zappa's climax as an artist came as a result of his lone endeavours into the musical cesspool, where even the pioneers of the 1960's musical rebellion had dared to tread. The embracing of what society deems the ‘grotesque’ in music is embraced by Zappa, with outlandish sexuality, vulgarity and a beckoning set of lyrics for this album. A personal favourite track for me is Son of Mr Green Genes, which is a rolling exploration of Zappa’s ability to pull a small band together in almost orchestral precision whilst still embodying the decade’s freedom and penchant for the spirit of freedom in music. The combination of the fresh and punchy brass section with the use of the bent-string twanging style, demonstrating his influence from the west coast surfer and hippie movements really gives a sense of Zappa’s progression up until this point in his career. Other songs, such as Willie the pimp give an insight into Zappa’s lyricism, displaying his preference for the gritty, intoxicating side of life. Just the description of a LA pimp going about his business is enough for Zappa, making a grotesque but Teflon character. Who is created only for t’s embodiment of the city where Hot Rats was written, Los Angeles. Willie the pimp was also written with music legend Captain Beefheart, who is a natural pairing with Zappa, given their reputations for being truly groovy. Zappa’s first foray into lone album is daring, concise and cool. The risk of adding heavy jazz and psychedelic elements into your own work, with both the chaos of rock and the precision of Zappa’s orchestration of this record being essential, makes for a tantalising piece of work. The perpetual savant, Hot Rats is clearly Zappa’s unhindered masterpiece, where the expression is identified for its unique blending of musical genre, genius lyricism and psychedelic routes.

Comments
Your summary of the band and this album has made me become quite interested in listening to a band that is typically not my personal style of music. I shall now listen to the album and hope that I enjoy it as much as you do DayleCleland (discuss • contribs) 18:02, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Wiki assignment #2: Visibility and Online Footprint
Assessing my own personal visibility online, I’ve found that the social element of social networks has somewhat put’s me off the idea. I think my visibility online is fairly minimal by design, and my analysis reflects that. Firstly I would like to consider what kind of information, and to whom, is available about me online. Combing over apps and my browsing history, my two most frequented types of websites were ‘social sites’ (primarily Facebook) and sites where I paid for goods/services or ‘retail sites’. Examining my own online visibility in two categories, I think I can illustrate both strengths and weaknesses to my own visibility online. I’m going to examine my ’social’ and ‘retail’ identities online as they’re most active, and as with the nature of the beast that is online monetization, they sometimes mix. The ‘social’ identity consists of online networks where you primarily socialise, on any platform. Upon examining all of my own accounts however, I impact on the online world seems to be minimal. The primary point of my online socialisation is Facebook, where my day and month of my birth and name are available, as well as a picture of me to anyone who happens to search for me. Overall, Facebook doesn’t really seem to be a problem in regards to my personal visibility: the only real information you can glean from the cosmetic elements is what I look like and my birthdate, anything more substantial is guarded, up to the point where I use a fake email and no location serves or related apps. The other tenant of my footprint is the ‘retail’, unlike the social element; this is not easily searchable online to the public, but information conceded by me in returns for goods/services from online stores. I personally feel like this is the biggest vulnerability online. Websites like Amazon, eBay, Steam are all used frequently, and these website have had all sensitive information willingly handed over. Bank information, addresses, purchase history are all more available to someone I’ve never met than anything posted on any social networking sites. However, the consideration of social networks in the commercial argument is critical. The control I have over my online presence, and by extension my online visibility, is actually surprisingly limited. I examined how quickly I would be able to unsubscribe and unregister with a few sites, and with Steam and Facebook specifically, uncoupling them totally takes quite a bit of faux- bureaucracy with captchas and finding the exact right links. The effort that it takes to unregister from many of the sites I’m visible from is seemingly quite arduous. In my case, there is no real need to control my online identity as its influence is fairly benign, but there could be a case for the visibility – including geo-tagging and data mining – of people who use these technology more actively. The main issues with this lack of control over personal information is where that information could theoretically be going; is it sold to a third party, or is the data of our online activity analysed, catalogued and filed for future reference? In regards to my own visibility, I feel as though I’m secure and discreet. However, the analysis of this subject has given me lots to bear in mind for future uses of the internet and my presence online.

Blackflagdog (discuss • contribs) 13:14, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments
I like that you mentioned bank details and home addresses. It is something that I have not thought about until now. It is indeed scary to think that somebody you have never met retains that information. But then again, I would not use the sites and put in my information if I did not trust the company or supplier. I think to be able to give a distinction between trustworthy and untrustworthy sites gives more value as it is different from publicly posting the information and subjugating yourself to the whole wider-web. Also if your information is sold to a third party without your acknowledgement or consent then you have the right to take the company to court over the matter - especially if it is something as secure as bank details and home addresses. Digitalkitty (discuss • contribs) 12:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #3: Information Overload!
The advancement of personal technology has given users the freedom to access information, wherever and whenever. Where we were once limited by the physical elements of our devices (Such as landline telephone, where you cannot move it from the house, as it needs a wired connection.) we now have far more freedom and connectedness with our personal devices. The progression of both cellular telephone technology and the culmination of the World Wide Web as a consumer accessible platform bought about the convergence of these two technologies. As the technology has become more refined with time, the popularity of devices like smartphones and tablets have become ubiquitous across the world, leading to a cultural shift of 'screen importance' wherein the appeal of these devices surely comes from their availability, usability and adaptability. The frequency with which we use our devices illustrates our new addiction to accessible information. With the process of information gathering now requiring nothing more than a mobile and internet connection, the populations demand for this access to technology will only grow. Since everyone can now access huge amounts of information with minimal effort, the widespread adaption of this technology across the world has only aided in its prevalence, with smartphones becoming an essential item for anyone to carry and tablets are used for dozens of commercial and business applications. This degree of interconnectivity with technology inevitably comes at a price. Turkle’s concept of tethering is reminiscent, but where she theorises that "a parent, partner, or child can be lost for a few seconds or a few minutes to an alternative reality”. Turkle believes the time which we become engrossed in our screens is seconds, but this has an astounding effect of disconnection with those we are with. The idea of overdependence on our screens is nothing new, Lanier’s theory that the individual can become “locked-in” seem to be ringing true in some developed nations with the cultural phenomenon of hikikomori in Japan, where technological dependence plays an apparently large role in a young person’s withdrawal from society.  The inclination to blame technology for the modern worlds social maladies is all too prevalent, but I do feel as though the new convenience right at the fingertips of the ‘modern hermit’ could allow  them to live in a state of perpetual adolescence. This is just an example of the spectrum on which individuals can struggle with our combined adaption to new technologies, as this is illustrative that lack of understanding and over indulgence are both dangerous beasts when considering technology. However, consideration of this spectrum of users (or non-users) is essential, as there is a portion of the population that do not embrace technology, but instead avoid usage for a variety of reasons. Despite the evident cultural shift towards screen dominance, even amongst the young, these groups that avoid technology. Like the hikikomori, there is a danger in an inability or unwillingness of part of the population to practice restraint in their reaction to this continuing cultural wave; where dealing in absolutes has done more damage to individuals that simply trying to accept new technologies with some reservations may have done. When there are more issues with separation from our devices, paying attention to why there is trouble is vital in resolving that. Disconnectivity Anxiety or DA is, as defined by Dr. Jim Taylor, "a persistent and unpleasant condition characterized by worry and unease caused by periods of technological disconnection from others" (9). This idea of anxiety over the inability to access your technology is interesting as it highlights the individuals addiction for a device, rather than any substantial need. There is a shift where we lose the ability to disconnect from the rest of the worlds, and consider our technology our primary (and sometimes only) means of communication.

The considerations that must be taken into account when dealing with such a new and, sometimes pervasive, technologies. The world grows smaller with each step in communications technology, with new steps and applications being discovered and taking our technological exploration to new heights, with private and commercial usages of these technologies replacing traditional, manual methods in all parts of our lives. There is no definite method for dealing with his influx of technology, but the idea of responsible usage still remains. Taking into consideration all that we know, it makes sense to simply be aware of the addictiveness that this new technology carries and be wary of it.

Blackflagdog (discuss • contribs) 13:52, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments

 * Some really interesting ideas posed in this essay; the notion of Disconnectivity Anxiety is something I can really relate to. I find myself intentionally detaching myself from smartphones, computers and video games for an extended period of time for that exact reason. Occasionally I will find myself scrolling through meaningless information on facebook or playing games online purely so that I can stay "connected". When I move away from these technologies I feel myself yearning for them, as if I am missing out on something important. When I realise this I will distance myself from it for a while, to remind myself that I don't NEED to be online all the time, but that I have conditioned myself into becoming dependent on it. Its refreshing to live for a while without a phone in your pocket - do you find yourself doing the same thing? Banddcole (discuss • contribs) 11:23, 11 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Thatnk for the replyǃ I can honestly say that I'm completely with you on your points about deliberate disconnection, but I think that conscious choice to remove yourself from, wjhat is effectively now, the world is also interesting. Whilst there is undoubtedly value in getting off all of our devices once in a while, can I ask if you have any leftover anxieties or concerns about being unreachable when they are off? I know that I've come to a point where complete isolation is a bit of double-edged sword, as although I'm glad to be unplugged, I'm never completely comfortable if I have no real means of using technology (No battery, breakages, ect.) Blackflagdog (discuss • contribs) 11:31, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Exercise #4ː Wikibook Project Reflective Account
The wiki book project offered different challenges than the ones that are typically faced in university assessment, with both the cohesiveness of group co-operation and collecting and reforming information in a flowing and erudite manner.

Accessing the different set of skills required for these types of tasks can always be challenging, and there are inherent issues with any given tasks that must be overcome. The use of digital media when organizing and delegating tasks amongst a group are paramount, using social media such as Facebook when organizing a group is the simplest and most effective way to plan within a group. The face-to-face aspect of group interaction revolved around peer-review of materials and sources, collaboration on our respective section and proofreading amongst other group members. This interaction also included others who worked on the same wiki book, where the same tasks are delegated and peer-reviewed over a greater scale.

Analyzing the task from a critical perspective, I found it to be versatile and interesting. Although the singular effort can be diluted by certain obstacles of the task, such as lack of understanding of the platform or communication breakdowns within groups, the overall effects, and requirements of the task do draw good results from active participants. Considering that it fits the qualifications for Clay Shirkey’s (2010) concept of cognitive surplus, and its encompassed lessons surrounding group responses to the call for their ‘cognitive surplus’. This cumulative effort amongst groups that are in turn, part of a larger group, is representative of Shirkey’s idea of cognitive surplus. The organization of key contributors and the continuous effort of the active participants also lent itself to strengthening the argument of Banaji and Buckingham (2013). The concept of ‘the civic web’ was evident in this exercise, as its core requirement was collaboration and reflection on our work and with others. The more overarching concept from Banaji and Buckingham, as I take from it, is the importance of younger people as active and in-tune participants in issues through the web.

These ideas are instrumental when assessing the nature of the wiki book exercise. Whilst the collaborative elements of the project are invaluable when analyzing, there was some underlying issue. Although we were greatly interconnected as a group, there were some issues with communication; this was primarily caused by lack of familiarity with the medium and some issues with usability of the wiki book page (Mainly the feature of user-tagging on boards). Another issue we faced as a group was the issue of task delegation, although I believe this was fair and allowed for a somewhat even distribution of tasks.

However, there were issues where some people were left without a section to write until the last minute, although I believe with a task of this size, this type of error may be unavoidable. This task provided a diverse set of challenges from a wide variety of skill groups. The focus on interpersonal skills, IT literacy, and knowledge of the course as a whole led to a very impressive final piece of group work, and the value of the project should be realized. Although it is not the perfect assessment because of the high level of variable factors, I feel it is invaluable in its relevance to the digital media and culture course and teaches us practical lessons on the web as a public space and an open source resource.

Blackflagdog (discuss • contribs) 15:32, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Comments

 * Hey man, I like your insight into the wiki exercise, I think that we both felt very similarly as to how it went. I too felt that the Wikibooks platform didn't offer an up-to-date or intuitive mode of communication. The process felt very cumbersome and I felt as if many messaged got lost in the wind. Do you think that more updated message platform on Wikibooks would help the collaborative process or would a UI similar to Facebook's Messenger app simply be too confusing with such a large group of people? I feel like in our smaller group this would have worked well as we could easily talk amongst ourselves whilst working on the project - and our messages to one another would be logged as contributions. However, with the large number of people working on our section, a chat function I feel would have been impossible to follow! Banddcole (discuss • contribs) 10:41, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Comment

 * It's an interesting topic, and you could have made more if this in terms of markets and potential associated with, say technological; innovation, or online music communities, fandom and so on. as it stands, however, it would have been useful to try to feed this into the themes and concerns of the module, and you haven’t really engaged with this part of the brief at all (always, always, pay close attention to what the brief is asking you to do).


 * A post of this standard roughly corresponds to the following grade descriptor
 * Very Poor. Often, entries of this standard are quite brief, are structured poorly and are not spell-checked. They are often irrelevant, and offer little engagement with the concerns of the module or the assignment brief. Entries of this grade may have been subject to admin warnings or take-down notices for copyright infringement. The wiki markup formatting will be of a very poor standard and as a result it will be difficult for the reader to engage with the discussion.

RE: Comments on others’ work

 * These are absent. You have not adhered to the brief. Remember that your comments on other people's work is weighted as heavily as your own post when it comes to grades. Not completing this part of the exercise means that, effectively you are halving your mark. GregXenon01 (discuss • contribs) 16:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Marker’s Feedback on Wikibook Project Work
You make a number of very good (sometimes excellent) contribs to your chapter page during the final week of the project. The work on Habermas, Schafer, and on Sopa are significant to the chapter's overall critical content, and your formatting and referencing is great. All materials seem to be drawing from solid reliable scholarship, rather than relying on wiki – although where this is relevant, you include interwiki links. Posts are very well written and thoroughly researched, and your comments on other people's work are generous and insightful, although I did spot a cut and paste error in one of your comments. Good work!

Wiki Exercises


 * Excellent. Among other things, these entries will probably demonstrate a complex, critical understanding of the themes of the module. They will communicate very effectively, making excellent and creative use of the possibilities of the form (including links, as well as perhaps copyright-free videos and images, linked to from Wiki Commons), and may be written with some skill and flair. They will address the assignment tasks in a thoughtful way. They will make insightful connections between original examples and relevant concepts. They will be informed by serious reading and reflection, are likely to demonstrate originality of thought, and will probably be rewarding and informative for the reader. The wiki markup formatting will be impeccable.

Content (weighted 20%)

 * Your contribution to the book page gives an excellent brief overview of the subject under discussion in your chosen themed chapter. There is an excellent range of concepts associated with your subject, and the effort to deliver critical definitions, drawing from relevant literature and scholarship, and your own critical voice in the building of a robust argument is very much in evidence. The primary and secondary sources you found about the chapter’s themes cover an excellent range and depth of subject matter.

Understanding (weighted 30%)

 * Reading and research:
 * evidence of critical engagement with set materials, clearly grounded on close familiarity with concepts and ideas encountered on the module
 * evidence of independent reading of appropriate academic and peer-reviewed material through evidence of close familiarity with a wide range of evidence
 * Argument and analysis:
 * well-articulated and well-supported argument featuring appreciable depth of understanding
 * good level of critical thinking (through taking a position in relation to key ideas from the module, and supporting this position in discussion);
 * good level of evidence of relational thinking (through making connections between key ideas from the module and wider literature, and supporting these connections in discussion);
 * evidence of appreciable independent critical ability

Engagement (weighted 50%)

 * Evidence from contributions to both editing and discussion of content to an appreciable standard (i.e. volume and breadth of activity as evidenced through contribs)
 * Good engagement with and learning from other Wikipedians about the task of writing/editing content for a Wikibook
 * Reflexive, creative and well-managed use of discussion pages using deployment of judgement relating to key issues, concepts and procedures

Overall Mark % available on Succeed

FMSU9A4marker (discuss • contribs) 15:06, 3 May 2016 (UTC)