One of the readings for this week was an excerpt from Albert-László Barabási’s book Linked which introduced the concept of the 80/20 rule. Barabási uses examples such as, “80 percent of Italy’s land was owned by only 20 percent of the population … 80 percent of customer service problems are created by only 20 percent of consumers, 80 percent of decisions are made 20 percent of meeting time” to demonstrate how it applies to numerous societal patterns. He then applies the rule to networks, however the numbers slightly differ. 

I’m still trying to get my head around this rule, however Stefan’s idea about relating it to Lentils as Anything allowed me to view this rule in a real life situation.

I will continue to dwell on this rule, trying to apply it to my surroundings!

What is neutral technology?

Unfortunately I was unable to go to this weeks lecture/symposium but after talking to some friends about what was discussed, this was the question I was left with.

Mitchell explained to me that Adrian used a hammer as an example to discuss the idea that the intended purpose for technologies are mostly irrelevant. It is the way in which it is commonly used which is important as it will have cultural effects. Who knows what the first hammer was created for? There are various models and modes of hammers nowadays, however I believe that the first thought of a hammers use would be for hitting nails.

There would be so many more technologies that were created for one purpose but are instead being used for a multitude 0f others. For instance, duct tape. Created during WW2 when soldiers needed something that would keep there ammunition cases dry. After the war it was suggested by soldiers to be used to hold heating and air-conditioning duct work together. Today, duct tape is used for various things: holding together shoes, books, cover broken windows… etc etc.

I have many questions surrounding this symposium, but first I should probably wrap my head around neutral technology.

Even though at the beginning I was sure I would be captivated and entertained throughout David Shields ‘collage’ reading, a few pages in my focus began to falter.

When I googled “collage”, it is described as an “artistic product” and “any collection of diverse things.” Therefore, the order of the paragraphs in this reading should be read in no particular order. However by putting the paragraphs in sequential order theres a sense of hierarchy that you have to follow.

I think that it was an interesting idea for Shields to write his piece on collages in a the form of a collage yet I don’t think it was presented in the best way.

One of the opening concepts that drew me in was Adrian stating “a word can only mean something by not what it is but by what it is not“. He mentioned semiotics and the large dictionary we have for words and other typical points. However the idea that was emphasised in my mind was who decides what every word means?  How does a certain word become a word? A friend had an assignment the other week in which she had to create a 27th letter for the English alphabet and the sound that goes with it. If we included another letter into the alphabet there would be thousands of new words, but who is going to create them?

Another question that Adrian posed was “have we lost all sense of privacy through technology?” I agreed with him on the notion that everything that we post online is 100% public and that we have lost all sense of privacy. For example, the other day I searched my name into google images and pictures of people vines that I have ‘re-vined’ are now under Claudia Nankervis on google images. The thought that just a simple tap on my phone to re-vine a post would then go onto google images, had not crossed through my mind at all. I have always been very cautious of the images that I post online and what I write, but this is another layer that I will have to think about as well.

Another example with internet privacy is the recent leaking of the naked photos of celebrities. Photos they thought would never be seen by anyone else, photos taken in the complete privacy of their home, are now on the internet for everyone and anyone to see. How somebody managed to get their hands on the photos through iCloud I will never understand, but it demonstrates to us that if we send or publish anything online or through the ‘interwebs’, we must be comfortable knowing that it may be seen by anyone in the world.