I went to the Infinity Dome on the weekend. The concept was great, a pop up planetarium that brings astronomy to a wider audience. The implantation was a little less great, the clarity of the images were definitely not as good as an actual planetarium but it is exciting that this kind of stuff is happening and available to people. The technology will improve and it’ll only get better.
Technology does not define culture, although it has certainly been used as a tool to shape and influence it. Technology in every sense of the word has been used to progress civilisations, so what does identifying oneself as a Melburnian mean? Mebourne culture is unarguably a result of 200 years of technological advancements and improvements, forming what we have today. Used as processes and tools to aid our routines, businesses and doings. Our culture identity forms independently. The dependablity on technology is fundamental to our culture, but certainly not what defines it.
In the unlecture Adrian explained hypertext in the way that it is the gaps between links that create the story in narrative. Just like in a film, the editing between shots express emotion and feeling.
The 80/20 rule is a natural phenomenon.
I don’t think I had actually ever known that there was a word for it but its something that is extremely evident in a lot of different systems.
The network takes this 80/20 rule, therefore it is natural.
The network creates its own structure.
It is natural but not arbitrary.
Links increase exponentially, filing a webpage into the 20%.
Popularity promotes attention.
Last night I watched a documentary about the incredible artist and activist Ai Wei Wei.
His presence on Twitter is part of a Chinese social media that extends beyond the great firewall, put in place by the Chinese government. He believes that “connection is an extremely important part of both life and art”, and whilst his popularity in China remains relatively small, he is increasingly idolized in the West.
His involvement in the network is a platform to inspire global audiences, push boundaries and challenge Chinese authorities. Something that in our democratic society we are free to do, but for Ai Wei Wei is a dangerous act of defiance.
This is an example of someone who has realized the potential of social media and the network to reach and inform on a massive scale. Using social media as a weapon against the authorities he records and shares everything. And that’s how you make people notice.
One of my friends sent this to me yesterday, I thought it was spot on,
” We cannot hope to solve tomorrow’s problems with yesterday’s problem-solving paradigm. Exclusive reliance on incremental, adaptive responses will no longer suffice. We are deep in a planetary emergency now. What is now needed to meet the challenge that faces the human race is a new mode of response, an evolutionary quantum jump, a new order of regulation in our species…”
*did not happen*
When Adrian described the linear way in which we learn and understand history, I was reminded of a reddit post I read a few days before.
The way we remember history in separate causal linear progression is extremely evident is the surprising realisations;
Mozart’s heyday was about the same time as the American Revolution,
Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin were born on the exact same day,
The Guillotine stopped being the official method of execution in France the same year that MS-DOS premiered,
Prisoners began to arrive in Auschwitz a few days after McDonalds was founded,
The Pueblo Indians were building Mesa Verde during the heart of The Crusade
Slavery was made illegal in China the same year that the first commercial flight took place. 1910.
The lack of a network structure in our understanding of history means we do not get a complete relational perception of important events.
i love my puppy
To procrastinate from study during the week, I went with a friend to a seminar held for the Melbourne Writers Festival. Being a tag along I had no idea what I was going to listen to, and having no faith in my intellectual abilities thought I may be out of my depth with my Honour student friend and those like him. To my pleasant surprise I was able to keep up, sometimes I think I worry too much.
The seminar was a part of the One Just World series, this one was called Tradition Vs Development.
Put simply, it raised the questions whether development and cultural linquistic traditions are mutally exclusive.
Here are some things I found interesting:
The majority of the world now speaks at least two languages. I guess I’m in the minority, I think many young Australians in my demographic would be in the minority. We dont need to speak another language, although maybe we should learn Mandarin just in case.
Development refers to the intergration of smaller communities who have not yet been influenced by Western Culture. Development should always be about those people and not for economic gain. Althought sometimes there is not a clear answer to the question, whose agenda do development agencies have?
Many of the panelists had first hand accounts of working with these small communities. The decision to develop should always come from the people, yet often times they would not talk. Which is why there are instances where the decision is made for them.
One of the panelists, Butet Manurung does aid work in Sumatra with a village called Onaringa. She recounts the villagers telling her that they were constantly mocked and called primitive, this caused a lack of confidence in themselves and an unwillingness to perserve their own culture. This village was being threatend by an improaching Pine plantation. The villagers were skeptical of education, it was this modernisation that was threatening to destroy their homes. Although, without an education they were unable to fend for themselves, they could not communicate with those people that could advantage of this. Not knowing a common language means not knowing when you are agreeing to sell your home.
So there is a dichotomy. Education for those that need it in order for a sustainable, stable life, and the threat of eradication of polyglotism and definable cultures.
Whose decision is it to preserve this cultures? Many villagers, just like in the western world, want economic stability for their children, more attainable by learning a universal language. A connection with a wider network of economic and social benefits. Who are we to tell them that it is their duty to preserve their language, and even if they wanted to do they have the means to go about it? Should it be the states? Should it be our duty to record and preserve?
How integral is language to culture? Many people on the panel believed that with the disappearance of a cultures unique language we are cutting the roots of cultural identity. That language holds the cultural knowledge. The homogenality threat means a less diverse world.
Many many more points were raised but to be honest I cant remember enough to form them into sentences. Just another quick one though, make sure whose agenda you are funding when giving money to charitable associations.
