the Net at Home - Home with the Net

I am moving Feb 1st, so my Net situation is far from being clear. ;)

First things first: my computer is a laptop. I used a high speed modem. I am connected every time my laptop is on, and it is on almost all day.

Since Feb last year, I have been living with a roommate, so I have kept my computer in my bedroom - my only private space - most of the time. It sat on and IKEA desk - very clean, very neat, very functional, with my books, readers and all handy. That desk - and thus the laptop - was the first thing you'd run into when you'd walk into my room. I put it there because:

I could see through the window from where I sat, and there was a lot of light;

The power outlet was conveniently there;

It forced me to sit with my back to the bed. Reduced the appeal of the ominous flat, wide and comfy object in my room.

Whenever my roommate was away for a while, or when I needed to work on a paper that required the use of many books, I would move the laptop to the kitchen area, where a wide table gave me more space to spread my stuff.
I'd sometimes get a wireless signal from that place.

From Feb 1st on, I'll live alone in a house where there is a wireless connection. My room is in the basement.
I'll most likely end up doing most of my work upstairs, where there is more light, and a very large table.

The ubiquitous connection will be a plus:

I love to cook, so I'll be able to surf while cooking;

I love to work in different places, I find it inspiring;

There is a wonderful, comfy leather sofa in the living room;

I'll be able to move from one place to another without loosing the connection, which currently happens.

And the fact that I will be living alone allows me more freedom in my use of space and of the net.

What does my computer/internet space say about me? That I am someone focused on efficiency, very organized, who has developed a strong online community, and who keeps in touch with friends everywhere on the planet through email.
The "ideal," flexible situation I will be living in from Feb 1st tells how important the Net has become in my life, as a working tool, socializing medium, and source of entertainment.

Clément et l'énigme de Québec

The following text was posted as a reply to a text written by Clément Laberge here. It is about the "Québec City Enigma," i.e. why didn't Québec citizens vote for the Bloc Québecois, like everybody else in the province? Clément attempted a response. I added my grain of salt.

I am posting it here because ICTs are seen as an answer to the growing cynicism about politics in Québec, and Canada, for that matter.

Très cher Clément,

J'ai lu ton texte avec beaucoup d'intérêt... surtout que de mon côté, en Ontario isolé ;), j'ai essayé de comprendre ce qui se passe dans notre petite région de Québec. Pêle-mêle, donc, quelques réactions:

Je crois que tu as raison de dire qu'il est peu probable qu'on ait affaire à un phénomène de sagesse collective.

Toutefois, je ne suis pas certaine si je suis d'accord avec toi au sujet du «problème d'organes». En effet, je crois que les gens de Québec ont trop écouté les critiques superficielles et faciles d'un Jeff Filion, d'une mairesse Boucher, ou d'autres «grands politicologues» de leur espèce. Ce que je ne comprends pas, c'est la démographie du vote: pourquoi voit-on les jeunes, et les pauvres, voter pour la droite? Ça n'a AUCUN sens! Qu'ont-ils à gagner?
Du côté des pauvres, il est compréhensible qu'ils en aient eu assez des promesses «petit-bourgeois» du BQ. Ils ont souvent des besoins plus criants que celui de faire la souveraineté. Pourquoi, par contre, ne se tournent-ils pas, comme on l'a vu historiquement, vers la gauche? À cet effet, qu'est-ce que le NPD n'a PAS compris de la situation québécoise?
Du côté des jeunes, toutefois, c'est plus problématique. Qu'ils soient devenus cyniques par rapport au traditionnel BQ et qu'ils rejettent eux-aussi la gauche est incompréhensible. Tu parles de problème d'attitude au sein de la classe politique. Je crois qu'il y a aussi un problème d'attitude chez les jeunes de ma génération...

Je crois, tout comme toi, que la classe politique doit s'ouvrir aux vrais besoins des gens, et que les NTIC sont à cet effet un outil qui soit des plus pertinent. Or, il faut se souvenir du «digital divide», qui malheureusement laisse les exclus en marge de la révolution technologique. Toute stratégie d'intrégration des NTIC se DOIT de tenir compte des «laissés pour compte», d'autant plus qu'on se targe de valeurs sociaux-démocrates: au Québec plus qu'ailleurs, même.

Finalement, pour ce qui est d'une ligne de parti flexible, qui débute avec l'écoute de l'autre, ce serait l'idéal. Un antidote au cynisme, une promesse démocratique, un renouveau politique. Qui seront les artisans de ce nouveau mouvement? Quel groupe de gens vraiment spéciaux sera à même de réunir sous une même bannière des gens de croyances diverses? Quel leadership pour un tel parti? Quel mécènes? La réflection est certainement à poursuirvre pour emmener cette idée dans le domaine du faisable... et du fait établi!

Bonne chance à nous!
;)

Hey, Women Hactivists!

I am writing this in the hope that some of the women who will read this post and I are like-minded.

I am part of a women's reading and discussion group, called the Wondering Women, and we have a project going on that might have some of you interested.

Recently, a book called 'What I Meant to Say' was published by Canadian 'intellectuals,' about their 'private lives,' which we know often include... WOMEN!

So I am preparing a defensive move against the too-often misogynistic content of the book, a website with the title of the book in the URL, offering an 'alternative' point of views of the different essays/stories of the book. So, women! If you are interested in participating, please contact me so I can give you more information. Basically, we are preparing reviews to be posted online.
A lot of fun... Using the WWW to counter cultural messages!
;)

My utoronto email address is elise dot paradis.

Cheers!

comments on issues raised in class...

A melting pot of reactions rising from discussions in class:

About survey results... I am always really skeptical of survey results. In my pov, they are simply too subjective to be worth much. What I THINK I am doing online is not necessarily EXACTLY what I AM doing. I wish there were more results from direct observation, time logs, and all. (I simply think of how much money my friend in the online porn industry is making hourly, and... it just doesn't fit with the results from surveys... ;)

We talk about how people who have internet access use it to get information about nutrition, health, etc., in order to make pre-visit, pre-purchase decisions. For example, before buying an MP3 player, a computer-savvy person might go online, read reviews, compare prices, post questions on list servs, etc. However, one has to question the new type of exclusion this creates: WWW-illiterate people cannot make as good and as well-informed decisions than their counterparts. The cycle of poverty and exclusion is in fact reinforced by the web, an issue that Castell evaluates in length. On similar issues, something I got from one of the class blogs... (See the full entry here) The digital divide "... is a much more powerful form of discrimination than racial hate literature because it is occuring at a systemic nature." As MK says, we have to deal with the digital divide before we can move on...

From the class blog, now... a comment on Charles McGrath's New York Times article... Its conclusion just supports an idea that I have been playing with recently... People love email and txt msgs (!) because they are not intrusive. Speaking with a good friend of mine in Boston yesterday, we talked about the implicit 'pact' that is now being made by giving out your phone number: You are allowing one to invade your PRIVATE space, to disturb you on THEIR schedule. You make yourself vulnerable, unlike the Chinese people who love text messaging because "everyone's dignity" is preserved through it... ;)

Translation-class time! Eeek!

Hate and the WWW - What? Who? Why?

First I'll answer the questions for the assignment, then I'll add some more bla-bla.

Assignment

Why is this important in relation to Cybercultural studies?

How do the issues of this film fit into Cybercultural Studies; as culture and culture artifact?

The issue of "cyberhate" is an important one for cybercultural studies since it is a tangible manifestation of socio-cultural tensions. It boldly raises questions about the right to free speech vs. the need to protect the wider, more fundamental rights of every individual of the community to dignity and freedom.

As Me. Floyd Abrams said in the program we saw in class, Western societies have decided that there is a higher price to pay for governmental censorship than there is for hate propaganda to be allowed. For example, Canadians would be less free if the government was censoring the Internet, for example, than if a few hate groups were to keep propagating their hateful point of views.
This way of seeing things – which is implicit in the Canadian Charter of Rights – still allows for the development and use of censorship products, to be used at the individual level – by parents, for example –, and the institutional level – by libraries, schools, etc.

Thus, through the legalization of the publication of hateful material online and of the use of censoring material, cybercultural analysts can see in "real time" social values at play, fighting for legitimacy and audience on the one side, for integrity, "political correctness" and morality on the other. Indeed, as discussed by Don Black in the movie, choices over what is proper or not for viewing are basically subjective: if some would lump together animal cruelty and racist propaganda as elements to be banned, some like Black would not. He, personally, wants to be informed on White supremacist movements, but NOT on animal cruelty "how-to's".

In summary, the cyberhate on the net is a social artifact that has a lot to tell on the power structures of our societies. Not surprisingly (read on for more!), the oppressed in "real life" are the ones who are being oppressed in "virtual life".

There is more to it

I have to mention some of the assumptions underlying the no-censorship argument, which are debatable.

First, it assumes that the individual net user is able to discriminate between different sources of information, and judge their legitimacy, content, and morality in the light of their ethical standards, and choose to rely on the information that they believe to suit their needs, beliefs.

Second, it assumes that in the end, everybody is able to publish information that supports their point of view, to justify it with sound evidence, such that "truth" will ultimately triumph in different social debates.

Those two assumptions are part of our democratic ideal; if they are totally true is something else. History seems to tell us otherwise (looking at the different genocides of the 20th century is quite telling…). But since democracy is the least terrible of all political systems…
;)

The second assumption is the one that troubles me the most. I have already spoken about it in a previous post… and in class… and in my dreams… Ahah! But really: it is false to think/say that everybody is able to voice their opinions online. We should be aware of that, just from the digital divide data… Poor, non-White, old, rural women are under-represented – if they are at all, since so many of them are also illiterate –; rich, White, young, educated urban men are over-represented. Until the oppressed get access to the web in just proportion to their number, we are very much more likely to fall upon hateful material than we are to stumble, by chance, on "alternative" material.

I'll finish this post with two last details: first, I posted a link towards RaceSciNet, an alternative source for information on the issue of race and the "scientificity" of racial differences. Second, a statistic: women own one percent of the wealth of the planet. So for those among you who still believe in the equality of the sexes…
Bonjour la discrimination!

shocking!

Woooo!
The Jan 19th class was SO thought-provoking!
I have a lot to say, before I even get to the homework issues about hatred on the WWW… So I'll post the homework later, and just ramble about my general comments for now.

First, I know I have mentioned it in class, but since there was some rebuttal, I think it is worth my while repeating it online: What is published and read online is what is posted by mainstream media, big organizations, institutions, and the wealthy and powerful, by Marx's ruling elite. They are the ones who have the money, the manpower, the resources and the ads. They are the big players.

Indeed, the poor, the weak, the oppressed can't have their voice heard. Women, for example, are in too many countries still confined to their kitchens, while men socialize, work, and maintain their 'superiority'. The illiterate, similarly, can't publish or get heard, unless it is through the mediated voice of the learned, the erudite, the almighty. People with meager incomes can't afford the technology, and too often come back exhausted from their work days.

Using Norris' 3 digital divides, I am arguing here that one of the most important ones is the actual 'democratic' divide, which leaves the oppressed… oppressed! They are neither creating, contributing knowledge, but rather, at best, absorbing it. But I'll get back to that in the homework post…

I very much appreciated the talk about bridges.org, an organization that I might study a little further… I will certainly post their link in my Linkin' and Likin' It section… Their 12 factors of real access tackle the multidimensionality of technology, and show that technological determinism is nothing but an aberration, a simplistic account of societies' interaction with 'tools'.

Finally, a word about literacy. I am appalled by the fact that very few Canadians see literacy as an important issue in fostering/hindering economic development. I was shocked when I moved in my current neighborhood (Sherbourne and Bloor) to see that at the St. James Town library, there was NO LITERACY NOR ESL PROGRAM.! I wanted to get involved… and the closest to home was in Scarborough!!!!!!!!!!
This is all horrible. The Feds have talked about a federal daycare program. Right. They talk about investing in higher education. Good. But it is a matter of jurisdiction whether they can invest in literacy programs! Shame!

Anyways, I am getting overly emotional. Until I calm down… ;)

This is all about...

...another homework!!!

Now, I won't repeat what I have posted in the side bar, under "This Blog and I in a Nutshell", as my goals for this blog. It is quite straightforward and simple.

How I managed to customize my blog: by flushing the blogger ad, by shrinking my profile, by dividing the links into two sections: 1-Bloggin' It, links to the 'blogosphere'; 2-Linkin' and Likin' It, to route my readers (and myself, by the way) towards interesting links on development, education, and technologies. This section is likely to become big as I progress with my paper; I'll try to distil it once in a while, in order to make sure that I am offering "quality stuff" on my blog.

The links towards my other blogs are important for me: they allow the reader to see me as a multidimensional individual, rather than as text on a screen. Elements of my personal life (eeek!) can be found under "Personal, Classified", whereas more general comments about the history of science and the evolution of my understanding of the role of science for development can be found under "It All Comes Down to This".

Finally, I will insert a sentence or two in French here and there, since I am still a very proud Québécoise, and believe I should somewhat contribute to French scholarship on issues of technology.

Voilà! C'est tout pour le moment! À la prochaine!

weblog youblog theyblog

First post: a homework! Yippee! ;)

I had to find an online definition of weblog. So here it is, taken from a longer definition on Whatis.com:

A weblog (sometimes shortened to blog or written as "web log" or "Weblog") is a Web site of personal or non-commercial origin that uses a dated log format that is updated on a daily or very frequent basis with new information about a particular subject or range of subjects. The information can be written by the site owner, gleaned from other Web sites or other sources, or contributed by users.

I liked this definition, because it is somewhat more complete than the boring one from Wikipedia (although the full Wiki entry is very interesting and informative), but I have to admit there is a flaw to it: the fact that it states that blogs are of non-commercial origin. More and more companies are establishing their own blogs, from newspapers to car companies. Where is that all going?

Whatis.com is actually mentioning the flowing 'identity' of blogs. It would be interesting to revisit this definition in a few years, to see how much it evolved... because it surely will!

I also reflected back on a comment made by a friend on my first blog: 'Welcome to the Blogosphere!'

The Blogosphere idea is crucial to our understanding of the blog phenomenon. To be a blogger is to be part of a community. And depending on the goals of the blog, it can be an actual exercise in community building... allowing for the sharing of information on certain topics of interest, put forward an agenda, or as we have recently seen, make light on some controversial issues. This is REAL freedom of expression, beyond boundaries, laws.

Lovely!

Pour une définition et un petit historique en français... Wikipédia FR.