So, on to the notes…

—

The Dynamics of Collaborative Innovation: Exploring the tension between knowledge novelty and reuse

Karim Lakhani, Ned Gulley

Karim:

we think collaborative innovation as more modern: open-source/Wikipedia
most major innovations: highly collaborative in history

airplane development: not just Wright brothers, but creation with multiple people
pre-Wright brothers: network of 10 individuals
locus on innovation: moved over to Europe after Wright brothers

collaborative innovation: Meyer’s Analysis

dynamics of collaborative innovation: how people build off of others’ work

Ned:

contest at MathWorks: MATLAB programming contest
usually: smartest person gets the prize
but: not how ideas move/work in the world
contest: notion of borrowing/stealing ideas in contest: create page of code

Competitive Wikipedia
everyone: encouraged to edit articles
if article made worse: thrown away; if better: article edit it kept
would Wikipedia display article editing winner?

MATLAB week-long open collaborative competition for programmers
- entries automatically scored, ranked, displayed immediately
- code author score are visible at all times
- anyone can modify other’s code

leaders –> view entry: person makes new entry and becomes leader

first place: completely objective
good code: gets better optimization score from test lead

really about reputation and interaction with community

what we see in practice:
people: anxious to acknowledge people they took code from

types of changes:
- Big changes (leaps)
I know a much better way to do this, replaces previous code
- Small changes (tweaks)
minor optimization; tweakers don’t need to understand full optimization to improve code

code: improves over time
sometimes: people take best code at certain point in time & make it worse

by inserting new idea after previously solved problem: people swarm on it to work with and improve idea

tough question: how would you value tweakers over leapers
hard to say who really is making the important contributions

systematic variations: tweak bombs: take the entry in the lead, sniff around for secret number replacements to test
changes to the lead entry: fly off like sparks

social signals: sent through entry titles
- scrambled eggs
- rotten eggs
- I didn’t start the fire
- Don’t get obfuscated… follow the light
- You Call This Collaboration? Give Me a Break

motivation:
to participate: opportunity: for personal glory or collaboration?

behavior of successful code:
high rank, time on top, high status author, clarity, elegance, novelty, etc.

tension: not between any two coders
code: wants to propagate
coder: wants to block code propagation

a chicken is only an egg’s way of making another egg
a hacker is only code’s way of making more code

—

Karim:

collaborative innovation: implicit tension between collective and individual:

collective point of view: value contributions that get reused more often
individual view: value being the top amongst peers

social value of contribution (code) = # of times lines of code reused
relative novelty: helps you; too new: others don’t use it/know what to do with it
value of adding new things, after a while: gets too complicated
not much value in borrowing code, but if you use it in the right way it’s very valuable

leaders: borrow > novelty, in this setting

For now, the notes:

—

Designing Culture: The Technological Imagination at Work: Anne Balsamo

—

book: transmedia project

addresses 3 points:

technological innovation: transform what is known to what is possible
technological imagination: engage materiality of world to create conditions for future world making
cultural reproduction: development of new narratives, myths, rituals;

technology, the world, culture: created anew
training of technological imagination: necessary

designers: work scene of technological emergence

ch. 1 – culture in the age of innovation

polemic of book: need to train imaginations to take seriously technological innovations: responsibility of educators across curriculum
how humanities can serve as resources: to engage new technologies

ch. 2 – gendering the technological imagination

always gendered, but we didn’t recognize it as such
biological reproductive technologies: connects to media technologies as premier reproductive technologies of our age: draws from feminist criticism on reproduction

ch. 3 – the performance of innovation

work on future of reading: w/ embryonic technologies

ch. – public interactives and technological literacies
designed to communicate history that is all of ours
future of literacies

ch. – working the paradigm shift
focus on literal labor: participatory culture: call people to the hard work required by the paradigm shift

ch. – the work of the book in a digital age
Q: why are you writing a print-based book?

—

transmedia project: relates to other previous projects:

interactive multimedia documentary (“women of the world talk back”) on women’s rights held by UN in Beijing

practices on new media journalism

museum exhibit: designed to probe how we might read in the future: not abandon but rethink the print-based book

—

we need to do something different to bridge the two cultures
need to create new institutional places: multidisciplinary research/projects

new participants: women, underrepresented participants
new commitments: requires everyone to be learners again
collaborative teams: from early work in feminist organizing
new spaces: where people can work together on technological things

—

distributed research network: in UC Irvine, Boston, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago
scholarship in a digital age: will look different: local and distributed
understanding technological infrastructure to support distributed research network

digital research & learning @ McArthur: funded: museums, libraries, schools, recreation, home, after-school
claim: learning is changing in a digital age: eg. learning occurs in distributed environment, not just one local place
think about how museums/libraries will function in distributed learning environment

—

What’s next?

XFR: Take 2
Digital Learning Objects: Open Education
MIxed Reality Learning Environments: Morse’s Law, Nintendo Wii (gesture-based interface)
Thinking with Objects: DIY movement, makers culture movement (making things with your hands; virtual: only simulations of what we used to do with our hands)

—

Q: what has everyone been thinking about futures of museums/libraries

—

Q&A:

Q: what is the future of designing librarians; how do you design professionals to adapt to new changes?

A: information designers: need standardization of metadata; also need people to understand how (meta-)information also has narrative, cultural effectivity; when we get to semantic web: it can’t be stupid

Q: Weinberger: future of paper-based books?

A: many genres of paper-based books that will migrate to the digital space; other genres: that aren’t going to disappear, because of physicality: paper-based: will long outlive human lives: part of case history; have to maintain digital archive
libraries: becoming museums of books that have ‘collections’

Q: Weinberger: in future w/ electronic readers: publishers won’t actually print books: will want to move directly to digital

A: things that are slipping away in a digital age: we will want to preserve

Q: humanities in the future: esp. w/ focus on publication

A: rethink scholarly publication, but I’m not the one to take on such a project;
have to learn to read again
UChicago: thinking about new paradigm of peer-review process for publication
tenure cases for those w/ digital scholarship

Q: printing a book: just output form; talk about crafting in digital environment: you: on laptop, w/ word processor

A: these kind of questions are critical, esp. w/ close reading of electronic text
authoring backwards
designer parallels with author

discussion:
libraries: providing ACCESS to books, etc.; cost of maintaining digital libraries: low, but not zero; decisions will always need to be made about curation
assumption: possibility of a canon: where all the ‘good’ books are

Q: “science fiction: the mythology of the industrial age”

Q: what do you think might be lost?

A: course: history of literacy: ongoing question of why is it important to remember?: disturbing: youth: just-in-time learners/rememberers
we haven’t taught value of remembering
culturally: remembering was more valuable to the other generation: ties to why history is important: ties to “future of the past”

—

digital divide: the other way: economic/social reasons
need to have interdisciplinary places of learning

—

OLPC: plan: have impact on learning
lack in opportunity: how do you give kids high quality education, opportunity to learn

school reform: impossible if done top-down; way it will change: generation of children who come to school w/ different skills/expectations: will change school
these laptops: will be part of manufacturing change

title: “Confessions of a Fundamentalist”
passionate about free/open source software
fundamentalist about: learning itself: what are the best ways to position/plant seeds of learning

constructionism: role for computation as thing to think with; something children should engage with
not just access to knowledge, but appropriation of knowledge
learn through doing; what’s a better tool for doing than a computer
want to engage people in things they’re passionate about

child-centric v. teacher-centric view of education/learning
everyone’s a learner, everyone’s a teacher
humans: expressive & social

proprietary v. free/open source
a = deals with delivery of knowledge
b = trying to move over the standard deviation: users: people who appropriate, rather than just access, knowledge
open source: culture of appropriation: cultural value

service-oriented stuff: not very good
phones: about service, not construction: service model: example: people don’t write programs or essays ON their phone
point: social nature of phones
optimal situation for learning: phones: lacking in other attributes (teaching, learning, expressive)

example: Dynabook, with background
building platform: skewing odds to ~ activity happening
1. build
2. critique/reflect
3. iterate (go back to step 1)

learning: wants to be free
culture around open source –> how do you decide about governance? difference between governance and engagement of community in critical discourse

engaging in collaboration, engaging in critique
tools to do this: lacking in education (maybe not university ed, but definitely in primary ed)

example:
Nigeria: English = official language, but spoken: probably 3rd largest
kids: built spelling dictionary for Igbo

Sugar: primary user experience on OLPC
at core of Sugar: notion of activity
before: run applications; turned “application” into “activity”: enhancement of application: 1) brings notion of sharing/sociability into the open: always present; presence of others is always with you; eg. ability to share document between users, whether online or offline; 2) journal: file system that automatically saves everything you do: never have to save/back up; creating a diary/portfolio of your work; place to watch your progress, have conversation with another about your progress: importance of progress, march through time: important feature of learning; 3) transparency: no ceiling; music: network with other laptops to play music, can compose music, make own instruments
Python: language that underlies Sugar: open

[why cell phones will never replace computers: memory capacity]

example: want to change metrics inside Sugar so that kids can measure in anything, any metric they imagine

David Hilbert: 23 problems of mathematics
23 problems facing people in technology & learning:
- how to make the network work?
- make code that is malleable yet won’t lead to malware
- better tools for localization & internationalization
- power: use a scarce resource better? even if you’re using calories to crank in power, better use them intelligently
- construction in scale
- economics: correlating economic development with learning: hypothesis or fact that learning leads to economic development
- governance
(will be blogged)

—
Q&A:

Q: definition of free
A: not as in beer
comes down to appropriation: example: learn to code by copying code, breaking it down & changing it

Q: small inexpensive laptops: ie. Asus EEE
ultimately: help cause of learning via computers by making hardware more available, or hurt it by losing sight of mission of learning
A: definitely help it; $200 for laptop, versus $10,000/year on education; in developing countries: maybe $200/year on education

Q: cultural implications behind OLPC
A: one item of 23: understand culture vs. construction; constructionism: about people, about how they learn: based on Piaget’s constructivism
teacher: having more fun

Q: resistance — proprietary companies: don’t like idea of open source; how does interaction of proprietary companies and developing nations play out?
A: big social/economic battles in next few decades; people that go with open source: will do better in the long run;

Q: concern: not if enough laptops will be available in 1 week, but how many available in 5 years
A: OLPC: trying to keep the pressure on: so that industry won’t slip back; 5 affordable laptops announced in the last week
if we replace chalkboards with laptops: loss of value

Q: modern edu: these principles aren’t being taught
A: part of education: should be dirt on hands experience
lots of children, but “laptop” is part of OLPC so don’t forget that

Q: what is it that drives discussion: people, community, tools? what assumptions drive the balance and what we can do about it?
A: open source projects: rely on developers but also multiple volunteers; don’t think many are in it for the glory, but think they can make a difference

Q: people seem more willing to work on things and jump into them if they’re not shiny/new; how does design seem to enable more interest in working inside the laptop?
A: thought about it in slightly different way; skins: can replace set with more inviting images; other issue: don’t want things to break, but want people to explore: how do you make environment where you can find that balance?; instead of make it hard to break, make it easy to repair, so that people are willing to take risks and make mistakes

I thought it already difficult to take notes and eventually blog after a live feed had already informed the people who cared about the content. Is there really a point in taking notes if the original content is available in full? Probably not. But I don’t want to suggest that blogging is out of the option. For one, blogging, although a form of journalism, is also a form of exploration, through essay form. The author may process the original content and produce reactions: argument, hypothesis, questions. The blog medium may also take on a hypertextual nature, unlike paper or televisual journalism, so even more information can be accessed to provide more context for the audience. In fact, blog articles plus original visual media is possibly the best opportunity for the digital author, because he has a primary text to reference directly, like a film.

I bring all this up because Berkman@10 is webcasting the conference’s panels and lectures, and will most likely publish the video recordings as it has done in the past. The Berkman Center’s actions help push forward initiatives like BU’s OpenCourseWare project to get videos of lectures, and other course materials, online for public use. And I’m happy about that.

My obsession with blogs exploded at the beginning of 2008, when I began reading through Diana Kimball‘s website (she’s on the ROFLcon staff) and finally discovered Henry Jenkins’ blog (the director of MIT’s Comparative Media Studies department). Actually, I would say it really began over the summer, when I began to download hundreds of podcasts and listen to them while working in the basement of Harvard’s Houghton Library (aka. my summer job). A month’s worth of audio later, I became addicted to searching out information on the Internet. Combined with my discovery of the MIT CMS website and the concentration of media studies, this quest to learn from the bloggers of the simply escalated into hours of “healthy” procrastination.

I have been a “blogger” for a good while now through LiveJournal’s platform, mainly commenting on the quotidianities of my life. This year, I was inspired to actually give birth to my own weblog, because I felt an urge to actually respond to the articles I was reading.

The problems associated with publishing my own writing, though, are endless.

For one, I always feel as if I will plagiarize, not someone’s work, but someone’s idea. Actually, with my luck over the past three months of 2008, I have had a multitude of light bulb clicks for articles that ultimately end up on the New York Times or one of the Berkman Center’s blogs. In the first few years of the new millennium, I realized that we basically live in the Age of the Experts. To be original means to win the race to a niche idea and publish it, either in Barnes & Noble or on a webpage.

Realizing that I will probably not have many entirely novel theories and thoughts, I present my second problem: the awareness that much of my writing will not, in fact, be original, but instead be in response to other blogs, scholarly publications, and newspaper articles. Not that this is a bad thing. In fact, many bloggers appreciate feedback on what they have written. And these bloggers usually respond to the comments they receive. Essentially, I am continue the circular supply-and-demand economy of digital information.

The difference with white paper publication remains that I can participate in a similar economy, working inside my head. When I read and reread my old posts, then get a craving to edit my horrible style decide to add a few tidbits to an article, I can easily edit it. Back in high school, when I wrote a paper, it was done — I had no desire to look at it again. With a constant bombardment of information, I would not be surprised to find myself editing older articles more often than continuing them in new posts. So, I’ll try my hardest to add a header to each emended entry.

Where will I go with this blog? Hopefully to graduate school (no, seriously). Topically, I want to write as much about Internet culture as possible. On the side, I’ll comment on my classes at Boston University, my experiences swing dancing in Boston, and those thoughts that would make great subjects for first-year university writing seminars. Maybe I’ll even take a few of my articles, expand them in my free time, and publish a few in actual magazines. I’m feeling ambitious. But, hey, we can do anything with the Internet.