Suchergebnisse

In La cittadinanza digitale: La crisi dell'idea occidentale di democrazia e la partecipazione nelle reti digitali, Massimo Di Felice describes two fundamental transformations that characterize our time: the advent of digital networks and the environmental crisis. This conjunction would lead the traditional forms of politics – eminently human – to an aporia, since now, in a context of widespread connectivity, elements of other natures – nonhuman – would also act. His proposal for the crisis: to bring all together in a new and diverse common, the digital citizenship. In this regard, he recommends an epistemological review and the formulation of a new lexicon, problematizing concepts such as society, individual and politics. ; Na obra La cittadinanza digitale: La crisi dell'idea occidentale di democrazia e la partecipazione nelle reti digitali, Massimo Di Felice descreve duas transformações fundamentais que caracterizariam nossa época: o advento das redes digitais e a crise ambiental. Essa conjunção levaria as formas tradicionais do fazer político – eminentemente humanas – a uma certa aporia, já que agora, em um contexto de conectividade generalizada, elementos de outras naturezas – não humanas – passariam também a agir. Sua proposta à crise: reunir todos em um novo e diverso comum, a cidadania digital. Defende, para isso, uma revisão epistemológica e a formulação de um novo léxico, problematizando conceitos como sociedade, indivíduo e mesmo política.

Technology is reconfiguring the ways in which we consume, produce and disseminate literature, both within literary studies and outside of the academy. However, most importantly, the apparent breakdown of the gatekeeper function that has been triggered by technology in the distribution of both fiction and criticism leads to a form that looks, at least to some perhaps neo-liberal degree, as though it might be more democratic. In this paper, I explore the ways in which these new technologies unearth value structures within our discipline that have been present for a long time, despite the corrective efforts of cultural studies, but are now more overtly surfacing in a swing back toward Leavisite modes. How are we to strike a balance and sensitivity in our practice of reading and teaching towards a liberal model of value and a top-down authoritarian approach? How might technology enable or hinder such a balancing act?

Technology is reconfiguring the ways in which we consume, produce and disseminate literature, both within literary studies and outside of the academy. However, most importantly, the apparent breakdown of the gatekeeper function that has been triggered by technology in the distribution of both fiction and criticism leads to a form that looks, at least to some perhaps neo-liberal degree, as though it might be more democratic. In this paper, I explore the ways in which these new technologies unearth value structures within our discipline that have been present for a long time, despite the corrective efforts of cultural studies, but are now more overtly surfacing in a swing back toward Leavisite modes. How are we to strike a balance and sensitivity in our practice of reading and teaching towards a liberal model of value and a top-down authoritarian approach? How might technology enable or hinder such a balancing act?

In light of the existing copyright system and the latest developments of the law of the European Union (with a special focus on the authors' home country, Hungary) and the United States, the article tries to answer whether and how the phenomena of Web 2.0 and P2P ("peer-to-peer" filesharing), the digitization for cultural preservation, and several other special technologies affect the culture of our age. This article argues that the several different usages influence the culture in three main ways: it can improve, preserve or deteriorate the culture. Naturally, it is hard to determine, if a use is either right or wrong. For example, P2P filesharing services are generally used for illegal purposes, despite the fact that the technology has several positive effects. Vice versa: one example of Web 2.0, YouTube, collects millions of home videos created by "average users". However, episodes of copyrighted TV shows or sports events are also accessible on the YouTube servers. Similarly, the Google Books Project impressively aims to preserve and provide access to millions of books in digital form. However, the original plan to execute the project raised legitimate copyright and competition law concerns, and so it sheds another light on Google. To sum up: only time will tell, whether a technological innovation or use will result in the improvement of culture or contribute to the deterioration of it. Due to the technological revolution almost all areas of life have undergone a major transformation in the past few decades. Digital technologies earned a vital role in this reform, since they made time, space and energy saving activities possible through replacing analogue technologies.2 Digital technology heavily affected intellectual creative activity as well. The spread of digital technologies have had at least two important consequences: first, intellectual creations may be copied and changed without limitation and without changing the quality.3 Second, due to the evolution of digital networks the distribution of, access to, and the forming of an opinion on accessible works has changed too: it has become easier, faster and more effective – both in time and in place. The traditional forms of human communication have been generally changed as well. Nowadays, people cannot imagine their life without digital technologies. Social networking sites, chat rooms, blogs, podcasts, e-newspapers, or streaming of TV or radio programs are great examples. The evolution of an entirely new digital culture is apparent. Intellectual creative activity has become something of a norm in our everyday lives. It would appear that besides the traditional copyright paradigm a new copyright conception emerges, where the user-generated content earns great importance.4 Due to the mass creation of works of literature, musical and audiovisual works, and photographs the respect of copyright law and intellectual creativity has partially disappeared. The young digital generations – by lack of a better example – may feel that easier, faster and cheaper accessible materials do not have any monetary value. The article starts with an introduction that introduces three separate effects of digital technologies upon the improvement, preservation, and deterioration of digital culture. Part two discusses the phenomena of Web 2.0, i.e. the way internet users communicate via the World Wide Web and contribute to culture at the same time. This part makes it clear that the present copyright rules are capable of solving the legal controversies raised by Web 2.0. Part three reflects upon the controversial question of file sharing. The article concludes that though file sharing may have several positive effects, it is clear that it the application is generally used for illegal activities, and therefore has a remarkable negative effect upon the entertainment industry and culture. Part four introduces the topic of digitization of already existing works, and emphasizes that there are several major differences between the existing copyright regimes of the European Union, the United Kingdom, Hungary and the United States. The author proposes consideration on whether it is necessary to broaden current statutory rules on digitization by libraries, in order to allow for the much broader preservation and making available of the valuable cultural heritage of our world. Based upon this logical line of events the article will continue to introduce the main effects of digital technologies upon the culture: the improvement, the deterioration and the preservation of culture.

ABSTRACT In this paper, T.G. Makarov and E.V. Kobchikova considered digital rights in the system of objects of civil legal relations. The features of digital rights are highlighted. The authors emphasize that digital rights can consolidate rights of various types, in particular, rights to things, property rights, intellectual rights, etc. The application of all these rights is possible using electronic tools in the appropriate information system. The authors concluded that the consolidation of digital rights in russian legislation is terminologically not quite accurate, as well as their assignment to the number of objects of civil rights is not entirely accurate.RESUMEN En este artículo, T.G. Makarov y E.V. Kobchikova consideraron los derechos digitales en el sistema de objetos de relaciones legales civiles. Se destacan las características de los derechos digitales. Los autores señalan que los derechos digitales pueden consolidar derechos de diversa índole, en particular, derechos sobre las cosas, derechos de propiedad, derechos intelectuales, etc. La aplicación de todos estos derechos es posible utilizando herramientas electrónicas en el sistema de información adecuado. Los autores concluyeron que la consolidación de los derechos digitales en la legislación rusa no es terminológicamente del todo precisa, así como su asignación al número de objetos de derechos civiles tampoco lo es.

There is no doubt that we live in exciting times: Ours is the age of many 'silent revolutions' triggered by startups and research labs of big IT companies; revolutions that quietly and profoundly alter the world we live in. Another ten or five years, and self-tracking will be as normal and inevitable as having a Facebook account or a mobile phone. Our bodies, hooked to wearable devices sitting directly at or beneath the skin, will constantly transmit data to the big aggregation in the cloud. Permanent recording and automatic sharing will provide unabridged memory, both shareable and analyzable. The digitization of everything will allow for comprehensive quantification; predictive analytics and algorithmic regulation will prove themselves effective and indispensable ways to govern modern mass society. Given such prospects, it is neither too early to speculate on the possible futures of digital media nor too soon to remember how we expected it to develop ten, or twenty years ago. The observations shared in this book take the form of conversations about digital media and culture centered around four distinct thematic fields: politics and government, algorithm and censorship, art and aesthetics, as well as media literacy and education. Among the keywords discussed are: data mining, algorithmic regulation, sharing culture, filter bubble, distant reading, power browsing, deep attention, transparent reader, interactive art, participatory culture. The interviewees (mostly from the US, but also from France, Brazil, and Denmark) were given a set of common questions as well specific inquiries tailored to their individual areas of interest and expertise. As a result, the book both identifies different takes on the same issues and enables a diversity of perspectives when it comes to the interviewees' particular concerns. ; Roberto Simanowski: Introduction Johanna Drucker: At the intersection of computational methods and the traditional humanities John Cayley: Of Capta, vectoralists, reading and the Googlization of universities Erick Felinto: Mediascape, antropotechnics, culture of presence, and the flight from God David Golumbia: Computerization always promotes centralization even as it promotes decentralization Ulrik Ekman: Network Societies 2.0: The extension of computing into the social and human environment Mihai Nadin: Enslaved by digital technology Nick Montfort: Self-monitoring and corporate interests Rodney Jones: The age of print literacy and 'deep critical attention' is filled with war, genocide and environmental devastation Diane Favro et al.: Surfing the web, algorithmic criticism and Digital Humanities N. Katherine Hayles: Opening the depths, not sliding on surfaces Jay David Bolter: From writing space to designing mirrors Bernard Stiegler: Digital knowledge, obsessive computing, short-termism and need for a negentropic Web

The development of information technologies, and in particular the Internet, has led to the emergence of new social concerns that raise the impossibility of preserving privacy in the digital sphere. This contribution addresses, in historical perspective, the formation of a new socio-political concept of privacy that has replaced the previous one. To this end, the main elements that differentiate both are presented and what are the fundamental sociotechnical transformations that have enabled this conceptual change. The development of the text will lead to defend the suitability of a political view on privacy and ends with the presentation of some recent proposals that advocate understanding privacy as a collective problem. ; El desarrollo de las tecnologías de la información, y en particular Internet, ha supuesto la aparición de nuevas preocupaciones sociales que plantean la imposibilidad de preservar la privacidad ―que no la intimidad― de la población en el ámbito digital. Esta contribución aborda, en perspectiva histórica, la formación de un nuevo concepto sociopolítico de privacidad que ha sustituido al de intimidad en el ámbito digital. A tal fin se presentan los principales elementos que diferencian a ambos y cuáles son las transformaciones sociotécnicas fundamentales que han posibilitado este cambio conceptual. El desarrollo del texto llevará a defender la idoneidad de una mirada política sobre la privacidad y finaliza con la presentación de algunas propuestas recientes que abogan por entender la privacidad como un problema colectivo.

Die umfassende Digitalisierung vieler Lebensbereiche, die derzeit in Europa zu beobachten ist, macht auch vor der Arbeitswelt nicht halt: Vielmehr werden gerade umfassende technische Visionen einer "Industrie 4.0" oder unbegrenzte Freiheiten von "Crowdwork" und ihre möglichen positiven und negativen Konsequenzen intensiv in der Öffentlichkeit, Wissenschaft und Politik diskutiert. Insbesondere Studien, die große Rationalisierungspotentiale digitaler Technologien aufzeigen, sorgten kürzlich für eine große Aufmerksamkeit für das Thema. Allerdings lassen sich – jenseits dieser aktuellen Entwicklungen – schon seit einigen Jahren tiefgreifende Veränderungen in der Arbeitswelt konstatieren, die eng mit technischen Entwicklungen verbunden sind: So ermöglichte das World Wide Web weitreichende Formen der Globalisierung von Arbeit, auf der Ebene des Arbeitsplatzes ließen sich neue Organisationsformen von Wissensarbeit als "Informatisierung" beschreiben. Die Einführung digitaler Technologien lässt sich demnach tatsächlich als Zäsur im herrschenden Wandel von Arbeit verstehen, allerdings ist diese eng verknüpft mit gesellschaftlichen und organisationalen Veränderungen. In diesem Beitrag werden aktuelle Entwicklungen einer digitalen Arbeitswelt anhand von jüngsten Prognosen zur Beschäftigungsentwicklung, der digitalen Entgrenzung von Arbeit und Leben sowie neuen digitalen Formen von Arbeit dargestellt und hinsichtlich ihrer wissenschaftlichen Herausforderungen und gesellschaftlichen Folgen kritisch ...

Using digital media is complicated. Invasions of privacy, increasing dataveillance, digital-by-default commercial and civic transactions and the erosion of the democratic sphere are just some of the complex issues in modern societies. Existential questions associated with digital life challenge the individual to come to terms with who they are, as well as their social interactions and realities. In this article, we identify three contemporary normative responses to these complex issues –digital citizenship, digital rights and digital literacy. These three terms capture epistemological and ontological frames that theorise and enact (both in policy and everyday social interactions) how individuals learn to live in digitally mediated societies. The article explores the effectiveness of each in addressing the philosophical, ethical and practical issues raised by datafication, and the limitations of human agency as an overarching goal within these responses. We examine how each response addresses challenges in policy, everyday social life and political rhetoric, tracing the fluctuating uses of these terms and their address to different stakeholders. The article concludes with a series of conceptual and practical 'action points' that might optimise these responses to the benefit of the individual and society. ; Usar los medios digitales es complicado. Las invasiones de la intimidad, la creciente vigilancia de los datos, las transacciones comerciales y cívicas "digitales por defecto", así como la erosión del ámbito democrático, son sólo algunos de los problemas complejos a los que se enfrentan las sociedades modernas. Cuestiones existenciales asociadas con la vida digital desafían al individuo a asumir quién es, al igual que sus interacciones y realidades sociales. En este artículo identificamos tres respuestas normativas contemporáneas a estos temas complejos —la ciudadanía digital, los derechos digitales y la alfabetización digital. Estos tres términos engloban marcos epistemológicos y ontológicos que teorizan y representan (tanto en las políticas como en las interacciones sociales cotidianas) cómo aprenden los individuos en las sociedades digitalmente mediatizadas. El artículo explora la eficacia de cada una a la hora de abordar las cuestiones filosóficas, éticas y prácticas planteadas por la dataficación, y las limitaciones de la agencia humana como un objetivo global dentro de dichas respuestas. Examinamos cómo afronta cada una de estas respuestas los retos en materia de diseño de políticas, vida social cotidiana y retórica política, haciendo un seguimiento de los usos fluctuantes de estos términos y cómo se dirigen a las distintas partes interesadas. El artículo concluye con una serie de "puntos de actuación" conceptuales y prácticos que podrían optimizar estas respuestas en beneficio del individuo y de la sociedad.

Using digital media is complicated. Invasions of privacy, increasing dataveillance, digital-by-default commercial and civic transactions and the erosion of the democratic sphere are just some of the complex issues in modern societies. Existential questions associated with digital life challenge the individual to come to terms with who they are, as well as their social interactions and realities. In this article, we identify three contemporary normative responses to these complex issues –digital citizenship, digital rights and digital literacy. These three terms capture epistemological and ontological frames that theorise and enact (both in policy and everyday social interactions) how individuals learn to live in digitally mediated societies. The article explores the effectiveness of each in addressing the philosophical, ethical and practical issues raised by datafication, and the limitations of human agency as an overarching goal within these responses. We examine how each response addresses challenges in policy, everyday social life and political rhetoric, tracing the fluctuating uses of these terms and their address to different stakeholders. The article concludes with a series of conceptual and practical 'action points' that might optimise these responses to the benefit of the individual and society. ; Usar los medios digitales es complicado. Las invasiones de la intimidad, la creciente vigilancia de los datos, las transacciones comerciales y cívicas "digitales por defecto", así como la erosión del ámbito democrático, son sólo algunos de los problemas complejos a los que se enfrentan las sociedades modernas. Cuestiones existenciales asociadas con la vida digital desafían al individuo a asumir quién es, al igual que sus interacciones y realidades sociales. En este artículo identificamos tres respuestas normativas contemporáneas a estos temas complejos —la ciudadanía digital, los derechos digitales y la alfabetización digital. Estos tres términos engloban marcos epistemológicos y ontológicos que teorizan y representan (tanto en las políticas como en las interacciones sociales cotidianas) cómo aprenden los individuos en las sociedades digitalmente mediatizadas. El artículo explora la eficacia de cada una a la hora de abordar las cuestiones filosóficas, éticas y prácticas planteadas por la dataficación, y las limitaciones de la agencia humana como un objetivo global dentro de dichas respuestas. Examinamos cómo afronta cada una de estas respuestas los retos en materia de diseño de políticas, vida social cotidiana y retórica política, haciendo un seguimiento de los usos fluctuantes de estos términos y cómo se dirigen a las distintas partes interesadas. El artículo concluye con una serie de "puntos de actuación" conceptuales y prácticos que podrían optimizar estas respuestas en beneficio del individuo y de la sociedad.

This is the accepted version of the following article: Brown, C. & Czerniewicz, L. 2010. Debunking the 'digital native': beyond digital apartheid, towards digital democracy. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 26(5): 357-369., which has been published in final form at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00369.x. ; This paper interrogates the currently pervasive discourse of the 'net generation' finding the concept of the 'digital native' especially problematic, both empirically and conceptually. We draw on a research project of South African higher education students' access to and use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) to show that age is not a determining factor in students' digital lives; rather, their familiarity and experience using ICTs is more relevant. We also demonstrate that the notion of a generation of 'digital natives' is inaccurate: those with such attributes are effectively a digital elite. Instead of a new net generation growing up to replace an older analogue generation, there is a deepening digital divide in South Africa characterized not by age but by access and opportunity; indeed, digital apartheid is alive and well. We suggest that the possibility for digital democracy does exist in the form of a mobile society which is not age specific, and which is ubiquitous. Finally, we propose redefining the concepts 'digital', 'net', 'native', and 'generation' in favour of reclaiming the term 'digitizen'.