"Besides the generally perceived new possibilities of searching (and finding) as well as the distribution of information, the World Wide Web (WWW) opens new possibilities for the construction of knowledge (166)". I agree with this quote that with the internet and the advancement of technology the way we learn and the possibilities in which we gain new information has completely been revolutionized. We no longer need to stand over an encyclopedia and flip through the pages to find information on a word/idea.
We now put the word in google and find hundreds of thousands of articles, many peer reviewed and many are not, on this concept. New information is now in the palm of our hand, but having this information so readily available can definitely make it less credible. Now, we needs to hone in on the skill of being able to separate (essentially) bullshit from actual correct and legitimate information. Whereas years ago, students and other people never really needed to do that, nor did they have a means to.
Society appreciates interactive programs and that is what makes Wiki systems successful. Everyone is allowed to participate in this simple program. It provides people a way to be an active learner and teacher, too. Wiki systems provide a history of a continued, unfinished learning continuum like no other encyclopedia forum before.
Johnson-Eilola
The problem with Wiki systems is found in the first paragraph of this piece. We are comfortable with an unreliable narrative. By using Wikipedia, we are not sure what we are going to get, but yet we use it anyway. Johnson-Eilola goes further to say "we're at ease with Postmodernism." I, for one, am certainly not at ease with this, but I do think that is an accurate generalization.
Meaning is nothing without connection. We wouldn't know what anything meant if someone showed it to us 200 years ago. We would have to be taught, for example, that a pen is something you use on paper to write with. We would then have to be taught what paper is, and how it is made. I definitely agree that contemporary intellectual property law is catching up to postmodernism. A few years ago, my parents and I were at a flea market in DC and my dad took a picture of a booth in which a vender had cool photos in frames. The vender proceeded to freak out at my dad for taking the photos, yelling about my dad about not knowing/respecting the importance of intellectual property. Well, turns out (my Dad knew this) the photos were not even originally his. They were famous photos that he had just reprinted. Clearly, the spirit of IP had been tattered.
I like your anecdote about intellectual property theft. The IP law aspect of JJ's article is what stood out to me the most in this last week's reading. Along with the freedom to construct knowledge that technology facilitates, it seems from your story that there is plenty of freedom for knowledge theft also. Technology allows access to all sorts of things, and this isn't necessarily good thing, as demonstrated by your story. Two hundred years ago, the vendor would have had to go through a lot more effort to steal IP--like he'd have to be an expert painting forger or something. Now that's an admirable skill.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the increased access to information on the Internet, knowledge is becoming less credibly; which is a real shame. This places the burden on the audience to decipher if the source is credible. Finding out if a source is credible sometime presents more difficulty than one would imagine. I know from my Internet experience that I have had difficulties determining the validity of the source and whether I should use them or not. However, the Internet is a great place to find ideas. Even if you do not think your article is 100% credible it will raise questions or point you in places that could have more credibility. I know that I have seen articles on news sites like Huffington Post that I have questioned where the author got their research, but from those articles I was able to find other areas of interest.
ReplyDelete