The Motor of the Internet

        Bryan and Jase made some good posts this past week, and whether they knew it or not, made a connection that unearthed what might be one of the most prevelent forces of our time. Jase posted about the hacker group anonymous. For those of you who haven't been on the internet very long, this article should make a good enough introduction. Suffice it to say, they're basically the definition of a 'troll' - people who traverse the internet with the sole purpose of  getting a good laugh at others expense. However, they're not just your average bunch of troublesome nerds- despite being leaderless and disorganized, the 'group' has played a vital role in attacks on the Church of Scientology, the FBI, Sony, MasterCard, and even manifested quite a bit with the Occupy movement. They have something called the Low Orbit Ion Cannon (LOIC), which is a DDOS network loosely constructed that lets them crash websites and networks around the world. So what do these 4chan troublemakers have to do with Betty White and sprezzatura? They use the same weapon. Not that Betty White has an ion cannon in her basement, but Anonymous' greatest weapon isn't its computers - it's what they give as their motivation for all their attacks; they do everything 'for the LOLZ".

     As ridiculous as it is to type that acronym in a serious sentence, it's the same concept as sprezzatura, sarcasm, or any other humor used to mask and defend one's self. Anonymous has no defined leadership, and no means of enforcing any leadership claims that are made. In the 'official' decleration of war, it says "... for the good of mankind, and for our own enjoyment, we shall proceed to expel you from the internet and dismantle the church of Scientology in its present form." Thus we see, rather than a leader or set of ideals, the driving force behind Anonymous, behind a group that cost hundreds of organizations millions of dollars, is laughs.

       While this may seem like a new thing to some, making a mockery of held beliefs and societal standards just for laughs, as well as rejection of order and reason are not new ideas. In the later half of the 20th century, new philosophies of arose from the Dada movement to Existentialism. Authors like Ayn Rand, Sarte, and others rejected everything that pointed to world with any meaning or purpose and instead, embraced a godless world with moral relativism (Atlas Shrugged, anyone?). Faced with this, as Sisyphus is faced with his boulder in Camus' example, one needed to make one's own pleasure from the struggle of life. Perhaps Anonymous is merely the next phase of existentialism? And not just Anonymous, but everyone that ever became famous (or infamous) on the internet - for the most part, the sole reason for their success (or failure) was because people found it funny. Given the lack of strict control on the internet, there is sometimes a wild-wild-west feel to it. So like the existentialists, and like Anonymous, when order is gone, we rely on humor, or whatever our basest appeal is at the moment. The leading force behind the internet is not the government, the media, or even facebook. It's the zeitgeist that drives millions of people around the world to attack or defend whatever is popular or funny en masse. There were quite a few posts for and against SOPA that show just how the zeitgeist works. Did most people actually care about DNS regulation and piracy? No, but it was 'cool', so they emailed their senators. We all recognized that the internet could be a tool for something great, like SETI or wikipedia, but we also recognize that it's main use isn't those things - its for looking at pictures of cats with funny captions. That is, until someone decides that it would be funnier to take that picture and replace your profile picture on facebook with it...

       So next time you get frustrated for someone hacking your MySpace or Twitter, remember that's it's nothing personal, because the real people to blame are the post-modernists from the 1950s. The internet is just a reflection of what really drives and interests us, and the they're are just doing it for kicks and giggles. Why so serious?

Henry Darger: If only he had a laptop

     I don't know about you all, but I had never heard of Henry Darger until I stumbled upon him during a foray into artists on Wikipedia. This is to be expected, as he was a hermit his whole life, who could count his friends on one hand. However, after his death a series of fifteen full-length novels and hundreds of paintings were found inside his house. Today, his work has received praise from various  institutions, mostly for his artwork rather than writing. Unfortunately he never heard a word of it. While there are countless artists that go without fame during their lifetime, Henry is an extreme case where very few, if anybody, even knew he existed (he stayed home when not working as a custodian).
     I find it interesting that the class I am in now as a college student, has the ability to publish our thoughts and comments to the world, and even publish a book online with little or no effort, and certainly no requirement of skill or talent. Thanks technology, anyone can become an internet star (whether they want to or not), and be seen and heard by thousands, if not millions around the globe. How many Henry Dargers are out there, with talents and ideas unpublished simply because they had no outlet? I personally see the internet as an great tool for allowing people to share and specialize in their interests - you really like socks? There's a whole community out there for you. On the internet, being a niche artist is more than possible (like this cheese artist, for example). So, go out there and post, folks! Take whatever your passionate about, throw it out there, and you'll be the better off for it- there's an audience for everything now - even for Nicholas Cage freaks. And who knows? Maybe you'll even live long enough to see your work become famous. More than we can say for ol' Henry.

Crowdsourcing and Crime

Last semester a friend and I did a little experimentation with crowdsourcing, without actually realizing it. We took some sidewalk chalk to the wall at the ramp south of campus. After finishing a little winter-break picture, we left the chalk at the base, with a note that said "help yourself". I came back later, and found it had doubled in size.

What I noticed was the overwhelmingly positive nature of what people had drawn and written. Before we left, someone passing told me "you know that's grafitting, right?". The thing is, he was right! However, if you've ever noticed grafitti in restrooms, on buildings, and in desks, it's almost universally crude at best, and obscene at worst. However, the 'graffiti' I found later added on was overwhelmingly positive. Wikipedia, and other open forums, turn out positive as well in the long run (despite the rabble rousers - we'll get to that in trolling, I believe). When a medium is closed off to the public, that doesn't mean nobody uses it, just the people who have no regard for the law. Take the prohibition, for example - alcohol sales didn't stop, they were taken over by criminals (thus, the prohibition was the 'birth' of organized crime in america) When it's opened up, however, people with something good to have a voice, and I feel that they outnumber those who don't.

Censorship and restrictions on digital formats might affect the volume of information flow, but more evident is how they affect the nature- Peer to Peer file transfer is a great way to spread large files, and has the potential to share vast amounts of information - textbooks, education software, openware. Perhaps due to the stigma on filesharing portrayed by its opponents, though, the overwhelming majority of PtP traffic is in illegally copied material- music, games, and unfortunately, pornography. If we as a culture hope to get the most out of technology, we have to be willing to accept it openly, rather than attempt to restrict it. Let's not have another Prohibition, but instead, an Enlightenment. Happy Blackout day, everone!

Nature of the Beast

Any representation of information has an inherent bias in the medium. Take maps, for example. Taking the earth, and displaying it in a 2D format requires you to make choices in how to display it. Those choices are the bias. I don't really think about this when I look at a map, and unless you're a cartographer, I assume you don't either. But personally, when I saw this map here, I realized just how large a bias I'd had (the other way never really did seem to be 2/3 water).

I see the internet kind of like a new kind of map. We get to recreate the world around us, and share it with everyone, but there's a bias. Through all the arguments about copyright holders and profits, and even the necessity of publishers, let us not forget that the very nature of the electronic medium is to let information flow freely. Something as simple as Ctrl+C is enough to reduplicate the entire life's work of an artist, or all the information of every major war in the past 20 years. While we must define how much information should flow, and how free it should be, it's going against the grain- free, unlimited content is the nature of the beast. The only price we pay for this freedom is that anyone with a laptop can get a little too much coverage- like my friend Vermin Supreme here. But that's something for another post. Vermin 2012!

What do you know about....

the 19th century and information! Good question. Sorry to pull a Clinton here, but that depends very much on your definition of 'know'. I've studied the 1800s enough to be familiar enough with who did what when, but how much is actually contained inside of my head? Very little. Rarely do I memorize information that can be pulled up in seconds, and when I do it usually stays there only as long as the test. I guess that in itself is a kind of commentary about information, which is the other half of my assignment. So, before I go to refresh myself on the notes of previous history classes, here is what information actually resides in my head.

American history I know pretty well; War of 1812, Louisiana Purchase, civil war, gilded age, all that good stuff. My grasp on the world stage of that century is a little shakier. I haven't taken a history class in over three years. What I do recall is the collapse of empires and the rise of technology. Asia began to open up, Edison and Tesla make important steps in the field of electricity, and science in general expands greatly. Darwin shakes up things with his 'Origin of species', and slavery starts to be abolished. Basically, the 19th century breaks down the walls established in the medieval world and sets the stage for technology and globalization, which was realized later in the 20th century.

As for information, it's kind of a self-referential loop to know something about information, isn't it? I very much like the three concepts outlined in class: consume, create, and connect. I feel that those are very pertinent to information in our world today. The internet and technology has created a veritable flood of information that drowns quite a number of people. Despite the ready availability, vast populations still reside in ignorance of much of the advances in science, world politics, and basically all the advantages that technology affords us. The ability to filter information and getting the right knowledge to the right people is, I feel, one of the greatest tasks of this digital age. No one person or organization can sit atop the internet and try to funnel everything to the right place, so the answer lies more in the direction of getting the masses to guide themselves, by connecting themselves to the right people, and the right people to themselves. Like the catch-phrase from class, 50 brains are better than 1, even if the 1 has a PhD. So what do I actually know about information? I know that it's important, and I would like to know more about it. That's about all I've got.

How Digitally Civilized am I?

Organisms exist and thrive so long as they either adapt to the environment around them, or adapt the environment to them. In the beginning, man made computers to solve his problems, or adapted them to suit himself. Now, computers and electronics have infiltrated every aspect of life, and it is we who must adapt to the computers around us. I personally have only a rudimentary knowledge of programming, networking, and the ins-and-outs of the machine. However, I feel more secure in my knowledge of how to survive in a digital world, and I feel that is what 'digitally civilized' means. Having grown up using computers to do homework, connect with friends, and research, I feel comfortable accepting technology as a part of my life and using it in an informed, efficient fashion. That's not to say I'm good at it, though. I hope that this class will significantly increase my understanding of how this digital world works, and how I can better 'civilize' myself to thrive in our electronic environment.

Introduction

Name: Jared Halpin

Age: 22

I was born and raised in Virginia, and love the east coast. I served a mission in Arcadia, CA, speaking mandarin chinese. I enjoy enjoying things, and I generally switch hobbies every couple of weeks. As of late, I am trying to learn french and the ukulele. My longer running hobbies are the harmonica, reading, hanging out, and learning. I eat dark chocolate like a junkie shoots speed, and the results are about the same. I think I am a sophmore, but am not sure. I am also unsure about my major. It will be either Chinese, Computer Science, or I will drop out and live in the mountains.