Fantastic collage, and each part of it very thought provoking! For me, some of the themes that strike me are the idea of “implanting memories” that came up in the films, and the Cartesian mind/body dualism apparent in many of those ideas. As we moved beyond that, the blurring of boundaries between human and machine and a questioning of what ‘humanness’ is came to mind as I was looking over the images. Really like it!
Great video! For me, it speaks about the utopian/dystopian oppositions we’ve looked at in this block, and also how we might consider ‘ethics’ – how might machines ‘understand’ this, the reproduction of existing inequalities, flawed ‘human’ ethics and the problematic nature of putting the ‘human’ at the centre of all this. Really got me thinking!
As we end our first block on cyberculture, it continues to strike me how many ideas about technology and education appear rooted in dualisms which tend to centre (a certain kind of) ‘human’, whilst othering the ‘digital’ (Knox 2015).
What kind of ‘human’, however, influences the design of ‘artificial intelligence’, and what assumptions may be baked into the algorithms that influence the choice of content we include in our lifestreams? Does this reproduce existing biases or privilege a certain view of ‘human’ ‘intelligence’? What might be the implications for education and learning analytics?
If ‘machines’ can ‘learn’, does the responsibility still lie with the programmer? If ‘distributed cognition replaces autonomous will’ (Hayles 1999: 288), should we instead think in terms of ‘cognitive assemblages’ and ‘nonconscious cognition’? Reflecting on this, I found an example of distributed cognition through slippingglimpse (Hayles 2008).
I continued this week to consider how technology is often visualised as a ‘tool’ or ‘enhancement’ (‘Ping Body’, Stelarc). Moving beyond technology ‘enhanced’ learning (Bayne 2015a), and towards a critical posthumanist view, can we imagine a view of education where the human subject is not separate nor central but the human and non-human are entangled in a ‘creative “gathering”’ (Bayne 2015b)? How might we visualise this?
This paper examines what the term ‘postdigital’ might mean for education through the discussion of human-technology relationships. It begins with a summary of two general interpretations of the postdigital: firstly, to understand the ‘post’ as meaning simply ‘posterior to’ the digital, suggesting a different stage in the perception and use of technology; and secondly, to consider the ‘post’ as signalling a critical appraisal of the assumptions embedded in the general understanding of the digital. Subsequently, the paper outlines three critical perspectives on the digital with specific relevance for educational concerns. The first examines the economic rationales underpinning digital technology, focusing on the idea of the platform and the assumed benefits of sharing. The second discusses the role of the digital in educational policy and the compound effects of the metrification of institutional quality. The third section explores the digital as ‘material’, and the increasing attention paid to issues of labour and the exploitation of natural resources required to produce digital technologies. These perspectives suggest an understanding of the postdigital in terms of profound and far-reaching socio-technical relations, which have significant consequences for thinking about the purpose, focus, and governance of education in contemporary times.
Three commercially released facial-analysis programs from major technology companies demonstrate both skin-type and gender biases, according to a new paper researchers from MIT and Stanford University will present later this month at the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency.
What a great way to visualise your journey, David, and I’m also amazed at how much content is feeding into our lifestreams (automated albeit curated)! Your screenome really brought to mind how much data is being collected about students by institutions and companies involved in learning analytics – but what conclusions are drawn, who is drawing those conclusions and why, and do students know/understand/have a say in it? The screenome does particularly make me consider that we will all here likely draw different conclusions from the subset of screenshots you presented. Really thought provoking!
Really enjoying the questions and imagery, particularly where no humans are shown! It got me thinking about where this idea of the ‘human’ has come from, what would ‘nature’ look like if ‘we’ had never existed, what might we ‘look like’ to machines…and if making these kind of distinctions (always putting the human at the centre of it all) is just something (some) humans have done? If we don’t put the ‘human’ at the centre, how might this affect our thinking about education and technology?
Very thought provoking!