User:)biyibiyibiyi(/RW&RM 04/bibliography

Networking, Infrastructure, Protocols

* Galloway, A. (2004). Protocol: How Control Exists After Decentralization. MIT Press.

* Larkin, B. (2013). The Politics and Poetics of Infrastructure. Annual Review of Anthropology, 42(1), pp.327-343.

* Easterling, K. (2014). Extrastatecraft; London ; Brooklyn, NY: Verso

* Aranda, J., Kuan Wood, B., Vidokle, A., Assange, J., Berardi Bifo, F., Diederichsen, D., Latour, B., Lovink, G., MacCormack, P., Obrist, H. and Steyerl, H. (2015). The Internet Does Not Exist. Berlin: Sternberg Press.

* Barbrook, R. and Cameron, A. ()The Internet Revolution: From Dot-com Capitalism to Cybernetic Communism. Amsterdam: Institute for Network Cultures.

* Abraham, A. and Bansal, L. (2006). In the shade of the commons. Amsterdam: Waag Society.

Dragana, D. and Charitos, D. (2017). Going Off the Cloud: The Role of the Art in the Development of a User Owned & Controlled Connected World. Journal of Peer Production, Issue 9

Dragana, D. (2014). Counter-Infrastructures: Critical Empowerment and Emancipation in a Networked World. Media N Journal. Vol 10, No.3

Abbing, R. and Morandi, M. (2016) The stupid network that we know and love. Available at https://machineresearch.wordpress.com/2016/09/26/marino-monti-roel-abbing/

cheek, cris, Braxton Soderman and Nicole Starosielski.(2013) Network Archaeology. Amodern Journal. Vol. 2

Antoniadis, P. (2016) Local Networks for Local Interactions: Four Reasons Why and a Way Forward. First Monday. Volume 21, Number 12.

Toupin, S. (2016) Gesturing Towards "Anti-Colonial Hacking" and its Infrastructure. Journal of Peer Production

Cramer, F. () Peer-to-Peer Services: Transgressing the Archive (and its melodies?). Digital Craft. Available at http://www.digitalcraft.org/index.php?artikel_id=502

* Striegl, L. and Emerson, L. (2019). Anarchive as technique in the Media Archaeology Lab | building a one Laptop Per Child mesh network. International Journal of Digital Humanities, 1(1), pp.59-70.

Media Archaeology

* Rosenzweig, R. (1998). Wizards, Bureaucrats, Warriors, and Hackers: Writing the History of the Internet. The American Historical Review, 103(5), p.1530.

Hertz,G. (2009) Methodologies of Reuse in the Media Arts: Exploring Black Boxex, Tatics and Archaeologies. Ditigal Arts and Culture

Open Source Software/Hardware Practices

* Mazzilli-Daechsel, S. (2019). Simondon and the maker movement. Culture, Theory and Critique, pp.1-13.

Abbing, R. and Morandi, M. (2016). Using a Teletype Model 43 with Gnu/Linux. MALware Technical Report. Available at: https://mediaarchaeologylab.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/MALware_Roel-Martino.pdf

* Markoff, J. (2014). What the dormouse said. New York: Penguin Books.

It's quite lengthy and rich with details, writing from a journalistic perspective on how personal computer is invented. I am missing critical commentary on, for example, when once computer become personal, does it become an instrument of liberation or subjectification?

* Abraham, A. and Bansal, L. (2006). In the shade of the commons. Amsterdam: Waag Society.

Nafus, D.(2011). Patches Don't Have Gender: What is Not Open in Open Source Software. New Media & Society

Coffin, J (2006) Analysis of Open Source Principles in Diverse Collaborative Communities. First Monday, volume 11, number 6

Coleman, G. (2012). Coding Freedom. Princeton University Press.

Kelty, C. (2008). Two Bits: The Cultural Significance of free Software. Duke University Press

Techno-Feminism

Nafus, D.(2011). Patches Don't Have Gender: What is Not Open in Open Source Software. New Media & Society

Maker Movement

* Lindtner, S. (2015). Hacking with Chinese Characteristics. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 40(5), pp.854-879.

Dragana, D. and Charitos, D. (2017). Going Off the Cloud: The Role of the Art in the Development of a User Owned & Controlled Connected World. Journal of Peer Production, Issue 9

an overview of maker movement in China from the very first hacker spaces. The writer took noticed of the unique cultural fabrics that exist in Chinese context of maker culture. It also provided brief history of how maker culture originated in Silicon Valley. Origination of maker culture in the U.S. was instilled by media such as the Wired Magazine, as ways to enabling of new forms of citizen science and democratizing technology production. It drew critical comparisons between the Chinese context and elite reuse culture; such as, the understanding of dealing e-waste in mundane small shops in China as making out of necessity and intuitive acts, as compared to reuse promoted as an compensation towards consumerism.

The article also discussed topics of authorship and IP(intellectual property) in context of Chinese manufacturing. It cited "Gongkai", a principle that refer to open sharing principle in Chinese manufacturing and "Gongban", a prototype board that's shared across various components in manufacturing business to decrease cost. This is cited as example that differs to the quintessential Western open source culture.

The examination of Chinese maker movement offered by author's field work challenges western authority and authenticity claims of what counts as innovation, creativity, and design; challenges a global maker movement that subsumes local practices in the visions and historical references to American digital culture.

Relevancy to be determined/Broader scope

Bridle, J. (2018). New Dark Age: Technology and the End of the Future. London ; Brooklyn, NY: Verso

* Crary, J. (2014). 24/7. London: Verso.

* Han, B. (2017). Psychopolitics. London ; Brooklyn, NY: Verso

* Halpern, O. (2015). Beautiful data. Durham: Duke University Press.

* Turner, F. (2010). From Counterculture to Cyberculture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

No Longer Relevant

de Kloet, J. (2002). Digitisation and Its Asian Discontents: The Internet, Politics and Hacking in China and Indonesia