User:)biyibiyibiyi(/RW&RM 04/thesis o 0 0 0: Difference between revisions

From XPUB & Lens-Based wiki
No edit summary
Line 4: Line 4:
<p>In the present tense, my research responds to pervasive phenomenons and realities of techno- hegemony, such as forms of centralization, censorship and surveillance. Decentralizing practices and DIY hacktivism offer demystifying and empowering potentials to weave counter narratives against techno-hegemonic realities. The counter narrative also constructs interpretive tools to comprehend technology. Today's society at large present a rift between technological advancement and civic understanding of technology, due to technical thresholds, barriers created by intellectual property rights, and decreased knowledge mobility working in hyper-specialized divisions of labor. DIY hacktivism and decentralizing practices offer porosity, transparency and flexibility unavailable within centralized organizations. </p>
<p>In the present tense, my research responds to pervasive phenomenons and realities of techno- hegemony, such as forms of centralization, censorship and surveillance. Decentralizing practices and DIY hacktivism offer demystifying and empowering potentials to weave counter narratives against techno-hegemonic realities. The counter narrative also constructs interpretive tools to comprehend technology. Today's society at large present a rift between technological advancement and civic understanding of technology, due to technical thresholds, barriers created by intellectual property rights, and decreased knowledge mobility working in hyper-specialized divisions of labor. DIY hacktivism and decentralizing practices offer porosity, transparency and flexibility unavailable within centralized organizations. </p>


<p>The making and hacking of of distributed, peer to peer infrastructure, networks and protocols construct the counter narrative towards centralization, by promising porosity, transparency and flexibility unavailable in centralized systems. Very often, decentralizing practices are associated with F/LOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software) tools and its tenets. The hacking process often call for transparency in making, such as making public and accessible the materials and technical procedures. These information are written within the framework of technical texts such as tutorials, user manuals, and bug reports. Such texts may appear to be instructive, technical, universal and decontextualized by nature. However, critical interpretation towards instructive texts can activate them as public sites to interface with technology, interject discourses and instigate collective making. In my research, the writing of technical and instructive texts is taken as a lens to probe into larger processes of maker culture, hacktivism and decentralizing practices. By examining the writing of technical and instructive texts in both contemporary practices and media archaeology, I aim to address the importance of making acknowledging privileges, making visible barriers of access, and diversifying contextualized understanding of hacktivism, maker culture and decentralizing practices. </p>
<p>The making and hacking of of distributed, peer to peer infrastructure, networks and protocols construct the counter narrative towards centralization, by promising porosity, transparency and flexibility unavailable in centralized systems. Very often, decentralizing practices are associated with F/LOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software) tools and its tenets. The hacking process often call for transparency in making, such as making public and accessible the materials and technical procedures. These information are written within the framework of technical texts such as tutorials, user manuals, and bug reports. Such texts may appear to be instructive, technical, universal and decontextualized by nature. However, critical interpretation towards instructive texts can activate them as public sites to interface with technology, interject discourses and instigate collective making. In my research, the writing of technical and instructive texts is taken as a lens to probe into larger processes of maker culture, hacktivism and decentralizing practices. By examining the writing of technical and instructive texts in both contemporary practices and media archaeology, I aim to address the importance of making acknowledging privileges, making visible barriers of access, and diversifying understanding of hacktivism, maker culture and decentralizing practices by inviting richer contexts. </p>

Revision as of 17:09, 13 October 2019

Introduction

Subjects of DIY hacktivism, forms of decentralization, autonomous network, infrastructure and protocol are of both contemporary and historical concern. Since the 1960s, the narrative of technological development is marked by antagonistic visions of technocratic elitism and technology for social and political autonomy.

In the present tense, my research responds to pervasive phenomenons and realities of techno- hegemony, such as forms of centralization, censorship and surveillance. Decentralizing practices and DIY hacktivism offer demystifying and empowering potentials to weave counter narratives against techno-hegemonic realities. The counter narrative also constructs interpretive tools to comprehend technology. Today's society at large present a rift between technological advancement and civic understanding of technology, due to technical thresholds, barriers created by intellectual property rights, and decreased knowledge mobility working in hyper-specialized divisions of labor. DIY hacktivism and decentralizing practices offer porosity, transparency and flexibility unavailable within centralized organizations.

The making and hacking of of distributed, peer to peer infrastructure, networks and protocols construct the counter narrative towards centralization, by promising porosity, transparency and flexibility unavailable in centralized systems. Very often, decentralizing practices are associated with F/LOSS (Free/Libre and Open Source Software) tools and its tenets. The hacking process often call for transparency in making, such as making public and accessible the materials and technical procedures. These information are written within the framework of technical texts such as tutorials, user manuals, and bug reports. Such texts may appear to be instructive, technical, universal and decontextualized by nature. However, critical interpretation towards instructive texts can activate them as public sites to interface with technology, interject discourses and instigate collective making. In my research, the writing of technical and instructive texts is taken as a lens to probe into larger processes of maker culture, hacktivism and decentralizing practices. By examining the writing of technical and instructive texts in both contemporary practices and media archaeology, I aim to address the importance of making acknowledging privileges, making visible barriers of access, and diversifying understanding of hacktivism, maker culture and decentralizing practices by inviting richer contexts.