User:)biyibiyibiyi(/RW&RM 04/thesis outline sesh3: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I. Introduction | I. Introduction | ||
1. Background | 1. Background | ||
Variations of P2P production, parallel to and as alternative to centralized services. Open source, global commons maker culture taking place around the world, originated in Silicon Valley as new forms of enabling new forms of science citizens and to democratize technology. Open source culture that take place around in different parts of the world pertain to different characteristics, there shouldn't be a dominating homogeneity in open source maker culture. maker culture in economical precarity. communities of experimental publishing making ways of making things public as gestures of decentralization and transparent porous making. | Variations of P2P production, parallel to and as alternative to centralized services. Open source, global commons maker culture taking place around the world, originated in Silicon Valley as new forms of enabling new forms of science citizens and to democratize technology. Open source culture that take place around in different parts of the world pertain to different characteristics, there shouldn't be a dominating homogeneity in open source maker culture. maker culture in economical precarity. communities of experimental publishing making ways of making things public as gestures of decentralization and transparent porous making. | ||
2. Thesis Statement | 2. Thesis Statement | ||
Contemporary phenomenons of centralization and decentralization found root in development of network culture, counter culture in 60s and 70s. Critical examination on old media can shed light on contemporary practices. | |||
II. Body | II. Body | ||
First Topic | First Topic | ||
Examination of P2P production, does p2p provides infrastructural possibility, but does it grant a productive commons, or does it re-iterate principles of capitalism, such as BitCoin mining? | |||
1. | 1. examples overview of P2P infrastructure, various kinds. | ||
2. | 2. shortcomings of P2P | ||
Point B | Point B | ||
1. Supporting evidence | 1. Supporting evidence | ||
Revision as of 15:55, 19 September 2019
I. Introduction
1. Background Variations of P2P production, parallel to and as alternative to centralized services. Open source, global commons maker culture taking place around the world, originated in Silicon Valley as new forms of enabling new forms of science citizens and to democratize technology. Open source culture that take place around in different parts of the world pertain to different characteristics, there shouldn't be a dominating homogeneity in open source maker culture. maker culture in economical precarity. communities of experimental publishing making ways of making things public as gestures of decentralization and transparent porous making.
2. Thesis Statement Contemporary phenomenons of centralization and decentralization found root in development of network culture, counter culture in 60s and 70s. Critical examination on old media can shed light on contemporary practices.
II. Body
First Topic Examination of P2P production, does p2p provides infrastructural possibility, but does it grant a productive commons, or does it re-iterate principles of capitalism, such as BitCoin mining? 1. examples overview of P2P infrastructure, various kinds. 2. shortcomings of P2P
Point B 1. Supporting evidence 2. Supporting evidence
Second Topic Point A 1. Supporting evidence 2. Supporting evidence Point B 1. Supporting evidence 2. Supporting evidence
Third Topic Point A 1. Supporting evidence 2. Supporting evidence
III. Conclusion 1. Summarize the main points of your paper and Restate your thesis in fresh words.2.Make a stong/memorable final statement