Humanities Computing – Page 19

Informatica Umanistica: Interrupting Digitization

Informatica Umanistica has just published a paper of mine on digitization titled, “Interrupting Digitalizatin and Thinking about Text”. The article starts,

One of the memes of new media is that the form of communication determines the content. As McLuhan puts it the medium is the message, and therefore, as we digitize the evidence of human culture from the Roman forum to Hamlet we inaugurate not just a new edition of our knowledge, but a new knowing and with it a new way of thinking. This paper will not engage the question of technological determinism, instead it will assume that the enthusiasts are right and ask then what is digitization? or what is the message of the digital form? Asking such questions is an interruption in the rush to digitize everything; imagine the scanner has broken down for a moment letting us pause and ask if we really understand the digital, if we understand what is gained and lost, and if we understand the possibilities before us or how we are constrained.

HuCon 2010: Current Graduate Research in Humanities Computing

The web site for our graduate conference is up: HuCon 2010: Current Graduate Research in Humanities Computing. This follows on the successful one that students ran last year. We hope to have Jon Bath and Yin Liu from the University of Saskatchewan as speakers. The conference is free thanks to support from our Office of Interdisciplinary Studies and the Faculty of Arts at the University of Alberta.

Wired Campus: Mellon Foundation Closes Grant Program

The Mellon Research in Information Technology program is being closed according to a Chronicle of Higher Education story by Marc Parry titled, “In Potential Blow to Open-Source Software, Mellon Foundation Closes Grant Program.” (Jan. 5, 2010.)

Mellon described the change as part of an effort to “consolidate resources” and concentrate on core program areas like the liberal arts, scholarly communications, and museums. RIT will merge into the Scholarly Communications program, which will manage its existing grants.

This program funded a number of really cool projects like Zotero, SAKAI, and Fedora. I wonder what will happen to ongoing projects like Bamboo that are not yet off the ground?

Update: Bamboo has been “smoothly migrated into the Scholarly Communications program.”

Ritsumeikan: Possibilities in Digital Humanities

The last week and a bit I have been in Kyoto to give a talk at a conference on the “Possibilities in Digital Humanities” which was organized by Professor Kozaburo Hachimura and sponsored by the Information Processing Society of Japan and by the Ritsumeikan University Digital Humanities Center for Japanese Arts and Culture.

While the talks were in Japanese I was able to follow most of the sessions with the help of Mistuyuki Inaba and Keiko Susuki. I was impressed by the quality of the research and the involvement of new scholars. There seemed to be a much higher participation of postdoctoral fellows and graduate students than at similar conferences in Canada which bodes well for digital humanities in Japan.

Continue reading Ritsumeikan: Possibilities in Digital Humanities

Digging Into Data

The Digging Into Data (DID) grants awards have been posted. The “Using Zotero and TAPoR on the Old Bailey Proceedings: Data Mining with Criminal Intent” project which I am part of was one of the ones funded. From the description:

Description: This project will create an intellectual exemplar for the role of data mining in an important historical discipline – the history of crime – and illustrate how the tools of digital humanities can be used to wrest new knowledge from one of the largest humanities data sets currently available: the Old Bailey Online.

This program is significant in a number of ways:

It encourages (forces) international cooperation. Brett Bobley and the others involved in the councils deserve a lot of credit for developing a model for international programs and overcoming all the differences between funding agencies in record time. We all know that good research is often international, but this program rewards such cooperation. I hope the next round involves other countries – this is a model to be extended and emulated.
One of the things that made a difference is that this program had a single evaluation process. The respective funding agencies agreed to work with one international assessment committee, thereby relinquishing a certain amount of control. This is significant because other attempts have kept separate panels which leads to projects being approved by one and not another. (This happens even within Canada.) DID shows that our councils are cooperating and willing to release control for the good of research – we should recognize that and encourage more.
It focuses on using large data-sets and they negotiated access to a number of data-sets to support this. The work they did convincing content providers to provide access to full-text collections was beneficial in and of itself.
It focuses on demonstrating research results from “digging into data” where computational techniques are applied to data. It isn’t a tools program, but a “what can you do with tools and lots of data” program. The time was right.

The number of letters of intent and applications is indicative of how successful this program was in identifying a research support need. As researchers we usually only think only about our work and ignore the host of conflicting demands of councils. Grant councils are also answerable – the design of programs is an administrative art that is rarely recognized by those who benefit. DID stands out in my mind as a successful experiment. If anything is was too successful – the low success rate shows they underestimated the number of applications and many deserving projects weren’t funded. Now the challenge to the councils is to scale up and build on this to meet the demand. The challenge to those of us funded is to live up to the potential and show that this works in order to make room for all the other deserving projects.

SSHRC, Yasmeen: “Technopreneurship” and social innovation

Lynne pointed me to a blog entry by SSHRC’s Gisèle Yasmeen on “Technopreneurship” and social innovation.

Canada has a grand history of involvement in developing technopreneurs, and not just in the video-game and hand-held device industry. Indeed, Canada has one of the strongest “digital humanities” scholarly communities in the world, with many of these researchers becoming “technopreneurs” in their own right and working with partners across the public, private and not-for-profit sectors. Many of these scholarly “technopreneurs” had their work incubated by SSHRC in the Image, Text, Sound and Technology (ITST) funding program which began in at the beginning of this millennium. Recently, SSHRC awarded one of its Major Collaborative Research Initiatives to a consortium of 35 digital humanities researchers and 21 partner agencies under the leadership of Ray Siemens at UVIC — an indication of how mature this type of activity has become.

Technopreneurs are those who develop new information and communication ideas. I would like to say that they don’t necessarily commercialize their innovations, but see innovation as a human and social enterprise. The digital humanities are more about the gift of innovation than profit.

Digital Humanities And Computer Science colloquium

I’m at the Digital Humanities And Computer Science (link to my report) colloquium at IIT in Chicago. Garry Wong and I gave a talk on the Big See project and designing visualizations for large-scale information displays. One of things that struck me is that we may be seeing the beginning of the end of digital humanities as a distinct field. Here is what I wrote in the conference report:

The End of Digital Humanities: I can’t help thinking (with just a little evidence) that the age of funding for digital humanities is coming to an end. Let me clarify this. My hunch is that the period when any reasonable digital humanities project seemed neat and innovative is coming to an end and that the funders are getting tired of more tool projects. I’m guessing that we will see a shift to funding content driven projects that use digital methodologies. Thus digital humanities programs may disappear and the projects are shunted into content areas like philosophy, English literature and so on. Accompanying this is a shift to thinking of digital humanities as infrastructure that therefore isn’t for research funding, but instead should be run as a service by professionals. This is the “stop reinventing wheel” argument and in some cases it is accompanied by coercive rhetoric to the effect that if you don’t get on the infrastructure bandwagon and use standards then you will be left out (or not funded.) I guess I am suggesting that we could be seeing a shift in what is considered legitimate research and what is considered closed and therefore ready for infrastructure. The tool project could be on the way out as research as it is moved as a problem into the domain of support (of infrastructure.) Is this a bad thing? It certainly will be a good thing if it leads to robust and widely usable technology. But could it be a cyclical trend where today’s research becomes tomorrows infrastructure to then be rediscovered later as a research problem all over.

Digital Studies / Le champ numérique

Announcing Digital Studies / Le champ numérique. This is a new journal from the SDH/SEMI (Society for Digital Humanities).

Wapedia – Wiki: Stewart Butterfield

Apparently Stewart Butterfield, one of the co-founders of Flickr was a philosophy major. He got his BA in philosophy from the University of Victoria and an MA from Cambridge. Did philosophy make a difference? Hard to tell, but he gives a talk on How to Make a Fortune with your Liberal Arts Degree according to the Lavin Agency that represents him. The site quotes him to the effect, “You can always pick up how to figure out profit and loss, but it’s harder to pick up the other stuff on the fly.”

His co-founder and partner Caterina Fake, now working on Hunch, studied English and has a thoughtful blog here.

Just goes to show how useful the humanities are.