Response III: Can’t be an expert in everything

Veni Vidi Vici

Response II:  Questioning the role of the Designer

With the growing emergence of web 2.0 applications like instructables which gives people knowledge of possible DIY projects ranging from minor crafts to higher tech projects. These newer more involved web tools were discussed in a lecture a few weeks back, leading to the inevitable question of: If people are able to make their own products by simply being taught specific steps of construction production, how will this affect the role of Designers if they are not needed to create and or manufacture certain products? Further and more importantly, this takes the creative control out of their hands into a free-for-all domain, potentially empowering everyone with same knowledge and skills. Which I think is great! People can start renewing, reusing old house hold items, different materials/supplies etc. to make something new, functional or just more enjoyable.

Many thoughts came to mind when thinking about the inevitable role change that Designers (of all disciplines) will have to face in the near future. First of all, when discussing the creation of objects, I see this unfolding in two different ways.

1)      Bad product will be possibly weeded out of the market because Designers will have to start creating a products (eg: a school bag) of more quality (aesthetic and function), since people are making regular low cost bags themselves and an alternative still needs to created for those people who want a `top of the line` designed bag. Overall creating a possible inflation of price, but with also a much higher quality to appeal to consumers that want to pay.

2)      Designers will have to compete with one another even more, since their potentially might be a smaller demand of certain products.

Concerning Creativity:

Designers roles (in my opinion) will start to be more of `harnessers` and creative consultants. Harnessing people`s ingenuity and creativity together into a solidified, efficient collective that will maximize DIY projects even more.  As well as focus on more human-human-design systems of how people can interact with one another. Another possibility is that Designers can start collaborating with people that are more skilled craftsman/showing off creativity on instructables to then further develop a project that could potentially be manufactured for the masses. I think it would be beneficial to designers to look for inspiration amongst those involved in instructables or sites that show off people’s creativity and craft work. It would be valuable to see what is then needed/what is liked that is being created and used.

Response IV: Cooperating vs Sharing

What is the difference between cooperating and sharing? (47-54)

Based on Shirky’s concepts of “information sharing”, “collaborative production” and “collaborative action” I have created a diagram that I am using to help explain the dynamic, interwoven relationship between all three concepts and how they are integral for utilizing web 2.0 social tools. When thinking about all three concepts and how they can be made into concrete terms I see this taking form as a mash up (of course it has to be a mash up of some kind!) of a pyramid and the motion of a circle. These to me when paired together represent two contradictory concepts (save this point of later).

1) pyramid- typically showing hierarchy/very structured, rigid, up/down/side-to-side motion

2) circle- the motion of infinity, never stopping

The base of the pyramid is “information sharing”. The basic foundation for creating any type of collaboration/team work, without it the structure would collapse. However I felt I had to incorporate arrows in both around and inside the pyramid to help represent the transient nature of the information and its fluidity throughout the structure. From what I take from Shirky’s explanation, is how heavily connected all three concepts are. They rely and feed into each other, therefore creating this kind of cyclical motion of communicating- but even more dynamic and interactive than that, simply because it doesn’t follow the same clean path as a circle, but a bit like a hyperactive child on lots of sugar and coffee.

Even though I have structured the concepts from ‘top’ to ‘bottom’ that is representational of how much ‘collaborative action’ there is versus ‘information sharing’. As Shirky explains, “. . . collaborative action is harder to arrange than information sharing or collaborative creation” (53). Therefore making ‘collaborative action’ at the most narrow part of the pyramid.

“it must have some shared vision strong enough to bind the group together, despite periodic decisions that will inevitably displease at least some members.”

The goal of the collective action could attract others to the cause as long as the collection action remains open for contributing and the people that join want to follow and ad to the already established goal.

Conflicts can potentially occur differently because of the fluidity and flexibility of the social interactions in having no physical boundaries (time and space). Since there are no visible faces  or voices there is a possible lack of formality presented, creating a more casual atmosphere, rather than standing up to a room full of people and expressing yourself through tone and gesture. Since this is the case the one typing has less control on how others reading his /her comments take them. This most definitely can be a major disadvantage, especially for when doing collaborative production and collective action. In the case of collective action especially, it is important to keep in mind the intent of project at hand, remembering that what people suggest/comment on is for the benefit of the group.

For collective action, even though Shirky states “…..it involves changing your behaviour to synchronize with people who are changing their behaviour to synchronize with you” (49-50) I am interested in understanding the role of leadership through these social tools. It seems that leadership is needed for the very beginning in helping to push ideas/concepts forward.For me it puts into question if human face-to-face interaction is not as valued anymore? Are people more or less satisfied collaborating over the internet or in person? What are the new social boundaries that need to be established with etiquette and ‘presenting’ yourself to an online group? Are you able to hide or speak more clearly? to do so.  illustrating how complex group dynamics and social structure.

For the end we go back to the beginning, in further discussing the pyramid versus cirlce contradiction. This contradiction when represented in concrete images and then translated into the abstract again, creates a very interesting paradox that illustrates the complexities of human behaviour in groups when using new these technological tools to socialize and be productive. The opportunity to exchange, share and be apart of an ongoing forum to me seems like the most natural thing any person desiring their freedom would want.

Hello! Salute!

Hello! Salute!

Welcome to my blog!

For those that might have happened to stumble upon this and is not in my class; it is for an online university course that is about the impact and development of web 2.0. How people are now taking an interactive, collaborative approach to communicating information, social networking and conducting business. Looking at how different information tools such as youtube, wikipedia, delicious.com, forums, instructables, blogs etc. help people to express and convey ideas, information, images successfully on a global scale. Because of this information sharing and/or collaborating phenomenon, the way people interact and behave is changing, leading to new ideas of how people see themselves functioning within culture and how the power of this change can be utilized. I will be posting reading responses based on the book(s) Wikinomics by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams and Here Comes Everybody by Clay Shirky.

I have been  a bit slow on figuring out what to say and how to say it. My apologies.

Those beginning words ¨Hello! Salute! when spoken to large numbers will always remind me of Gary Brolsma aka The Numa-Numa Guy, who fearlessly looked into the black whole of his web cam proudly dancing and winking, to what would end up being millions of people around the world. I remember seeing that video years ago and thinking “what’s the big deal? So this guy is acting like an idiot, alone in front of his camera in his bedroom”. However in hindsight, this incident foreshadowed how through technology human interaction and behavior was evolving. Its not like Marx philosophy of how technology can aliente people, however this Numa Numa phenomenon is by far the oppostive. Howard Rheinhold a writer and critic stated: “Collectivism involves coersions and centralized control; collective action involves freely chosen self-selection and distributed coordination” (Wikinomics, 17).