#program or be programmed

[chunci1994-blog]

Program or Be Programmed, Part I

"Computer Science is no more about computers than Astronomy is about telescopes.” -Edsger Dijkstra, Dutch Computer Scientist (1930-2002)

This quote was read as part of a presentation on Edsger Dijkstra in my Intro to CS class, and I’d say that it was well-received by my fellow students. My professor, however, pushed back on this notion that the computer is merely a tool through which we, as humans, can create and explore. He briefly questioned our blind acceptance of the statement and let us mull it over for a second before moving forward with the day’s lesson plan. Having the time to think on this quote as well as have the opportunity to read Douglas Rushkoff’s Program or Be Programmed, I think I am beginning to understand why it is important to be cognizant of technology’s inherent biases and how those biases affect how technology shapes our society.

A commandment of Rushkoff’s that resonated with me was the first discussed in his book: IV. You are Never Completely Right. In this chapter, Rushkoff states that digital technology is inherently biased towards reductionism. In particular, this quote caught my attention: “net research is more about engaging with data in order to dismiss it and move on -- like a magazine one flips through not to read, but to make sure there’s nothing that has to be read” (67). The idea of information then becomes increasingly about the result -- the data points -- than it is about the process of obtaining it and understanding its context. 

Rushkoff then continues to explain the dangers of a reductionist approach to tech: “the more complex our technologies become, and more impenetrable their decision-making (especially by our increasingly simplified, gist-of-it brains), the more dependent on them we become. . . their simplifying bias reduced us once again to passive spectators of technology itself” (68). To bring this post full circle with Edsger Dijkstra’s quote, I think that computer science is fundamentally about the computer. The computer is indeed a tool through which humans can create and explore, but it is important to note the biases of the computer that limit what exactly we can create and explore, and how, in turn, computer-generated creations and explorations affect human habits and behavior.

I’ve found Rushkoff’s commandments to be particularly applicable to my life this semester, as three of the four classes I’m taking revolve around computers, technology and electronics. I’m grateful for this art class because I feel like it gives me a grounded perspective on technology and its role in society -- for example, I would have never understood my CS prof’s opposition to Edsger Dijkstra’s quote if not for reading Rushkoff. I think that it’s pretty cool for my semester to basically revolve around machines and that it’s even cooler that I have the opportunity to read texts about technology that aren’t user manuals. 

[aftertigers]

The digital realm is biased toward choice, because everything must be expressed in the terms of a discrete, yes-or-no, symbolic language. This, in turn, often forces choices on humans operating within the digital sphere.

Douglas Rushkoff's Program or Be Programmed.

[romanceconflictadventure]

The digital information gatherer tends to have the opposite approach to knowledge as his text-based ancestors, who saw research as an excuse to sit and read old books. Instead, net research is more about engaging with data in order to dismiss it and move on— like a magazine one flips through not to read, but to make sure there’s nothing that has to be read. Reading becomes a process elimination rather than deep engagement. Life becomes about knowing how not to know what one doesn’t have to know.

Douglas Rushkoff, Program or Be Programmed

[dylanamartin]

Thoughts on Douglas Rushkoff's "Program or be Programmed"

Douglas Rushkoff is certainly a firebrand.  His passion for encouraging others to consider other perspectives other than the intrinsic the biases of modern technology seeps out of every page of his book, and his diction is at times both accusatory and inspirational.  Rushkoff is well-versed in seemingly all of our ubiquitous modern technologies, and using this information he constructs a list of "10 Command for a Digital Age", which he frequently references throughout his book.  His goal is to inspire the reader to open their eyes to how much information we carelessly cede to technology in an average day, and how we can consciously make ourselves aware of how to set limits on how much we give away.  

These commands range from the reasonably obvious ("Don't steal things") to the more cryptic ("You may always choose 'None of the Above'"), and the one that really resonated with me was, "Scale: One Size Does Not Fit All", and it struck me for a few reasons.  For one, I liked it because it seemed very relevant to me in the context of the professional work that I'd like do.  I've worked a few jobs designer interactive web interfaces for different users, and one of my biggest challenges is writing code that scales to different interfaces.  However, building scalable data structures  wasn't really Rushkoff's point.  By scaling, he means In a sense, our ability to abstract has been a driving force of civilization. We fill our world with signs, symbols, and representations in order to have higher level interactions and complexity. For instance, we agree upon a highly abstract concept like money in order to create a standardized instrument for economic activity. But as we’ve seen, abstraction leads to more abstraction – those in banking created hedge funds and derivative instruments that allow money to be made from money, without actually having to create any real value. In fact, it seems the closer you are to the actual creation of value, the further you get from the money.

In the digital realm, we also get caught into the trap of putting more emphasis on the representation of value than on the value itself. For instance, building a website that talks about how to accomplish social change, or “liking” a cause or subscribing to a mailing list to ‘join a movement,’ and confusing that online behavior with activism that has an impact in the physical world. In essence, we’re all marketing to each other instead of just doing the thing we’re advocating.

And just because we’re able to “scale” our message to lots of fans and followers, that abstraction may become untethered from any association to reality. As it could be said that bankers have become entranced with the abstractions of currency without regard to creating actual value, we must also be careful not to mistake our online assertions as a substitute for taking action in the world and actually doing something.

So, abstraction – scaling – is something that is obviously very important, but only if you are able to translate the abstract into something concrete.  Too much abstraction can easily get out of hand, though, which is why I think the command about scaling goes well with another command, "Don't Sell Your Friends."  Rushkoff says that, "Our digital networks are biased toward social connections – toward contact. Any effort to redefine or hijack those connections for profit end up compromising the integrity of the network itself, and compromising the real promise of contact."  This means that we have to be careful with how much we abstract the value of our social network.  It's easy to lump our friends into data, a myriad of connections that we can draw on as individuals or en masse.  But these data are people too, and even though it is easy to benefit from the digital representations of these people, we have to constantly be wary of what cost any exploitation of our social network could cause us.  

Anyway, Rushkoff has some interesting points, and while I don't think this book necessarily opened my eyes to anything completely new, it definitely got my thinking about the stuff that was always kinda in the back of my mind.  Being the programmer is tough, but like Rushkoff, I think that it is essential to modern-day living.  

[kerina]

This may require further investigation.

[mediaunmasked]

#MediaLiteracy is about more than just critically analyzing media, it's about knowing HOW TO MAKE YOUR OWN.  And coding is basically the new literacy. 21 century empowerment demands an understanding of how programming and coding shapes our world.  Program or be programmed, as one smarty pants hero of mine puts it.  

But the new codebabes.com is shocking in its use of the female form to 'motivate' learning.  How do these ideas get funded when FOR REAL GOOD BUSINESS PLANS THAT LIFT WOMEN UP ARE DESPERATELY UNDERFUNDED? 

Anyway, if you want to learn to code, head to one of the many sites dedicated to empowering women, minorities, and youth:

blackgirlscode.com

girlswhocode.com

computerclubhouse.org

girldevelopit.com

codeacademy.com

[quotecatalog]

The instinct for increased contact is the evolutionary imperative we feel to become something greater than ourselves. Just as atoms combined into molecules, molecules clustered into cells, and cells collected into organisms, we organisms are networking into greater levels of organization... The content is not the message, the contact is. The ping itself. It’s the synaptic transmission of an organism trying to wake itself up.

Douglas Rushkoff