Category / Class 2

by Carsen

If It doesn’t exist on the internet it doesn’t exist ( can’t find the right subheading to post this in either so does it even exist?)

“…Doing so means posting our works on the world wide web so that anyone, anywhere, at any

time can have access to them. In this way, we will ensure that our work exists.”

If a tree falls in the woods and no one sees it does it make a noise? If no one reads/see your

academic or professional work (and arguably your personal work, your artistic work) does it

exist? Can things exist inside a vacuum? If knowledge or ideas are not shared, that is unable to

be passed from one person to another and carried on to further social circles, cultural circles,

economic circles, etc., do those ideas die? Does an idea have to be shared in order to have a

life; must it be shared on the internet?

“UbuWeb embraces the distributive possibilities inherent in the web’s original technologies: call

it radical forms of distribution.”

What is the purpose of the internet; is it still to be a radical platform to share information or has it

mutated and become more commercially driven (broadband, access, cost, government control

vs. control in the hand of people vs. control in the hands of corporations are all things one

should consider when answering)?

“But we are in a unique position — I’d call it a privileged position — to be able to give our work

away, ensuring that it exists.”

“Can you imagine taking a laptop to the beach to read an e-book? Not yet. But it will happen. So

for the time being, our books need to have an online counterpart which extends, updates or in

some way acts as a corollary agent to the paper edition.”

This paper was published in 2005, ten years ago. One needs to consider if the points it makes

are still as relevant today as they were ten years ago because people do take e-readers to the

beach now. What has changed in the online climate since Goldsmith published this paper? In

what ways has [academic] information become more available to the public because of the

internet. Has it? (Google books) Or is it become closer to the Barnes and Noble example

Goldsmith gives, that what is available is narrow, or the online purchasing examples, only

available to those who can shell out for it?

“But almost everyone has access to the web (and if not now, they soon will). From this stems

numerous opportunities.”

Is this true or the position of someone who lives in a privileged position who has nearly unlimited

internet access?

“Older media needs to be digitized in order to exist.”

How does the reemergence and popularity of analog products like records or instant film fit into

this idea? Goldsmith addresses vinyl records specifically but the climate ten years ago

regarding the subject is different. The Impossible Project, which was successful was the

initiative to start producing Polaroid film again after production ceased. Nowadays when you

walk into any Urban Outfitters you can purchase a pack of Polaroid film, a distinctly analog

product that does not exist online. However the roots of The Impossible Project are online. I

remember signing a petition to show my support for the project in high school. The support and

success of the project probably would not have been possible without the internets ability to

make the project accessible to millions of people; much more than the bubble of photographers

and enthusiasts who originally started the endeavor. Or take fujifilm instax cameras and film,

another instant but different film project. I work at a summer camp and two years ago I was the

only person who knew of or owned such a camera. Last year it was myself and one 14 year old

girl. This summer, in 2015, several campers, ages ranging between 13-18 owned such cameras

and utilized them daily. And it can be argued that girls that age have real buying and market

power (think of the wild success of things girls that age support — Twilight, The Hunger Games,

etc.,) so it’s not a niche group, as I was in 2013 with my fujifilm camera as a photographer who

lived primarily in New York City. These analog products are having a moment again and for so

many people they do exist, they are real. They are real and live in conjunction with their digital

counterparts. Instagram posts of polaroid pictures are seen everywhere. Records are now sold

with coupons for digital copies. Is this the future of analog and digital, a world where the two can

coexist simultaneously, each with their merits and short comings, in a symbiotic relationship?

All quotations come from Kenneth Goldsmith’s online article “If It Doesn’t Exist On The Internet, It Doesn’t Exist”

by Joya

Goosebumps Google

I have been intrigued generally about how people have hypothesized the internet to grow into in the past. In recent years the internet has taken over print, I believe that build your own story would be a brilliant idea for literature to take over the internet. It reminded me alot of the Goosebumps books so I decided to merge that typeface with the worlds largest create your own adventure–Google!

 

goosebumpgoogle

 

by Ashley

Are non-linear reading spaces or linear reading spaces more clear for the reader?

This article explains how we got to this web we have today full of unlimited use and information. As explained in the article, the intention of the web was never to have so much information available so quickly, rather have necessary information that is thoughtful with a plethora of well researched material. However, now we are left with so much information that most of the time scholars would admit to be a high percentage of the material false. If information was harder to get then the non-linear reading space would give someone all well researched truths instead of clicking through millions of contradicting articles. I do think that the linear reading spaces gives the reader an opinion to interpret for themselves what is bad and good information. Although, the non-linear reading space gives a reader all the information needed about a certain topic in the paper, for example a definition of a word and the article come together not separately of dictionary.com and wikipedia. It is a complicated topic but both have pros and cons that can be discussed over and over, unfortunately as we live in 2015 we must sort out the bads and goods of the linear reading space.

by Luna

Reading Response Class 2

How has the development of hyperlinks and technology impacted the way we tell stories today? 

While the article mentions that the non-linear information sharing site, “Buzz”, failed, I can identify some ways that the idea of pulling together fractured sections of stories is used today to create a broader constellation of archives.  When thinking of the way in which media and specifically journalism sites work today, the individual users’ ability to access and contribute to online sites also changes the information we receive.  Through social media sites like Twitter and Facebook as well as through blogs and online news sites that use citizen journalism, people who have historically not had a voice are able to share their perspective when it comes to news, technology and cultural events.  While before news was written by an elite few who had access to education and a certain rhetoric, the somewhat neutralizing landscape of the internet makes it so that anyone with access to internet can contribute.
Because we have more individuals from different ethnic, gender, location and class backgrounds contributing knowledge, we collectively have more holistic stories. I think the most fundamental idea this challenges is that of objective history and knowledge; what we previously think of as “fact” we now can see is heavily dependent on the individual viewpoint and experience. Therefore the line between fact and opinion are blurred to create a non-linear and inclusive story.  While there is not one singular site that can create a a “hyperlink story” in which all different aspects are shown, the idea lives on through the internet as a platform that allow individuals to search and explore one topic or event through different websites that are specific to different communities and individuals.
by Carsen

Response to Steven Johnson’s “Why No One Clicked On The Great Hypertext Story”

What role do “poets and philosophers” and other creative types have in the physical creation of the Internet?

I grew up reading the Choose Your Own Adventure Books (and inevitably always died with my first three choices, no matter what I did) and the world of hypertext storytelling Johnson talks about immediately evoked these books. However, as Johnson also goes on to point out, there are millions of Internet pages all connected by hyperlinks. The books I read were physical objects in the world (not just a bunch of tubes) limited to a finite number of words and pages. I like Johnson’s point however that while the type of story telling they envisioned did not pan out, mostly out of the mere impossibility of the logistics, he has optimism that of that conceit something better was created, and it relied on the tenacity of the “poets and philosophers.” And I have to agree that the way the hypertext exists now, as a connection between information, a way to build one’s wealth of knowledge in the shape of a constellation (to borrow Johnson’s word).

I also have to agree with his idea that creative people are just as needed as coders to build the infrastructure of the Internet. To make things like clicking a hyperlink possible, Internet needs the poets, the storytellers, the investigators, philosophers, artists, and creative. Because what good is a hyperlink that goes nowhere? What good is the Internet without the information and entertainment it provides? Is that not why it was created — to be able to be a network, like a spiders web, of interconnecting and cross-sectioning ideas? While Choose Your Own Adventure books are fun, they are limited and we ultimately can’t learn anything else from them. The internet does not have this problem; a symbiotic home to both the logical and illogical; infinite.

 

by Jessica

If it doesn’t exist on the Internet

thanks_wikipedia_0-500x500

Kenneth Goldsmith describes the world of academic resources to be in the midst of a stubborn transition from physical to virtual, digital. At the very end of his argument, he warns:

“Shhhh… the new radicalism is paper. Right. Publish it on a printed page and no one will ever know about it. It’s the perfect vehicle for terrorists, plagiarists, and for subversive thoughts in general. In closing, if you don’t want it to exist — and there are many reasons to want to keep things private — keep it off the web.”

My visual response is in two parts. The first and more significant one depicts the cover of a book. Usually when we look to a source of information for something in particular, we must search for it. Here I chose this search to take place within a virtual space, because web-based search engines like Google have become our first if not only attempts to look for more specific information.

The internet has become the most familiar and accessible way of researching. This mass-appeal bleeds over into the world of academia, which revolves around the abundance of well-researched documents and articles.

3_blank_books_magazines_vector

The second part of my response develops this point even further, showing the inside of the book as being completely useless. These familiar red X’s are often displayed in web applets/applications that attempt to display information, but have essentially failed.

by Maria

If It Doesn’t Exist on the Internet, It Doesn’t Exist – Maria Jessica

We sometimes would get frustrated if Google is not showing what we are looking for. In fact, not all materials available for free and unfettered access to all. Then we have to pay certain of many to become a member and get an access to the website or buy the hard copy book. As a result many of the writers might not surprise that their work doesn’t not exist because they don’t exist on the Internet. For example, Goldsmith experience when he was invited on a reading tour of Scandinavia where no one knows his eight books he had published over the past decade. Everyone recognizes him from his work on the Internet. Definitely, Internet helps writers to extend their careers and book publishing. But it forgets the value of the book, authorities, credibility, and publishing houses. As Goldsmith also mention that the publishing houses and magazines don’t make writes rich, they only extend writers’ career a frame for the work to exist as same as Internet.

In my opinion, Goldsmith thinks that the writes cannot earn more money by depending only to the book publishing. While, putting all of the works on the Internet can caused loss of the writer’s hard work such as no-credibility, no-value, and plagiarism. Not only that, book publishing such, as Barnes and Noble also might not completely put the value of the book. They let the consumers to use books for research purposes without having to buy them. Such as sit on soft chair, sipping up a cup of coffee and taking notes on a laptop. But it is educators and intellectuals’ obligation to make knowledge (book) can be accessed by all.

In the long run, I think only students, educators, and fraction of web users who can have free access. Whenever they must put credits or how spotify work by pay small of money. For example the school department funds all the expenses for online access or printed book in their own library. Besides that writes’ name can be know by mouth-by-mouth, credits, promoting their works on the internet by giving sample of book’s pages or review from the readers. Then again, it is the problem of access, the speed of academic blogging, and socialization.

Screen Shot 2015-09-09 at 1.21.25 PM

by Breeana

Reading Response “Doesn’t Exist…”

Would creating an online form to access information globally abolish/devalue careers in writing/ journalism?

 

 

I agree with a lot of the articles point about how Internet is the most prominent way of sharing information; and I agree that knowledge should be free and accessible to anyone. When Goldsmith starts going on about how publishing houses don’t make authors rich, I agree- to an extent. Publishing a book today definitely does not make someone rich, but if everything that was ever published becomes available on the web, writing as a career would be devalued considerably. This means that anyone can write anything. Who’s deciding if it’s a credible source? Who has time to sift through loads of articles to find real information?

 

The reason a book gets published is because that piece of work underwent intensive creating and editing in order to be chosen as a worthy piece of knowledge to publish and put into the world. If the world of blogs and books mix, there will be an information overload on the Internet, and people will either have trouble differentiating, or not care enough to differentiate. Making the Internet a primary source for information seems a little unstable. When I walk into Barnes & Noble and pick up a book, I can be assured that this book went through hell and back in order to be placed onto that table; making it a valuable, reliable source. If society gets used to posting a thought on the web and calling it knowledge, the entire concept of knowledge will be devalued.

 

In an ideal world everyone would use the Internet for searching information because of interest/ research, but unfortunately the Internet is often abused. I also am incredibly bias because I’m a Literary Studies major at Lang, so books are my friends.

by isabela

Week 2 Question/Response – “If It Doesn’t Exist on the Internet, it Doesn’t Exist”

Question- Is it more detrimental or beneficial to an author if their work is easily accessible without having to be bought?

Response- In the Reading, Kenneth Goldsmith often touched on the fact that in many areas, literature is not as easily accessible. This was one of the reasons for him creating ‘UbuWeb’, a site that distributes hard to find or out of print reading materials for free. This idea reminded of me the concept behind ‘Wattpad’, which is a website where users can access literary work written by other users, for free. This also includes more well known authors of today and lesser known writers in a myriad of genres.

Although I believe that the web is a great platform for getting one’s work noticed, I can’t help but contemplate how beneficial it actually is to distribute your own work for free. Having free excerpts is understandable, but an entire novel? Wouldn’t it lesson the value to leak your own work to an unfathomable population of people without them giving you any sort of reward for the work you put into it? There are definite benefits, and definite downsides, which is why i’m conflicted. My personal opinion is that it would be counterproductive to do so.

by Fernanda

Discussion Question/Response – “If It Doesn’t Exist on the Internet, it Doesn’t Exist”

  • How far does the free sharing of your work and ideas on the Internet benefit you, regarding authorship and originality?

My question relates to the growing cases of plagiarism due to the help of technology. I agree with Goldsmith when he says that your work receives more attention, visibility, can be spread out much easier and you can network much more through the Internet, which, like he says, can makes wonder to a career like his. The constant flow of information that people have access to is something wonderful as well, specially with websites like Goldsmith’s, UbuWeb. However, I am not sure until what point the free sharing of your work can be beneficial to you, when in the Digital Age, people can easily copy and paste what you did and make it theirs. 

Unfortunately, I believe that the “older proprietary ways of thinking [that] condemn this practice with the fear that your ideas would be swiped”, which Goldsmith talks about, are not so old. I say that, due to the fact that, nowadays, there are so many readings that could be easily found on the Internet, that people can just take that opinion or work and make theirs and only a certain number of people (a certain community) would know that and would do something about it, if they read the person’s work, the rest wouldn’t. 

Thinking of this, it might be the case that people not only charge to share their work on the Internet, because of financial issues (of course), but also because of authorship, that is, making sure they get credit for their work. 

There is certainly a fine line between the benefits and disadvantages of free sharing on the Internet and as everything, the difficulty is finding the right balance.