The future of science

The Generosity of New Media - Science, Technology and Innovation


This week's theme is a field that dominates and permeates every aspect of our lives. In the learning materials, we have explored the complex issues surrounding the scientific research - how the role of media has facilitated, accelerated and simultaneously slowed down the process of research.

While the lecture focuses on open and shared data's macro benefits and the communication between scientists, I wish to explore these various questions: How has the way of conducting scientific research transformed throughout the years? What are the changes in the communication channels of science? How have the sharing and publication of science (within academic circles and to the public) changed? How has the use of database facilitated scientific research?

Science, technologies, invention and innovation create ongoing transversals - they transform media, which then change all forms of science in what Murphie (2013) calls a 'feedback loop'. Wilbanks (2011) states that scientific research is still profoundly tied to the media of print, including academic journals, releases of latest innovative development and databases. The print systems aren’t very adaptable to the world of the internet, unfortunately. Even worse, the paper-based status quo relies on strictly enforced barriers to public access which prevent the rapid dissemination of vital knowledge (Wilbank 2011). Although this way enables secured profits through punitive pricing, such a rigid and outdated way of communication has diminished the transfer of knowledge. In addition, it has slowed down the efficiency of innovation in the research industry.

Producing and storing data is not enough. As Rosling (2010) puts forward, researchers need to be able to present them in a way that is both accessible and comprehensible for the viewers. A video below shows Rosling's short and interesting visualisation of life expectancy and income level of 200 countries over 200 years, using augmented reality animation.

200 years of 200 countries' data explained in 5 minutes

If scientific data is presented in an easy and visual way (like in the video), the same group of tedious data immediately becomes much more engaging and meaningful. Thus, it is empirical for the industry to understand the philosophical transactions of knowledge - the importance of a platform which enables researchers to collaborate, publish and share the knowledge which is comprehensible to the public.

Though peer-reviewed work has arguably constrained the discourse of ‘fact-making’ in the scientific community, it has largely facilitated collaboration and critiquing of research methods. In academic circles, research paper serves as the ‘container’ of knowledge that is learned from and disseminated (Wilbanks 2011). Science knowledge has been turned into an economic transaction all because of publishing. Yet the current publishing system delays the dissemination of research, considering the time-consuming production and verification of journals and their standard distribution time.

Even though the cost of digital publishing and distribution is constantly decreasing, the knowledge industry constantly enforces legal covenants that make it difficult to transfer knowledge in research circles. With crippled knowledge-compression systems, under-developed protocols for digital science database, multiple hoops to jump through when publishing, such as digital library access and copyright law, it's getting harder to produce AND consume scientific knowledge (Seed Magazine 2011). But if we can enjoy free digital transfer of cultural objects, why should the digital transfer of knowledge be any different?

It's difficult to find a smart and transversal solution, especially one that overlaps existing ecologies of publishing and scientific practice. But how can we find a new and sustainable 'container' for scientific knowledge?

Perhaps a better way to facilitate scientific research and publishing is to think beyond the idea of knowledge as copyright. Emerging global challenges demand rapid responses and flexibility from the scientific community. This can only be achieved through a reformation of the culture and practice of science. Seed Magazine (2011) suggests a market-driven change toward access which tackles with the limitations of the outdated copyright laws - open source knowledge. 'Rip, Mix and Burn’ is an unspoken mantra in the distribution and re-distribution of cultural content in the digital landscape to disseminate knowledge (Wilbanks 2011). For instance, publishers like BioMed Central and the Public Library of Science use Creative Commons copyright licenses to grant all rights to their users to 'make and distribute copies, to remake and remix the knowledge, reserving only the mandate for attribution'  (Wilbanks 2011). This is a fundamental change from the conventional copyright-reliant, paper-based research publishing to a realm where the data, ontologies, and machine-readable knowledge meet. Unlike our ordinary readable platforms such as blogs, videos and music, this system is a field where the publication of research serves as a distributed commons of knowledge which can be created, shared and spread without restrictions.

If all fail, maybe the industry can consider to transfer knowledge and skills the 'Dollhouse' way. Look at the short video clip below to get an impression of this amazing idea!

Dollhouse's concept explained

Basically, it is a technology which manipulates people's neural system to achieve a blank state. This requires people to surrender their minds (despite their willingness). Subsequently, their minds will be stored in a database and replaced by one of the personality imprints stocked in a character bank. If such a technology is ever available for humans, the science community could save the valuable, scientific knowledge in a hard drive, and transfer such data into people's minds, without corrupting with their personalities, of course. Instead of publishing via print and digital platforms with associated constraints such as copyright, one can easily purchase a hard drive full of knowledge and simply plug it in our heads. (Perquisite: if the distribution channels are fully established and the technology has diffused to provide affordable prices.) How amazing would that be? Yes, this is unethical, disturbing and a violation to human rights. But hey, for all I know, it's always good to have something to fall back to?

Word: Open Science

References:

'Dollhouse' explained in under three minutes Eliza Dushku, 2009, YouTube video, accessed 16 May 2013, <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0MhT7H-j1U>.

Hans Rosling's 200 Countries, 200 Years, 4 Minutes - The Joy of Stats - BBC Four, 2010, YouTube video, accessed 16 May 2013, <http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jbkSRLYSojo>. 

Murphie, A. 2013, The Generosity of New Media - Science,Technology and Innovation/The Future, lecture notes, University of New South Wales,  accessed 16 May 2013, <http://www.andrewmurphie.org/3091/lecture-notes/#weeks-ten-and-eleven-science-technology-innovation-invention-the-future>.

Open Science Summit - Openness by far and away will win out! 2011, YouTube video, accessed 16 May 2013, <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMxYymZ8Zqo>.

Seed Magazine 2011, 'On Scientific Transfer', Seed Magazine, 27 January, accessed 16 May 2013, <http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/on_science_transfer/>.

Wilbanks, J. 2011, 'On Science Publishing', Seed Magazine, 28 January, accessed 16 May 2013, <http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/on_science_publishing>.

People's power belongs to the people

Big Politics: The Fate of the State

Imagine an Utopian world without hierarchy, just plain transparency. What would happen when no one is in charge? You might think there must be disorder and even social unrest. But in many fields of the real world, a lack of effective leadership has given rise to powerful groups that are turning the pyramids of industry and society upside down (Brafman and Beckstrom 2010).

Due to the shifts in the engagement with social media and the rise of other media platforms, there are new changes faced by social organisations, and threaten various institutions, especially our government. Consider the leaderless yet superbly powerful organisations like the Anonymous group, WikiLeaks, Al Qaeda; collaborative platforms such as Wikipedia and Craigslist. Think significant social movements such as Kony 2012 and peer-to-peer (P2P) sharing medium. Can you point out the common features between these media platforms and social groups?

Simply put, they all involve a high level of engagement with technology and interaction with social media. They mostly consist of a new sociological type - the graduates who reject traditional and endemic ideologies, who are driven by governmental and economic failures. They usually demand for the idealised autonomy and personal freedom. More often than not, these social movements are promoted through memes. These movements have turned traditional media events into ceremonial occurrences that are treated with reverence by broadcasters (Dayan and Katz 2007, cited in Usher 2011). Horizontalism is the golden rule of these social movements, as it 'kills vertical hierarchies spontaneously' and thus, is quintessential to eliminate bureaucratisation and facilitate communication (Mason 2011) .

So, the essence of the social movements lies within the people, the medium (social networks) and the cause. Technology is one of the key agents which unleash the force of the people. This intensifies decentralisation and ultimately influences businesses and world politics (Brafman and Beckstrom 2010). Isn't it interesting how these think tanks, grass roots organisations, networks and even politicians are using liberating media channels to rally support? Have the social organisations replaced the government as authority? Epipheo's video below illustrates how the Occupy Wall Street group is operated under a horizontal, transparent and leaderless structure. These social forces have changed the rules of the game. More importantly, they have challenged and defeated established institutions.

What is Occupy Wall Street?

The absence of structure, hierarchy, and formal organisation - once considered a weakness, has become a major asset (Brafman and Beckstrom 2010). Most of these social movements are driven by the same hidden force. The harder you fight this force, the stronger it gets. The more chaotic it seems, the more resilient it is. The more you try to control it, the more unpredictable it becomes (Brafman and Beckstrom 2010).

There are of course, many more challenges for the government, including 3D printing. Recently, Cody Wilson has designed a prototype for a 3D handgun and posted the blueprints online for anyone to download. After two days, and 100,000 downloads (Ball 2013), the State Department ordered him to take them down the computer-aided design (CAD) file. A few months later, two journalists from DailyMail UK even smuggled this 3D printed handgun on Eurostar without being noticed by the security check (Murphy and Myers 2013). What does this imply for the people and the government?

World's first 3D handgun (Creative Commons 2013)

No doubt, it decentralises manufacturing and purchasing, it also provides much more freedom and flexibility for citizens to own weapons. On the other hand, the government is panicking about this development, which is why they have attempted to stifle the 3D-printer gun designs online until it ultimately fails (Ball 2013). It is not hard to understand the government's worries. The problem isn't so much about citizens downloading the plans, but the abstract risk of sanctioned groups, or those affected by export bans, downloading the plans and printing armaments (Thornhill 2012).What seems to be even more problematic, is the spread and reach of these 3D handguns in countries where weapons are not traditionally or lawfully allowed, such as Australia and England. Though this may entail a series of stricter gun control, 3D printer regulations and a lower transparency in governments, it is a good start for the citizens.

While the notion of governments operating under pure transparency is naive, that seems to be the trend. Governments are under immense pressure to offer a higher level of transparency through open data and sources, regardless of the strengths and threats it may pose to the people. As Styles (2009) puts it, “Transparent, collaborative decision-making is satisfying, even when you don’t get what you want.”

However, it is just as important to consider the downside of having too much transparency. According to Lessig (2009), 'We are not thinking critically enough about where and when transparency works, and where and when it may lead to confusion, or to worse'. This view has some level of wisdom. Indeed, what people want is transparency, without the consideration of when or where it's appropriate. When they find out the absolute truth, it will not liberate them, but disgust them. Though the process of enhancing transparency can be time-consuming and taxpayers'-resources-dumping, it would definitely lead to a fairer and more ethical society.

Word: Transversally (given in lecture 7, in preparation for the seventh tutorial for week 8)


References:


Ball, J. 2013, 'US government attempts to stifle 3D-printer gun designs will ultimately fail', The Guardian, 1 May, accessed 3 May 2013, <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/10/3d-printing-gun-blueprint-state-department-ban>.

Bloomfield, A. 2013, 'How Much Does a 3D Printer Cost? Still Expensive, But Becoming More Affordable', Policy Mic, accessed 2 May 2013, <http://www.policymic.com/articles/41111/how-much-does-a-3d-printer-cost-still-expensive-but-becoming-more-affordable>.

Brafman, O. and Beckstrom, R. D. 2010, ‘The Power Of Leaderless Organizations’, National Journal, 11 September, accessed 2 May 2013, <http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/the-power-of-leaderless-organizations-20100911>.

Epipheo 2011, 'What is Occupy Wall Street (and how will it be remembered)?', Youtube video, 2 December, accessed 2 May 2013, <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VbrdplVRLw>.

Mason, P. 2011, 'Twenty reasons why it's kicking off everywhere,' BBC News, 5 February, accessed 2 May 2013, <http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/paulmason/2011/02/twenty_reasons_why_its_kicking.html>.

Motherboard 2013, Cody Wilson Successfully 3D-Printed an Entire Gun, digital photograph, Creative Commons, accessed 2 May 2013, <http://www.flickr.com/photos/95447178@N06/8706183374/in/photolist-egksZU-eh6cmz-ei9oEf-d7EYzW-eqAhSC-LDdyo-ehYfvx-cKdnTj-d7Erkh-ehh4xm-96nrc9-eiwYUi-dd6yVV-efUYnR-em9t25-dJTmSP-Kogku-ecEiyQ-vxLHx-bufGDA-bufGsW-98nxtD-dxgaUs-9M2JC3-e6Uv9p-cH1tmb-batrf2-batrh4-batrdH-dUo1Jf-727PQe-ddy6Lo-8WV5Q2-dd6yYn-dTx2pp-aYrzmp-e2YL4A-3wSo48-e5BaWj-daeWD8-aH9GZT-8rghB6-dWhBvn-cnpAFj-8V5L2S-5p8B75-ehgs8m-5fapRb-dfbhzL-dfcJtK-5f62Wr>.

Murphy, S. and Myers, R. 2013, 'How Mail On Sunday 'printed' first plastic gun in UK using a 3D printer- and then took it on board Eurostar without being stopped in security scandal', Daily Mail UK, 11 May, accessed 12 May 2013, <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2323158/How-Mail-On-Sunday-printed-plastic-gun-UK--took-board-Eurostar-stopped-security-scandal.html>.

Lessig, L. 2009, ‘Against Transparency’, New Republic, 9 October, accessed 2 May 2013, <http://www.newrepublic.com/article/books-and-arts/against-transparency?page=0,0#>.

Thornhill, T. 2012, 'Amazing 3D printer in action: Watch a working wrench being made from powder',  Daily Mail UK, 20 March, accessed 2 May 2013, <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2117570/Amazing-3D-printer-action-Watch-working-wrench-printed-powder.html>.

Usher, N. 2011, ‘How Egypt’s uprising is helping redefine the idea of a “media event’, Nieman Journalism Lab, 8 February, accessed 2 May 2013, <http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/02/how-egypts-uprising-is-helping-redefine-the-idea-of-a-media-event/>.

Zizek, S. (n.d.) 'The Interpassive Subject', The European Graduate School, accessed 2 May 2013, <http://www.egs.edu/faculty/slavoj-zizek/articles/the-interpassive-subject/>.