394 resultados para Prove it works
Resumo:
In his 1987 book, The Media Lab: Inventing the Future at MIT, Stewart Brand provides an insight into the visions of the future of the media in the 1970s and 1980s. 1 He notes that Nicolas Negroponte made a compelling case for the foundation of a media laboratory at MIT with diagrams detailing the convergence of three sectors of the media—the broadcast and motion picture industry; the print and publishing industry; and the computer industry. Stewart Brand commented: ‘If Negroponte was right and communications technologies really are converging, you would look for signs that technological homogenisation was dissolving old boundaries out of existence, and you would expect an explosion of new media where those boundaries used to be’. Two decades later, technology developers, media analysts and lawyers have become excited about the latest phase of media convergence. In 2006, the faddish Time Magazine heralded the arrival of various Web 2.0 social networking services: You can learn more about how Americans live just by looking at the backgrounds of YouTube videos—those rumpled bedrooms and toy‐strewn basement rec rooms—than you could from 1,000 hours of network television. And we didn’t just watch, we also worked. Like crazy. We made Facebook profiles and Second Life avatars and reviewed books at Amazon and recorded podcasts. We blogged about our candidates losing and wrote songs about getting dumped. We camcordered bombing runs and built open‐source software. America loves its solitary geniuses—its Einsteins, its Edisons, its Jobses—but those lonely dreamers may have to learn to play with others. Car companies are running open design contests. Reuters is carrying blog postings alongside its regular news feed. Microsoft is working overtime to fend off user‐created Linux. We’re looking at an explosion of productivity and innovation, and it’s just getting started, as millions of minds that would otherwise have drowned in obscurity get backhauled into the global intellectual economy. The magazine announced that Time’s Person of the Year was ‘You’, the everyman and everywoman consumer ‘for seizing the reins of the global media, for founding and framing the new digital democracy, for working for nothing and beating the pros at their own game’. This review essay considers three recent books, which have explored the legal dimensions of new media. In contrast to the unbridled exuberance of Time Magazine, this series of legal works displays an anxious trepidation about the legal ramifications associated with the rise of social networking services. In his tour de force, The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet, Daniel Solove considers the implications of social networking services, such as Facebook and YouTube, for the legal protection of reputation under privacy law and defamation law. Andrew Kenyon’s edited collection, TV Futures: Digital Television Policy in Australia, explores the intersection between media law and copyright law in the regulation of digital television and Internet videos. In The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It, Jonathan Zittrain explores the impact of ‘generative’ technologies and ‘tethered applications’—considering everything from the Apple Mac and the iPhone to the One Laptop per Child programme.
Resumo:
For a hundred years, since Federation, Australian consumers have suffered the indignity and the tragedy of price discrimination. From the time of imperial publishing networks, Australia has been suffered from cultural colonialism. In respect of pricing of copyright works, Australian consumers have been gouged; ripped-off; and exploited. Digital technologies have not necessarily brought an end to such price discrimination. Australian consumers have been locked out by technological protection measures; subject to surveillance, privacy intrusions and security breaches; locked into walled gardens by digital rights management systems; and geo-blocked.
Resumo:
Upon reading this esteemed collection of Sally Tomlinson’s works, published in Routledge’s prestigious World Library of Educationalists series, I was struck by three things. First, Sally is one of only three women among the 26 scholars whose collections have been published in this series to date, and the only scholar researching questions relating to disability and special education. Second, her early work on the sociology of special education Tomlinson, 1982) is just as pertinent today as her most recent research on the political scapegoating of low-attainers in a global knowledge economy (Tomlinson, 2012). Third, I was reminded of the extent to which her research has both inspired and guided me as I now grapple with the same research problems, albeit in a different country and at a different time, but always from a similar sociological standpoint (Graham & Jahnukainen, 2011; Graham & Sweller, 2011; Graham, 2012; Graham, 2014; Graham, Van Bergen & Sweller, 2014). Not surprisingly, the phrase that kept echoing through my head as I read through the 11 chapters chronicling a rich and immensely productive academic career was: ‘history repeats’. And, throughout the book are numerous examples and observations as to why it does. To paraphrase, the answer is power, status and politics.
Resumo:
This thesis contributes a substantial new theoretical understanding of what 'landscape meanings' are, and what constitutes the specific meanings of particular landscapes to individuals. Further, it proposes how landscape architects may identify these meanings to inform critical and ethical research, theory, professional practice and education. What emerges from this representative case study of the landscape of Richard Haag's Gas Works Park in Seattle is the understanding that a person's expressions of their 'cognitive landscape images' of a particular landscape, coupled with their expressions of their 'interactions' with that landscape, constitute the specific 'meaning-narrative' they attach to it.
Resumo:
Health professionals, academics, social commentators and the media are increasingly sending the same message – Australian men are in crisis. This message has been supported by documented rises in alcoholism, violence, depression, suicide and crime amongst men in Australia. A major cause of this crisis, it can be argued, is an over-reliance on the out-dated and limited model of hegemonic masculinity that all men are encouraged to imitate in their own behaviour. This paper, as part of a larger study, explores representations of masculinity in selected works of contemporary Australian theatre in order to investigate the concept of hegemonic masculinity and any influence it may have on the perceived ‘crisis of masculinity’. Theatre is but one of the artistic modes that can be used to investigate masculinity and issues associated with identity. The Australia Council for the Arts recognises theatre, along with literature, dance, film, television, inter-arts, music and visual arts, as critical to the understanding and expression of Australian culture and identity. Theatre has been chosen in this instance because of the opportunities available to this study for direct access to specific theatre performances and creators and, also, because of the researcher’s experience, as a theatre director, with the dramatic arts. Through interviews with writers, directors and actors, combined with the analysis of scripts, academic writings, reviews, articles, programmes, play rehearsals and workshops, this research utilises theatre as a medium to explore masculinity in Australia.
Resumo:
Even though today’s corporations recognize that they need to understand modern project management techniques (Schwalbe, 2002, p2), many researchers continue to provide evidence of poor IT project success. With Kotnour, (2000) finding that project performance is positively associated with project knowledge, a better understanding of how to effectively manage knowledge in IT projects should have considerable practical significance for increasing the chances of project success. Using a combined qualitative/quantitative method of data collection in multiple case studies spanning four continents, and comprising a variety of organizational types, the focus of this current research centered on the question of why individuals working within IT project teams might be motivated towards, or inhibited from, sharing their knowledge and experience in their activities, procedures, and processes. The research concluded with the development of a new theoretical model of knowledge sharing behavior, ‘The Alignment Model of Motivational Focus’. This model suggests that an individual’s propensity to share knowledge and experience is a function of perceived personal benefits and costs associated with the activity, balanced against the individual’s alignment to a group of ‘institutional’ factors. These factors are identified as alignments to the project team, to the organization, and dependent on the circumstances, to either the professional discipline or community of practice, to which the individual belongs.