Jack CUber, LinkedIn, Google Docs, iPhone, Apple products in general for being silver, Twitter, Facebook, StayFocused, indoor plumbing, the MBTA, contact lenses, Skype/Google Hangouts/web conferencing software, Medium, VR that makes you dizzy, smartphones, digital cameras, Oculus Rift, printers (2d and 3d), digital communication ...
Willow BWants these groups to talk to each other more. Talk about the important questions, but without writing in such a way that the system doesn't even want to hear about it.
Relationship critic has with their audience and the thing they're criticising. Critics who are on your side versus not on your side (Republican critique of Obama, versus Marco Arment on Apple because he's invested in the space). He also has authority.
Gap in expertise and what's coming out. Naseem Taleb writes about crises being unassociated with what we know.
Experts are rarely good at taking the view of the user.
Different kinds of criticism:
Fan - loves it, wants it to succeed
NYT - grey lady saying you should feel this way about this
Authorities - people speaking from deep technical knowledge. Doesn't make us better at telling you how to feel
taking the view of the user - food critic etc.
advocate - walk in with a position, a conversation they want to have, informed by the thing they're criticising.
Looking for an interdisciplinary approach -- grey lady authority.
A lot of tech won't work unless we're all using it. We don't ahve a voice as users or critics because of this. Mirroring the poverty of choices. Monoculture. We're all going to use it or reject it.
How to get beyond negative connotation
Grounding in history
field defining- carve out a space and a practice of technology criticism
elevating those already doing it
affect popular discourse on how we talk about technology
Willow BClassify by discipline (or at least background) -- then see where things overlap.
Interesting to expand the bibliography to include tech reviews. Digital humanities toolkit. Topic modeling. Look for patterns in large textual corpera. "How is technology talked about among tech critics, scholars, etc?"
Seperation between authority and commentary. Bruce's post on HeartBleed versus jsut about anyone else's.
People speak about historical technology in a strange way, too.
Journalists are really bad at thinking about their audience.
Tiffany LTechnology is not going to stay its own "thing" for much longer. How we understand and see tech is quite different from the 15-16 year olds view (who in a decade will be the decision makers)
What would the strong outcome be for you? I spend a lot of time thinking about moral hazards. People who write about cybersecurity in a naive way, and are powerful and listened to. Powerful, English Language Western discourses. What is the scope? What would you want to see journalists adopt?
Trying to see constructive technology criticism. Not just picking apart, but offering a solution.
Not just a power structure of media (not everyone is a critic), those publications have a responsibility to push back and ask questions, because they are the ones that google facebook etc will listen to. Impetus to ask them to answer these questions in useful ways.
Who makes the change? What sorts of criticism prompts change? Can have it coming from consumers or from management or etc. Different actors have different criticism-listening activities.