Why Design Can Not Remain Exclusive The Writers

There are few places on this Earth, if any, where the possibilities are truly endless. However, if you detach yourself from the physical world and emerge into the “online” world, you find that this just might actually be accurate in this realm. The World Wide Web has had so much to offer to us since the early 1990s, but with this comes controversy. Unleashed onto a plane of seemingly immeasurable freedom of anonymity, was the world ready for such responsibility? Since those early days when new emerging technology changed our lives immensely, have we at all become a better place, or have we bitten off more than we can chew, and doomed our human relations forever? Exploring these concepts are three in-depth articles, including: “Growing Up Tethered” by Sherry Turkle, “The Loneliness of the Interconnected” by Charles Seife, and “Cybersexism” by Laurie Penny. Although it is thought that the Internet brings the world together, it actually does not help us politically, culturally, and economically like one would believe, as it makes us unable to be independent, isolates us from different points of view, and encourages real-world violence against women and other minority groups.

In her call to action, The People’s Platform; Taking Back Power and Culture in the Digital Age, Astra Taylor addresses underlying social and economic forces of the internet and differential perspectives towards it. Taylor discusses the new internet in which content is king and, people are now the product, this is called Web 2.0. She discusses this topic from a couple viewpoints; those who would believe that the internet is truly the new people’s platform and that it is the golden age of sharing and collaboration, called the Techno-optimists. The counterparts of this interpretation of the internet are what she calls the Techno-Skeptics, who have a similar mindset in that of Nicholas Carr, an author about technology in the modern age, with the

The boundaries and scope of design have broaden massively and the limits blur amongst the different endeavours and practices.

Over the past few decades our generation has witnessed a communication revolution no generation has ever witnessed before. The Internet was fully commercialized in the U.S. by mid-1990s and instant communication including the World Wide Web, email, and instant messaging have all played part of an enormous impact on media, commerce, and politics during that time and up until now. U.S. scholar and activist Robert McChesney has spent the past twenty years studying and documenting the effects of this Internet revolution and its relationship with capitalism and democracy. In his 2013 work “Digital Disconnect: How Capitalism is Turning the Internet Against Democracy,” McChesney addresses the relationship between the economic power and the digital

Russell’s review, “What Would Happen if You Threw a Revolution and Everyone Showed Up,” sets a discussion of the impact of the internet on our daily lives. One of Russell’s arguments against Shirky’s Cognitive Surplus is that “because of the Internet’s inherent mass organizing ability, by using it we are able to contribute to society (Russell 916).” Russell then argues that people do not contribute any more than they did before the internet. “…has he never heard of church organizations, non-profits, volunteer groups, the Boy and Girl Scouts, neighborhood watch programs, rideshare programs, Little League, food banks, the Lions Club…? The list is virtually endless, Shirky doesn’t contribute things to the public sphere, that doesn’t mean

What’s everyone doing now a day? Do you see people walking around reading a book or talking face to face with another human being? Not exactly, now a day you see people walking around with phones in their hands and worrying about what their social media status looks like. Internet has become a very large influence in everyday life, impacting life from health to political beliefs. With the elections coming up in November we see candidates heading to medias to gain publicity, but non of them have used Ron Pauls’ tactic of starting his campaign online and using the Internet to his benefit.

In 1993, citizens still cursed out the web World-Wide-Web and afterward accommodatingly shortened it (W.W.W.) for newcomers. A considerable amount has changed since that year, when it started to first light on activists, agitators, and nerds that organized PCs could be utilized as devices for individual and gathering political activity. The individuals who perceived the power and reach of broad communications had as of now been searching for approaches to talk back to government officials, organizations and others. Access to work area best distributing and picture altering, and in addition the way to disseminate through the web started to be utilized as instruments in a practice that came to be known as "culture jamming," which includes turning around the normal messages and making a resistance. [Culture Jamming] Does post-9/11 America still discover the defiance of net saboteurs? What’s more, hacktivists Romantic? Is it handy today to seek after individual activism and resistance?

Many claim that the majority of the United States’ population depend on the internet for numerous reasons. With the end of Net Neutrality, comes the compromise of that dependency. “The consequences will be particularly devastating for marginalized communities media outlets have misrepresented or failed to serve” stated by Free Press. Minority groups such as the LGBTQ community, People of color and Indigenous groups use the internet as a vital tool in fighting back against systemic discrimination (Press, Free. “Net). Net Neutrality is also crucial for local businesses, startups and entrepreneurs who depend on an open internet to advertise their businesses. Some states are passing specific laws that would ensure individuals would have access to free content, protect businesses from having to pay in order to reach online users while also protecting diversity (Kang, Cecilia. “States). Net Neutrality supporters claim that the attempts to protect the system is to ensure that everyone has free and equal rights to the

The widespread availability of the internet has produced a serge in communication in today’s society. The introduction of television to Australia in the 1950’s could be said to have had a proportionately similar effect. In today’s world the internet enables people to research, communicate and entertain across the globe at the touch of a computer key. However, the internet is sometimes seen, as a technology that contributes to the breakdown of the structure of community. In this essay I will discuss whether, the internet, in introducing a technology that enables the transfer of a seemingly unlimited quantity of uncensored information world-wide

Makerspaces lead to what Holman explains as a “digital fabrication and a decentralized workforce,” which entails several makers with unique thoughts drive the industry. Even so, Crawford remarks that craftsmanship returning to production will lead to diverse methods of employing the makers’ workforce, as the maker’s focus is on their individuality. Small businesses are carrying the profitability of Makerspace innovations, as many are shifting to specified markets. For example, OpenDesk is openly entering competition with the McDonaldized corporate giant, IKEA. Small businesses lack the capability of big companies to keep up with the demand of the total market, create a streamlined manufacturing process, and maximize profits in every way possible. Democratizing Makerspaces will reverse rationalization as it will lead to the break-up of manufacturing and creating less division between small businesses and corporate giants.

In Gershenfeld’s When Things Start to Think, the ultimate way for technology to reach full potential of personal fabrication is through simplicity of structure, as well as efficiency in its ability to create anything. Gershenfeld (1999) states, “big companies use big machines to make things we may not want” demonstrating the unnecessary need for elaborate high cost technology to give society the things they want and need. With these big companies and their machines being the only means to acquire merchanise, it makes it difficult for others to see a different way in obtaining these products in a more basic way. Gershenfeld (1999) provides through research an example of a “3D printer” as an alternative route in cutting out the middleman to establish

Who owns the internet? The common opinion is that the web is a free and equal source for all its’ users, belonging to no one and everyone at the same time, however the increasing monopolization of content producers and methods of access has become a major cause for concern. As a unified, single entity, the Internet does not belong to any single person or organization, but the quality and levels of access available are dependent on thousands of corporate groups and impact every internet user. While once seen as an equalizing field, discussions of web fast lanes, private platforms, and pay-for-play access have turned the once obviously neutral Internet into a highly contested structure. Net neutrality is a step forward towards ensuring a future

Vinton Cerf, chief internet evangelist of the aforementioned giant, Google, is an advocate of an open and free internet that is not limited by any standard of censorship, restriction, and regulation, whether it is domestic or international. Cerf, an early proponent of the internet in its dawning days, believes that the internet has been “powered by the people” and that the early “organic” blossoming of the web was due to a lack of restrictions imposed by governments during its inception (Cerf). Google believes that it would be shameful to suggest any form of change to this method of internet policy. Additionally, Google believes that the internet has flourished as an integral piece of the world’s economy that has become essential to its users (Cerf). The internet has, in other words, become a necessary and irreplaceable force of economic and communicative

The almost omnipresent Internet transforms our lives, connecting us to family, friends, and the world in ways inconceivable only a few years ago. Through social media, we actively participate in creating, editing, and consuming a never-ending stream of data. Private corporations and protagonists of political or social change all vie to reach and engage highly targeted

Running for the 22nd edition, the UK 's largest design trade show, 100% Design is especially curated to the theme “Experience”. The aim is to consider the multiplicity with which design guides, frames and improves the ways that we live, work and consume. The theme will be expressed through a series of specially commissioned installations and the show’s unrivalled talks programme, ‘Talks with 100% Design’ which last year had designer Isle Crawford founder of Studioilse and Yves Béhar, founder and principal designer fuseproject, the integrated design and branding firm, and chief creative officer at Jawbone.