Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences, written by Geoffrey Bowker and Susan Star, felt very interesting to read.  But the transitions the authors make between subjects, as well as the author's style of writing, make it a challenge to discern any themes or make any generalizations about the text.

In order to facilitate the discussion in tomorrow's class about the text, I have thought of the following questions:

1.) Do you feel that we form any unique internal infrastructures that create our perception of the world?  If so, what are they?  Why or why not?

2.) Are there any classification systems that are still in use today that you feel we should get rid of?  What are these systems and why should we get rid of them?  If we should keep them, why should we keep them?

3.) On page sixty, Bowker and Star write, "Common to both philosophical descriptions is the position that no category stands alone-when a new member is added to a class, this has ramifications for the class and the system of which it is part".  Although in this context, the author's may not be referring to racism and prejudice, do you feel that they would feel racism and prejudice would be a classification subject they would feel is worth exploring?  Do you think that racism and prejudice is a classification system?  If so, how do we create this system?  If so, how can we get rid of it?  Or do you feel there are reasons we should keep it?

4.) On page seventy-one, the authors address categorizing patient's symptoms.  Do you see any negative issues for patients over categorizing patient's symptoms the way the medical field currently does?

5.) Are there any disadvantages to using a classification system like the ICD (International Statistical Classification Of Diseases)?  Can you think of any (other than what we addressed for individual patients in the question above)?

6.) The authors speak several times about how the ICD is conservative in its approach to changing categories for diseases.  We can see an analagous situation in today's current infrastructure for America's energy infrastructure.  Are there any suggestions the author's make about categories that we can translate to moving away from our dependence on foreign oil?

7.) The controversial abortion drug "RU486" isn't mentioned in the ICD-10.  What issues do you see with this?

8.) On page eighty-eight the author's write, "To an outside observer, there is remarkably little reference to the process of aging."  What conclusions (narratives) can we draw from this?

9.) In terms of classifying how our government legislates, do you feel our forefathers did a good job?  Why or why not?

10.) Do you agree with the ICD's categorical assessment of viruses?  What affect will that assessment have?

Sorting Things Out, by Bowker and Star is an examination of classifications that have become woven into lives without us even realizing it, how these classifications affect us and the way we think about things, and how they were formulated in the first place.

 

That being said, I found this book to be near impossible to get through.  The subject had great potential to be interesting, but the academic jargon and over-the-top writing style not only put me off from the get-go, but it nearly put me to sleep at the same time.  Furthermore, instead of making my way through the readings at a good clip, I had to constantly re-read sections to figure out what the authors were talking about.  I often felt that this whole book as a case of “less is more”; it seemed that they often opted for pompous-type ways of expressing ideas.  For example, on page 158, they say, “Despite a growing body of evidence from sociology and the history of science, distributed artificial intelligence and distributed cognitive science, images of universal policy and encyclopedic knowledge often invoke the ideal imposition of universal standardization schemes.”  I felt that statements like this one were a bit overdone.

 

I did, however, find the subject matter intriguing.  The concept of “torque” was one that interested me, especially in its demonstration in Chapter 6 that dealt with the apartheid in South Africa.  It was amazing to see how a simple classification system became responsible for forcing people to change residences and jobs, follow a set of rules, show proper documentation, etc.  It was also scary to see the kind of power classification can have.

 

I was constantly trying to relate the ideas in the book to real-life examples that I deal with on a regular basis.  The one that worked best for me would be musical classifications.  As a musician, people often ask me, “Well what kind of music do you write?” or “What’s your style?”  This becomes a difficult question to answer.  My influences range from jazz (George Benson and Al Jarreau) to rock (Led Zepplin and Jimi Hendrix) to blues (Joe Bonamassa and Stevie Ray Vaughan) to jam (The John Butler Trio) to acoustic (Ben Harper).  They all become mixed together to create a sound that I feel is unique.  But people want a classification, they want to place it in a box or a filing cabinet because they feel that this makes it organized and easier to understand and pass around.  If I say I’m a blues artist, I’m incorrect.  If I say I’m a rock player, that’s still not quite right.  What happens if I don’t fit into a category?  What happens if I’m categorized incorrectly?

 

Furthermore, I am currently working on an oral history project about the punk rock scene in South Jersey.  While doing a little research, I’ve found at least 12 sub-genres (Glam Punk, Anarcho Punk, Horror Punk, etc) and more than 13 fusion genres (Celtic Punk, Cow Punk, Gypsy Punk, etc).

 

I think that this was one of the points that the authors were trying to make; that no classification system is 100% accurate or complete. We must understand and recognize the classifying structures that surround us, and accept that they sometimes need to evolve and grow.

In Sorting Things Out:  Classification and Its Consequences, Geoffrey Bowker and Susan Leigh Star carry an indepth discussion on the politics of classification in the medical industry and the misrepresentation that results from the construction of such information.

The text (which I am still only slightly more than halfway through at this point) has made me consider the classification systems implemented in school systems and the consequences these systems have on the way of thinking for both students and teachers as well as public perception of the school system.

At the public high school where I used to teach, students were placed in three primary levels:  Core students required learning support; some students at this level were also classified as "Special Ed", depending on the level of support required.  Honors students (or Advance Placement (AP) at the senior level) were considered accelerated, and Het students (Heterogeneous) were essentially classified as average due to their placement outside of the Core and Honors levels.  Students were placed in these categories as a result of their grade history (a track following them from middle school into their freshman year and through graduation) as well as standardized testing (such as the HSPA).

As an English III teacher of all three levels, I often questioned the placement of certain students and found myself frustrated with the general classifications of the system.  For example, a Core class would commonly consist of students with learning disabilities, some of whom spent extra time with me outside of class in attempt to earn an average grade, coupled with students who (appeared to be) simply disinterested in learning, though likely capable of succeeding even in a Het class had they applied themselves.  (I realize as I write this I am scripting the troubles of anyone who has ever taught and that this situation was not unique to my school.)  Something the system fails to account for, beyond these differences, is the varying underlying causes for behavioral or academic deficiency, ranging from destructive home lives or poor economic conditions.  Although schools offer programs to offer support in varying situations, I think the possibility exists that placement in certain categories can hinder a student's progress rather than offer the support that had been intended. 

To take this at another level, the district receives reports of schools' progress on standardized testing.  When a certain percentage of students fall below the standard, the school is characterized as a "failing school."  (Such was the case when my high school narrowly fell short of proficiency in language arts for the HSPA.)  However, similar to the information that Isn't documented in classroom categorization, what the state test reports do not account for is outside circumstances that affect proficiency.   (For example, even if a school falls into the "failure" category by three students, two of whom rarely showed up for school, the label of failure and the district's resulting perception does not alter.  All that ultimately matters is the standard established by the state and the report card published in the paper.)

Depending on perception, it's unclear who holds the "power" of influence in such infrastructures, this idea muddled further by the overlapping and sometimes contradictory goals and incentives of all participants.

 

 

 

I feel like I have a knack for picking stuff with weird names.  Either that, or there are some real strange folks naming these online applications and Web 2.0 things.  If it were up to me, I'd be calling stuff "Dragon Fire", or "Steel Blade", or maybe even "Crank 2: High Voltage......" (Well, come on, who's more manly and tough than Jason Statham?)  As if Twitterlicious wasn't odd enough, this week, I'll be talking about LuLu. 

 

LuLu was founded in 2002 as a way for independent publishers to publish their work (as an option other than being published by a mainstream publishing company). The idea is that anyone who wishes to publish a book, CD, etc, can do so for free.  This sounds too good to be true, but surprisingly, LuLu’s process is pretty fair: 

“You set your own price, we print and ship each item as it's ordered, and you collect 80% of the creator revenue on every sale.

Then your book is, if you choose, automatically listed for sale on the Lulu Marketplace - a booming ecommerce destination that attracts more than 900,000 unique visitors every week. Even better, Lulu's #1 ranking among self-publishing websites ensures that your work will show up at the top of the search results in places like Google and Yahoo.

We even make it possible for you to get your own ISBN, so you can make your masterpiece available in retail stores, libraries and schools around the world - online and off.”

 

The trade off for all these benefits, though, is that LuLu deals strictly with publishing, and they do not handle publicity or promotion of any works featured on the site; it’s up to the author to market and sell his or her work.

 

The author retains the full copyright, and work on a POD (print on demand) basis.  This means you only pay for the copies that are purchased.

 

Signing up is a snap, you simply need your name, email address, password, and a "store location", which is the LuLu equivalent to a MySpace-type personalized extension that's tagged onto the end of the LuLu web address.

 

 

            On the “Publish” page, you’re given a slew of options for media to be published including paperback and hardback books, text books, yearbooks, calendars, and even CDs and DVDs.  Once you click on your choice, you are taken to another screen that will help you personalize your work.  Each type of publishing differs depending on what type of media you are using (so comic books, which are an option, are different than paperback books, which are different that wedding albums, etc).  Paperback, for example, begins by asking for the title of your work and your name in the author space.  You then must choose your paper type (standard or publisher grade), size, binding type, and color options.  From there, all that’s left is to choose the file from your computer for upload, so long as they fall into the accepted formats (DOC, RTF, WPS, PDF, PS, Images (jpg, gif, png))

 

 

 

At this point, LuLu will make your file “print-ready.”  This is where I encountered a problem.  Your personalization options are largely determined by the length of your work.  Because I was trying to upload a short 10 page file just as a demonstration, I had to edit some of my options to get past the “print-ready” stage.  Even then, I still couldn’t get it to work, and as of right now, I’m not entirely sure why.

 

 

            But there is more to LuLu than just the publishing end of it.  Your dashboard gives you a great amount of info about your progress thus far, which includes sales and revenue summaries, and recent orders.  But there is also a social networking aspect to it as well.  You can search and add friends, and if you add in your “interests”, LuLu will search its database of members and suggest people you may find interesting.  When I first signed up, and went into the “My Friends” screen, two sentences stared me in the face: “You do not have any friends. How very sad for you.”  Thanks, LuLu.  If I wasn’t depressed enough that no one will publish my book and I have to do it on my own, you’ve made me perk right up by reminding me that I don’t even have friends in the online world.

 

 

            You also have the option of joining groups, which you can sort through by looking at the ones with the most recent activity, or ones with the most members.  You can also search groups by name, or if you find that no one is as cool as you are, you can make your own group, name it something witty and clever (since you are, technically, a published author now), and wait for other LuLu-ites to come begging for you to admit them into your exclusive and prestigious club.  (“I am the Key Master.”  “I am the Gatekeeper.”)

 

            All in all, the site is pretty impressive and is a great concept for up-and-coming authors/artists/musicians who want to get their work out there, but may not have the dough to do it.  As long as you’re cool with self-promotion, then LuLu may be the place for you.

 

 

 

TweetDeck is a desktop application that enables users to manage the information they distribute and receive through Twitter.  TweetDeck (beta) is available for Mac OS X and Windows (Vista and Windows XP).  To use TweetDeck, users must download the application to their hard drives.  Once installation is complete, users sign in to TweetDeck using their Twitter username and password, thereby connecting them to Twitter activity in real time.

 

 

Those who have used Twitter are likely aware of how difficult it can be to manage the overwhelming flow of information.  With messages posting in a single column with limited means of organization, users could easily lose track of posts from those they are following, possibly missing messages all together.  TweetDeck offers a solution to this by giving users the freedom to create columns to organize contacts and other content.  In addition to providing means of organization, TweetDeck incorporates both the user-created features of Twitter (such as re-tweeting) as well as standard features (such as replying) and structures them to enhance usability.  (Further details on such features follows.)

 

TweetDeck has a toolbar which provides users the ability to tweet and to create columns to organize tweets.  Throughout TweetDeck, users can roll-over icons to see the label of that feature, though explanations of these features are not provided.

 

 

To begin, the area for tweeting is similar to Twitter:  “What are you doing?” labels an area where users enter text, with the number “140” counting down the characters available.  TweetDeck has added some useful features here:  Similar to MS Word, TweetDeck identifies misspelled words by underlining in red.  Also, simply hitting Enter posts the tweet.  (An icon calls out this difference for users directly to the right of the text box.)  Another addition I found particularly useful is the ability to shorten a URL directly in TweetDeck.  Rather than accessing a site, such as tinyurl.com, to shorten a URL and copying that link into Twitter, TweetDeck enables users to simply enter the full text.  Based on the site selected in the dropdown, clicking Shorten allows TweetDeck to pulls from that site and deposit the shortened URL into the tweet.  Further, users can attach pictures through the TwitPik button, translate tweets into a variety of languages, and view recent hashtags.    

 

 

 

The rest of the toolbar is used to view/create columns to manage tweets.  Users will recognize some of these features from Twitter, though some are new. 

• All Friends includes all Twitter members who users are following.  As on Twitter, this column condenses all users into one chain.
• Users should recognize the Reply icon from Twitter—this column includes all replies both to and from the user. 
• Similarly, Direct Messages includes all direct messages both to and from the users.  (This is a difference from Twitter, which only shows messages received in this category.) 
• Unlike the star Twitter users to identify favorites, the heart icon (which users may better recognize from aol) identifies the column for favorite tweets. 
• Groups enable users to create unique columns to label twitter groups.

 

• Through Search, users can create a column that includes all users related to the search criteria entered. 

 

• Twitscoop pulls information from Twitscoop.com, a site that crawls twitter identifies words most frequently found.  (The larger the word, the more frequently it is appearing on twitter at the moment the site was crawled.) 
• 12seconds pulls videos from 12seconds.tv, a site where users can post 12 second videos online to twitter, facebook, and so forth.
• StockTwits connects users to conversations on StockTwits.com, a site used for discussion of the stock market.

Note that certain columns (such as Favorites) can only be applied once.  If a column cannot be applied more than once, the system will inform the user of such when he/she clicks the icon.

 

Within each tweet, TweetDeck has made performing common Twitter actions easy.  By rolling over a user’s icon, users can reply, send a direct message, retweet in one click, or perform a variety of other actions available in dropdown (pictured below). 

 

 

Also in TweetDeck, clicking a username clearly displays the user’s profile, twitter stats, and recent tweets.  A useful feature TweetDeck has added is hyperlinking #hashtags.  Clicking a hashtag links users to the search results in twitter in real time, external to TweetDeck.  Users can also add others to groups by clicking the [+] within a tweet.

 

 

Finally, users have the ability to organize the information within and surrounding each column.  This includes filtering tweets by defined criteria, marking all tweets as seen (unread tweets have a white circle that clicking marks as seen), clearing seen tweets, clearing all tweets, and moving columns left or right.

 

 

One way TweetDeck supports the movement of information is simply by making incoming information more easily accessible.  Because users have the ability to filter information and the tweets that display, they are better able to find the topics that interest them, thereby making it easier to collect and distribute related information.  Also, TweetDeck’s connections to external sites, such as 12seconds and Stocktwits, provides users with easy access to information of which they may otherwise by unaware, providing a vehicle to share that information within one location.  Finally, shortcut features, such as the ability to shorten a URL or retweet in a click, increases the expedience of information sharing. 

 

Compared to other applications that take up only a small portion of the screen, such as Ada or Twitterlicious, TweetDeck does not provide the ability to work other items while the application is open.  While this may prevent users from seeing TweetDeck as an application they can work while continuing other items, it is important to note the additional features and connections TweetDeck offers may account for the size it takes up on screen.  In addition, the Notification feature TweetDeck applies enables users to work other issues and continue to receive updates as long as the application is running.  Also, whereas Twitterlicious marks items that have been read but continues to display the tweets, TweetDeck deletes read items for the next time users log into the application.

 

 

One of the limitations of TweetDeck is that users can only work with ten columns.  If users want to take advantage of the other features TweetDeck offers, such as connections to Twitscoop and 12seconds, they can only create a limited number of groups, which seems to contradict part of the application’s primary purpose in organizing information.

 

The search feature may cause confusion in that, although posts display in TweetDeck based on columns created for search criteria, users are not actually following these members on Twitter, though the posts continue to display in TweetDeck.  (Clicking the Other actions option w/in the user icon and selecting Follow allows users to add the member to their list.)

 

I also found the features of the toolbar confusing at first.  With the Tweet icon appearing first, I made the assumption that the icons following would execute other familiar functions.  (For example, I thought clicking the envelop would allow me to send a direct message rather than create a column for direct messages, which already displayed by default.)  Since TweetDeck has made use of a roll-over feature, it may be advantageous to add descriptions of the call-outs and restructure the toolbar based on its features.

 

Overall, I found TweetDeck highly effective due to its organizational structure and shortcuts and recommend it to anyone who twitters regularly.