Slashdot Mirror
Hacking as Scholarship
FatherBusa writes "I am a professor of English who specializes in what is usually called "humanities computing"--a discipline concerned with creating and theorizing about the use of computers in humanities research (the homepage for the Association for Computers in the Humanities has some info). I was recently asked to join a working group charged with the task of establishing a peer review process for scholarly software projects in the humanities and stumbled across the Guidelines for Evaluating Work with Digital Media in the Modern Languages put out by the Modern Language Association (the main professional organization for language and literature studies in North America). Hackers working in humanities departments may want to give it a read. It's an interesting statement that speaks to the (sometimes difficult) process of getting "tools" and other sorts of digital work evaluated as academic scholarship in promotion and tenure processes."
frist pist
Sounds damn good!
...by the CLIT! Give it up, AC scum!
There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
good morning slashbots. Eat an ass today!!
for me to poop on
Karma: Terrible (mostly affected by moderation done to your comments)
The CLIT is no more.
The CUNT was circumcized in accordance with fundamentalist islamic traditions.
Sorry.
I wonder how the DMCA will weigh in on this.
SL33ZE - Artificial Intelligence is No Match For Natural Stupidity -
A Ahem when was the last time a hacker even entered a humanities classroom? and looking for girls does not count!
This story probably belongs in some other publication
Don't Tread on OpenSource
I'm a computer engineering student in my 4th year of study @ Memorial University. Right now we have to do an Assesment of Technology course and an Ethics course before we graduate. The Ass. tech covers the social implications of past tech. work and other topics along those lines.
:)
I also never heard of a CE/EE student in Canada/USA who don't have to do these courses and i'm quite sure that we make up a fair share of the "Hackers" In the world.
Either way they are interesting courses to take
"I believe in everything in moderation. Including moderation." -Dean DeLeo, Stone Temple Pilots
d00d, j00 w4nna kn0 bout m0d3rn l4nguag3?!?! I'll h00kz j00 uP Wit 0-day hax0r nFO!
REBORN, Linux audio software is dead :( From ReBorn's website: It was fun while it lasted... I have today been instructed by Propellerhead Software to remove ReBorn from my Website. The ReBorn user interface falls foul of the copyright inherent in the ReBirth product and is consequently an infringement of Propellerhead Software's rights. Unfortunatley, this situation means I have had to reverse my position on releasing the ReBorn source code, which will now not be made publicly available. However, the effort in developing ReBorn will not go entirely to waste. I already have plans to integrate the core audio code into a new soft-synth application, with an all-new interface and 100% incompatibilty with all Propellerhead's products :-) Thankyou to all those people who contacted me to say nice things about ReBorn. I ask all of you to respect Propellerhead Software's wishes (as I have) and not to distribute the program on other websites. David J. Singer
Bumper sticker in a history prof's office down the hallway from mine:
"Yes, I majored in humanities. Would you like fries with that?"
If I was that drunk, I would have remembered it -- H. Simpson
Still, Humanities Computing sounds like an interesting aspect of the field. It could be very useful in most corporations (like my Engineering company, for example).
I've read more interesting cereal boxes.
- Don't eat grass and stay out of trees.
You never answered my question from yesterday.
Anyway, why would a school give college credit for using an axe?
Universities literature departments sure are slow to change. I remember trying to get the literature department to change in college and boy was that fruitless. One of the things many people suggested was to use the internet in every aspect, but that was met with no interest. I love literature, but the biggest problem with literature programs are the departments and stuck-in-past chairs who hate change. They want to keep doing the same old thing until they die, but in the mean time their happy bitching about how contemporary literature is trash.
slightly ot
If you're in the tech things/scientific and don't know who Strauss was, you are automatically banned in the limb of the mind numbed tech freak, while if you studied history of arts and you don't know what a square root is, that's simply normal.
I remember time spent fixing pc for other students that had to finish their thesis about don't know the role of granary in the middle of dark ages and that trated the "machine" as the root of evil, the stuff that was wasting their precious time.
They were of course thankful but at their eyes you were just a cleric of the satanic cult of technology that behave in a very gentle manner, and fixing the pc was a sort of dark ritual.
So if someone in the Humanities starts looking at the technology in another way maybe is the begining of a better world.
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Version 2, June 1991
Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundashun, Inc.
59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
Everyone be puh'mitted t'copy and distribute verbatim copies
uh dis license document, but changin' it be not allowed.
Preamble
De licenses fo' most software are designed t'take away yo'
freedom t'share and change it. By contrast, de GNU General Public
License be intended t'guarantee yo' freedom t'share and change free
software--to make sho' nuff de software be free fo' all its users. Dis
General Public License applies t'most uh de Free Software
Foundashun's software and t'any oda' honky code whose audo's commit to
usin' it. (Some oda' Free Software Foundashun software be covered by
de GNU Library General Public License instead.) You's kin apply it to
yo' honky codes, too.
When we speak uh free software, we are referrin' t'freedom, not
price. What it is, Mama! Our General Public Licenses are designed t'make sho' nuff dat ya'
gots' de freedom t'distribute copies uh free software (and charge fo'
dis service if ya' wish), dat ya' receive source code o' kin git it
if ya' wants' it, dat ya' kin change da damn software o' use pieces uh it
in new free honky codes; and dat ya' know ya' kin do dese wahtahmelluns.
To protect yo' rights, we need t'make restricshuns dat fo'bid
anyone t'deny ya' dese rights o' t'ax' ya' t'surrenda' de rights.
Dese restricshuns translate t'certain responsibilities fo' ya' if ya'
distribute copies uh de software, o' if ya' modify it.
Fo' 'esample, if ya' distribute copies uh such some honky code, wheder
gratis o' fo' some fee, ya' must give da damn recipients all de rights dat
ya' gots'. You's must make sho' nuff dat dey, too, receive o' kin git de
source code. What it is, Mama! And ya' must show dem dese terms so's dey know deir
rights.
We protect yo' rights wid two steps, dig dis: (1) copyright da damn software, and
(2) offa' ya' dis license which gives ya' legal puh'mission t'copy,
distribute and/o' modify de software. What it is, Mama!
Also, fo' each audo''s protecshun and ours, we wanna make certain
dat everyone dig its dat dere be no warranty fo' dis free
software. What it is, Mama! If de software be modified by someone else and passed on, we
wants' its recipients t'know dat whut dey gots' be not da damn o'iginal, so
dat any problems introduced by oders gots'ta not reflect on de o'iginal
audo's' reputashuns.
Finally, any free honky code be dreatened constantly by software
patents. We wish t'avoid da damn danga' dat redistributo's uh a free
honky code gots'ta individually obtain patent licenses, in effect makin' de
honky code proprietary. Slap mah fro! To prevent dis, we gots' made it clear dat any
patent must be licensed fo' everyone's free use o' not licensed at all.
De precise terms and condishuns fo' copyin', distribushun and
modificashun follow.
GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
TERMS AND CONDISHUNS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUSHUN AND MODIFICASHUN
0. Dis License applies t'any honky code o' oda' wo'k which contains
a notice placed by de copyright holda' sayin' it may be distributed
unda' de terms uh dis General Public License. What it is, Mama! De "Program", below,
refers t'any such honky code o' wo'k, and some "wo'k based on de Program"
means eida' de Program o' any derivative wo'k unda' copyright law, dig dis:
dat be to say, some wo'k containin' de Program o' some po'shun uh it,
eida' verbatim o' wid modificashuns and/o' translated into anoder
language. What it is, Mama! (Hereinafter, translashun be included widout limitashun in
de term "modificashun".) Each licensee be addressed as "ya'".
Activities oda' dan copyin', distribushun and modificashun aint
covered by dis License; dey are outside its scope. What it is, Mama! De act of
runnin' de Program be not restricted, and da damn output fum de Program
is covered only if its contents constitute some wo'k based on de
Program (independent uh havin' been made by runnin' de Program).
Wheda' dat be true depends on whut de Program duz.
1. You's may copy and distribute verbatim copies uh de Program's
source code as ya' receive it, in any medium, provided dat ya'
conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy some appropriate
copyright notice and disclaima' of warranty; keep intact all de
notices dat refa' to dis License and t'de absence uh any warranty;
and give any oda' recipients uh de Program some copy uh dis License
along wid de Program. 'S coo', bro.
You's may charge some fee fo' de physical act uh transferrin' some copy, and
ya' may at yo' opshun offa' warranty protecshun in 'shange fo' some fee. What it is, Mama!
2. You's may modify yo' copy o' copies uh de Program o' any po'shun
of it, dus fo'min' some wo'k based on de Program, and copy and
distribute such modificashuns o' wo'k unda' de terms uh Secshun 1
above, provided dat ya' also meet all uh dese condishuns, dig dis:
a) You's must cause da damn modified stashs t'carry prominent notices
statin' dat ya' changed da damn stashs and da damn date uh any change. What it is, Mama!
b) You's must cause any wo'k dat ya' distribute o' publish, dat in
whole o' in part contains o' be derived fum de Program o' any
part dereof, t'be licensed as some whole at no charge t'all dird
parties unda' de terms uh dis License. What it is, Mama!
c) If de modified honky code no'mally eyeballs commands interactively
when run, ya' must cause it, when started runnin' fo' such
interactive use in de most o'dinary way, t'print o' display an
announcement includin' some appropriate copyright notice and a
notice dat dere be no warranty (o' else, sayin' dat ya' provide
some warranty) and dat users may redistribute da damn honky code under
dese condishuns, and tellin' de usa' how t'view some copy uh dis
License. What it is, Mama! (Excepshun: if de Program itself be interactive but
duz not no'mally print such some announcement, yo' wo'k based on
de Program be not required t'print some announcement.)
Dese requirements apply t'de modified wo'k as some whole. What it is, Mama! If
identifiable secshuns uh dat wo'k aint derived fum de Program,
and kin be reasonably considered independent and separate wo'ks in
demselves, den dis License, and its terms, do not apply t'dose
secshuns when ya' distribute dem as separate wo'ks. But when ya'
distribute da damn same secshuns as part uh a whole which be some wo'k based
on de Program, de distribushun uh de whole must be on de terms of
dis License, whose puh'missions fo' oda' licensees 'estend t'de
entire whole, and dus t'each and every part regardless uh who wrote it.
Dus, it be not da damn intent uh dis secshun t'claim rights o' contest
yo' rights t'wo'k written entirely by ya'; rader, de intent be to
exercise da damn right t'control de distribushun uh derivative o'
collective wo'ks based on de Program. 'S coo', bro.
In addishun, mere aggregashun uh anoda' wo'k not based on de Program
wid de Program (o' wid some wo'k based on de Program) on some volume of
a sto'age o' distribushun medium duz not brin' de oda' wo'k under
de scope uh dis License. What it is, Mama!
3. You's may copy and distribute da damn Program (o' some wo'k based on it,
unda' Secshun 2) in object code o' 'esecutable fo'm unda' de terms of
Secshuns 1 and 2 above provided dat ya' also do one uh de followin':
a) Accompany it wid de complete co'respondin' machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed unda' de terms uh Secshuns
1 and 2 above on some medium customarily used fo' software interchange; o',
b) Accompany it wid some written offer, valid fo' at least dree
years, t'give any dird party, fo' some charge no mo'e dan yo'
cost uh physically puh'fo'min' source distribushun, some complete
machine-readable copy uh de co'respondin' source code, t'be
distributed unda' de terms uh Secshuns 1 and 2 above on some medium
customarily used fo' software interchange; o',
c) Accompany it wid de info'mashun ya' received as t'de offer
t'distribute co'respondin' source code. What it is, Mama! (Dis alternative is
allowed only fo' noncommercial distribushun and only if ya'
received da damn honky code in object code o' 'esecutable fo'm wid such
some offer, in acco'd wid Subsecshun b above. What it is, Mama!)
De source code fo' some wo'k means de preferred fo'm uh de wo'k fo'
makin' modificashuns t'it. Fo' some executable wo'k, complete source
code means all de source code fo' all modules it contains, plus any
associated interface definishun stashs, plus de scripts used to
control compilashun and installashun uh de 'esecutable. What it is, Mama! However, as a
special 'sepshun, de source code distributed need not include
anydin' dat be no'mally distributed (in eida' source o' binary
fo'm) wid de majo' components (compiler, kernel, and so's on) uh de
opuh'tin' system on which de 'esecutable runs, unless dat component
itself accompanies de 'esecutable. What it is, Mama!
If distribushun uh executable o' object code be made by offerin'
access t'copy fum some designated place, den offerin' equivalent
access t'copy de source code fum de same place counts as
distribushun uh de source code, even dough dird parties aint
compelled t'copy de source along wid de object code. What it is, Mama!
4. You's may not copy, modify, sublicense, o' distribute da damn Program
except as 'espressly provided unda' dis License. What it is, Mama! Any attempt
oderwise t'copy, modify, sublicense o' distribute da damn Program is
void, and gots'ta automatically terminate yo' rights unda' dis License. What it is, Mama!
However, parties who gots' received copies, o' rights, fum ya' under
dis License gots'ta not gots' deir licenses terminated so's long as such
parties remain in full compliance. What it is, Mama!
5. You's aint required t'accept dis License, since ya' gots' not
signed it. However, nodin' else grants ya' puh'mission t'modify o'
distribute da damn Program o' its derivative wo'ks. Dese acshuns are
prohibited by law if ya' do not accept dis License. What it is, Mama! Derefo'e, by
modifyin' o' distributin' de Program (o' any wo'k based on de
Program), ya' indicate yo' acceptance uh dis License t'do so, and
all its terms and condishuns fo' copyin', distributin' o' modifyin'
de Program o' wo'ks based on it.
6. Each time ya' redistribute da damn Program (o' any wo'k based on de
Program), de recipient automatically receives some license fum de
o'iginal licenso' t'copy, distribute o' modify de Program subject to
dese terms and condishuns. You's may not impose any furder
restricshuns on de recipients' 'esercise uh de rights granted herein. 'S coo', bro.
You's aint responsible fo' enfo'cin' compliance by dird parties to
dis License. What it is, Mama!
7. If, as some consequence uh a court judgment o' allegashun uh patent
infrin'ement o' fo' any oda' reason (not limited t'patent issues),
condishuns are imposed on ya' (wheda' by court o'der, agreement o'
oderwise) dat contradict da damn condishuns uh dis License, dey do not
excuse ya' fum de condishuns uh dis License. What it is, Mama! If ya' kinnot
distribute so's as t'satisfy simultaneously yo' obligashuns unda' dis
License and any oda' puh'tinent obligashuns, den as some consequence ya'
may not distribute da damn Program at all. Fo' 'esample, if some patent
license would not puh'mit royalty-free redistribushun uh de Program by
all dose who receive copies directly o' indirectly drough ya', den
de only way ya' could satisfy bod it and dis License would be to
refrain entirely fum distribushun uh de Program. 'S coo', bro.
If any po'shun uh dis secshun be held invalid o' unenfo'ceable under
any particular circumstance, de balance uh de secshun be intended to
apply and da damn secshun as some whole be intended t'apply in oder
circumstances.
It be not da damn purpose uh dis secshun t'induce ya' t'infrin'e any
patents o' oda' propuh'ty right claims o' t'contest validity uh any
such claims; dis secshun gots'ta de sole purpose uh protectin' de
integrity uh de free software distribushun system, which is
implemented by public license practices. Many sucka's gots' made
generous contribushuns t'de wide range uh software distributed
drough dat system in reliance on consistent applicashun uh dat
system; it be up t'de audo'/dono' t'decide if he o' she be willin'
to distribute software drough any oda' system and some licensee kinnot
impose dat choice. What it is, Mama!
Dis secshun be intended t'make do'oughly clear whut be believed to
be some consequence uh de rest uh dis License. What it is, Mama!
8. If de distribushun and/o' use uh de Program be restricted in
certain countries eida' by patents o' by copyrighted interfaces, de
o'iginal copyright holda' who places de Program unda' dis License
may add some 'splicit geographical distribushun limitashun 'sludin'
dose countries, so's dat distribushun be puh'mitted only in o' among
countries not dus 'sluded. In such case, dis License inco'po'ates
de limitashun as if written in de body uh dis License. What it is, Mama!
9. De Free Software Foundashun may publish revised and/o' new versions
of de General Public License fum time t'time. What it is, Mama! Such new versions will
be similar in spirit t'de present version, but may diffa' in detail to
address new problems o' concerns.
Each version be given some distin'uishin' version number. Ah be baaad... If de Program
specifies some version numba' of dis License which applies t'it and "any
lata' version", ya' gots' de opshun uh followin' de terms and condishuns
eida' of dat version o' uh any lata' version published by de Free
Software Foundashun. If de Program duz not specify some version numba' of
dis License, ya' may choose any version eva' published by de Free Software
Foundashun.
10. If ya' wish t'inco'po'ate parts uh de Program into oda' free
honky codes whose distribushun condishuns are different, scribble t'de audo'
to ax' fo' puh'mission. 'S coo', bro. Fo' software which be copyrighted by de Free
Software Foundashun, scribble t'de Free Software Foundashun; we sometimes
make 'sepshuns fo' dis. Our decision gots'ta be guided by de two goals
of preservin' de free status uh all derivatives uh our free software and
of promotin' de sharin' and reuse uh software generally. Slap mah fro!
NO WARRANTY
11. BECAUSE THE PROGRAM IS LICENSED FREE OF CHARGE, THERE IS NO WARRANTY
FOR THE PROGRAM, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW. EXCEPT WHEN
OTHERWISE STATED IN WRITING THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND/OR OTHER PARTIES
PROVIDE THE PROGRAM "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS
TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE
PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING,
REPAIR OR CORRECSHUN.
12. IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW OR AGREED TO IN WRITING
WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR
REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES,
INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING
OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY
YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER
PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
END OF TERMS AND CONDISHUNS
How t'Apply Dese Terms t'Yo' New Programs
If ya' develop some new honky code, and ya' wants' it t'be uh de greatest
possible use t'de public, de best way t'achieve dis be to make it
free software which everyone kin redistribute and change unda' dese terms.
To do so, attach de followin' notices t'de honky code. It be safest
to attach dem t'de start uh each source stash t'most effectively
convey de 'slusion uh warranty; and each stash should gots' at least
de "copyright" line and some pointa' to where da damn full notice be found.
Copyright (C)
Dis honky code be free software; ya' kin redistribute it and/o' modify
it unda' de terms uh de GNU General Public License as published by
de Free Software Foundashun; eida' version 2 uh de License, o'
(at yo' opshun) any lata' version. 'S coo', bro.
Dis honky code be distributed in de hope dat it gots'ta be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; widout even de implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY o' FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See de
GNU General Public License fo' mo'e details.
You's should gots' received some copy uh de GNU General Public License
along wid dis honky code; if not, scribble t'de Free Software
Foundashun, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA
Also add info'mashun on how t'contact ya' by electronic and sheet mail.
If de honky code be interactive, make it output some sho't notice likes dis
when it starts in some interactive mode, dig dis:
Gnomovision version 69, Copyright (C) year dojigger uh audo'
Gnomovision comes wid ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY; fo' details type `show w'.
Dis be free software, and ya' are welcome t'redistribute it
unda' certain condishuns; type `show c' fo' details.
De hypodetical commands `show w' and `show c' should show de appropriate
parts uh de General Public License. What it is, Mama! Of course, de commands ya' use may
be called sump'n oda' dan `show w' and `show c'; dey could even be
mouse-clicks o' menu items--whuteva' suits yo' honky code.
You's should also git yo' employa' (if ya' wo'k as some honky codemer) o' yo'
farm, if any, t'sign some "copyright disclaimer" fo' de honky code, if
necessary. Slap mah fro! Here be some sample; alta' de dojiggers, dig dis:
Yoyodyne, Inc., hereby disclaims all copyright interest in de honky code
`Gnomovision' (which makes passes at compilers) written by James Hacker. Ah be baaad...
, 1 April 1989
Ty Coon, President uh Vice
Dis General Public License duz not puh'mit inco'po'atin' yo' honky code into
proprietary honky codes. If yo' honky code be some subroutine library, ya' may
consida' it mo'e useful t'puh'mit linkin' proprietary applicashuns wid de
library. Slap mah fro! If dis be whut ya' wanna do, use da damn GNU Library General
Public License instead uh dis License. What it is, Mama!
Many readers apparently found this to be boring and irrelavant reading. I think they may be missing the point.
In the "old school", professors would get recognized (and tenure) for their contributions thorugh publications (appearing in critical journals, for example).
Now though, you can make MAJOR contributions by writing "software" (not just programs, but anything published in a digital medium). Using the old rules, you wouldn't be recognized.
The article referenced implies that such digital contributions are equally relevant for recognition, PROVIDED that they follow the same sort of review process - peer review, unique contribution, etc.
This seems to be a good approach and good news for "hackers" - our value is being recognized in fields beyond software development.
The conventional evaluation method is for a professional society in a subject to think the creation is worth saving in perpetuity. Then they provide archival and serving of this material. The official stamp of approval is the "citation reference", which could be electronic. This is normally done with peer-reviewed papers in journals. However some of these journals are now entirely electronic.
Did you say ass?
This is pure, unadulterated bullshit. A rare find. Better grab some while you can!
Because hey, you sure need them. Could you perhaps take the time to re-write your post so that it doesn't look a bad translation by an early version of Babelfish? Thanks.
Humanists are not only adopting new technologies but are also actively collaborating with technical experts in fields like image processing, document encoding, and information science. The whole point of the article is the stress of cross-disciplinary useage of technology. The motto is "do the work, and don't be so obsessed about getting credit for it." The principle underlying these guidelines is that when institutions seek work with digital media and faculty members express interest in it, the institution must give full regard to this work when faculty members are hired or considered for reappointment, tenure, and promotion. This gives some "rigor" to any "proof" of theoretical underpinnings of projects -- you don't need ML or TWELF (www.twelf.org) to provide the level of mathematical rigor previously needed to publish. That nifty speech-recognition software that you wrote for the linguistics department is now worth a whole lot more to you. We can probably expect a whole new outpouring in professor/grad student productivity.....i mean heck, I'm probably going to use this in the coming two years to justify some of *my* work. (Dual ms/bs....so my senior project has to be a doozie) -b
When in doubt, parenthesize. At the very least it will let some poor schmuck bounce on the % key in vi. (Larry Wall)
While you are right about one thing: I'm not sure either how appropriate this piece is for Slashdot. However, hackers are in the humanities classrooms more and more. You might look at the programs offered at Rennsselaer Polytechnic's Language, Literature and Communications department which is involved in different technology based programs. Meanwhile, I have a degree in computer science theory and am working on a PhD in English. And I know of others who are "hackers" and English types.
As a social scientist (somewhat removed from humanities, but close enough), I've come to really value the role that computing can play in non-traditional fields. While some institutions have come to respect it as a component of any research, it's nice to see articles actively promoting computation, and in particular, elite and elegant computation, in soft research. Despite the stereotype that the only tool required for humanities students are books, the volume of information available now has reached a point where computer-based data mining and high-level analysis algorithms are necessary in order to provide anything resembling a thorough presentation.
Up to this point, that sort of work, no matter how exceptionally coded, has been seen as just another research tool. I'm very supportive of any effort to arrange for scholarly recognition of code written in support of research. Just as in the sciences, a tool, once written, can be used again and again to further study. Furthermore, a well-crafted program or script can be of more value to the field than the initial data it returns, if only because it makes one more avenue of investigation available to future researchers.
In summary, I'm glad to see that some of the fields that have traditionally relegated computation to the sidelines are beginning to recognize that there is academic and scholarly value in more than just the data that comes from computers. The development of research tools in the soft sciences may in time come to be almost as important as it is to the hard sciences.
~Cloudmark
"Be proud to be a fighter" - Martial Arts Adage
Hackers working in humanities departments .
Sorry, by definition, there are no hackers working in any humanities departments, anywhere. One does not "hack" part-time. Does one?
Repeat in chorus with me: We are not worthy...
Many /.'ers thumb their noses at the academy. Who needs a degree if you have the skills? Why pay money for a piece of paper when one can get right to coding? But the acceptance digital media within the ivy-covered walls can help the acceptance of digital media as more than "playing" video games, surfing pr0n, and "stealing" copyrighted content (not that any of these are not worthy endeavors in themselves ;) ). One of the best ways to ensure the evaluation and production of digital media is to have them studied in an academic context, and only a tenured professoriat can make that happen in ways that matter academically.
At present, digital media are often marginalized as low-brow. Video-games are often blamed for encouraging mindless violence, the web is blamed for shortening attention spans, and security-checking is vilified as terrorism, email is the font of spam, and reverse-engineering is called breaking copyright. This is the public understanding of digital media.
Specialized software and digital research being done at the Institute for Advanced Technology in the Humanites is at present abstract and does little to affect the thinking of the unwashed masses of undergraduates, let alone the public at large. But this kind of work is important because it influences the scholars who drive the field, and their work goes largely unnoticed by the established disciplines that might most benefit from them. On the other hand publicly-accessible texts are in many ways the "content" the web has been looking for (as demonstrated by usage), but recognition of such projects is still limited to circles of elite users. This must change, and a cohort of professors teaching students can help bring about that change.
Creating an established body of scholars able to use computers in ways that help normal people understand how Art and Architecture, Modern Languages and Film shape the world in which we live--this will further the widescale acceptance of digital media as worthile and noble ones.
It is important that people see digital media as more than video-games and surfing the web. Devising a body of standards by which digital media can be evaluated in the context of tenure review (limited though that context might be) will help.
The need for a set of standards to review and assign value to the digital work of humanities scholars is crucial to the culture of computing.
blog
In some cases I support this. Scholarship is a very broad concept at small liberal arts colleges (unlike tier one research schools). If you write a textbook that has no new ideas of your own, but which can help students learn the material better, that counts as scholarship. If that is acceptable, then why shouldn't some computer tool that you created (i.e. language teaching tool, a chip simulator for a C.S. class, etc...) count?
In my opinion, it should, provided that it goes through the same rigid requirements other stuff does. It is not enough to write a textbook and force your students to use it -- you must demonstrate that it is good enough that other people use it as well (otherwise you are just pawning crap off on your students). That is the difference between scholarship and class preparation.
And this is also where the debate gets nasty. Many (but not all!) of the people who are trying to get credit for their hacking as scholarship are trying to get it with just their class prep and not subjecting it to higher standards. Sure, they want a review process, but the people often reviewing are other people who want credit for hacking, not the academic community at large. This is very bad; I am reminded of a card from the game "Survival of the Witless" (a satire of tenure politics) called "New York Times reviews of each others books".
As a result many of them have hurt their credibility badly. And therefore, even though I would like to support them, it has been very difficult.
I can see it now...
}"johnson your spending way to much time at the porno shop"
I have a masters degree. I have defended my thesis against a panel of Doctors who will later take my best ideas and trademark them as their own.
Here is how academic book publishing works. Write a book, make your undergrads use it in your course and cash in. Every year revise it by adding a useless chapter. Then require your students to buy the newest revision saying it's 'important to be up to date'(tm).
IMHO the best thing about the digital age is that their is a preference to work like the IEEE boards who ratify standards based on "rough consensus and running code". Many people, myself included, consider this "keeping it real".
I should not have to beg an academic institution for brownie points for a software implementation that I researched, developed and implemented. I don't have to be taxed for being different and taking the lead. If my software is of use to the world then others can pick it up and go from there, assuming it's public source. Otherwise, the project can die on it's own without a lengthy debate by noble men.
shit! this is worse than ebonics!!
*english major dies of "language" realted stress disorder.* -binky.
I know I spelt related wrong. just shut up!
-binky.
Don't make me laugh - I've never met an humanities student (or professor) bright enough to hack their way out of a wet paper bag.
Fuckwits in humanities departments - now that;s a different matter....
oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
This won't be relevant to most slashdot readers until we can get a tenure committee to accept "+5 Insightful" as the equivalent of a peer-reviewed publication.
In addition to the MLA guidelines mentioned by FatherBusa, there is a "Call for Action on Problems in Scholarly Book Publishing" by the president of the MLA. The president's letter looks at the problem of scholarship from the opposite angle: it's becoming more difficult for young PhDs to publish the traditional monograph (books are expensive and academic presses are selling fewer of them), this problem is systemic and threatens to damage the careers of otherwise promising, tenurable scholars.
Not only should hacking be considered a form a scholarship, it (along with online publishing) may be the only option available for disseminating one's ideas.