The way the world in which we live has become so dependent on the centralised hub and information networks we use today is quite fascinating. With the homogenization of space and time, we can now predict the weather in real time, receive news stories instantly and feed our pets when we’re not home at the touch of a button. This is the idea of the material world becoming more, and more so, intangible.
These new technologies change the ways of how we receive and communicate information, as well as how we think about the parameters of reality. This then allows for “A new kind of space beyond material borders free flow of information ‘thought, nothing but thought’ (Marshal McLuhan)” as said by my lecturer Ted Mitew. Simply put, it is the idea of material borders of communication, being broken down so no barriers between them exist. Therefore, this catalyses the idea of scale and speed in relation to the movement of information.
As the world becomes more so intangible, in relation to communication, we become more so dependent on the speed in which we gain information and to the scale of which we receive the information. This is the basis for which we see the scale of an information hub, relating to the control which it has, and the speed of this control, relating to the coordination of how effectively the hub works. Therefore, the speed of coordination emphasises the effectiveness of control. Mindboggling.
This very idea of control and coordination in real time was brought about by Norbert Wiener and the science of Cybernetics being used to tell a story about how to steer something, how to control something (The Human Use of Human Beings 1950).
This is the new paradigm which the people of the 1950s found themselves in, being the paradigm of Global Coordination and control. This is how we have begun to adhere to one node, as a network of nodes (people) of whom all latch onto one centralised hub. This then being the star-network topography. The science of control and coordination has led us here.
~ krisesandchrosses ~
It’s crazy to think how we are so connected to our mobile devices and other technologies. Its become part of our daily routine to check the twitter feed and see what has happened around the world throughout the day. Because twitter is so instant, its really simple to watch an event unfold right in front of you. I like your take on this weeks topic, your meme is pretty cheeky too 😉
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’ve put forward some really good ideas and themes from the lecture! I must admit the whole idea of coordination and control within networks is definitely a complicated thought. However, to add to this further you could look into the new space that has been developed to break the border of materiality. If we were to move the whole idea of materiality, ie, removing the computer screen would we still be able to have the same level of engagement within cyberspace. A Ted Talk I found, looks deeper into the idea of having a screen as taking away from being in the moment and effectively engaging within cyberspace and its technologies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9ZOpQzjukY
A good question to explore would be about cyberspace and its tropes, would virtual reality, google glasses and such be a better way to amerce ourselves within cyberspace. Breaking down the walls of the centralised hub further? If we were to use this type of technology would the idea of cybernetics be something we would be use to rather than be afraid of what it could make us do.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Very true yet fair point about the world being dependant on the centralised hub, the world really has become accustomed to subconsiously being glued to our electronic devices. Your meme is engaging and l like how you put it in the centre of your blog rather than at the beginning or end allowing it to break up the text.
Your language is concise and quite intriguing, l initially felt like l had to read the text twice to fully understand your post. Nonetheless, when a text is somewhat challenging to read it is much more interesting which l admire.
LikeLiked by 1 person
So true what you’ve said, especially ” dependent on the speed in which we gain information and to the scale of which we receive the information” – that line really resonates with me. The amount of times I’ve been annoyed at the internet taking a long time to load things, youtube adds in the way of a clip I really want to see or text messages failing to send is actually tragic (I am TOO dependent on devices). I know that they’re simple examples but that’s what I find most relatable! Thanks for a short and understandable read. Funny meme too, good job with that one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s interesting to talk about Weiners work, especially now we’re onto the cyber punk week.
I’ve also got to say that it’s a pretty daunting concept you’re talking about. The idea that we could all one day exist entirely in a different reality is a little scary, if not also a little exciting. For now though, for better or worse, we’re still stuck with these meat bags.
I believe strong authority figures such as Governments and large companies depend on centralised hubs, which is why it’s so hard for them to gain control over the internet, a technology that is not built around one. We as the users are less dependent which is why the internet is so valuable to us. It allows us to have equal control over what information is sent out online giving us a sense of freedom.
Ah remember the good old days of dial up. When we would do a little dance, make a cuppa tea, knit a cardigan all before the google home page loaded (or are you all too young for that). The faster our online experiences get the more impatient we become. The more prevalent it becomes in everyday life the more we expect it and, perhaps more importantly, the more we depend on it. I agree that large agencies often rely on centralized hubs due to the level of control that they need to have over their business, while other independent websites and social media platforms take advantage of the many, many worker bees. They let us do the work for them, pretty brilliant really.
Really nice blog man! It’s crazy to think that the relationship between the material world and immaterial artefacts (communication) birthed progression. It was the physical borders of a country that rendered global communication inefficient, which catalysed the need to overcome this. I find it also astounding to believe that without war the internet would not be as it is. Because networks were heavily dependant on centralised hubs, their construct rendered them vulnerable to being ‘shut down’ because the network was heavily dependant on the centre hub (take out the hub, take out the network). And this pushed for a need to ‘overcome’ this. Not only is a decentralised network more efficient, it had inherent contingencies to salvage the flow of communication if a part of the network was destroyed. Take out a node, another node will replace it