tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1175530035414490569Mon, 28 Sep 2026 16:35:25 +0000collaborationMOOCOERe-learningteachingsocial networkingparticipationlearning environmenteducationpeer learninginnovationlecturelifelong learningdigital literacyresearchconferencevideodistance learninginformal learningqualityfreecampus ITsecurityubiquitous learningpublicationbookse-bookreadingexaminationoverloadskillsweb 2.0webinarOEPchangeconcentrationmultitaskingmobile learningstressstudent recruitmentcampuslibrarytoolstwitterinclusionFacebookcreative commonsdigital dividebloggingglobalisationlanguagesustainableartificial intelligenceidentityprivacywikiwritingchoicemobilityvirtual worldsLMSlearning analyticssecond lifesilenceGooglecopyrightpresentationcheatinggamingmusiciPodbadgescompatibilityevaluationgroupsmeetingstandardsaccessibilitydistance workiPadopenaccessthroughputphotoconnectivismenvironmentgovernmentpolitics#h817openpasswordsplagiarismspeakingsuccessadministrationaugmented realitycloud computingdigital preservationfakesafety#langoerPLEeconomicspersonalizationTVdead web sitese-mailinterviewsimulationtagtextingweb archive#OCL4Edanonymityaudiodefinitionhigh schoolhybridlocationpresidentradiospam#nordicoerappscloudsocial bookmarkingwork#ONL141#eden14#moocqualityartholidayplaylistsocial media#EIFLINQ2014#ONL161#twitterEDU#vmpassQR codeacarclimatedictionaryimashuprole playsign languagetrolluThe corridor of uncertaintyAssorted thoughts and reflections on technology in education, and other things ...noreply@blogger.com (Alastair Creelman)Blogger972125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1175530035414490569.post-3718576863085150823Thu, 21 May 2026 09:56:22 +00002026-05-21T11:56:22.437+02:00artificial intelligenceeducationinformal learningreadingskillsThe joy of knowing<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="; style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="441" data-original-width="566" height="249" src="; width="320" /></a></div> Why do we have to learn things when we can just ask Google or ChatGPT? A friend told me recently about a conversation with a child when they were doing a puzzle together about capital cities. The child asked my friend why she knew so many capital cities and she said that she had memorised them. The child then wondered why she should spend time memorising such information when the answer is only a click or two away. A logical question really and it has become a reflex action to reach for your mobile whenever you're not sure of something. I sometimes get frustrated when I ask someone if they can give me directions of if they know how to fix something and they simply reply "just google it". The reason I ask is to engage in some conversation or to gain from their advice. I know I can find some kind of answer on YouTube or a web search (I don't google anymore) but prefer to ask.<p></p><p>It's ironic that trivia quizzes are so popular today when the answers are nearly always a few quick clicks away. There are usually strict rules to keep mobiles out of reach during quizzes and the joy of such activities is finding how much you actually know. We feel pride in what we have learnt over the years, whether it is knowledge in a particular subject area or everyday trivia. Getting an instant answer from a chatbot gives us no sense of achievement at all. </p><p>Learning is hard work but gives us great satisfaction and pride when we find that we have mastered a skill or can remember important facts. This is particularly true with the information we learn in our hobbies. I have spent a significant part of my life learning all sorts of useless information about nature, history, sport, railways, music, languages and indeed the capital cities of the world. I get a real kick when I am able to use this knowledge and can amaze my friends. Admittedly 95% of this personal information archive will never be used except in my own head but sometimes, in a quiz for example, it suddenly comes to use. </p><p>Increasingly we hear of AI-enabled literature, art or music but for me these are empty vessels, devoid of human experience. They can never be more than decoration or background noise because they convey no human experience and required no thought or skill to produce. I could certainly generate this post with AI and it could well be better written, but it would not be mine and give me no sense of achievement no matter how many views it got. When I read in languages that I haven't mastered I prefer to struggle and work out the meaning myself with the help of an old-fashioned dictionary than to simply use the camera function in Google Translate. I am rather proud to have read books in, say Finnish, even if I probably missed many nuances and guessed or skipped a few words on each page. Using Google Translate wouldn't give me any satisfaction. That's the reward for years of painstaking memorising and practice and that's why we keep on struggling to learn even when there are tempting shortcuts.</p><br /><p><br /></p>2026/05/the-joy-of-knowing.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Alastair Creelman)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1175530035414490569.post-8071000578320913223Wed, 18 Mar 2026 10:11:38 +00002026-03-18T11:17:46.389+01:00artificial intelligenceFacebookGooglegovernmentprivacysocial mediaEscaping the clutches of big tech - initiative from Norway
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="; style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2592" data-original-width="3888" height="426" src="; width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Photo by <a href=" Berntsen</a> on <a href=" /><div>At last there seems to be some serious resistance to the monopolistic dominance of big tech, the empires of the tech billionaires. The term <i><b>enshittification</b></i>, coined by <b>Cory Doctorow </b>a few years ago has now gained mainstream acceptance: read more about this in a post I wrote a couple of years ago, <a href="2024/02/the-enshittification-of-internet-we.html"><b>The "enshittification" of the internet - we know it's bad for us but we're hooked</b></a>. Digital platforms and services that initially offered genuinely useful and attractive services for users have been slowly and deliberately degraded (for the users) by increasingly promoting adverts and paid content at the expense of the useful functions the user originally signed up for. Once users and advertisers are locked in then the companies add subscriptions for previously free functions, increase fees for advertisers and sell user data to the highest bidders. They hold users and advertisers hostage since the platforms are so big and powerful that you simply can't afford not to be there. If competition comes along big tech just buys them creating de facto monopolies. The unprecedented global power wielded by the Big Five (Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft and Apple) mean that users, companies and governments are all helplessly trapped in their walled gardens. You and all your content can be instantly removed from the platform without explanation or right to appeal. Indeed it's hard to appeal when you don't know what you have done wrong as I found out a few weeks ago. We are no longer customers and the concept of customer service beyond an exasperating chatbot is becoming extremely rare.</div><div><br /></div><div>But maybe a backlash is coming. <b>The Norwegian Consumer Council, </b>together with other similar bodies in Europe, has released a report on the dangers of enshittification with concrete policy recommendations for the EU and European govenments, <a href="; style="font-weight: bold;" target="_blank">BREAKING FREE – Pathways to a fair technological future</a>. They define the issue thus:</div><div><i><blockquote>Enshittification is the result of a dysfunctional market, where companies have been able to get away with mistreating and exploiting consumers. Consumers are trapped in digital services, potential competitors are shut out, and policymakers and regulators are unable or reluctant to clamp down on anticompetitive, illegal and otherwise abusive behavior. In practice, a handful of tech companies have become so powerful that they do not have reason to fear any consequences. </blockquote></i></div><div>To make people realise how far this phenomenon has gone they have produced a satirical video showing how companies make their products increasingly "shitty".</div><div><br /><div style="text-align: center;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" src="; title="YouTube video player" width="560"></iframe></div></div><div><br /></div><div><p>We are becoming trapped in the walled gardens of big tech and it's very hard to escape. In recent years I have tried to at least reduce my dependence by using a European browser (Vivaldi), a non-tracking search engine (Duckduckgo), an alternative music streaming service (Tidal), a European storage, calender and mail service (Proton) and an open source office suite (LibreOffice). But here I am blogging on Google's Blogger platform, I still use Google Maps, YouTube, Instagram, Whatsapp etc. My banishment from Facebook should have been a relief but I really miss my communities and network there. As in the old Eagles song: <i>You can check out any time you want but you can never leave</i>. </p><p>An alternative suite of social media services, the <b><a href="; target="_blank">Fediverse</a></b>, has existed for several years with built-in portability and interoperability. These include <b>Mastodon </b>as an alternative to X, <b>PeerTube </b>for YouTube, <b>Pixelfed </b>for sharing images and many more. They work but the problem is how to move all your own contacts into those services.</p><p>AI is of course a key element in this process. Big tech owns the tools and are integrating AI into almost everything, in many cases as a feature that you cannot remove and certainly can't ignore.</p><p><i></i></p><blockquote><i>Generative AI is to a large degree driven either by the incumbent big
tech companies or by companies with strong financial connections to
these companies. It is also evident that big tech companies want to
lock users into their generative AI services, to capture an emergent
market and further entrench their dominance. </i></blockquote><p></p><p>Our search requests are now reliant on AI, often leading to misleading or biased results. Our "smart" devices from TVs and fridges to cars and homes are AI-enabled allowing big tech to harvest vast amounts of personal data on users' lives. All devices require frequent updates and standard functions can suddenly become premium features at an extra expense as shown amusingly in the final part of the video. Whether you like it or not you are forced to become reliant on AI and even more helpless to work things out for yourself. The days of fixing your car in the garage at weekends or mending electrical appliances in the home are well and truly dead. Everyday life without an app-ridden smartphone is virtually impossible.</p><p>The report is well researched and provides many examples and references. The final chapter proposes a number of recommendations that offer the hope of an alternative internet with interoperability between platforms and services and freedom for users to change platforms without losing their contacts or content. </p><p></p><ol style="text-align: left;"><li><i>Rebalance power between service providers and consumers.</i></li><li><i>End dependence on big tech. To lay the groundwork for innovative
products and services and pave the way for alternatives to big tech,
competition in digital markets must be restored.</i></li><li><i>Double down on the enforcement of existing laws.</i></li></ol><p></p><p></p><p>Innovation and competition have been effectively stifled as it is impossible to challenge big tech's dominance. The report recommends that governments invest in new solutions that are based on openness, interoperability and portability. There are indeed regulations and guidelines in place to combat monopolistic practice but they are poorly implemented and the tech giants can easily avoid taking any responsibility - they are too big to care basically. The report urges European authorities to seriously challenge big tech and implement regulations vigorously.</p><p>This is very admirable and I hope the report has some effect but in today's toxic political climate I am not confident that much will change. The EU is far from united on any issue and many governments are either governed by neoliberal right-wing parties and their allies or are too afraid to challenge those parties and their followers. Big tech funds and embraces the march of Trump-inspired authoritarianism and will fight to prevent anyone from threatening their dominance. The report urges the public sector to lead the change by moving away from dependence on big tech. Indeed, there are already examples of municipalities that have switched from Microsoft to open source software. </p><p><span style="font-style: italic;"></span></p><blockquote><i>For example, Denmark, Germany and Austria are trying to swap out their proprietary (Microsoft) software for the open-source alternative LibreOffice. The German state administration of Schleswig-Holstein estimate they will save 15 million euros by not purchasing Microsoft licenses annually, whereas the open-source alternative is a one-time investment of nine million euros.</i></blockquote><p></p><p>Vast savings could indeed be made but logic is sadly lacking in modern politics. We seem unable to imagine an alternative to the existing order, even if we see how harmful it is for us. This applies not only to technology but also on a global scale to our lifestyles that are accelerating us towards catastrophic climate change. But all signs of resistance must be applauded and encouraged and I would love to see this report stimulating serious discussions in the media and in politics. I am not confident but try to hope for better times.</p><p style="font-style: italic;"> </p><p></p><p> </p></div>2026/03/escaping-clutches-of-big-tech.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Alastair Creelman)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1175530035414490569.post-6112094491221766898Mon, 09 Feb 2026 17:38:00 +00002026-06-17T17:20:43.818+02:00digital preservationFacebookprivacysocial mediaDigital unravelling - losing Facebook and the transience of social media<p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="; style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1280" data-original-width="1920" height="426" src="; width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Photo by <a href=" McClintock</a> on <a href=" />When I signed off here in 2024 (see previous post) I didn't think I would return. But today I suddenly feel like writing again. Not about education but on the transience of social media in an age where AI controls what we do and who can participate.<p></p><p>Last week I was suddenly and without explanation thrown out of Facebook and Messenger. I was scolling through posts, as we all do, when a message appeared telling me that my account was suspended because activity on it didn't follow their Community standards on account integrity. They included a link to appeal against the decision and that lead me to a video selfie facility. I don't like the idea of recording a video of myself, especially for a company like Facebook, but I had no alternative in this case. So I did that and it was accepted. Then came a captcha to prove I'm not a robot and finally a confirmation of my e-mail. An hour later came the final bombshell as you see below.</p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="; style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="535" data-original-width="1002" height="243" src="; width="454" /></a></div>I have been a user for almost 20 years and have always been a responsible user, never making offensive comments or promoting disinformation or hatred. I had absolutely no idea why I had been targetted like this except that the algorithms had made a mistake. Since Facebook, like most social media, is basically a machine there is no contact information or customer service and my attempts to find out more about my banishment simply hit a brick wall of FAQs.<div><br /></div><div>I was deeply hurt by this. Despite the enshittification of the platform, ie all the ads and "suggested links", I still got a lot of joy from it all. I posted photos from my hikes and travels and was active in several enthusiast hobby groups mostly on topics like football, cricket, railways and nature. Nothing very controversial there! I also had a lot of contacts: relatives, friends and work colleagues from around the world. They were now all gone and I had no back-up contact channels for most of them. Suddenly my digital world shrunk even further. I started searching for as many as possible on other platforms - after several years of neglect I finally found Linkedin very useful! </div><div><br /></div><div>Then came the next blow. My computer crashed and I began to think that the digital gods were really out to get me. I took the ailing machine into an IT repair company in town and awaited the verdict on whether they could salvage at least some of the contents on my hard drive. It turned out that Windows was corrupted and the hard drive was virtually finished. But the main discovery was that the computer was full of virus including trojans. The repair guy said that that could have triggered alarms in Meta's algorithms leading to my sudden expulsion. I hadn't noticed my account being hacked but the trojans and their friends were certainly doing some strange things with my accounts. At the same time I have been well aware of the dangers of viruses and have run anti-virus scans every couple of weeks and always got the all clear sign. I also used VPNs and anti-tracking software so I thought I was well protected. However they told me that my protection, Macafee, was very unreliable and I have now bought another solution. But how are ordinary mortals like me supposed to know all the details of which solution is best? Some people really enjoy comparing products and reading reviews but I don't and I suspect I am far from alone. I just chose a well-known brand and trusted that. The computer was cleaned out and I have now started from scratch with all the bright and shiny updated apps and programs and am now checking my virus scans daily! I had backed up my data on two external hard drives so I didn't lose my photos and documents but it's still a dull chore getting everything working again.</div><div><br /></div><div>So what have I learned from all this? Don't trust anything digital and always have multiple backups. Platforms can delete you whenever they feel like it or if the company goes bust. If it is free you are not a customer and we have usually forfeited our rights by accepting the terms and conditions. I have found a lot of my contacts on other platforms and am beginning to adapt to having fewer things to scroll through (probably a good thing even if I get withdrawal symptoms now and then). There is really no alternative to Facebook - the nearest I've seen is <b>MeWe</b>. I created an account there but can't find anyone I know. If you have lots of digital contacts I strongly advise you to copy them in multiple places including on paper. I went out and bought an old-fashioned paper address book and am writing down all the contacts with e-mail addresses, phone numbers and any other information I have on them. If you are one of my old contacts please conatct me through this blog or search on other social media.</div><div><br /></div><div>Be careful out there! </div>2026/02/digital-unravelling-losing-facebook-and.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Alastair Creelman)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1175530035414490569.post-92019627199059624Mon, 09 Sep 2024 08:56:00 +00002024-09-09T10:56:21.579+02:00bloggingAt the end of the corridor<p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="; style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3464" data-original-width="2309" height="640" src="; width="426" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Photo by <a href=" Kazaks</a> on <a href=" /><div style="text-align: left;"></div></td></tr></tbody></table></p>After over 16 years and 968 posts I feel it is now time to say farewell to this blog. It's a sad decision but but having been retired from academic life for two years I don't feel I have much more to contribute to the discussion of technology in education. To be honest I have lost my enthusiasm and even interest in the field and see no sign of the spark returning. <div><br /></div><div>My posts over the past five years have become increasingly darker as the menacing shadows of surveillance, manipulation, commercial exploitation, disinformation and hatred contaminate the digital landscape and indeed society as a whole. Into this toxic environment we have now released the genie/demon of artificial intelligence, a power that we barely understand, with the potential to benefit science and education but with even greater destructive potential. This frightens me. Even more so when we consider our pathetically inadequate response to the galloping climate crisis and the rise of political extremism. I'm not sure that education has an answer to this, especially as we see a growing skepticism towards science and research. In many countries, including here in Sweden, we regularly hear politicians snearingly dismissing scientific research as nonsense and government policies are instead guided by prejudiced opinions. So much of what I believe in and value is being cynically destroyed and very few people seem to be concerned.</div><div><div><br /></div><div>I have tried to respond to all this in a number of ways. I don't fly anymore, have become vegetarian (well almost), consciously try to cut my digital activities, watch and read much less news than before, never search with Google or Bing and don't use Chrome or Edge. Not that any of these things make any difference to the world but I am at least trying to adapt. I go on long walks in the region where I live and have discovered so many beautiful places. I read almost as much as I did in my student days but always printed books and very seldom contemporary literature. I don't plan for more than a few months in the future and try to find happiness in my own bubble. I have often written about the dangers of becoming trapped in the so-called filter bubble but today I find it a safe space, a shelter from the ignorance, hatred and manipulation of the modern world. <br /><p></p><p>I am very fond of this blog. It all started on 5 April 2008 with a post entitled quite simply <b><a href="2008/04/why.html" target="_blank">Why?</a> </b>I had started using social media and was trying to build a network using Twitter, Diigo, LinkedIn etc. A blog seemed a logical channel to add but I wondered how I could get anyone to read it.</p><i><blockquote>The point of this and probably the majority of blogs is not to become famous but simply to write down ideas and impressions and be able to access them anywhere. If you have a few friends or colleagues who want to contribute then that's a bonus.<br /><br />I'm interested in seeing what happens when I start this blog and how it develops. I don't have a clear idea of what I want to do with this but I like the idea of just casting off and letting the wind blow me along. Will anyone stumble upon this and comment? How do you get noticed in the world of blogging? Will I turn up on other blogs? If I continue writing like this, probably not.</blockquote></i><p>So off I went writing about a wide range of topics. In the early years I wrote lots of shorter posts, some good but also plenty that were not terribly useful to anyone. I spent several years trying to find a format and eventually settled on writing one quite long post every week or so and that remained the strategy till I retired. I loved the heady days of Web 2.0, social media, open educational resources, collaborative tools, the early MOOCs etc. The internet was exciting, open, free and offered hope for a new approach to education. Online education could reach out to all and foster tolerance, understanding and solidarity. We could build a better future. I miss all that. We totally underestimated the power of tradition, greed and power.</p>My top post was <b><a href="2019/10/organising-digital-conference.html" target="_blank">Organising a digital conference</a></b> from 2019 with 23,500 views, written only months before the covid pandemic forced all conferences online. I had been a member of a team who organised Sweden's first (we think) wholly online academic conference and showed that such an event could be interactive, engaging and collaborative. Curiously we ran a workshop on this theme at an international conference on online education that year and only three people showed up. The following year's conference was completely online!<br /><p>I have never bothered analysing the statistics of my readers in any depth. I don't know how many regular readers I have had or whether many of the visitors were bots or real people. It's maybe best not to think too hard about all that. However, the blog became my window on the world and helped me to become part of an international network of educational technology professionals. It has reached an audience I could never have even dreamed of when I started, 1.35 million page views so far. I've written and co-authored plenty of journal articles but none with the reach of the blog. It has lead me into many exciting international projects and organisations and allowed me to work with inspirational colleagues with much higher academic merits than myself. </p><p>Is this the end of the corridor then? At the moment I think so but I will let it rest for now and maybe some day I will get the urge again. Never say never again! But to all of you who read this and remember better times then I thank you for reading and giving feedback and comments over the years. Also thanks to all who have helped to widen my readership through tweets and posts on other social media as well as those who have simply "liked" my posts. Every like is appreciated. </p><p>So until we meet again, thanks for the memories!</p></div></div>2024/09/at-end-of-corridor.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Alastair Creelman)7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1175530035414490569.post-8652819522756719670Sun, 07 Apr 2024 09:54:00 +00002024-04-07T12:04:51.023+02:00climateenvironmentpoliticsresearchsustainableClimate crisis - why are universities so silent?<p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="; style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2333" data-original-width="3500" height="426" src="; width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Photo by <a href=" Spiske</a> on <a href=" />We are in the midst of the greatest environmental collapse since long before human beings emerged onto this planet but the vast majority of governments and obedient citizens have decided that the best strategy is to pretend that there is no threat and continue with business as usual, focusing on short-term profit above future survival. Science denial is now becoming mainstream and the <a href="; target="_blank">United Nations' reports</a> coming from the world's experts on climate and environmental science are flippantly dismissed as alarmist and governments pay at best lip service with greenwashed statments of fantasy and wishful thinking. Climate activists are ridiculed and often branded as extremists and a "threat to democracy" whilst the governments and corporations that are profiting from actively destroying the world we live in are portrayed as rational and responsible. <p></p><p>Since the science behind these reports come from the world's universities and research institutes these organisations are worryingly silent in national debates. Instead of fully and vocally standing up for their own researchers and offering a united front against the deluge of disinformation and greenwashing, they seldom if ever make their voices heard. There are some positive signs, such as the <b>EUA's </b>(European Universities Association) <b><a href="; target="_blank">A Green deal roadmap for European universities</a></b> published in October last year..</p><i><blockquote>EUA’s Green Deal roadmap outlines processes and interventions which can boost universities’ impact and visibility in pursuing a climate-neutral, environmentally sustainable, and socially equitable Europe. The roadmap should serve as an inspiration and template for how universities can face the climate and environmental challenge over an extensive timeframe, enabling them to make both an effective contribution and serve as exemplars of sustainable communities.</blockquote></i><p>Certainly almost every university has some kind of environmental/sustainability policy but on the ground there are often only cosmetic changes. Despite the lessons learned during the pandemic about the affordances of digital meetings and conferences we have largely flocked back to on-site conferences and academics, like other professions, are flying far and wide again. This despite all relevant research pointing to the fact that business as usual will have catastrophic societal consequences in the next 20-30 years. If that wasn't bad enough we have the terrifying trend that just when we need global cooperation to solve global crises the world is filled with toxic xenophobic nationalism leading to more conflict and destruction.</p><p>These thoughts were given greater perspective last week in an article in <b>Frontiers in Education</b>, <b><a href="; target="_blank">“No research on a dead planet”: preserving the socio-ecological conditions for academia</a></b>, by <b>Aaron Thierry</b>, <b>Laura Horn</b>, <b>Pauline von Hellermann</b> and <b>Charlie J. Gardner</b>. Universities' passivity in this issue will threaten their future existence.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic;">Despite thousands of higher education institutions (HEIs) having issued Climate Emergency declarations, most academics continue to operate according to ‘business-as-usual’. However, such passivity increases the risk of climate impacts so severe as to threaten the persistence of organized society, and thus HEIs themselves.</blockquote><p>Universities are of course simply following the societal indifference to our impending crisis, often with a warped pride in being as climate unfriendly as possible, refusing to even contemplate flying and driving less often, eating less meat, consuming less and living more sustainably. Our governments confirm these prejudices as here in Sweden where we are being encouraged to fly and drive more with increasing subsidies to fossil industries. Climate change and environmental protection are guaranteed conversation killers - I have tried! But universities should at least support their own scientists and offer a research-based response to the disinformation.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic;">This dissonance extends to the individual behavior of many academics. For example, the normalization of aviation-based hyper-mobility in academic work (<a href=" and Franco Duharte, 2022</a>). It is even the case that professors in climate science fly more than other researchers, despite the tremendous carbon emissions associated with such activities (<a href=" et al., 2020</a>). On a day-to-day basis, most academic staff seem to be maintaining the semblance of normalcy and unconcern. So great is our apparent collective indifference that an onlooker could be forgiven for thinking that we do not believe our own institutions’ official warnings that an emergency is unfolding around us.</blockquote><p>It's time to speak out, but not as individuals (vulnerable to the hate and threats that speaking out provokes) but rather as institutions or even alliances of institutions. Universities still carry a lot of weight in society even if it is being eroded by authoritarian politicians. If they do not speak loudly and clearly in support of their own science then they risk becoming irrelevant. It is that serious. I will give the last word here to the authors of the article.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic;">For too long we have allowed a culture of climate silence to dominate in our universities, leading to a misalignment of our priorities from our core purpose and values, thereby perpetuating a maladaptive response to the unfolding planetary emergency and undermining the very future of the higher education sector. Universities have in effect become ‘fraud bubbles’ (<a href=", 2021</a>) in which staff and students must construct a ‘double reality’, in order to pursue a narrow social role, trapped in maladaptive incentive structures of increasingly neoliberal institutions. This ultimately serves to reproduce the hegemonic practices, norms and conventions driving socio-ecological collapse. As an academic community we must urgently learn to grapple with the role that universities can play as leaders in the necessary social transformation to come. Our dearest notions of progress, rooted in our desire for the beneficial accumulation and application of knowledge (<a href=", 2012</a>), are now both directly and indirectly threatened by the climate crisis.</blockquote><p>Maybe I have missed good examples of university action. Please send examples in that case. Happy for all signs of resistance!</p>2024/04/climate-crisis-why-are-universities-so.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Alastair Creelman)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1175530035414490569.post-4438103591669957597Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:01:00 +00002024-03-23T12:01:18.146+01:00artificial intelligenceglobalisationpersonalizationMass personalisation - when every cafe looks the same<p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="; imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2912" data-original-width="3883" height="480" src="; width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Photo by <a href="; on <a href=" />Remember when you first used Amazon and they offered recommendations of other books you might like based on what you had bought or browsed on the platform? Often the recommendations were very much in line with your tastes and you discovered new books or music. Google searched for results that matched your browsing, giving you a personalised search service. We felt served, but today we feel used and manipulated by algorithm-driven recommendations that are now extremely commercialised. If you keep getting fed music or literature that you already like you'll never discover anything new. It's a bit like the radio stations that promise to play only hit music - that means you'll never hear anything new until after it has become a hit. The trap of personalisation becomes even more worrying when you show interest in more extreme political views and the algorithms offer you increasingly extreme material until you see very little else. Add to that the power of influencers on social media and our flock instinct and the result is a global streamlining. In the end everything looks or sounds roughly the same.</p>This streamlining is the subject of a fascinating podcast and article on <b>The Verge</b>, <b><a href="; target="_blank">How to save culture from the algorithms, with Filterworld author Kyle Chayka</a></b>. Kyle is the author of a book called <b><a href="; target="_blank">Filterworld: How Algorithms Flattened Culture</a></b>, about how global trends are created on a viral scale, via social media and streaming services.<div><i><blockquote>It’s a book about how digital platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and Spotify took over our modes of cultural distribution in the past decade. Algorithmic recommendations, like TikTok’s For You feed or Netflix’s homepage, control the majority of what we see and hear online. Though they promise personalization, the net result of so many algorithms is a homogenization of culture.</blockquote></i>Mass personalisation leads in the end to a final common denominator, as in all the trendy cafes, restaurants and BnBs looking very similar no matter where they are in the world.<br /><div><div><i><blockquote>I was traveling around the world quite a bit and landing in all these different cities, and I would notice that every Airbnb I stayed in had the same kind of aesthetic signature, every coffee shop I went to in Reykjavík or Kyoto or LA or Berlin all had the same stuff in it, and I just started wondering or almost being anxious about why all the sameness was happening</blockquote></i>Products, services, trends and influencers pay for ratings in the main platforms and if you press the right buttons you can go viral. Ratings and reviews matter and these can now also be manipulated with the help of AI bots. Some music, books, films etc get pushed more than others. Our personalised services are not as personal as they seem. Our tastes are moulded by the algorithms. The question is how to escape. According to Chayka you need to reconnect with yourself and ignore the recommendations, reviews and like-counts.<br /><blockquote style="font-style: italic;">Being more thoughtful is a good start. I think what I came out of it with was you want to know that you like what you like because you like it, not just because it was recommended to you and exposed to you repeatedly in a feed. Thinking about your personal taste, having a real encounter with a song or a piece of art or a piece of clothing where you don’t think about how many people liked it, where you don’t think about the Instagram account, where you just sit with your own feelings and have an experience of culture that’s in front of you that’s changing your mind or your soul or whatever, that’s truly what I want people to have. I want you to sit and stare at a painting and be like, “What does this make me feel? I don’t care how many likes it has. I don’t care how many followers the artist has. How am I feeling right now?”</blockquote><p>I try by using for example <b><a href="; target="_blank">Duckduckgo</a></b> for searching since it doesn't track me. I get a more diverse set of results than with Google but that is the point. Google frequently suggested my own blog posts or articles whereas I can hardly find them with Duckduckgo! I've stopped using TripAdvisor since since reviews can be written by bots or trolls. I don't use Amazon anymore and my use of Spotify is sinking to the point where I don't think I want to subscribe anymore. We don't need to go completely offline but treat the big tech platforms with extreme care and suspicion. There are alternatives out there.</p></div></div></div>2024/03/mass-personalisation-when-every-cafe.htmlnoreply@blogger.com (Alastair Creelman)0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1175530035414490569.post-5447354556273462350Mon, 26 Feb 2024 08:31:00 +00002024-02-26T09:31:08.617+01:00artificial intelligencefakeprivacyThe "enshittification" of the internet - we know it's bad for us but we're hooked<p></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="; style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="3456" data-original-width="5184" height="426" src="; width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">Photo by <a href=" WORRALL</a> on <a href=" />I frequently consider leaving social media completely but can't quite bring myself to do it. As I have no doubt written before I have so many contacts in there that I would lose and I still get pleasure from the groups I belong to. But you will certainly have noticed over the years how what was once a place to see photos and comments from friends has turned into a stream of adverts and posts (often political or provocative) from organisations you don't follow. At first, the ads on Facebook were often hilariously irrelevant, based merely on stereotypes. As an older male living in a village I saw ads for chainsaws, tractors, hair restorer, Viagra (of course), crypto nonsense and the fact that hundreds of fascinating women are waiting to meet me. They're getting better at finding things I am at least vaguely interested in but the problem is that the platform has become just a random stream of stuff that I never asked for. Basically it has become <i>enshittified</i>.<p></p><p>Enshittification is a concept launched by <b>Cory Doctorow</b> last year in a post about <b>TikTok</b>, <a href="; style="font-weight: bold;" target="_blank">Tiktok's enshittification</a>. In it he argues that all platforms inevitably fill up with garbage due to the greed of the owners. Even if he writes mostly about TikTok the principle seems to apply across the board. A new post, <a href="; style="font-weight: bold;" target="_blank">My McLuhan lecture on enshittification</a>, is the script of a recent lecture where he goes into more depth on the phenomenon. In short, the enshittification process goes like this:</p><div><i><blockquote>It's a three stage process: First, platforms are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die.</blockquote></i><div>This rings true for most if not all the tech platforms: Google, Amazon, Facebook, X (Twitter), TikTok, etc. Facebook, Instagram and Twitter were very succesful in getting us all onboard to share our everyday events and interests and we quickly got hooked. But once we were all in there and the platform changed into an ad-based channel we were trapped. If you leave the platform you leave behi