Why You Should be Networking as an Anthropology Graduate Student

I won’t make it to the AAA meeting this year as I am focusing on securing money for dissertation research. #GrantWritingFTW! However, I wanted to share some lessons I have learned over my career that I think can make your AAA meeting (or any conference) more productive for you. Networking, that is meeting new people and making professional connections to people outside of one’s department, has made my academic life easier and more productive. There are many opportunities that would not be available to me if it wasn’t for that one time I met someone for coffee at a conference. So, if you are an anthropology graduate student and you are not actively networking, this is for you.


UPDATE: Another great thing about networking is that people actually read the things you write! My friend and fellow networker, Nick Seaver,  points out that “‘networking’ may sound/feel forced, but it’s really just getting to know people! The more you think of it as just normal socializing, the better off you’ll be. (Of course, it can take work to look that laid back ?).” This is important to keep in mind! The advice and tips supplied below are not meant to make you a calculating-networking-machine. Rather, these are methods I have found to reduce my own anxiety about social encounters with colleagues, especially when meeting for the first time. Feeling prepared isn’t about networking efficiency but about making you feel confident to go out and introduce yourself, get to know people, and join conversations.



Some Basics

Why You Should be Networking

#1 The people who will hire you when you graduate won’t be from your department.

#2 There are more peers relevant to your research outside your department than in it.

#3 Opportunities are more plentiful when you have connections who think of you.

Conferences are about PEOPLE not research.

Conferences are one of the only places you can mingle with anthropologists outside of your department. It is ok to prioritize socializing over attending panels. It is a rookie mistake to just shuffle from panel to panel. Instead, go to events, meet people for coffee, go to parties, loiter in the hotel lobby during off times, and go to panels in between social obligations. (more…)

Friends on Facebook for 46 Years: Experiencing Technical Difficulty Differently

Where did the 46 Years come from?

You didn’t become Facebook friends 46 years ago. So, where does the number come from. It isn’t random. It is a result of how time is calculated in computing.

Unix Time is how most programmers calculate and store time. It is the number of seconds (not counting leap seconds) since the Unix epoch, January 1, 1970, 00:00:00 UTC. Unix time is incredibly useful on the Internet because it allows you to store time independent from timezones. (If you are not sure why timezones strike fear into the hearts of programmers, watch Tom Scott explain why on Computerphile.)

So, say you want to see exactly how many years it has been since two people became friends on Facebook. Instead of trying to subtract dates like this (shudder):

Now: December 31, 2015 13:00:00 EST
Date Friended: June 14, 2008 8:00:00 EST
December 31, 2015 13:00:00 EST minus June 14, 2008 8:00:00 EST =
¯ \ _(ಠ_ಠ) _ / ¯  Years

You would use a programming function that some other wonderful programmer (or team of programmers) has painstakingly put together and maintained to convert these messy times into Unix time stamps to store and use throughout your website or application. In PHP the function is strtotime(), string-to-time. You put in an English date and it gives you the number of seconds since the Unix epoch (January 1, 1970 00:00:00 UTC).

(more…)

Tweeting Sweden: Technological Solutionism, #RotationCuration, and the World’s Most Democratic Twitter Account

Screenshot of article title page.I have a new publication out in the Theorizing the Web special issue of the open access journal Interface. Check it out! I also recommend reading the rest of the issue, which is a must read for anyone who missed these talks at Theorizing the Web 2014.

Abstract

The Curators of Sweden began in 2011 when two official governmental agencies, the Swedish Institute and VisitSweden, gave a Swedish citizen full and seemingly unfettered control of the official Twitter account of the Swedish government. Every week since then, a new Swedish citizen has been given access to write as @sweden, to curate Swedishness for the Internet. From this project, others have extracted the technology of #RotationCuration to develop similar projects, representing cities, states, countries and ethnic groups. However, in comparison to the Curators of Sweden, these #RotationCuration projects have been failures with small follower counts, minimal press coverage, and the inability to recruit curators.

I argue that the reduction of the Curators of Sweden to its technology, i.e. #RotationCuration, is a form of technological solutionism that impoverishes our understanding of the project and is ultimately the reason behind the failure of #RotationCuration as a solution for democratic engagement with branding and group identity. To this end, I will contextualize the Curators of Sweden into the history of Swedish Modernism and Swedish nation branding that shaped the creators’ choices in design, development, and platforms to demonstrate the complex milieu that has led to @sweden’s success.

Aligned Anxieties: Rethinking Critiques of the Internet through the Anxieties of Web Professionals

The following is a paper I gave at the 2015 Theorizing the Web Conference on April 18. Below you will find: my presentation with audio, the video of the entire panel, and the backchannel conversation from Twitter. Thank you to the Theorizing the Web committee for putting on such a great conference and to the rest of the panel (Emma Stamm, Daniel Luxemburg, Burcu Baykurt and presider, Sands Fish) for their thought provoking contributions. To read the abstract for this paper head over to the abstract post.

Presentation with Audio

(more…)

It Knows the World: What the Wolfram Language Can Teach Anthropologists about the Problematic Nature of Ontological Approaches (#AAA2014)

Here is the prezi (with audio) of my presentation from the American Anthropological Association Annual Meeting for 2014.

It Knows the World: What the Wolfram Language Can Teach Anthropologists about the Problematic Nature of Ontological Approaches

As anthropologists have become deeply entangled in debates of ontology, Wolfram Research developed a new multi-paradigm programming language that knows the world. Wolfram Language is knowledge-based, meaning that “unlike other programming languages, the philosophy of the Wolfram Language is to build as much knowledge—about algorithms and about the world—into the language as possible” (Wolfram 2014). The language, with its built-in knowledge, can recognize handwriting, visualize celebrity gossip, make pop art, determine the author of a text, and identify prose from poetry (Wolfram 2014). Each of these feats is accomplishable without requiring the programmer to engage with data or algorithms directly and requiring only a handful of commands. The language is being heralded as the answer to dealing with big data, accomplishing artificial intelligence, and overcoming alienation in programming. However, despite the immense potential of the language, it also introduces new inequalities into programming and the Internet. Wolfram Research takes for granted the situatedness of the language’s understanding of the world and seems to conflate its epistemology—what it knows and how—with ontology—the infinitely complex entanglement of being and becoming. If taken up, as is predicted, the Wolfram Language will have the potential to bury alternative epistemologies and build immense swaths of the digital world in its own image. By engaging the Wolfram Language’s implications, I will demonstrate how the abuse of ontological thinking, particularly the pluralization of the ontology and the conflation of ontology and epistemology, has serious implications for thinking and making in the world and in anthropological theorizing.

PhD Year One

I recently finished my first year of my PhD program in anthropology at Binghamton University. Now, I am course complete and working on bibliographies for my qualifying exams. This post is a look back over this year.


Classes

This year I have taken six courses, three each semester.

y1i-1

Between August 26 and May 14, I went to 109 class sessions for a total of 276 hours in class.

(more…)

Tweeting Sweden: Complicating Anthropology through the Analysis of the World’s Most Democratic Twitter Account

Here is my presentation from this Spring’s Theorizing the Web Conference.

Stream from #TtW14

Did you find this presentation interesting? You should watch the rest of the panel. Great stuff! You can watch the rest of the conference online too!

The Culture Concept

The culture concept — which overtime has been contrasted, combined, and entangled with the related concepts of society, personality, identity, symbolism and practice — weaves together the history and core philosophical and methodological debates of anthropology as a discipline. Yet, today the concept that lies at the center of what anthropology is and does is fragmented and contested, as anthropologists have taken on the challenges put forth by postmodernity to cope with contradiction, borderlessness, constant flux, and the impacts of anthropological and historical biases, such as sexism, orientalism, and othering. This has left some anthropologists reaching back to science to find stability and others plunging into a realm of interpretation and description, while a new generation of anthropologists formed within this milieu must find space to make a discipline, whose central subject is disputed, both relevant and professional.

The 12th century Anglo-Norman word culture was derived from the Latin word cultura, meaning the cultivation of land (Beldo 2010:144, OED Online n.d.). As colleges and universities spread through Europe in the 16th century, culture came to mean the cultivation of people through education (OED Online n.d.). The culture concept came to mean a quality of the upper class that indicated refinement in taste, judgement and intellect through the 18th century leading up to the Industrial Revolution (Beldo 2010:145). European contact with other peoples through the rise of imperialism produced the need to discuss a collective customs of a people (OED Online n.d.). In the 19th century, French philosophers used the term civilisation to encompass the religion, economy, politics, morals and technology that distinguished the West from contemporary “primitive” cultures (Kuper 1999:30). After the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, the German word kultur was positioned in opposition to the French concept of civilisation (31).  While civilisation was conceptualized as transnational, German kultur was expressed as the nationalistic and individual achievement through the cultivation of intellectual, religious and artistic pursuits (31). In 1871, Edward Burnett Tylor used elements of both civilisation and kultur, to create the first formal anthropological definition of culture: “Culture or Civilization, taken in its wide ethnographic sense, is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society” (1). Tylor’s definition — one of the most widely cited definitions of culture in anthropology — became the seed for anthropological deliberation for the next century. (more…)

Being a Curious Potential — #AAA2013 Presentation

This is the presentation I gave at the 2013 American Anthropological Association meeting in Chicago. Turn up on your speakers or headphones because audio is included. Enjoy!