Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future : The Potential of Digital Archaeology

Mobilizing the Past is a collection of 20 articles that explore the use and impact of mobile digital technology in archaeological field practice. The detailed case studies present in this volume range from drones in the Andes to iPads at Pompeii, digital workflows in the American Southwest, and examples of how bespoke, DIY, and commercial software provide solutions and craft novel challenges for field archaeologists. The range of projects and contexts ensures that Mobilizing the Past for a Digital Future is far more than a state-of-the-field manual or technical handbook. Instead, the contributors embrace the growing spirit of critique present in digital archaeology. This critical edge, backed by real projects, systems, and experiences, gives the book lasting value as both a glimpse into present practices as well as the anxieties and enthusiasm associated with the most recent generation of mobile digital tools. This book emerged from a workshop funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities held in 2015 at Wentworth Institute of Technology in Boston. The workshop brought together over 20 leading practitioners of digital archaeology in the U.S. for a weekend of conversation. The papers in this volume reflect the discussions at this workshop with significant additional content. Starting with an expansive introduction and concluding with a series of reflective papers, this volume illustrates how tablets, connectivity, sophisticated software, and powerful computers have transformed field practices and offer potential for a radically transformed discipline.https://dc.uwm.edu/arthist_mobilizingthepast/1000/thumbnail.jp

CIRCUS 2001 Conference Proceedings: New Synergies in Digital Creativity. Conference for Content Integrated Research in Creative User Systems

CIRCUS (Content Integrated Research For Creative User Systems) was an ESPRIT Working Group, originally set up in 1988 as one of the very last additional actions in Framework 4, under DG III. Its purpose was to develop models for collaborative work between artists (the term here used in its widest sense) and technologists (ditto) and to promote these models by whatever means available. While some have criticised this aim as implicitly promoting a 1950s agenda of building bridges across C.P. Snow’s ‘two cultures’, there is no such intention here, rather that technology, particularly computer and communications technology (ICT) , is irresistibly intruding into what is normally thought of as creative work (and so practised by artists) and that, like any new technique, this has to be understood by its potential practitioners in terms of its true strengths and limitations. The specific problem that computer technology poses is that it is in principle malleable to such an extent that the limitations on its form and functionality are still barely understood, yet the people charged with the task of making the technology available have little or no understanding of the needs of creative users. What the artist usually sees is a tool which is in principle capable of being harnessed to creative ends but in practice resists being so applied. Quite often the tool is shaped more by blind economic forces than by a clear response to a specific, here creative, need. CIRCUS came into existence as a forum in which both artists and technologists could work out how best to play to the strengths of ICT and how to apply both creative and technological solutions (possibly both together) to its limitations. In particular the then new Framework V programme invited projects in such areas as new media but required them to be addressed in essentially the same old way, by technologists working towards commercialisation. The only obvious exception to this was in the area of cultural heritage which, incidentally, CIRCUS was also capable of reviewing. The scope for effective participation by artists was thus limited by an essentially technological agenda although everybody at the time, the participants of CIRCUS and programme managers in DG III, believed that we could do far better than this, and to develop new models of working which could inform the nature of Framework VI or even the later stages of F V. It is fair to say that everyone involved was excited by the idea of doing something quite new (and iconoclastic), not least the expanding of the expertise base on which future Frameworks could draw. It is also fair to say that, while not ultimately wholly original, the CIRCUS agenda was an ambitious one and the WG has had a chequered history peppered with misunderstandings perpetrated by the very people who might have thought would give the WG their strongest support. The CIRCUS idea has been aired before, specifically at the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, the MIT Media Lab (and its imitators), and a recent IEEE forum. However a near total change in participation, fuelled by natural migration and a switch to DG XIII, has resulted in the CIRCUS agenda being restarted on at least one occasion and a fairly regular questioning of the principles on whose elucidation we are engaged. While this is no bad thing in principle, in practice we haven’t learned anything new from these periodic bouts of self-examination other than a reinforcement of the values our goals. On the other hand it is evident that we have made progress and have moved on a long way from where we started. A recent experience of a workshop whose agenda appeared to be to form another version of CIRCUS, this time with an overwhelmingly technological (DG III) membership, demonstrates they have a CIRCUS-worth of work to do before they will have reached where we are now. (Foreword of CIRCUS for Beginners

CTRL SHIFT

CTRL SHIFT makes a case for design under contemporary computation. The abstractions of reading, writing, metaphors, mythology, code, cryptography, interfaces, and other such symbolic languages are leveraged as tools for understanding. Alternative modes of knowledge become access points through which users can subvert the control structures of software. By challenging the singular expertise of programmers, the work presented within advocates for the examination of internalized beliefs, the redistribution of networked power, and the collective sabotage of computational authority

Engaging older adults with age-related macular degeneration in the design and evaluation of mobile assistive technologies

Ongoing advances in technology are undoubtedly increasing the scope for enhancing and supporting older adults’ daily living. The digital divide between older and younger adults, however, raises concerns about the suitability of technological solutions for older adults, especially for those with impairments. Taking older adults with Age-Related Macular Degeneration (AMD) – a progressive and degenerative disease of the eye – as a case study, the research reported in this dissertation considers how best to engage older adults in the design and evaluation of mobile assistive technologies to achieve sympathetic design of such technologies. Recognising the importance of good nutrition and the challenges involved in designing for people with AMD, this research followed a participatory and user-centred design (UCD) approach to develop a proof–of–concept diet diary application for people with AMD. Findings from initial knowledge elicitation activities contribute to the growing debate surrounding the issues on how older adults’ participation is initiated, planned and managed. Reflections on the application of the participatory design method highlighted a number of key strategies that can be applied to maintain empathic participatory design rapport with older adults and, subsequently, lead to the formulation of participatory design guidelines for effectively engaging older adults in design activities. Taking a novel approach, the final evaluation study contributed to the gap in the knowledge on how to bring closure to the participatory process in as positive a way as possible, cognisant of the potential negative effect that withdrawal of the participatory process may have on individuals. Based on the results of this study, we ascertain that (a) sympathetic design of technology with older adults will maximise technology acceptance and shows strong indicators for affecting behaviour change; and (b) being involved in the design and development of such technologies has the capacity to significantly improve the quality of life of older adults (with AMD)