Category Archives: tech

Hacio Iaith 2012

Leave a reply

Gyda ymennydd caffeinated, i ffwrdd a fi am ddiwrnod llawn yn yr Adeilad Parry-Williams. Wedi edrych ymlaen i hwn ers dipyn, ac nes i fwynhau a chael fy ysbrydoli unwaith eto’r flwyddyn yma. Yn y diwedd, bu’r digwyddiad ychydig yn wahanol i’r flwyddyn gynt: mwy o wynebau cyfarwydd i fi i ddechra, mwy o bobl sy’n ‘creu cynnwys’ neu’n ymwneud â darlledu yn yr ystyr traddodiadol. Roedd na deimlad eitha cyffrous, ‘on the cusp’ am yr holl beth. Ta waeth rhain yw’r prif nodiadau nes i gymryd yn ystod y dydd, gyda tweets @kopetatxuri hefyd yn ychwanegu rhan arall o’r stori gen i. Ddim di mentro i Storify eto. Rhain di’r nodiadau o ambell sesiwn:

Sesiwn cyntaf:

Gwaith dau fyfyriwr, Sion Richards a  Rhys Jones, edrych ar hyperlleol, neu’ ‘tra-leol’. Trafodaeth agored nath droi’n rili diddorol, lot o syniadau am hen rhwydweithiau sydd ddim yn cael eu defnyddio i’w llawn potensial yma yng Nghymru – sef y papurau bro. Enghraifft Goiena eto. Gymaint i’w ddadansoddi o’r gwefan yna yn nhermau model i ni yma. Mae’n amlwg fod darnau yn cael ei dalu dwi’n siwr e.e. ‘eskelak’, yr obits, pethau sy’n amlwg yn codi arian. Ond mae hefyd gyda cynnwys proffesiynol ‘teledu’ lleol , yn amlwg yn defnyddio model ‘citizen journalists’, felly mae’n rhaid fod hwn yn pwyntio at ffordd ymlaen i ni rhywsut. Mae’n amlwg hefyd fod yn  ffynhonellau cyllid lleol yn cael eu defnyddio, ee o lywudraeth lleol (Gipuzkoa) a llywodraeth Gwlad y Basg sydd hefo presenoldeb da eu hunain.

A yw’n bosib cael cyllid i hyfforddi pobl sydd eisioes yn mewnbynnu ar gyfrifiadur? ydyn nhw ofn colli cyllid o werthu’r papur ? Huw M. yn rhoi enghreifftiau o ddefnydd ffrwd gwahanol. Efallai fod angen dangos i bobl mai ychwanegu mae gwasnaethau ar y we, nid tynnu i ffwrdd. Beth yw’r posibilrwydd o ddefnyddio pot Communities 2.0?

Bryn Salisbury

Ail sesiwn:

Twitter dwyieithog, sut mae’r iaith wedi datblygu a newid, (Ian Johnson, pennaeth ymchwil Plaid Cymru).

Cunliffe a Honeycutt – Ymchwil Facebook

Astudiaeth bychan, ‘cymuned’, grwp eitha llac (25 wedi eu dilyn dros gyfnod o 3 mlynedd), ac wedi defnydio SS19, i wneud yr analyisis oedd yn un fwy meintiol.effaith y botwm RT – pobl yn gyru mwy o ddeunydd yn saesneg – newid y technoleg o gwmpas y user interface yn newid defnydd yr iaith pobl yn tueddu gael mwy o ‘dyddiadur agored’ i ‘sgwrs cyhoeddus’, trafod pynciau

Haclediad -trafodaeth ar SOPA, PIPA etc. , a’r holl beth yn cyrraedd pobl fel Doctorow, diddorol

Twitter a sensoriaeth – beth yw’r ddadl newydd am fod yna bosib i newid pethau fesul gwlad erbyn hyn. A wnaeth SOPA cael ei roi ar y silff am y tro oherwydd fod Obama eisiau ennill blwyddyn yma? A fydd o’n ol ar ol yr etholiadau yn Nhachwedd? Straen ar feddylfryd  ‘rhyddfrydol’ moguls Hollywood?

Sesiwn 3:

Bryn Salisbury ar  S4C, darlledu, yn gofyn  ‘ what would google do? , Jeff Jarvis – ‘give the people control….’ . Rheolau Jarvis : crynodeb da yma hefyd.

‘be a platform…’ ‘middlemen are dead’

Sesiwn 4 :

Defnyddio camerau ffilm, DSLR , Rhys Llwyd

- gallu switchio lens yn hawdd ar y math yma o gamera, http://vimeo.com/33570778

- aestheteg still yn haws i’w gael am bris rhesymol

- dan mil o bunnau!

- angen mike gwell (allanol) , defnyddio ‘pluralise’ gyda Final Cut

defnyddio final cut

Sianel 62 - 8 o’r gloch bob nos sul, 2 o oriau

mwy o gymraeg yn cael ei ddefnyddio, os ydych yn dod a’r RT

Sesiwn 5

Cyfieithu peirianyddol

Hebog

Uned Tchnolegau iaith -  http://techiaith.bangor.ac.uk/?page_id=73

Glyder – sustem ffeilio a chyfieithu

termau.org

Sesiwn 6

Defnyddio’r android emulator. Eclipse SDK i wneud stwff gyda php neu java – rhedeg android emulator

Prosiect cod agored, prosiect Replicant – fork o Android

100 string i’r cloc….

Glotpress – WordPress -yn lle agor cod, jest cyfieithu nid mesio gwmpas hefo cod

[defnyddio 'Scratch' - Beds - MIT]

Sesiwn 7

Wicipedia – ydi’r rheolau’n hir wyntog? Parchu hawlfraint dal yn bwysig, ond mae diffyg cyfrannwyr dal yn broblem, edrych ar

http://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defnyddiwr:Ben_Bore

QRpedia http://qrpedia.org/

Creative Commons: ffordd o rannu beth da ni’n ei greu….

http://www.creativecommons.org.uk/

http://vo.do/ – model arall sy’n gweithio i werthu cynnwys, siwtio pobl sydd eisiau cael pethau i weld mwy na dim arall

Sesiwn olaf

Radio’r Cymry

Defnyddio Shoutcast servers. Wedi ‘crowdsourcio’ lot o’r wybodaeth technegol. Pa fath o gynnwys? Farchnad am gomedi a adolygu ffilmiau er enghraifft. Fydd enghreifftiau o’r math o raglenni yn mynd i fyny’n fuan. Syniad o ‘hunan gomisiynu’

……….

Prif negeseuon y diwrnod – mae’r diwylliant ‘caniatad’ ar ben – sesiwn Daniel Glyn a…… a sesiwn Huw M

Mae sawl model ar gael, rhai masnachol, tu hwnt i’r darlledwyr/ffynhonellau arferol – ond un o themau’r diwrnod i sawl sesiwn (yn fy marn i) oedd y tensiwn rhwng cael model sy’n gwneud rhywfaint i arian i bobl, ond yn annibynol – roedd esiamplau da o hyn ar gael. Sawl peth diddorol yn codi o’r model Creative Commons etc.

Beth yw gwerth cyhoeddus yn yr iaith? Rhywbeth lleol, ond sy’n gallu cynnal sgwrs ehangach hefyd. Roedd yna rhyw eironi o’n i’n teimli hefyd yn y ffaith fod y naws i Haciaith (yn fy marn i eto) yn un bell iawn  o’r meddylfryd ‘corfforaethol’ sy’n llywodraethu ymhobman, ond oedd yna fwy o ddiddrdeb corfforaethol yn y gynhadledd, yn sicr…. Felly roedd teimlad gwahanol i un blwyddyn diwethaf, fwy o ddiddordeb gan ‘cyfryngau’ arferol h.y. teledu etc. Onus mwy ar modelau sy’n mynd i ganiatau cynnwys, oedd yn beth da, ond hefyd roedd dal le i stwff fwy technegol – byddai mwy o amser a strwythur i weithdai yn syniad da efallai.

 

 

 

 

 

digital taylorism

Leave a reply

Interesting article in the Guardian which reminded me of a lecture by Phillip Brown a couple of years ago, where he outlined some of the research that he’d been doing for his latest co-written book, The Global Auction. His lecture was part of the methods course, where he explained the intricacies of gaining useful interviews with business elites across the world – how important it was to dress the part, produce brochures etc., to enter their world a little to get the best possible research data. But the main thrust of his research seems to explore this central idea of digital Taylorism, which Aditya Chakrabortty of the Guardian has been looking in various articles over the last year or so. Also, related article by Peter Wilby in the same paper, written in February.

Taylorism...

Ultimately, this is an observation that there’s a process of  a McDonaldization happening to jobs which previously required more autonomous, creative thinking. Key passage from the book  is this one:

If the twentieth century brought what can be described as mechanical Taylorism characterized by the Fordist production line, where the knowledge of craft workers was captured by management, codified and reengineered in the shape of the moving assembly line, the twenty-first century is the age of digital Taylorism. This involves translating the knowledge work of managers, professionals and technicians into working knowledge by capturing, codifying and digitalizing their work in software packages, templates and prescripts that can be transferred and manipulated by others regardless of location. It is being applied to offices as well as factories and to services as well as manufacturing. Unlike mechanical Taylorism which required the concentration of labor in factories, digital Taylorism enables work activities to be dispersed and recombined form anywhere around the world in less time than it takes to read this sentence.

More of this can be read here. It’s an interesting idea because these methods are now being applied to all manner of professions, to a greater or lesser extent, and ones which hitherto have seemed protected by their own guilds, such as the legal profession, even medicine. Neo-liberalisation of all aspects of government surely means that deregulation of all such services is on the cards (and actually happening – coming to Tesco about now), but at what cost eventually, we don’t really know. Costs and responsibilities are shifted to the individual citizen (who will be looking for the cheapest option), choice the mantra. Not sure if it makes a difference in legal services, but for health? There’s going to be a lot of people out there, highly educated, spending a lot of money on uni fees and finding that the work has been shifted to another English speaking country, or scanned at virtually no cost by a ‘lawbot’.

All sadly inevitable with our current system of capitalism, when the cost-accountants took over at the end of the 70s. I can also see how it runs in parallel with a lot of magical thinking that’s about already; in tandem, and complicit, with unfettered capitalism, we start thinking of  technology as the only efficient answer for human systems and problems e.g. health. There’s that  impending feeling of techno determinism, of technological processes being end in themselves, without regard for end users, let alone trained, professional people. Also, reminds me of the Dreyfus model – if all the ‘mundane’ work in professions e.g. legal are to be carried out by software/cheap labour, how do you make sure that professionals have a true, deep understanding of what they’re doing, if they haven’t put in the hours sifting through data themselves? By taking away the autonomy at certain level, aren’t you hobbling the potential for expert understanding?

Software can’t do everything, nor can we expect people to interact completely rationally with software – bad news for those who would have us do everything online I guess, worse news for those who are already excluded (good, myth-busting report on digital inclusion in Wales here).

 

diwedd cyfnod y space shuttle

Leave a reply

Dwi edi bod yn teimlo’n eitha trist am hyn, mae’r shuttle wedi bod yng nghefndir bywyd rhywun ers pan oeddwn i tua 9 mlwydd oed. Seryddiaeth ac aeronautics oedd fy mheth i pan yn hogyn bach, hollol gutted pan ddwedson nhw mod i’n lliwddall a felly byswn i byth yn cael bod yn beilot, heb son am astronaut….

Space Shuttle Atlantis yn glanio am y tro olaf

Hanes technegol eitha trylwyr ar gael o’r llefydd arferol yn cynnwys NASA. Nes i sgwennu llythyr i NASA pan oeddwn i tua 10, aerogramme ar bapur arbennig, a sawl mis wedyn ges i parsel yn ol O AMERICA gyda lluniau o’r test flight cyntaf gan Columbia yn 1981, a pac addysgiadol. Nes i ecseitio’n lan.

Dros y blynyddoedd wedyn, ac fel oedd rhywun yn darganod pethau eraill mewn bywyd, roedd dal  rhywbeth arbennig am glywed fod y shuttle wedi cyflawni pethau, yn enwedig Hubble. Gyda trychineb y Challenger, a’r Comisiwn Rogers ddaeth wedyn, ddois i ar draws Richard Feynman am y tro cyntaf hefyd, dwi’n cofio ei esboniad i’r wasg o beth oedd wedi methu yn y Challenger, yn glir- roedd o’n ffigwr mor charismatic, diddorol. Daeth na raglen Horizon allan yn y 90au oedd yn dangos y cyfan, werth ei wylio.

Ond mewn ffordd, mae’r holl ffordd o edrych ar beth da ni’n ei wneud yn y gofod wedi newid gymaint o’r 70au, pan o’n i’n blentyn. Digwydd bod daeth Bladerunner allan yn 1981 hefyd wrth gwrs, efallai fel ateb i’r genre opera-gofodaidd oedd wedi ysbrydoli ni fel plant ifanc, sef Star Wars. Aeth Bladerunner a ni ddyfodol arall, lle roedd y mewnol a’r athronyddol yn bwysicach. Does dim voice over yn Star Wars. Roedd Bladerunner hefyd yn adlewyrchiad  efallai o syrffed pobl gyda dadleuon ideolegol da/drwg, comiwynddiaeth/cyfalafiaeth, dwyrain/gorllewin yr 20fed ganrif. Roedd y Space Shuttle, gymaint a’r Saturn series gynt, yn arfau yn y dadleuon yna, ac er nad oes posib dadlau fod yna gymaint wedi gyflawni ym meysydd peirianeg, cyfathrebu, mapio a.y.b. mae technoleg wedi troi mwy at y bychan, y micro, y sub-atomic llawer mwy erbyn hyn.

Ond dwi dal i edrych i fyny a mynd  ‘Waw!’ o bryd i’w gilydd, fel oeddwn i’n 7 mlwydd oed. Pwysig gwneud dwi’n meddwl.

Erthygl diddorol yn yr Economist

Eben Moglen – bach o arwr, rili

Leave a reply

Newydd ddod ar draws hwn trwy erthygl ar ‘gyfrifaduro cwmwl’ (?) yn yr Observer, ac wedi dilyn i fyny tipyn o’r sgyrsia gan Eben Moglen, sy’n amddiffyn ac yn datblygu’r syniad o feddalwedd cod agored: http://bit.ly/hhXUZD. Un o fy hoff syniadau yw ei gymhariaeth o’r 20fed ganrif yn un sydd wedi ei danategu gan ddur, tra bod yr 21ain (hyd hyn…)yn un sydd wedi ei adeiladu ar feddalwedd, rhywbeth fedrwn ni ddim ei weld, ond sydd o’n cwmpas ac yn rheoli ein bywydau i raddau mwy nag ydym yn ymwybodol. ‘Primer’ da ar hanes cyfrifiaduro, peer-to-peer, Microsoft a.y.b.

Mae ei osgo a’i arddull fel pregethwr, ond mae hefyd yn codi pwyntiau dilys iawn am beth mae preifatrwydd yn ei olygu mewn byd gyda gymaint o wybodaeth yn cael rannu yn ddi-feddwl, a pa mor bwysig yw hi i ni feddwl am hyn yn ein bywydau ni’n hunain a thrwy fod yn wyliadwrus o’r sawl sydd yn erbyn rhyddid agored i bawb – fel arfer drwy roi diddordebau masnachol cyn popeth.

Shock of the Old

Leave a reply

Book by David Edgerton and a really good read which gives an alternative look at the historical significance of technology, deviating from the conventional narratives of ‘progress’ as white-hot technology, and pointing out that innovation and engineering take many different forms, and that we often mistake or ignore the relationship between innovation and use. We should think of the world in terms of useful ‘things’ not useful ‘technology’.  We spout future-orientated rhetoric which consistently overestimates the present and underestimates the past. Good review here also.

Opening sentence defines our current problems and skewed vision of ‘progress’ in this sense: ‘ Much of what is written on the history of technology is for boys of all ages. This book is a history for grown-ups of all genders’ (ix). It makes the point that much of what we hear in this (often) linear narrative is a kind of ‘reheated futurism’, which bears no real relation to the facts about pieces of technology e.g. for all the bluster about recent advances, many seemingly significant facts such as speed-records etc were in fact set in the Cold War period, the 50s and 60s, not recently.

Chapter 4 on the idea of maintenance gave a really good account of how engineering which maintains ‘things’ is often severly overlooked. There is a tendency to think of engineers as people who are involved in design and development (they are therefore ‘progressive…send new things out to the world’ p.100), when in fact, most are involved in maintenance of one sort or another. Some technologies e.g. battleships, remain in operation for 50+ years, the world is actually full of repair workshops. Also, interesting quote by Langdon Winner from the 70s: ‘ in almost no instance can artificial-rational systems be built and left alone. They require continued attention, rebuilding and repair. Eternal vigilance ins the price of artificial complexity’ and ‘, in a technological age we should ask not who governs, but what governs: ‘government becomes the business of recognising what is necessary and efficient for the continued functioning and elaboration of large scale systems and the rational implementation of their manifest requirements.’ from Autonomous Technology: Technics-out-of-Control as a Theme in Political Thought, M.I.T. Press, 1977

The concluding comments (p206 onwards) are worth reading, even in isolation, but in brief, what we often call growth now is an illusion (…haha – this book was written in 2006!). Most change takes place through the transfer of techniques from place to place e.g. ‘developed’ to ‘developing’. Living in an inventive age requires us to reject the majority that are on offer. There are alternative technologies,m alternative paths to invention. The history of invention is not the history of a necessary future to which we must adapt or die, but rather of failed futures, and of futures firmly fixed in the past. We are constantly having to un-invent e.g. asbestos, CFC.

‘ We should feel free to research, develop, innovate, even in areas which are considered out of date by those stuck in passé futuristic ways of thinking. Most inventions will continue to fail, the future will remain uncertain….research policy should be ensuring there are many more good ideas, and thus many more failed ideas.’ p210

‘Culture has not lagged behind technology, rather the reverse; the idea that culture has lagged behind technology is itself very old and has existed under many different technological regimes. Technology has not generally been a revolutionary force; it has been responsible for keeping things the same as much as changing them. The place of technology in the undoubted increase in productivity in the twentieth century remains mysterious; but we are not entering a weightless, de-materialised information world. War changed in the twentieth century, but not according to the rhythms of conventional technological timelines….history is changed when we put into it the technology that counts; not only the famous spectacular technologies but the low and ubiquitous ones’ p212

 

some good background material

Leave a reply

Two of the most important general background papers , though not specific to Wales, would be the Futurelab report and the 2004 JRF report also (both listed in the side panel). Futurelab report especially good at describing the complexities and definitions behind the notion of ‘digital divide’ whilst maintaining that there are significant grounds for arguing that “demography is destiny when it comes to predicting who will go online”. However, the complexity of not only the multi-modal nature of ICT experience, but also the multi-dimensional aspects of ICT use have to be taken into account by policy makers and others – ‘bridging the gap’ in terms of hardware and software should not be the sole goal, nor is it only a matter of the usual suspects in terms of social variables. The website worth a look, and they’re a forward-thinking but realistic organisation.Still working through the Leadbeater book, which is more about the possibilities which are perhaps only clearly emerging now, in the last couple of years – but it is actually making me glad that I’ve started this blog as a means of sharing the work eventually, possibly. He points to five different scenarios for the internet in the initial chapters, underlining the fact that we might be at a critical point in its development:

 

  1. For some the internet is an overblown tool, just that it allows you to do things quickly and to a larger audience – but essentially it remains a flea market (ebay) or shop (amazon)
  2. Internet might have a big impact on society, but technology should always be seen in the long view – Shock of the Old, Dave Edgerton
  3. Web is already having a big influence on society, which is mainly bad – The Cult of the Amateur (Andrew Keen), The Big Switch (Nicholas Carr), Larry Sanger (co-founder, but now critic of, Wikipedia) and Susan Greenfield. The web is an unfiltered mess which obfuticates ‘truth’ and ‘expertise’, ‘Google is making us stupid’ etc.
  4. The web mainly good for us in a libertarian way, – ‘faster, frictionless market and an abundance of free culture – Chris Sanderson,(Wired – The Long Tail – which is a great book…, but has come in for criticism in its premise) seen as chief advocate
  5. The more communitarian viewpoint, espoused by Leadbeater : ‘the possibility of community and collaboration, commons-based, peer-to- peer production, will establish non-market and non-hierarchical organisations’. Other advocates along similar lines: Clay Shirky (Here Comes Everyone), Yochai Benkler (The Wealth of Networks)

Crucial systematic review by Yu (2006) accessed through Sage.<o:p></o:p>

<o:p> </o:p>