Commit 7f5df708 authored by maxigas's avatar maxigas

Pre-talk changes

parent 3ed9cf53
pandoc --csl=/home/maxigas/research/chicago-author-date.csl --bibliography=/home/maxigas/research/bib.bib -s -t revealjs -V theme=default -o index.html
This diff is collapsed.
reveal.js @ 131c0068
Subproject commit 131c00689a4c7a18e5c991fc8102347e4594b5d4
% Der 33 Jahrerückblick
% Technology and Politics in Congress Talks, from 1984 to now
% Mel & Maxigas @ 33C3
2C3 (1985) video:
ARD Tagesschau
# Data
* **Before 1992:**
+ *Congress archive* <small>``</small>
- 403 Forbidden →
+ *Datenschleuder archive* <small>``, ``</small>
- scanned PDFs without OCR, reviews, …
`Datenschleuder #7 (1984)`
`Datenschleuder #37 (1991)`
Congress 1990 review.
<!-- a talk that sounds very technical but in the abstract more politics comes up -->
* **After 1992:**
+ *Human readable* HTML schedules: scraping <small>`“no regex harmed”`</small>
* **After 2002:**
+ *Machine readable* dumps: iCal, XML
**→ repository**: <small>``</small>
# Methods
## Categories
* For Technology (e.g. technique only): t
* For Politics (e.g. societal implications too): p
* For Others: o
* For Nontalks: n
* For Unknown: u
## Categorisation
* 2307 talks in CSV
* 3 humans categorise
* ***Not*** according to conference tracks!
* Categories try to reflect the **research question**
## Tech vs. politics
* Almost ***all*** congress talks include *technique*.
* *Technique* can be (social) engineering, psychology, finance…
* *Law* is the most problematic, but:
+ ***does the talk include how the law shapes society?***
* *Political* talks refer to social groups and/or society as a whole.
<!-- <small> -->
<!-- Since most CCCongress talks has to do with technology, we should interpet this narrowly as “only technology”. However, technology in the broad sense including everything concerned with technique: for instance, social engineering, psychology, design and ergonomics and not necessary socio-political. The most problematic discipline for this consideration is law, but as long as a talk is not focused on the role of a policy in shaping society as a whole, we consider it technical. -->
<!-- </small> -->
<!-- <small> -->
<!-- Since most CCCongress talks has to do with technology, we should interpet this widely as “maybe technology but *also* societal aspects”. However, explaining a vulnerability in a security system is not political in itself: it has to also include explicit reflection on how such insight (potentially) changes society. This is shown by references to concepts – ideally in the title – that are recognisable from the social scientific literature, and conversely, out of scope of the O’Reilly books corpus. Like before, talks on policy (data protection and systems exploitation) are the most difficult to categorise, and they are weighted according to their focus on lawyers’ terms vs. societal implications. -->
<!-- </small> -->
## Difficulties
* ***Undefined*** talks:
+ 13C3 (1996): “THC++”, no abstract
* ***Not talks***:
+ Hacker jeopardy, radio, theatre, DJ set…
* Controvertial talks:
+ 25C3 (2008): “Objects as Software: \newline The Coming Revolution”
> How physical compilers (CNC machines, laser cutters, 3D printers, etc) are changing the way we make things, how we think about the nature of objects. This talk will focus on the future of digital manufacturing, and how self-replicating machines will make this technology accessible to everyone: ushering in a new era of technological advance.
# Preliminary results
## Consistencies
***What is the CCCongress?***
→ More tech talks but almost as much as political.
## Inconsistencies
* *Numbers go down after 2007*: Why?
+ No correllation with the change of venue…
## Potential findings
* *More participants does not mean more talks.*
* *1989*: report in the Datenschleuder says that
> "there was only a small part of the congress that was dealing with hacker-specific topics."
<!-- ## -->
<!-- ![](images/t-vs-p-fumiko.png) -->
# Future work
## Contribute
1. Hack on the repo:
+ Improve the code,
+ categorise talks,
+ fork and repurpose…
2. Point out more data sources:
+ Mentions of a printed *Congress Paper*?
+ Mentions (1989) of an *electronic newspaper*?
+ Mentions (1991 Datenschleuder #34) of a *Chaos Archiv*?
3. ***Talk to us!***
+ Discussion: *Day 3 (29th) 16:00 @ Room A.2*
## Next steps
* Merge three categorised datasets (Fumiko, Mel, Maxigas).
* Complete the dataset & clean up the code.
* *Categorisation is only the first step.*
* *Qualitative (interview, focus group) data to complement quantitative results.*
* Statistics as a consistent starting point for discussions.
* More interesting questions: *relationship*, **co-articulation**, etc.
## Thank you!
Questions, comments, etc.? Talk to us or…
* ``
+ <small>5BE8 241D 888E 0C44 0EB2 2F3E 8DA7 0308 F934 654C</small>
* ``
+ <small>FA00 8129 13E9 2617 C614 0901 7879 63BC 287E D166</small>
# Intro
The proper relationship of technology and politics have been the subject of an evergreen debate on the floor of the Chaos Communication Congress. Rather than taking a position in this debate, we are asking how the two have been co-articulated in practice so far by CCC participants?
The proper relationship of technology and politics and thereby the percentage each covers in the Congress schedule have been the subject of an evergreen debate at the floor and in the corridors of the Chaos Communication Congress. Rather than taking a position in this debate, we are asking how the two have been co-articulated in talks so far by CCC participants? In order to answer this question, we are analysing the available titles and abstracts of Congress talks from 1984 until now. This ongoing research seeks to identify changing trends, significant outliers, apparent patterns and common threads throughout the years. We also wonder if it is possible to identify turning points in the narrative. The empirical data is contextualised by reflections on the shifting ground of technology, politics and society in the world during the long history of the CCC, as well as by qualitative reflections of attendants. We are inviting the audience to help us with the latter by joining in a follow-up discussion after the presentation.
* social-context-impact: unification, NSA --> show chart
# what did we find so far: a few shots
* ratio of type of talks
* ratio and number throughout the years
* word cloud
* tech vs politics
* hand-raising about how many audience members were at how old congresses
* repeated mention of a congress paper: where is it archived?
* 1989: electronic newspaper mentioned again
# where do we want to go from here
* we know that the tagging is subjective to some extend, but it's based on a methodology and we try to make everything as transparent as possible. comments are always welcome.
* what we are looking for now is people to talk with, counting the talks was a first and possibly the easiest step
* invite everyone to the workshop day 3 4pm room A.2
Markdown is supported
0% or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment