Breaking Into Data-Spaces


One of my jobs as a Ph.D. student is to help Sean Googins with the Open Collaboration Data Factory (OCDF). A National Science Foundation (NSF) funded project, the OCDF is sponsoring a workshop at CSCW in February. The call is listed below.

Title: Breaking into new Data-Spaces: Infrastructure for Open Community Science
Date: February 27, 2016
Application Deadline: December 31, 2015
Conference: Website
Apply/Info: Breaking Into Data-Spaces 
Participants Announced: January 15, 2016

Abstract: Despite being easily accessible, open online community (OOC) data can be difficult to use effectively. In order to access and analyze large amounts of data, researchers must first become familiar with the meaning of data values. Then they must find a way to obtain and process the datasets to extract their desired vectors of behavior and content. This process is fraught with problems that are solved (through great difficulty) over and over again by each research team/lab that breaks into datasets for a new OOC.

In this workshop, we’ll experiment with documentation protocols and technologies that are designed to make the process of “breaking into” a new dataset more tractable for researchers studying open online communities. This workshop’s purpose is to bring together researchers to test these systems and discover problems and missed opportunities to support iteration. Participants will also be given the opportunity to use state-of-the-art documentation and technologies to break into a new collection of datasets.

Athletics and Libraries


One of my recent projects involves university research libraries and athletic programs in the SEC. It’s not surprising that athletics in a major conference are well-funded. It’s not surprising that they are growing either. What is surprising is that they are growing while library staff is declining and funding is stagnant.

So much for LibQUAL. Let no good deed go unpunished!

Unexpected Projects


A great thing about working for a university is how it affords opportunities to contribute to cool, unexpected projects. Last October, I was approached by the University of Missouri’s Journalism School about the Journalism and Women’s Symposium (JAWS). Growing out of a panel discussion at the university in the 1980s, the symposium has involved several high-profile journalists since its creation. It was also explained to me by J-School faculty that an effort was previously underway to interview founding JAWS members. A collection of interviews and the associated content is now provided online on a website that I helped to build. The majority of work was not mine, but it’s always rewarding to see a project come to fruition.

Startup Culture


One of my interests has to do with science and technology. When an article from Salon popped up in my Facebook feed about Neil deGrasse Tyson saying that, “society has bigger problems than can be solved with your next app,” I asked myself, “Why is this newsworthy?”

It’s established that Silicon Valley start-up types love the idea of technological disruption. The truth of the matter, however, seems to be that market-based innovation is often underwhelming. Many forms of research aren’t profitable. Others are better suited to the public sector. Also, just because one business model disrupts another business model doesn’t mean that society will benefit.

Take the ride-sharing company Uber as an example. Uber injects competition into the taxi industry. Its service model is novel, but in an era where median wages are stagnant Uber might make the problem worse. Was it hard to find a taxi before Uber? Is the mass allocation of capital to a tiny problem (people finding a ride) really worth it the money spent on it?

If America’s start-up culture is obsessed with disruption, I wish that they would spend more time thinking about whether deliberately creating disruption is worth the cost. Just because an innovator can find a way to make money by reshaping the world doesn’t mean that there aren’t opportunity costs associated with investment decisions.