Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.109158896 = product of:
  0.32747668 = sum of:
    0.16678819 = weight(_text_:united in 4306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16678819 = score(doc=4306,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22423708 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.7438029 = fieldWeight in 4306, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4306)
    0.16068847 = weight(_text_:states in 4306) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.16068847 = score(doc=4306,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22009853 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.7300752 = fieldWeight in 4306, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4306)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

0.07877865 = product of:
  0.23633593 = sum of:
    0.12036902 = weight(_text_:united in 715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12036902 = score(doc=715,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22423708 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.53679353 = fieldWeight in 715, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=715)
    0.11596692 = weight(_text_:states in 715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11596692 = score(doc=715,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22009853 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.5268864 = fieldWeight in 715, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=715)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

Information science has been convincingly characterised as a response to developments in information and communications technologies and as part of the gestalt of the computer. Despite this, it has had a limited understanding of information technology and has repressed or disguised its origins. Its understanding of itself and its potential for contribution to other discourses has thereby been restricted. The paper develops an understanding of information technology. The idea that the computer as a machine is concerned with the transformation of information, not material or energy, is extended to other information technologies. Technology is regarded as a radical human construction, in a position derived from Marx and mediated by economics. On these bases, an understanding of information technology as a form of knowledge concerned with the transformation of signals from one form or medium into another is proposed. Invention, innovation, and diffusion are distinguished as stages in the development of technologies. For modern information technologies, the history of copyright can provide indicators for innovation and diffusion. The mid- to late 19th century, in the United States and between the United States and Europe, is identified as the critical period for diffusion. An explanation for this is proposed in terms of the dynamism of the period, its hospitality to innovation, and in the United States continental expansion and developing links with Europe.

0.045482874 = product of:
  0.13644862 = sum of:
    0.06949508 = weight(_text_:united in 3444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06949508 = score(doc=3444,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22423708 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.30991787 = fieldWeight in 3444, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3444)
    0.06695353 = weight(_text_:states in 3444) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06695353 = score(doc=3444,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22009853 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.304198 = fieldWeight in 3444, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3444)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

The United States Supreme Court case of 1991, Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Service Co., continues to be highly significant for property in data and databases, but remains poorly understood. The approach taken in this article contrasts with previous studies. It focuses upon the not original rather than the original. The delineation of the absence of a modicum of creativity in selection, coordination, and arrangement of data as a component of the not original forms a pivotal point in the Supreme Court decision. The author also aims at elucidation rather than critique, using close textual exegesis of the Supreme Court decision. The results of the exegesis are translated into a more formal logical form to enhance clarity and rigor. The insufficiently creative is initially characterized as so mechanical or routine. Mechanical and routine are understood in their ordinary discourse senses, as a conjunction or as connected by AND, and as the central clause. Subsequent clauses amplify the senses of mechanical and routine without disturbing their conjunction. The delineation of the absence of a modicum of creativity can be correlated with classic conceptions of computability. The insufficiently creative can then be understood as a routine selection, coordination, or arrangement produced by an automatic mechanical procedure or algorithm. An understanding of a modicum of creativity and of copyright law is also indicated. The value of the exegesis and interpretation is identified as its final simplicity, clarity, comprehensiveness, and potential practical utility.

0.045482874 = product of:
  0.13644862 = sum of:
    0.06949508 = weight(_text_:united in 955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06949508 = score(doc=955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22423708 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.30991787 = fieldWeight in 955, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=955)
    0.06695353 = weight(_text_:states in 955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06695353 = score(doc=955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22009853 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.304198 = fieldWeight in 955, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=955)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Abstract

This paper develops an understanding of creativity to meet the requirements of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Feist v. Rural (1991). The inclusion of creativity in originality, in a minimal degree of creativity, and in a creative spark below the level required for originality, is first established. Conditions for creativity are simultaneously derived. Clauses negatively implying creativity are then identified and considered. The clauses that imply creativity can be extensively correlated with conceptions of computability. The negative of creativity is then understood as an automatic mechanical or computational procedure or a so routine process that results in a highly routine product. Conversely, creativity invariantly involves a not mechanical procedure. The not mechanical is then populated by meaning, in accord with accepted distinctions, drawing on a range of discourses. Meaning is understood as a different level of analysis to the syntactic or mechanical and also as involving direct human engagement with meaning. As direct engagement with meaning, it can be connected to classic concepts of creativity, through the association of dissimilars. Creativity is finally understood as not mechanical human activity above a certain level of routinicity. Creativity is then integrated with a minimal degree of creativity and with originality. The level of creativity required for a minimal degree is identified as intellectual. The combination of an intellectual level with a sufficient amount of creativity can be read from the exchange values connected with the product of creative activity. Humanly created bibliographic records and indexes are then possible correlates to, or constituents of, a minimal degree of creativity. A four-stage discriminatory process for determining originality is then specified. Finally, the strength and value of the argument are considered.

0.032161247 = product of:
  0.09648374 = sum of:
    0.049140442 = weight(_text_:united in 438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049140442 = score(doc=438,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22423708 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.21914503 = fieldWeight in 438, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.6101127 = idf(docFreq=439, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=438)
    0.047343295 = weight(_text_:states in 438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047343295 = score(doc=438,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22009853 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.21510047 = fieldWeight in 438, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=438)
  0.33333334 = coord(2/6)

Content

An information view of history -- Organs of the human brain, created by the human hand : toward an understanding of information technology -- Information society or cash nexus? : a study of the United States as a copyright haven -- As sharp as a pen : direct semantic ratification in oral, written, and electronic communication -- In the catalogue ye go for men : evaluation criteria for information retrieval systems -- Meta- and object-language for information retrieval research : proposal for a distinction -- Forms of labor in information systems -- W(h)ither information science?

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST. 56(2003) no.12, S.1360 (C.Tomer): "Humanizing Information Technology is a collection of essays that represent what are presumably Julian Warner's best efforts to understand the perpetually nascent discipline of information science and its relationship to information technology. It is clearly a formidable task. Warner succeeds occasionally in this endeavor; more often, he fails. Yet, it would be wrong to mark Humanizing Information Technology as a book not worth reading. On the contrary, though much fault was found and this review is far from positive, it was nevertheless a book well-worth reading. That Humanizing Information Technology succeeds at all is in some ways remarkable, because Warner's prose tends to be dense and graceless, and understanding his commentaries often relies an close readings of a wide array of sources, some of them familiar, many of them less so. The inaccessibility of Warner's prose is unfortunate; there is not a single idea in Humanizing Information Technology so complicated that it could not have been stated in a clear, straightforward manner. The failure to establish a clear, sufficiently füll context for the more obscure sources is an even more serious problem. Perhaps the most conspicuous example of this problem stems from the frequent examination of the concept of the "information society" and the related notion of information as an autonomous variable, each of them ideas drawn largely from Frank Webster's 1995 book, Theories of the Information Society. Several of Warner's essays contain passages in Humanizing Information Technology whose meaning and value are largely dependent an a familiarity with Webster's work. Yet, Warner never refers to Theories of the Information Society in more than cursory terms and never provides a context füll enough to understand the particular points of reference. Suffice it to say, Humanizing Information Technology is not a book for readers who lack patience or a thorough grounding in modern intellectual history. Warner's philosophical analyses, which frequently exhibit the meter, substance, and purpose of a carefully crafted comprehensive examination, are a large part of what is wrong with Humanizing Information Technology. Warner's successes come when he turns his attention away from Marxist scholasticism and toward historical events and trends. "Information Society or Cash Nexus?" the essay in which Warner compares the role of the United States as a "copyright haven" for most of the 19th century to modern China's similar status, is successful because it relies less an abstruse analysis and more an a sharply drawn comparison of the growth of two economies and parallel developments in the treatment of intellectual property. The essay establishes an illuminating context and cites historical precedents in the American experience suggesting that China's official positions toward intellectual property and related international conventions are likely to evolve and grow more mature as its economy expands and becomes more sophisticated. Similarly, the essay entitled "In the Catalogue Ye Go for Men" is effective because Warner comes dangerously close to pragmatism when he focuses an the possibility that aligning cataloging practice with the "paths and tracks" of discourse and its analysis may be the means by which to build more information systems that furnish a more direct basis for intellectual exploration.

0.011158923 = product of:
  0.06695353 = sum of:
    0.06695353 = weight(_text_:states in 4448) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06695353 = score(doc=4448,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22009853 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039970156 = queryNorm
        0.304198 = fieldWeight in 4448, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.506572 = idf(docFreq=487, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4448)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This paper considers an instance of non-verbal graphic communication from the legend of Theseus, in terms of information theory. The efficient cause of a failure in communication is regarded as a selection error and the formal cause as the absence of redundancy from the signals (a binary contrast between a black and a white sail) for transmission. Two considerations are then introduced. First, why should such a system of signalling have been succeeded by a graphic communication system, in alphabetic written language, so strongly marked by its redundancy? Second, why has information theory been so successful in describing systems for signal transmission but far less productive for modelling human-to-human communication, at the level of meaning or of the effects of messages on recipients? The legend is read historically, adopting specific insights, a method of interpretation, and a historical schema from Vico. The binary code used for the signal transmission is located as a rare but significant transitional form, mediating between heroic emblems and written language. For alphabetic written language, a link to the sounds of oral utterance replaces the connection to the mental states of the human information source and destination. It is also suggested that redundancy was deliberately introduced to counteract the effects of selection errors and noise. With regard to information theory, it is suggested that conformity with necessary conditions for signal transmission, which may include the introduction of redundancy, cannot be expected to yield insights into communication, at the level of meaning or the effects of messages.