Centre for Internet and Society

Free and Open Source Software

royson — 2009-01-26T08:04:12Z

Context

Lack of balance between proprietary software and FOSS in the market, educational sector and public sector.
Vendor lock-in of public data and infrastructure resulting in a dilution of citizen and consumer rights

Research Agenda

Document, summarize and analyse the participation divide (Gender, Rural/Urban, North/South) in production and consumption of FOSS by analysing code repositories, mailing list and discussion group archives, public URLs, etc. Case-studies of FOSS developers.
Aggregate, publicly archive and analyse academic curricula in various state and national school and college boards for vendor and technology neutrality.
Documenting the pedagogic impact, development impact, total cost of ownership and sustainability of e-learning and ICT4D projects based proprietary/open/mixed technologies. For instance, Friends in Kerala, and other such projects.
Designing and prototyping improved user interfaces and improvements to existing user interfaces. Pay particular attention to localization and internationalization issues related to Indic languages.
Documenting and designing best practices and processes for training, capacity-building, mentoring, testing and certification for FOSS developers from the global South. Looking at volunteer and corporate participation for example Apache in Sri Lanka.
Understand the similarities and differences between southern and northern Linux User Groups and Free Software User Groups.

Intervention Agenda

Provide feedback to the Open Source policy document to be published by the Ministry of Information and Communication Technology.
Support Free Software Foundation, Delhi Science Forum and others in the campaign against software patents—specifically deletion of “per se” in the Patent Act and related sections in the Indian Patent Office manual.
Advocate that software developed using public funds be licensed under an appropriate FOSS license. Advocate that e-governance software that directly impinges on the quality of citizenship stands public scrutiny.
Advocate for a vendor and technology neutral ICT curriculum in schools, colleges and universities.
Advocate that students participate in global projects for academic credits and all student work be archived on online code repositories. Advocate for local repositories in colleges and universities with insufficient access to the Internet.
Promote choice rather than mono-culture in public organisations, civil society and educational sector to ensure appropriate balance between innovation and access.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/public-accountability/free-and-open-source-softwar

Family

royson — 2009-02-06T09:09:06Z

Context

Contemporary public discourse around new Internet technologies carries with it the legacy of the forbidden, the dirty and the desired, which marked the arrival of internet in India. There is an ‘ecology of fear’ that technology feeds into; producing for us reinforced figures of illegality, of danger and of caution. From underage children accessing unmoderated, unpoliced pornographic material on the world wide web to the anonymous strangers influencing young adults into dangerous situations; from identity theft to extremely violent ‘deaths’ in simulated reality games; from disintegrating and dysfunctional families to corruption of youth and degeneration of values; from Orkut deaths’to MMS Scandals, internet technologies have always been mired with moral panic, redefinition of the notions of decency, obscenity and culture in public discourse in India.

So prevalent are these narratives of techno-terror that they inform our interactions with digital technologies and spaces to create resistance and suspicion. It is necessary that such narratives are deconstructed and the paranoia and anxiety that surrounds internet technologies, especially in the context of the family and the personal – the building blocks of sustained development and communities – need to be dismantled and mapped accurately. Responsible research that situates itself ethically and politically to deal with questions of danger, anxiety or threat on digital spaces and helping the larger public in engaging with questions and issues without giving in to the ecology of fear.

Research Agenda

The techno-narratives that accompany digital globalisation have altered the fabric of family, interpersonal relationships and communities. People respond to and relate to each other and the world around them differently. How do we look at technologies of information and communication as central to this changing shape of family and society? How do we look at the potentials of these technologies to connect people in new ways as the older forms of communication and relationship are lost?
As spaces of anonymous interactions increase within the digital world, how do we create new signs and symbols of caution to ensure safety, especially for people who are still younger in years or uninitiated, without curbing the freedom for others?
Are there successful models of sustainable community development and interpersonal relationships which can be constructed to decrease the gaps between people?
Can we mobilise the digital communities and forums towards larger concerns and socially responsible action? In times of crises, different online groups have come together to work towards specific causes. Is it possible to channelise the collective power of the internet towards a long term and sustained plan?
As the digital world expands its horizons, what are the new pedagogic practices which can be utilised towards a larger social good? How do we expand the social resources by translating them online?
How do we educate the digital natives, not only about the instrumentality and usage of internet technologies but also in thinking through the power and agency that these technologies inherit? How do we reflect on the digital family as the new unit for imagining the community, the society and the nation?

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/new-pedagogies/family

Digital and Participation divide

royson — 2008-09-21T14:57:53Z

Context

Basic infrastructural and logistic problems like power supply, connectivity and lack of physical access that hinder the growth of the Internet.
Existing and new forms of divides that are exacerbated or arise from Internet related technologies. For example - caste, class, gender, language, literacy and disability.
The high cost of technologies, shortage of suitable human resource and lack of a good support eco-system.
Large number of languages in use makes it difficult to ensure equal and unhindered access to digital resources.

Research Agenda

Analyse the various barriers to access faced by developing countries and gauge the extent to which they hinder participation of various segments of society?
Monitor state of connectivity in different parts of India and document tried and tested best-practices and affordable/appropriate technologies for different rural and remote environments.
Investigating the factors responsible for the varying degrees and quality of digital participation amongst different sections of society, such as students, women, distinct religious and ethnic groups, disabled groups, illiterate persons, elderly persons and so on
Analyse the linguistic dimension of digital and participation divide in India and evaluating systems and content based on Indic languages.
Monitor and track nascent Internet based technologies which could contribute significantly improving access and participation in the Information Society. Identify potential or existing barriers and problems that accompany these new technologies.
Extending Dana Boyd’s work and trying to extrapolate it in the Indian context; examining how factors such as caste, class, religion, gender, economic status and disability affect or shape discussions on various social networking sites, blogosphere, mailing lists and discussion forums and studying inter and intra community interaction over the net.
Studying the role of ICT in shaping the new generation and new culture resulting from digital interaction.
Exploring resources which would enhance participation in various areas, such as the increased availability of e-material (including both quantitative and qualitative increase) for ensuring more participation from the student and academic community.
Documenting the role played by cybercafés especially in villages, small towns and district headquarters in increasing participation and local content generation.

Intervention Agenda

Support initiatives that give voice to the disempowered by providing scholarships to bloggers and other participants in Web 2.0 technologies. Examples include: Cyber Mohalla, Wikipedia, and Rising Voices.
Work with Universities, libraries and academic institutions for the creation of digital libraries, institutional repositories, and digitization facilities.
Organize and support BarCamps, face-to-face conferences, and bloggers’ meetings to discuss and address different participation divides.
Support institutions like the NAB which work towards facilitating computer access for disadvantaged sections of society.

Resources

The New Digital Divide - Media Literacy

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/digital-pluralism/digital-and-participation-divide

Communities and Movements

royson — 2008-09-21T14:57:53Z

Context

One of the most significant contributions of ICTs is the way they have been able to generate new forms of viral networking, political mobilisation and expression around the world. From flash mobs that register protest in their playfulness to the online petitions and campaigns which have changed governments and established new forms of justice; from spontaneous groups that have come together around political causes to large communities that have gathered in times of crises; from teenagers networking for artistic expression to older citizens forming community watches, the digital spaces have seen unprecedented emergence of communities and movements.

Often, these movements or communities are dismissed as fads or recreation and the political potential or motivation is rendered invisible. The flash mobs were looked upon as just having fun, without realising how powerful they can be for public participation and protest. The social networking systems, before they became the hot hubs of business and economic networking, were discarded as merely a way of dating for young people. There has been much criticism from traditional media reportage and popular discourses (both a symptom of incomplete understanding or technophobia) of these movements and communities.

Moreover, when looked from the lens of pre-digital social communities and political movements, these digital forms often fail to be recognised for what they are and are overlooked as fashion trends. It is necessary to revisit these forms of networking, participation and expression to explore the potentials and possibilities that they offer. In theory, in the very manifestation of these forms, in the work of artists and academics, there is a huge wealth of experimenting with the possibility of the different spaces of internet. A probe into analysing the events of the past and looking at the possibilities of the future would serve to be very fruitful in understanding the interactive cyberspaces and the role they play in mediating the world around us.

Research Agenda

Is it possible to understand the many fads – some, often, short-lived – on the internet as symptoms of something larger, all sharing certain characteristic features in their aspirations and objectives?
How do we understand politics online? How do we characterise the new digital public sphere and the politics of participation online?
As digital spaces increasingly employ ‘edutainment’ in their pedagogic practices, how do we conflate aesthetics and politics to understand movements and communities online?
How do we explore, hypothesise and test the potentials of the new communities and movements which have mushroomed in the digital spaces? Can we coordinate or orchestrate (Like Bill Wysek coordinated the first flash-mob) models we think of as important, towards particular objectives?
Can these different forms be a part of our pedagogic and research practices? For example, Jeremy Hussinger’s ‘Lessons in Second Life’ series of lectures and essays, provides ample reflection on different political and philosophical issues by analysing the texts and interactions on Second Life.
Can we identify the participants within such communities and movements, as moving towards a new notion of the public and what it means to be a digital native? What are the threats and possible redundancies in such spaces and how do we address them?
Is it possible to utilise these existing networks and interactions to create more cohesive and sustainable forms of interaction and community formation?

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/about/substantive-areas/new-pedagogies/communities-and-movements

Censorship

royson — 2008-09-21T14:57:53Z

Context

The histories of technology in general and the internet technologies in particular, are riddled with debates of censorship, freedom of speech and expression, and the rise and fall of various political movements around the same. The history of cyberspaces in India has given rise to dense debates which have emerged in the popular as well as the academic spheres.

Moreover, with the State’s outsourcing of digital technologies and responsibilities to the corporate sector through the increasing public-private partnerships, there are several agencies of censorship which were not so visible or authoritative in the history of technology. There has been a severe demonisation and criminalisation of the ICTs, by State and other proto-Statist organisations who have, in its brief history, demanded extreme censorship, boycotting, banning and blocking of various cyberspaces.

A narrative of the critical moments of demands for and attempts at censoring cyberspaces, brings to the fore extremely intriguing questions about the relationship between language, power, expression and freedom. The issue of censorship touches, perhaps the most widely, different aspects of human behaviour and living—from consumption to sexuality to interpersonal relationships to practices of the self. It has become imperative to unpack the sheer inertia that censorship as a force imposes on the dynamic and often transient world of cyberspaces and the way the inherent anarchism and fluidity of the digital cyberspaces challenge the existing legislation, regulation and debates around censorship and freedom.

Research Agenda

In the fluid and decentralised mammoth nature of cyberspaces, what is the need and value of censorship? What does censorship enable and what does it bring to attention?
Instead of focusing merely upon the act of censorship, can we look at the larger contexts and crises, and the censorship as a critical symptom of the same?
Within digital narratives, where the sense of the text, the author, the body and the self are all conflated, can we look upon censorship, not only as a restrictive force but also a creative force that shapes and enables certain kinds of practices and ideas?
What are the objects of censorship online? How do these objects get created?
The cyberspaces have long been celebrated as spaces of free speech and a site where the new public spheres can be traced. How do we understand censorship in relation to this popular idea? What are the invisible and often hidden forms of censorship that are a part of being online? Can we go beyond censorship on content and look at the very modalities of technology and the regulation that surrounds it?
Censorship is geared towards a very specific ideal. How do we deconstruct the various attempts by the State and other State-like agencies at censorship, to look at the aspirations and objectives of censorship? What are the many freedoms that acts of censorship online are seeking to curtail and shape?
With the onus of making meaning and consumption being transferred to the individual user online, the traditional notions of censorship as emerging from limited centralised sources are lost. How do we reconceptualise censorship in its many forms as a part of digital inter-personal relationships and transactions? What happens when the citizen becomes, not only an object of censorship but also an enfranchised source of censorship? How do such communities and networks of censorship operate and proliferate?