Putting on my hat as someone trained as a political historian: Tom's point on the divergent meaning is an interesting one. I've enjoyed this thread. As I understand the derivation of transparency in a U.S. political context, the origins lie with a metaphor centered on doors and windows, open versus closed. Traditional machine politics -- Tammany Hall, smoke-filled back rooms, handshake deals out of sight of voters, reporters, etc. -- is obscured to the external observer by walls. Transparency here is akin to the Progressive-Era notion of a window permitting light to stream through. What you're making permeable to vision is the barrier external scrutiny, revealing the innerworkings. In government, optimal transparency means you're supposed to see the workings as they're in motion, but you are still outside the structure. I'd liken Henri Bergson's thirties-era theorization of an "open society" as the "glass-bottom boat model of democracy." In a truly open society, the citizen can see all the fishies but doesn't have to get wet. --AMM -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Andrew Meade McGee Corcoran Department of History University of Virginia PO Box 400180 - Nau Hall Charlottesville, VA 22904 On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Thomas Haigh <thaigh@computer.org> wrote:
It is actually the policy version of “transparency” that prompted me to remember the quote. (Thanks to all those who responded). Journalism sociologist/historian Michael Schudson from Columbia University was visiting our Social Studies of Information group at UWM last week and speaking on the “Origins of Transparency” which he located in the 1960s/70s developments of the Freedom of Information Act, public disclosure of EPA impact statements, etc.
However, contrary to Matthew’s point, it seemed to me that the meanings are actually opposite in the two areas. Something that is “transparent” in CS is invisible – you look right through it without seeing it. In the political sense, a “transparent” process is one where all the details are visible to the public.
It seems to me that the CS sense is a more intuitive use of the metaphor. Making a political process transparent would literally mean that you see straight through it to whatever is behind it, but also that the process itself is invisible. When we talk about making the workings of government transparent the metaphor somehow seems to have mutated to mean the opposite.
Tom
*From:* matthew.battles@gmail.com [mailto:matthew.battles@gmail.com] *On Behalf Of *Matthew Battles *Sent:* Friday, October 31, 2014 5:26 AM *To:* Nabeel Siddiqui *Cc:* James Cortada; thaigh@computer.org; sigcis *Subject:* Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Virtuality versus transprency -- trying to locate a quote about the difference
All this does have me wondering about the internet-and-society field's interest in, and advocacy for, a certain kind of "transparency" in civil discourse shares lineage with transparency in the comp-sci sense, to the effect that transparency (in the sense of openness and publicness of bureaucratic or deliberative decision-making process) is a quality that can be produced and modified computationally. There is an ideological disposition there to see government as a kind of social UTM upon which different norms, beliefs, and commitments may be run like so many lines of code...
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Nabeel Siddiqui <nasiddiqui@email.wm.edu> wrote:
Dear Tom,
I believe this is from an old 1978 poster that IBM released dealing with virtual memory. It is sometimes attributed to Scott Hammer, who worked at William and Mary before I got here as a graduate student. Here is him explaining that this is the first time he saw it: http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/92q3/seeit.html
Hope that helps.
Sincerely,
Nabeel Siddiqui
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 11:02 AM, James Cortada <jcortada@umn.edu> wrote:
By the way, Mike is alive and well. Mike can you pipe in and confirm. This is a fabulous insight and expression. It should be quoted frequently!!
Cheers.
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:24 AM, David Hemmendinger <hemmendd@union.edu> wrote:
I heard it from Mike Williams, when he had his professor of computer science hat on! Here's how he said it:
If it is there, but you can't see it, it is transparent. If it isn't there, but you see it, it is virtual. If it is there, and you see it, it is real.
For the purposes of symmetry, what if something is not there and you can't see it?
If it isn't there and you can't see it, you're ok.
David _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members@sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change your subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members
--
James W. Cortada
Senior Research Fellow
Charles Babbage Institute
University of Minnesota
jcortada@umn.edu
608-274-6382
_______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members@sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change your subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members
_______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members@sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change your subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members
--
matthew battles associate director, metaLAB (at) harvard <http://metalab.harvard.edu/> fellow, berkman center for internet and society <http://cyber.law.harvard.edu>
twitter = @matthewbattles <http://twitter.com/matthewbattles>
[image: Image removed by sender.]
_______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members@sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change your subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members
