MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W266181346

Some Reflections on the New Media and Lesser Used Languages

2012· article· en· W266181346 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDigital Communication and Language
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower (physics)HistoryTelecommunicationsMedia studiesAdvertisingBusinessEngineeringSociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scientific or technological inventions are neither good nor bad in themselves. It is how they are used by us that makes them either good or bad for humankind. Nuclear power immediately springs to mind as a classic example. Man's ability to fly is another. Aircraft can be used to transport people and goods from one place to another in double-quick time. Or, as we have witnessed all too often, aircraft can be used to drop bombs, kill and maim people, and destroy cities and towns.The development of information and communication technology (ICT) is undoubtedly the biggest scientific breakthrough in our lifetime. When I started working in the pre-computer age, international telephone calls, fax messages, airmail, telex, and even telegrams were the fastest way to communicate with people in other countries. Even with airmail, it could take a letter some weeks, rather than days, to reach its destination. Last night I sent an e-mail to a friend in Kalmykia in the North Caucuses. A reply was awaiting me this morning. To make a telephone call away from home or office in the pre-mobile age one had to use a public telephone and insert coins in the slot. We can now turn on our televisions and, thanks to satellites, enjoy a wide range of channels, some from the other side of the world. With Skype we can speak to and see our friends even if they live thousands of kilometres away on other continents.How these new media are affecting society is an ongoing process and one which no one can accurately forecast. It is said that the recent revolutions in Egypt and Libya were impossible to stop because the revolutionaries were able to communicate with each other and plot their next moves using text messages, e-mails, mobile phones, etc. One could suspect that neither President Mubarak nor Colonel Gaddafi foresaw what was coming down the tracks because of new communications technology.Language is an essential factor in practically all communications, be they oral, aural, or written. Modern media were developed primarily in highly developed countries in the West and in Japan. The first major consumers of these developments were again the more affluent developed counties, e.g. the USA Western Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, etc. A few languages were set to benefit from these media developments early on, especially English.David Crystal argued in his 2001 work Language and the Internet1 that, rather than technospeak becoming dominant on the internet, English-different varieties of it-was coming to dominate. I found evidence to support his arguments in some Russian universities. Whereas in the old Soviet period every effort was made to ensure that a wide range of foreign languages were studied, I found very striking evidence that English was becoming by far the most sought after foreign language. When I enquired about the reason for this, I was told that the internet was the answer. Many of the universities could not afford to buy a lot of books published in the West, but with the internet, students could access virtual libraries, resumes of new works, etc.-in English.A lot has changed over the past decade. On the internet site Internet World Stats we find that by 2010, English language websites had an estimated 536.6 million users, whereas Chinese websites then had 444.9 million users. A number of other languages (e.g. Spanish, Japanese, Portuguese, German etc.) also had many millions of users. Thousands of languages can now be found on the internet, including many lesser used ones.What will the long-term effect of all this have on lesser used (minority or regional) languages? Will modern media drive a series of nails into the coffins of these languages? In my opinion, this will depend almost entirely on how the users of these languages employ modern media. As already observed, technology is neither good nor bad in itself: everything depends on how we use it. All the evidence suggests that users of lesser used languages are making use-often in very creative ways-of new communications technologies. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it