Bibliographic record
Abstract
To write of digital indigeneity or digital Natives is to confront the fact that, as Anishinaabe/Métis games designer Elizabeth LaPensée described in a cryptic but resonant tweet: “The Internet has been colonized” (2017 n.pag.). Popularized in the title of Marc Prensky's influential 2001 paper on educational reform, the term “digital Native” is defined by the OED as “A person born or brought up during the age of digital technology and so familiar with computers and the Internet from an early age.” Similarly, artifacts that are created with digital tools and so originate in a digital environment, having no analog equivalent, are called “born-digital” objects. The discursive colonialist violence of cyberspace as a territory inhabited by “indigenous” artifacts and “digital Natives” preempts efforts to discuss the digital creativity of actual Indigenous artists and communities. The digital then is a discursive realm where the profound conflicts generated by settler-colonialism continue to be played out. Indigenous digital interventions pose counter-discourses that oppose the violence of colonialist stereotypes, claiming digital storying as an extension of a form of expression and communication that Indigenous peoples have been using long before the advent of contemporary electronic technology. Indigenizing the digital medium constitutes a powerful message that Natives are not primitive, pre-technological, and “vanishing.” Living Indigenous cultures endure, witnessed by digital creations that work to preserve and disseminate tribal languages in genres of digital storying that perform traditional customs, beliefs, traditions, and values. Indigenous digital storying is a claim to rhetorical sovereignty that articulates Native self-determination through specific ways of knowing and being. Tribal epistemologies express a unique relationship with the world, a relation of interconnection that is performatively enacted in digital genres. This chapter offers close analyses of two dominant “digital Native” forms of storying that use the capabilities of virtual media in conjunction with traditional literary genres to instantiate Indigenous cosmologies: digital film-poems, videopoems, or “poemeos” exemplified by Heid Erdrich's Anishinaabe storying; and Elizabeth LaPensée's Anishinaabe/Métis storying through Indigenously-determined digital narrative or videogames.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".