Digital Archaeological Landscapes & Replicated Artifacts: Questions of Analytical & Phenomenological Authenticity & Ethical Policies in Cyber Archaeology
•Descargar como PPTX, PDF•
1 recomendación•909 vistas
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
Destacado
Similar a Digital Archaeological Landscapes & Replicated Artifacts: Questions of Analytical & Phenomenological Authenticity & Ethical Policies in Cyber Archaeology
Similar a Digital Archaeological Landscapes & Replicated Artifacts: Questions of Analytical & Phenomenological Authenticity & Ethical Policies in Cyber Archaeology (20)
Más de Ashley M. Richter
Más de Ashley M. Richter (14)
Último
Último (20)
Digital Archaeological Landscapes & Replicated Artifacts: Questions of Analytical & Phenomenological Authenticity & Ethical Policies in Cyber Archaeology
- 1. DIGITAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES & REPLICATED ARTIFACTS: QUESTIONS OF ANALYTICAL & PHENOMENOLOGICAL AUTHENTICITY & ETHICAL POLICIES IN CYBERARCHAEOLOGY
- 2. DIGITAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES & REPLICATED ARTIFACTS: QUESTIONS OF ANALYTICAL & PHENOMENOLOGICAL AUTHENTICITY & ETHICAL POLICIES IN CYBERARCHAEOLOGY I’m an Archaeologist who works in the field, in the lab, and with museums and cultural heritage sites on building pipelines for digital data capture, processing, visualization, and effective dissemination systems – I’m looking at the anthropology of the adoption of technological dissemination systems in archaeology
- 3. DIGITAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES & REPLICATED ARTIFACTS: QUESTIONS OF ANALYTICAL & PHENOMENOLOGICAL AUTHENTICITY & ETHICAL POLICIES IN CYBERARCHAEOLOGY
- 4. DIGITAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL LANDSCAPES & REPLICATED ARTIFACTS: QUESTIONS OF ANALYTICAL & PHENOMENOLOGICAL AUTHENTICITY & ETHICAL POLICIES IN CYBERARCHAEOLOGY Semantic Debate Qualifying Different Aspects I actually prefer Cultural Heritage Diagnostic Visualization or Space/Spatial Archaeology if we’re getting specific… 3D Digital Heritage
- 5. Ashley M. Richter Anthropological Archaeology arichter@ucsd.edu Vid Petrovic Computer Science and Engineering David Vanoni Department of Computer Science Dr. Steven M. Parish Department of Anthropology, Psychological Anthropology Dr. Falko Kuester Departments of Structural Engineering and Computer Science and Engineering Dr. Thomas E. Levy Department of Anthropology, Anthropological Archaeology Note the Exciting Interdisciplinarity Representing the Philosophical Confluences We’re going to Discuss Center of Interdisciplinary Science for Art, Architecture, and Archaeology (CISA3) University of California, San Diego Qualcomm Institute, the UCSD branch of the California Institute of Telecommunications and Information Technology
- 6. UBIQUITOUS DIGITIZATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE Archaeological excavations are the test beds of new diagnostic imaging techniques and methodologies.The CISA3 Laser Scanners at work in Jordan & Italy
- 7. Museums have become the training grounds for augmented reality systems. This is ARtifact – the CISA3 Augmented Reality System which presented its user study results in the poster hall this morning UBIQUITOUS DIGITIZATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE
- 8. Digitization of the past provides new ways to see and think about humanity. But while it heralds a new shiny epoch of data transparency and access, it also represents a series of ethical quandaries which are looming on civilization’s horizon which we ought to be discussing as we evolve our digital systems. If something can be perfectly digitally replicated, what need is there to keep the original? What role does this intangible digital copy or any tangible physical copies made from it via techniques like 3D printing mean in comparison to the original? What does transparent access to digital cultural heritage mean for an engaged present? FOR INSTANCE:
- 11. Investigative Projects in Florence, Jordan, Mongolia, Mexico, and back home in San Diego Balboa Park Petra & The Sites of the Wadi Faynan, Jordan Mongolia Palazzo Vecchio Projects for the Museo dell’Opera del Duomo
- 12. CULTURAL HERITAGE AS A PATH TOWARDS ADVANCING TECHNOLOGY AND SIMULTANEOUSLY IMPACTING LEGAL AND ETHICAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT But we need to be ready for where we’re heading …even if we don’t know exactly where we’re headed. We Can’t and Shouldn’t Build blindly without any blueprints and without engaging the public further STEM -- STEAM education Speaking @ IEEE Aerospace 2014 on this subject
- 13. LAYERED REALITIES IN DIGITAL INFRASTRUCTURES FOR VISUALIZATION AT CISA3 Built on a Digital Scaffold
- 14. We are refining the way we replicate space & contribute towards humanities indexical relationship with the past. What fits where, and how? - Visualization Makes Things Make Sense & Expand our Awareness & Analytical Potential – be it in Immersive Realities or Virtual Realities IN STRENGTHENING THE DIGITAL SCAFFOLD WITH EXPANDED AND ENHANCED VISUALIZATION METHODS….
- 15. THE CREATION OF REMOVED AUTHENTICITIES Building hetero-utopias: Do they enhance and make the past accessible? Or threaten the real space or artifact ? Shifts in phenomenological perception between authentic and copy?
- 16. REPRODUCTION OF ARTIFACTS If we can have a “perfectly” phenomenological digital copy- do we need to keep the original? We absolutely should keep everything if we can…but there is a storage space limit (physical & digital!) How do we access both effectively? Who should access and analyze these? Limitations of “trained” people (or will open access change this?)
- 17. NEW ERA OF “AUTHENTIC” AND AUTHENTIC COPIES OF ANTIQUITIES GAME CHANGER for: *Antiquities Trade/Collectors *Looting & Local Economies *Museum Replication Economics *Digital Access & Data Collection Quality Policies Science fiction TV writers guess that the authentic artifacts will continue to hold prestige
- 18. 3D PRINTING Expanding and Augmenting Perception of the Past- (Auras) Threatening the Original OR Allowing Access and Engagement? 3D Printed Artifacts by CISA3 Collaborator Cosmos Wenman
- 19. SCIENCE FICTION INCREASINGLY BECOMING SCIENTIFIC POSSIBILITY AND REALITY Star Trek Holodeck = Phenomenologically Accurate Spatial Reconstruction CISA3 building up immersive visualization systems for cultural heritage to make things like holodeck a reality Future possibility of Phenomenological Experience of Re-created Time? Questions of Programming Reliability & Variations?
- 20. If and when everyone can experience the past- what does this mean to their sense of self in time? • Globalism = awareness of space • Social Media/Internet= awareness of society • What happens when there is a global awareness of time and one’s place in it?
- 21. THE DANGERS OF DATA TRANSPARENCY & (QUALITY) SECURITY What does this transparency of data mean and how we create navigation systems that mediate bias and political agenda? Cultural heritage big data should remain a tool for preservation, analysis, and engagement, but not for politics and mis-information. Past Misuse Present Misuse, Misunderstanding & Sensationalism Dangers of the Augmente d Future
- 22. STRIKING A BALANCE IN THE MUSEUM The Digital as Enlightened Augmentation – for scholars and the public alike. Should augment but not replace The UCSD Exodus Exhibition & CURII Presentation
- 23. AUTOPUBLICATION Rapid Access = Publication Issues but also greater expansion of access, engagement, and potentially citizen science opportunities
- 24. A Democratized Past with Open Access- Challenges the Current Paradigm of Authoritarian Education and Historical Engagement – pushes for positive shifts (STEM -STEAM again)
- 25. DEALING WITH THE DATA AVALANCHE How much information is too much? And how do we find meaning (especially archaeological analytical meaning) from within it? Technology is rapidly allowing us to efficiently and cheaply do more and more…. Graph: M. Mansour
- 26. Conclusion: Constructs need to be meaningful & navigable Escher WikiCommons BUT:
- 30. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION! PLEASE COME MAKE FRIENDS- LARGER NETWORKS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL INFORMATION & VISUALIZATION SYSTEMS WILL ONLY SUSTAINABLY & EFFECTIVELY WORK THROUGH GLOBAL COLLABORATION
Notas del editor
- Change of Pace to talk a bit about Philosophy in the form of Archaeological Theory…
- Wanted to break down the Talk Title first especially as I won’t be talking about the specific sites I work with but rather the challenges and anticipated theoretical challenges that have arisen during the work of myself and my colleagues…
- This paper will outline recent policy and political concerns which have impacted the on-going interdisciplinary, collaborative development of cultural heritage diagnostic tools and methodologies, with emphasis on the need for technology to advance in and via cultural heritage despite its potential drawbacks, the notion of digitization removing authenticity from sites and artifacts, and the beautiful but dangerous notion of cultural heritage data transparency.
- Technology has invaded our perception of the past, and it is inevitably only going to become more entangled with humankind’s engagement and relationship with our history as time marches forward [1].
- As one of the teams on the forefront of cultural heritage visualization, the Center of Interdisciplinary Science for Art, Architecture, and Archaeology (CISA3) seek to anticipate the potential social and political ramifications of our work.
- We are…
- The visualization and information infrastructures under construction at CISA3 and others like it need to be designed with the ethics of the future in mind as well as the concerns of the present. These furthermore need to be the precursor towards the development of corresponding international policies regarding cultural heritage digitization. These merit substantial investigation, if not outright wariness. Digitization possesses vast benefits for cultural heritage analytics and beyond [2], but like any adventure into the unknown, unimagined perils await off the edges of the proverbial map, and we may indeed encounter some of these dragons. Each of our sites has involved new challenges in data collection, processing, and dissemination…
- Typically: the discipline of archaeology in particular is infamous for pillaging technological advancements and jimmy-rigging them to fit their purposes. But the growing shift in data informatics development towards technology geared specifically for application that provides the archaeological cultural heritage community with the unique opportunity to have its policies, purposes, and intents built into the system of data collection and dissemination as actively as the construction of the system might reverse engineer potential developments in the disparate fields related to cultural heritage [3].
- Similar to many of yourselves: CISA3 has been developing a larger digital infrastructure geared towards the effective and meaningful collation of cultural heritage data in visualization systems. Utilizing and expanding base line techniques for diagnostic imaging, it is creating a scientifically appropriate and reproducible pipeline which builds a visual digital scaffold of archaeological sites and cultural heritage monuments upon which to swathe all other forms of visual and semantic data, including on-going annotation by scholars and tourists and flexible data additions[4][5].
- Questions regarding the Future of Site Conservation Recent displays of our layered systems work to the Theoretical Archaeology Group and of our advancements in terrestrial laser scanning and cyberarachaeology to the National Science Foundation, were very well received but prompted a barrage of similar questions from the audiences which mirrored our own growing existential concerns. The most forceful among these being a prevalent concern that if one can fully digitize a site- what then does this mean for the real site? Our responses address the realities of the situation. As more and more aspects of our lives become wrapped up in the intangibility of cyber-realms- we, as a world culture, will have to face large questions of authenticity. Specifically, in a global society that is inevitably running out of physical space to live in, how important and efficient is it to physically preserve a past which it has also preserved digitally? And we may have to face the tragic possibility that the architectural and archaeological landscapes of the past might have to be converted or supplanted in order for the world to move forwards, that we cannot hoard everything without it inevitably hurting us. Cyberarchaeology, as an emerging, interdisciplinary tradition, must balance its push for the implementation and innovations of technologies, while simultaneously addressing the anthropological questions of this unfortunate predicament. The existential and practical arguments must be made clear for policy-makers so that as these questions of digital vs. physical become more and more predicated on a global scale- there are philosophic arguments that can be dialectically debated in order to decide what is comfortably best for a global community and how tangibly we hold onto the past in the future.
- Artifact Archives The potential for future technologies to perfect the spatial reproduction of sites is even more explicitly relevant for artifacts. Structure for light technologies and other modeling agencies make it far easier to replicate a small artifact then a wider landscape. It seems likely that this form of smaller scale completely accurate replication will occur first. The ability to perfectly replicate an artifact and store it digitally instead of physically then begs an important question with reference to the masses of collected and stored artifacts excavated and held in repositories all around the world: Do we keep them? As indicated above, we are running out of space on planet earth, and we may have to eventually make some difficult decisions regarding what cultural heritage artifacts to digitize and keep and which artifacts we are going to digitize and throw away
- It seems inevitable that certain antiquities will be prized beyond others and therefore treasured- this is indeed the prevailing means by which many of the world’s artifacts have been kept until the present day. But given our self-awareness of our need to diligently record the past, and the technical ability to increasingly keep track of more and more of it- we will likely one day hit a threshold point where we are no longer preserving, but hoarding. And when this becomes evident, we will have to find an ethical way to ensure that the digitization of artifacts takes place prior to any potential destruction.
- The digital copy in a virtual environment is quickly and easily perceived as a “copy.” Likewise, a digital copy in an augmented reality situation is still a “copy.” But what happens to humanity’s perception of the authenticity of a site or artifact when it can be physically replicated in physical space or in something quite like it. How much of our phenomenological perception of this seemingly real “artifact” is altered by our awareness of its lack of authenticity- and will this play a role in the diagnostic analysis of 3D printed artifacts.
- The notion of phenomenologically appropriate systems like the Star Trek holo-deck under construction at CISA3 and other places have long been proposed by science fiction annals and if the past century and a half of industrious and seemingly impossible technological advancement has taught us nothing, it is that sky is the absolute limit when it comes to mankind’s capacity to create the systems which it envisions. Therefore if a recreated space is possible without significant hyperrealistic disconnectivity [10], could not a recreated time be possible- and if this is the case, what then would it mean to the modernist mindset to be able to venture a globalist perspective not just on the space of the globe, but on its temporal sequence[11]? And how can one avoid the potentiality of overly hetero-utopic creations of the past dominating these recreations? The existential quandaries implicit within distortions to one’s perception of self as part of the wider weltanshauung must not be overlooked as cultural heritage technological systems seek to create ways to visualize time and space, ostensibly for cyberarchaeological purposes[12][13].
- Data Transparency & Security The potentiality for systems to develop which display a navigable visualization of all immediately relevant cultural heritage data begs further investigation into exactly what this transparency of data can mean and how the ways to navigate it must be implicitly void of bias and political agenda. We need to ensure that systems to disseminate cultural heritage big data remain a tool for preservation, analysis, and engagement, but not for politics and mis-information.
- Digitization and data transparency poses considerable possible problems for the fate of the museum. Though it seems unlikely that social engagement of the past via the museum will ultimately slacken, a balance needs to be struck between the digital and the physical information a museum displays. This is inherently where the digital should not replace the physical. The digital should augment the physical that is already on display. Recent cyberarchaological exhibits put on by CISA3 featuring a combination of archaeological artifacts and digital displays of collated visual data examined the borderline between usage. The digital serves to enhance the physical, but in these settings should enhance physical collections through the revelation of contextual information otherwise not immediately evident, in particular the full archaeological pipeline that resulted in its presence in the museum. This is the beauty of a sprawling cross-referenced informatics system like that under design at CISA3.
- Transparency of digital information also presents an important quandary regarding its immediacy of publication. Often archaeological works go unknown for years and occasionally decades while its excavators pursue their own publication of the data. While immediate auto-publication in a virtual system will allow for rapid access to incoming information and prevent against it ever going un-published, as indeed, is sometimes the case- it also indicates the potential for other players to publish analysis on on-going work prior to the original cultural heritage investigator’s interpretation.
- Conclusion CISA3 is developing its layered reality systems for visualizing the data avalanche of cultural heritage data with the ethics of the above situations in mind. In building a virtual system comparable to a meaningfully navigable literary Library of Babel as envisioned by Jorge Luis Borges[19], it is hoping to push the discussion on the ethical policies which need to be imagined and evaluated for inclusion into a successful future for cultural heritage. Borges’ Library of Babel envisions the possibility of transparency of all available data sets in an imagined library whose information is ultimately inaccessible because its librarians do not know how to access it, leading to much political turmoil among the librarians. Evolving technologies are inevitably creating a chaotic library of disparate data sets which need to be drawn together, site by site, archive by archive the world over in order to effectively utilize them for thick descriptive analytical purposes[20]. But in building this system, it is important that the problems inherent with navigating the library and the repercussions of its digital existence be evaluated and built into the system and the world order which possesses it. This paper was intended to spark debate and raise the conglomerate of issues international policies regarding site conservation, artifact preservation, and data security need to be addressing as international collaborative conferences like the Digital Heritage International Congress go forward.