You have reached the end of the internet.
Please turn off the lights before you leave.

OK, perhaps things are not so dramatic but you have definitely reached the end of my lifestream. As a chronological collection of my digital activities and interests, my lifestream hopefully conveys a sense of my many disembodied online presences. These posthuman selves of mine are aggregated in the lifestream, but although the end result is less fragmented than my sense of online selfhood, I question whether it forms a coherent whole that is fully representative of who I am. I see it more as a representation of who I was supposed to be for the needs of this course; and if it weren’t for the inclusion of blog posts and comments, my lifestream would be haunted by a number of voiceless digital re-embodiments of myself that keep feeding it events like bots or automatons. On the positive side, however, this is an image of me as producer and information disseminator, not as a passive spectator in a classroom or a member of the “sit and watch” culture. In this respect the lifestream was a powerful motivator for participation, exploration and sharing.

My lifestream also reflects the multimodal nature of contemporary digital forms of human expression as well as the various literacies and transliteracies I had developed prior to course and those I acquired during these twelve weeks. My documented use of a plethora of Web 2.0 tools and services is indicative of how digital technology augments human abilities (with the tools acting as cybernetic prostheses) and reveals the value of using a wide range of tools (blogging and microblogging, social bookmarking and photo/video sharing, synchronous and asynchronous CMC, discussion forum, etc.). From the course designer’s point of view, these tools support a holistic approach at socially constructive learning and help students build a strong sense of an online community, while from the student’s point of view they facilitate different aspects of learning (reflection, communication, production, commenting and meta-commenting, sharing, etc.) and cater to different types of learning. Digital tool literacy emerges as an important asset for 21st century learners, equally important to linguistic competence, in that it enables interaction with the course materials and mechanisms.

A final thought: as a metaphor, the concept of the lifestream has one major drawback, the fact that it triggers images or horizontal movement. A retrospective look at my feeds, made me think more of digging for knowledge than of flowing towards it. The major themes of the course (digital utopias and dystopias, virtual communities and cyborg and uncanny pedagogies) keep recurring (as also evidenced by the tag cloud) but every week they are probed even deeper as interconnections are made and concepts are examined. In this respect, the lifestream offers proof of actual learning and therefore is invaluable.

a) Efforts to foresee how our cyber future will be haven’t really progressed a lot in the past few decades (at least as far as pop culture is concerned) and lack originality. Some of the key issues come straight from Philip K. Dick novels of the 60’s and Gibson’s Neuromancer (1984). Also, in the age of wireless communications, we probably need a more up-to-date, less stereotyped visualisation of cyberspace, be it dystopic or utopic.

b) Technology is giving robots and machines human traits (synthesized voices, anthropomorphic appearance, intelligence, existential blues etc.) and slowly turning humans into “robots”. Could it be that in all those “rise of the machines” dystopic cyber futures, we are the machines that revolt?

* this post was written while listening to “We Are the Robots” by Kraftwerk.