The Philosophy of Software: Code and Mediation in the Digital Age
By D. Berry. 2011
355 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Computational Theory and Mathematics, Safety Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c9d18d54c27e34bc1f0ba479a9b31b28dcff4453
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Cognitive Neuroscience
In Computational Theory and Mathematics
In Safety Research
- Hamid R. Ekbia
- Paul Dourish
- Ramón Alvarado
- Taina Bucher
- John F. Symons
- Sophie Bishop
- Joëlle Swart
- Annika Wærn
Citations in the corpus
- Can we trust Big Data? Applying philosophy of science to software (2016, background): “In his book The Philosophy of Software , David Berry (2011) defines software studies as a research field that includes disciplines as broad as platform studies , media archaeology , and media theory , all of which focus on the development, use, and historicity of hardware, operating systems, and even ”
- Big data, bigger dilemmas: A critical review (2015, methodology): “…hand, drawing an historical parallel with “the domestication of human mind that took place with pen and paper,” argue that the shift doesn’t have to be dehumanizing: “Rather than a method of thinking with eyes and hand, we would have a method of thinking with eyes and screen” (Berry, 2011, p. 22).”
- Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook (2012, background): “The relatively new field of software studies (Berry, 2011; Chun, 2011; Fuller, 2008; Kitchin and Dodge, 2011 ) usefully directs attention to the ways in which software functions as a sociotechnical actor capable of influencing users’ practices and experiences on the Web.”
- Algorithms and their others: Algorithmic culture in context (2016, background): “…in the form of ‘‘source code,’’ the human-readable expressions of program behavior that are the primary focus of pro-grammers’ productive attentions, it has perhaps been particular by those working under the umbrella of ‘‘critical code studies’’ (see, e.g., Berry, 2011; Montford et al., 2012).”