{"id":164290,"date":"2013-10-01T18:27:08","date_gmt":"2013-10-01T21:27:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/?p=164290"},"modified":"2015-02-25T17:24:22","modified_gmt":"2015-02-25T20:24:22","slug":"the-human-ark-in-a-deluge-of-data-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/the-human-ark-in-a-deluge-of-data-2\/","title":{"rendered":"The human ark in a deluge of data"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"074-077_microsoft_208-1\"NELSON PROVAZI<\/span>Published in June 2013<\/em><\/p>\n

For certain scientists, the Gordian knot in\u00a0developing their theories is that they require\u00a0ever more data and that new ideas\u00a0cannot be tested due to a lack of equipment\u00a0or technology. For others, such as\u00a0genomics researchers and astronomers, their anguish\u00a0is due precisely to an overabundance: data\u00a0are collected so quickly that they overwhelm\u00a0the ability to analyze, validate and store the information.\u00a0To address this flood of information,\u00a0eScience, a tool that aims to increase our ability\u00a0to analyze the large volumes of data generated\u00a0by research, involves creating software capable\u00a0of handling the information collected.<\/p>\n

FAPESP and Microsoft sponsored the 2013\u00a0Latin American eScience Workshop last month\u00a0in S\u00e3o Paulo to discuss the development of this\u00a0tool. \u201cSpace telescopes, genetic sequencing machines,\u00a0and particle accelerators are all generating\u00a0unprecedented volumes of data. To deal with this\u00a0phenomenon and allow scientists to manipulate\u00a0and share data, we need various types of computer\u00a0science technologies and tools that will\u00a0allow us to carry out scientific research faster\u00a0and with greater impact,\u201d explains Tony Hey,\u00a0Vice President of Microsoft Research.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe have high expectations for eScience. If\u00a0we learn how to use it properly, it can support\u00a0major advances not only in research, but in how\u00a0scientific research is carried out,\u201d says Carlos\u00a0Henrique de Brito Cruz, scientific director of\u00a0FAPESP, at the opening of the workshop, when he\u00a0announced that the institution intends to create a\u00a0program to support eScience research soon. \u201cWe\u00a0are convinced that one of FAPESP\u2019s important\u00a0roles is to be at the forefront of innovation and\u00a0knowledge, and we believe supporting research\u00a0in eScience is very important, not only because\u00a0its application to areas such as the environment\u00a0is unmistakable, but also because of its great potential\u00a0in the humanities, for example,\u201d says Celso\u00a0Lafer, president of FAPESP. Proof of this concept\u00a0is that the workshop was closed with a speech by\u00a0historian Chad Gaffield, President of the Social\u00a0Sciences and Humanities Research Council of\u00a0Canada (SSHRC), for whom the great question\u00a0of the technological age is determining what\u00a0makes us human.<\/p>\n

Specialists believe that Brazil cannot remain\u00a0on the sidelines of this movement, which seeks\u00a0to transform research practices through computational\u00a0thinking using scientific instruments\u00a0driven by computers that transform the instruments\u00a0into universal amplifiers. The idea might\u00a0not seem so new: remember Darwin and his network\u00a0of correspondents. However, whereas scientists\u00a0worked alone or with a few colleagues in\u00a0the past, the idea is that from now on, they can\u00a0work on projects with hundreds of colleagues\u00a0anywhere in the world in international networks\u00a0of collaborators.<\/p>\n

The attendance of a group of 54 graduate students\u00a0from Europe, North America, Latin America\u00a0(including Brazil), Asia and Africa gave the\u00a0workshop a youthful, globalized feel. The students,\u00a0who were mostly master\u2019s or PhD students,\u00a0were chosen from among 240 applicants\u00a0from around the world who participated in the\u00a0event\u2019s selection process. For example, the Indian\u00a0bioinformatician Angana Chakraborty, a PhD\u00a0candidate at the Indian Statistical Institute in\u00a0Calcutta, works on developing new algorithms\u00a0capable of exploiting the \u201cintelligence\u201d of machines\u00a0to speed up the process of analyzing gene\u00a0sequences.<\/p>\n

This type of research, notes Hey, shows that\u00a0we will need to restructure scientific culture to\u00a0integrate biological, physical, and social sciences\u00a0into engineering, creating an interdisciplinary\u00a0movement that brings together the creation and\u00a0use of knowledge. Amid all of this change, the\u00a0researcher notes, the focus must be on issues\u00a0such as ethics, privacy and cybersecurity. \u201cImportant\u00a0advances in science need to be placed\u00a0in a larger social context by the humanities and\u00a0the arts,\u201d says Hey.<\/p>\n

In the talk Big Data, Digital Humanities and the\u00a0New Knowledge Environments of the 21st Century,\u00a0Canadian Chad Gaffield defended the centrality\u00a0of the humanities in these new times because\u00a0these areas are responsible for the ideas, methods\u00a0and professionals that affect the industries\u00a0whose primary input is the knowledge that comes\u00a0from the \u201chard sciences.\u201d \u201cThe new innovation\u00a0model integrates technological invention in a\u00a0social context and therefore increases the need\u00a0for and value of research on individual groups\u00a0and societies,\u201d explains the researcher.<\/p>\n

\"074-077_microsoft_208-2\"NELSON PROVAZI<\/span>For this historian, understanding technology is\u00a0understanding human thought and behavior, or\u00a0why we do what we do and what makes us change\u00a0or remain the same. According to him, research\u00a0shows that technology is not just another tool,\u00a0contrary to what Bill Gates said a decade ago.\u00a0Technologies and cultures mingle and interact\u00a0to determine economic growth and competitiveness,\u00a0social cohesion and engagement, as well as\u00a0quality of life.<\/p>\n

Gaffield warns that as a society, we have to\u00a0recognize that we must understand the social\u00a0and human implications of our discoveries, even\u00a0if they appear to be primarily scientific or technological.\u00a0We have to understand the impacts of\u00a0innovation, whether they are related to ethical\u00a0issues, such as the use of stem cells, or human\u00a0behavior, as in the case of the recent economic\u00a0crisis, which was the result of individual, financial\u00a0and governmental choices.<\/p>\n

\u201cRecognizing this complexity is realizing that\u00a0building the future is not a matter of magic pills,\u00a0miracle drugs, technological fixes and easy solutions.\u00a0The meaning of a technology now depends\u00a0on its relationship with its environment.\u00a0Society matters, and technology depends on the\u00a0context, which brings meaning to new ways of\u00a0doing things,\u201d the historian says.<\/p>\n

Thus, he notes further, the Internet economy\u00a0no longer belongs to the builders of the framework\u00a0that made the digital age possible. The torch\u00a0has been passed on: the future now belongs, at\u00a0least equally, to those who use the technology,\u00a0including creative people; content providers;\u00a0servers; and everyone who has learned to share\u00a0pictures, sounds, ideas and concepts digitally.<\/p>\n

Gaffield explains, \u201cJust look at the interdisciplinary\u00a0collaborations between philosophers,\u00a0biologists, engineers and artists to interpret the\u00a0ethical, legal and aesthetic dimensions of biomedical\u00a0technologies; geographers, together with\u00a0demographers and economists, rethinking agriculture\u00a0policies; entrepreneurs identifying critical\u00a0issues to be researched by sustainable development\u00a0scholars.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Canadian then proposed a new way of\u00a0thinking about the technological age in which\u00a0we live. \u201cA new way to understand these profound\u00a0changes is to rethink what it is to be human,\u201d\u00a0he says. If the humanities are to assume\u00a0this task, they must also be suited to the times.\u00a0Gaffield argues that we must redefine teaching\u00a0and research. In projects that he undertakes with\u00a0his group, the old distinctions between pure and\u00a0applied research and between strategic and presumably\u00a0non-strategic research are being abandoned.\u00a0His group also rejects any hierarchy of\u00a0types of research activities in terms of prestige\u00a0or importance.<\/p>\n

\"074-077_microsoft_208-3\"NELSON PROVAZI<\/span>The same applies to expanding academic contributions\u00a0beyond the familiar emphasis on articles\u00a0in scholarly journals or books, including\u00a0various forms of knowledge mobilization on and\u00a0off campus. According to the researcher, research\u00a0must be redefined from an epistemology of specialization\u00a0to \u201cmultiple epistemologies\u201d; the digital\u00a0humanities are now asking themselves how\u00a0one can interpret 1 million books.<\/p>\n

Until recently, notes Gaffield, humanities scholars\u00a0thought that sharing their knowledge with\u00a0non-experts amounted to lowering themselves.\u00a0Today\u2019s academics recognize that effective communication\u00a0beyond specialized groups is a complex\u00a0rhetorical challenge. New professors are\u00a0specializing in using the potential offered by\u00a0the digital age. Thus, in addition to writing for\u00a0colleagues and students, more and more scholars\u00a0now provide audiences with online courses,\u00a0podcasts and social media content to disseminate\u00a0information, stimulate debate and advance\u00a0knowledge.<\/p>\n

The researcher believes that in the future, students\u00a0will no longer see a dividing line between\u00a0working in the humanities and technology. As a\u00a0result of new networks and access to information,\u00a0undergraduate degrees are quickly\u00a0becoming research degrees, at least\u00a0at universities that want to prepare\u00a0their students for the challenges of\u00a0this century.<\/p>\n

Gaffield believes that, until recently,\u00a0the dominant global flow occurred\u00a0in one direction, with former\u00a0colonies and developing countries\u00a0looking to metropolises to lead research\u00a0efforts and educate their best\u00a0students. Now, flows are multinational\u00a0and not clearly distributed.\u00a0The leaders of the old, prestigious\u00a0institutions know that they can be\u00a0left behind. At the same time, new\u00a0talent and knowledge developing\u00a0in other regions can help to build\u00a0societies in the new era that are no\u00a0longer subject to the old circuit of\u00a0knowledge. In other words, according\u00a0to Gaffield, the internationalization\u00a0of education and research has\u00a0become the central feature of national strategies\u00a0in the twenty-first century.<\/p>\n

The researcher stresses the observation made\u00a0in the 2012 OECD Global Science Forum Report\u00a0on Data and Research Infrastructure for the\u00a0Social Sciences, entitled New Data for Understanding\u00a0the Human Condition: \u201cThe national\u00a0research support agencies need to collaborate\u00a0internationally to provide resources to researchers\u00a0in order to foster the necessary potential and\u00a0develop new methods for understanding the\u00a0opportunities and limitations offered by new\u00a0forms of data and technologies, which will allow\u00a0them to keep up in important research areas.\u201d\u00a0Among the key issues, insists Gaffield, is\u00a0the discovery of what makes us human. \u201cThis\u00a0is the question that has never been answered\u00a0adequately and is at the center of this new era\u00a0in which we live,\u201d he warns.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Workshop discusses potential of eScience","protected":false},"author":24,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[165],"tags":[],"coauthors":[117],"class_list":["post-164290","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-humanities"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/164290","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/24"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=164290"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/164290\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=164290"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=164290"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=164290"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revistapesquisa.fapesp.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=164290"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}