Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
disruptive_entrepreneurship [2019/09/10 12:49] nathanairplane |
disruptive_entrepreneurship [2023/11/11 16:29] (current) ntnsndr [Phase three: Disruptionism] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| **MDST 2011** | **MDST 2011** | ||
| - | *Disruption* has become a hallowed achievement in contemporary business culture, to the point that we forget it used to be a bad thing. What, exactly, do entrepreneurs, investors, and internet evangelists mean by the word? What have been the great disruptions of our time, and who wound up disrupted? | + | *Disruption* has become a hallowed achievement in contemporary business culture. What, exactly, do entrepreneurs, investors, and Internet evangelists mean by the word? What have been the great disruptions of our time, and who wound up disrupted? |
| + | |||
| + | This course is a hands-on exploration of disruption as a practice and a theory, which goes to the heart of contemporary society. We will encounter disruptions in the world around us and devise some of our own. Students should expect to enlarge their entrepreneurial repertoires, but also to experience fresh trepidation about disruption's possible consequences. | ||
| - | This course is a hands-on exploration of disruptive media cultures, intended for entrepreneurs, critics, and activists alike. We will encounter disruptions in the world around us and devise some of our own. Students should expect to enlarge their entrepreneurial repertoires, but also to experience fresh trepidation about entrepreneurship's possible effects. | ||
| ## Instructor | ## Instructor | ||
| Line 11: | Line 12: | ||
| Nathan Schneider ("Nathan" or "Professor Schneider") | Nathan Schneider ("Nathan" or "Professor Schneider") | ||
| <nathan.schneider@colorado.edu> | <nathan.schneider@colorado.edu> | ||
| - | Armory 1B24, meetings by appointment via email | + | Armory Building, 1B24 |
| + | Office hours: Wednesday at 3-5 p.m., or by appointment ([[:email_etiquette|via email]]) | ||
| Website: [nathanschneider.info](https://nathanschneider.info) | Website: [nathanschneider.info](https://nathanschneider.info) | ||
| + | |||
| ## Objectives | ## Objectives | ||
| - | * Gain familiarity with discourses surrounding media entrepreneurship and disruptive innovation | + | * Gain familiarity with discourses surrounding media entrepreneurship and disruptive innovation |
| - | * Encounter the social impacts and enablers of economic disruptions | + | * Encounter the social impacts of economic disruptions |
| - | * Cultivate habits of ethical entrepreneurship in media economies | + | * Cultivate habits of ethical entrepreneurship in media economies |
| ## The business model | ## The business model | ||
| - | The course consists of six evaluated components; three are consecutive and three are ongoing. | + | The course consists of six evaluated components; three are consecutive "phases" and three are ongoing. |
| ### Phase one: Report | ### Phase one: Report | ||
| - | *20 points* | + | *20 percent* |
| - | Early in the course, each student produces a brief, researched report on a past disruption. Write an internal memo by an employee of an incumbent organization as it comes to terms with the disruption taking place. Explain it clearly to colleagues and suggest possible responses that the incumbent organization might take. The report should be between 1,200 and 1,500 words, formatted and written appropriately (and creatively) in the guise of an official document from the organization. Evaluation criteria are as follows: | + | Early in the course, each student produces a brief, researched report on a past disruption. Write an internal memo by an employee of an incumbent organization as it comes to terms with a potentially threatening disruption taking place. Examples of incumbent organizations include large corporations, governance agencies, and cultural institutions. Explain the disruption clearly to colleagues and suggest possible responses that their organization might take. The report should be between 1,200 and 1,500 words, formatted and written appropriately (and creatively) in the guise of an official document from the organization. Evaluation criteria are as follows: |
| * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, and creativity | * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, and creativity | ||
| * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive | * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive | ||
| - | * Evidence of self-directed research, including at least two peer-reviewed academic sources, using [[citation standards|appropriate citation]] | + | * Evidence of self-directed research beyond assigned materials, including at least two peer-reviewed [[scholarly sources]] and relevant market data, using [[citation standards|appropriate citation]] |
| - | * Meaningful engagement with at least two assigned materials from the course | + | * Meaningful [[engagement with assigned sources|engagement]] with at least two assigned sources from the course |
| ### Phase two: Presentation | ### Phase two: Presentation | ||
| - | *20 points* | + | *20 percent* |
| - | The second project for the course is a presentation to the class about the effects of a disruptive innovation. Students should interview at least two people (outside the CU community) with direct experience of having their way of life or livelihood challenged by the disruption. In the presentation, students will share interviewees' insights, alongside an explanation of the nature of the disruption and its broader context. This assignment is conducted in pairs, who will present 10-to-12 minute presentations with slides. Each presentation should cover a unique topic. Evaluation criteria are as follows: | + | The second project for the course is a presentation to the class about the human impacts of a disruptive innovation. Each student should interview at least one person (outside the CU community) whose way of life or livelihood has been threatened by the disruption. In the presentation, students will share interviewees' insights, alongside an explanation of the nature of the disruption and its broader context. This assignment is conducted in groups of 3-4, who will present 10-minute presentations with slides. |
| + | |||
| + | Each presentation should cover a unique topic. Evaluation criteria are as follows: | ||
| * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, and creativity | * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, and creativity | ||
| - | * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive | + | * Comprehension of the disruption, including its history, market dynamics, and what qualifies it as disruptive |
| - | * Evidence of self-directed research, including at least two peer-reviewed academic sources, and [[citation standards|appropriate citation]] | + | * Insightful interviews in disrupted communities by each student (duly credited), along with contextual data on social impacts |
| - | * Meaningful engagement with at least one assigned material from the course | + | * Meaningful [[engagement with assigned sources|engagement]] with at least two assigned sources from the course |
| ### Phase three: Whitepaper | ### Phase three: Whitepaper | ||
| - | *20 points* | + | *25 percent* |
| - | At the conclusion of the course, students produce a [[whitepaper]] outlining an original proposal for a disruption involving networked digital media. In between 1,500 and 1,800 words, describe the nature of the disruption, its economic and technological context, and the means of its financing and growth. Be sure to also consider its potential social effects. | + | At the conclusion of the course, students produce a [[whitepaper]] outlining an original proposal for a disruption involving networked digital media. It can advance business, social, or policy goals. In between 1,500 and 1,800 words, describe the nature of the disruption, its economic and technological context, and the means of its financing and growth. Be sure to also consider its potential social effects. |
| - | Students will twice present their ideas to the class as a two-minute pitch with one informative but parsimonious slide---first as a practice run for feedback and second as a peer-judged class contest. | + | Students will twice present their ideas to the class---first as a one-minute practice run for feedback and, second, as a one-minute pitch with one parsimonious slide. |
| Evaluation criteria are as follows: | Evaluation criteria are as follows: | ||
| - | * In-class pitches, including practice run and pitch contest | ||
| * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, and creativity | * Completion of the assignment with clarity, stylistic correctness, and creativity | ||
| * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive | * Comprehension of the disruption and explanation of what qualifies it as disruptive | ||
| - | * Evidence of self-directed research, including at least two peer-reviewed academic sources, and [[citation standards|appropriate citation]], along with meaningful engagement with at least two assigned materials from the course | + | * Evidence of self-directed research beyond assigned materials, including at least two peer-reviewed [[scholarly sources]] and relevant market data, using APA citation |
| + | * Meaningful [[engagement with assigned sources|engagement]] with at least two assigned sources from the courses | ||
| + | * Clear, compelling in-class pitch with an elegant slide | ||
| - | ### Class participation | + | ### Quizzes |
| - | *15 points* | + | *15 percent* |
| - | All students should contribute to class discussions as active listeners, question-askers, commentators, and critics. Respectful disagreement with the instructor and fellow students is welcome and encouraged. Students will also pitch their own disruptive ideas to the class. Attendance will not be taken formally, but meaningful participation is not compatible with absence. Be prepared to discuss each week's assigned materials by the start of that week's first meeting. | + | Quizzes based on readings and lectures will occur at random intervals during class using Canvas. Quizzes are meant to be taken individually, in class, without referencing external materials. Deviating from these norms will be regarded as a violation of the campus Honor Code. |
| - | Evaluation takes place at the midterm and the end of the course, with each evaluation period weighted equally. Evaluation is based on the following: | ||
| - | * Comments and questions that advance the conversation, with evidence of listening to others and engagement with assigned materials | + | ### Class participation |
| - | * In-class pitch exercises assigned the meeting before | + | *10 percent* |
| - | * Flash quizzes at random intervals | + | |
| + | All students should contribute to class discussions as active listeners, question-askers, commentators, and critics. Respectful disagreement with the instructor and fellow students is welcome and encouraged. Attendance will not be taken formally, but meaningful participation is not compatible with absence. Be prepared to discuss each week's assigned materials by the start of that week's first meeting. | ||
| - | ### Online participation | + | Evaluation takes place at the midterm and the end of the course, with each evaluation period weighted equally. Evaluation is based on: |
| - | *15 points* | + | * Contributing comments and questions that advance the conversation |
| + | * Evidence of listening to others | ||
| + | * [[engagement with assigned sources|Engagement]] with assigned materials | ||
| - | Each week, students should engage with the assigned materials by using the [[Hypothesis]] annotation platform, where technically possible. Both quality and quantity will be taken into account. Annotations for each week's assigned materials are due by the start of that week's first meeting. Evaluation takes place at the midterm and the end of the course, with each evaluation period weighted equally. | + | ### Entrepreneurial events |
| + | *10 percent* | ||
| - | It may not be necessary to read every assigned word with equal care. Expect to read effectively but strategically. Evaluation criteria are as follows: | + | Part of the course is participation in two synchronous events in the Boulder entrepreneurial community---at least one on campus. Within 24 hours after each event, submit a discussion post in Canvas about your experience there. With this, include proof of participation (such as a photo of yourself there or of you and your screen). Evaluation criteria are as follows: |
| - | * Volume of annotations and distribution throughout assigned materials; annotate every (annotatable) reading at least once and go deep on at least one of the readings each week | + | * Compelling proof of attendance at the event |
| - | * Evidence of reflection and insight | + | * Insightful, 300-500 word reflection on an aspect of each event |
| - | * Engagement with fellow students' annotations | + | * [[engagement with assigned sources|Engagement]] with at least one of the assigned materials in each analysis |
| - | ### Entrepreneurial events | + | Entrepreneurship-related events can be found at the campus [Innovation & Entrepreneurship Initiative website](https://www.colorado.edu/innovate/events), [Silicon Flatirons](https://siliconflatirons.org/events/), and [Meetup](https://www.meetup.com/cities/us/co/boulder/events/). |
| - | *10 points* | + | |
| - | Part of the course is participation in two live events in CU's and Boulder's entrepreneurial community. Before the end of the day after each event, submit a discussion post in Canvas about your experience there. With this, include proof of participation (such as a photo of yourself there) or a documented, pre-approved excuse for non-attendance. Evaluation criteria are as follows: | ||
| - | * Compelling proof of attendance at: | ||
| - | - The [Innovation & Entrepreneurship Fall Kickoff](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/innovation-entrepreneurship-fall-campus-kickoff-buff-big-idea-challenge-tickets-58042640099) or the [New Venture Challenge](http://www.colorado.edu/nvc/) kickoff | ||
| - | - A second event, on or off campus, of your choosing | ||
| - | * Insightful, 300-500 word analysis of an aspect of each event | ||
| - | * Engagement with at least one of the assigned materials in each analysis | ||
| - | |||
| - | Entrepreneurship-related events can be found at the campus [Innovation & Entrepreneurship Initiative website](https://www.colorado.edu/innovate/events), [Silicon Flatirons](https://siliconflatirons.org/events/), [Startup Digest](https://www.startupdigest.com/digests/boulder-denver), and [Meetup](https://www.meetup.com/cities/us/co/boulder/events/). | ||
| ### Grading | ### Grading | ||
| - | Based on the stated point structure, grades will be awarded as follows: A (94-100), A- (90-93), B+ (87-89), B (83-86), B- (80-82), C+ (77-79), C (73-76), C- (70-72), D+ (67-69), D (63-66), D- (60-62), F (0-59). The minimum passing grade is 60 for undergraduates and 70 for graduate students. | + | Grading will follow the expectations stated in this syllabus. |
| + | |||
| + | If you need an extension on any assignment, consult your instructor ahead of time. Late projects will be penalized 5 percentage points per day. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Plagiarism and similar lapses in [[academic honesty]] can result in no credit for the assignment and referral to campus authorities. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Based on the stated percentage structure, grades will be awarded as follows: A (94-100), A- (90-93), B+ (87-89), B (83-86), B- (80-82), C+ (77-79), C (73-76), C- (70-72), D+ (67-69), D (63-66), D- (60-62), F (0-59). The minimum passing grade is 60 for undergraduates and 70 for graduate students. | ||
| ### Terms and conditions | ### Terms and conditions | ||
| Line 103: | Line 109: | ||
| Together, we agree to: | Together, we agree to: | ||
| - | * Work together to foster a respectful, mature, convivial community based on discussion, accommodation, and attention | + | * Work together to foster a respectful, mature, convivial community based on mutual learning, diverse perspectives, and accommodation |
| - | * Adhere to all [[university policies]] regarding academic integrity, accessibility, behavior, discrimination, misconduct, and religious observances; we take responsibility for understanding them and the relevant procedures | + | * Adhere to all [[university policies]] regarding academic integrity, accessibility, behavior, discrimination, misconduct, inclusivity, and religious observances; we take responsibility for understanding them and the relevant procedures |
| - | * Respect student privacy, keeping any materials or statements shared in class confidential unless permission is granted to do otherwise | + | * Respect student privacy, keeping any materials or statements shared in class confidential unless permission is granted to do otherwise |
| - | * Refrain from the use of [[screen devices]] during class, except upon agreement with the instructor or for reasons of accessibility | + | * Be present in our interactions together, keeping programs, tabs, and notifications unrelated to class off during meetings |
| If you find yourself in a position where lack of access to food, housing, health care, or other basic necessities interferes with your studies, consider seeking support from the [Dean of Students](https://www.colorado.edu/studentaffairs/deanofstudents) and, if you feel comfortable doing so, your instructor. We will work to assist you however we can. | If you find yourself in a position where lack of access to food, housing, health care, or other basic necessities interferes with your studies, consider seeking support from the [Dean of Students](https://www.colorado.edu/studentaffairs/deanofstudents) and, if you feel comfortable doing so, your instructor. We will work to assist you however we can. | ||
| - | ### Fall 2019 calendar | ||
| - | Due dates are at 2 p.m.: | + | ## Topics |
| - | * Select Phase One project topic (shared document): 9/10 | + | The course topics, like the assignments, proceed in three phases. First, we acquaint ourselves with some processes and ideologies associated with Silicon Valley-style entrepreneurial culture and discourses of disruption. Second, we consider the human impacts of disruptive change. Third, we explore a variety of strategies and shortcomings of disruptive and entrepreneurial thinking. |
| - | * Phase One project (Canvas dropbox): 10/1 | + | |
| - | * Select Phase Two project topic and date (shared document): 9/24 | + | |
| - | * Midterm participation evaluations: 10/22 | + | |
| - | * Phase Two project (Canvas dropbox): Various presentation dates, 10/8-11/7 | + | |
| - | * Phase Three pitch practice: 12/3 | + | |
| - | * Phase Three pitch contest: 12/12 | + | |
| - | * Phase Three whitepaper (Canvas dropbox): 12/14 | + | |
| - | Entrepreneurial events: | + | Except for the book we read in Phase Two, all readings should be available online. Some readings require using the university network (either on campus or via VPN). |
| - | * [Innovation & Entrepreneurship Fall Kickoff](https://www.eventbrite.com/e/innovation-entrepreneurship-fall-campus-kickoff-buff-big-idea-challenge-tickets-58042640099): September 20 | + | ### Phase one: Disruption |
| - | * New Venture Challenge kickoff: TBA | + | |
| - | ## Topics | + | What does this overused word even mean? |
| - | The course topics, like the assignments, proceed in three phases. First, we acquaint ourselves with some processes and ideologies associated with Silicon Valley-style entrepreneurial culture and discourses of disruption. Second, we consider the human impacts of disruptive change. Third, we step back and explore some broader social, philosophical, and political consequences of disruptive thinking. | + | #### 1. Startup communities |
| - | ### Phase one: Disruption | + | * Brad Feld, {{:lib:feld-startup_communities-excerpt.pdf|chapters 1-3}} in _Startup Communities: Building an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem in Your City_ (Wiley, 2012) |
| - | + | * Xiaowei R. Wang, "[Letter from Shenzhen](https://logicmag.io/scale/letter-from-shenzhen/)," _Logic(s)_ (April 1, 2018) | |
| - | #### The universal calling (9/3) | + | |
| - | * In Michelle Ferrier and Elizabeth Mays (eds.), _[Media Innovation and Entrepreneurship](https://press.rebus.community/media-innovation-and-entrepreneurship/)_ (Rebus Community, 2017--2019): "Developing the Entrepreneurial Mindset," "Pitching Ideas" | + | #### 2. Theory and cliché |
| - | * Brad Feld, {{:lib:feld-startup_communities-excerpt.pdf|chapters 1-3}} in _Startup Communities: Building an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem in Your City_ (Wiley, 2012) | + | |
| - | * Sarabeth Berk, Ali LeBeau Greenstein, Nicholas Karas, and Allison Moran, "[Future-casting CU Boulder as the First Public University that Hacks the Academy](https://www.colorado.edu/academicfutures/2017/12/20/future-casting-cu-boulder-first-public-university-hacks-academy-berk-greenstein-karas)," CU Boulder Academic Futures whitepaper (December 2017) | + | |
| - | #### Theory and cliché (9/10) | + | * Clayton M. Christensen, Michael E. Raynor, and Rory McDonald, “[What Is Disruptive Innovation?](https://hbr.org/2015/12/what-is-disruptive-innovation),” _Harvard Business Review_ (December 1, 2015) |
| + | * Jill Lepore, "[The Disruption Machine](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/06/23/the-disruption-machine)," _New Yorker_ (June 23, 2014) | ||
| + | * Drake Bennett, "{{:lib:christensen-bloomberg.pdf|Clayton Christensen Responds to New Yorker Takedown of 'Disruptive Innovation'}}," _Bloomberg_ (June 21, 2014) | ||
| - | * Joseph L. Bower and Clayton M. Christensen, "[Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave](https://libguides.colorado.edu/Harvard_Business_Review)," _Harvard Business Review_ (January-February 1995) | + | #### 3. Organizational vessels |
| - | * Mark W. Johnson, Clayton M. Christensen, and Henning Kagermann, "[Reinventing Your Business Model](https://libguides.colorado.edu/Harvard_Business_Review)," _Harvard Business Review_ (December 2008) | + | |
| - | * Jill Lepore, "[The Disruption Machine](http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/06/23/the-disruption-machine)," _New Yorker_ (June 23, 2014) | + | |
| - | * Drake Bennett, "{{:lib:christensen-bloomberg.pdf|Clayton Christensen Responds to New Yorker Takedown of 'Disruptive Innovation'}}," _Bloomberg_ (June 21, 2014) | + | |
| - | #### Organizational vessels (9/17) | + | * Venkatesh Rao, "[A Brief History of the Corporation: 1600 to 2100](https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2011/06/08/a-brief-history-of-the-corporation-1600-to-2100/)," _Ribbonfarm_ (June 8, 2011) |
| + | * Jessica Livingston, "[Grow the Puzzle Around You](http://foundersatwork.posthaven.com/grow-the-puzzle-around-you)," _Posthaven_ (June 30, 2018) | ||
| - | * Jessica Livingston, "[Grow the Puzzle Around You](http://foundersatwork.posthaven.com/grow-the-puzzle-around-you)," _Posthaven_ (June 30, 2018) | + | #### 4. Raising rounds |
| - | * Steve Blank, "[Why the Lean Start-Up Changes Everything](https://hbr.org/2013/05/why-the-lean-start-up-changes-everything)," _Harvard Business Review_ (May 2013) | + | |
| - | * Luis Perez-Breva, "['The Lean Startup' Is an Unproductive Legend](https://qz.com/work/1349238/the-lean-startup-is-an-unproductive-legend/)," _Quartz_ (August 6, 2018) | + | |
| - | * In Michelle Ferrier and Elizabeth Mays (eds.), _[Media Innovation and Entrepreneurship](https://press.rebus.community/media-innovation-and-entrepreneurship/)_ (Rebus Community, 2017--2019): "Nonprofit Model Development" | + | |
| - | #### Raising rounds (9/24) | + | * Kim-Mai Cutler, "[The Unicorn Hunters](https://logicmag.io/04-the-unicorn-hunters/)," _Logic(s)_ no. 4 (2018) |
| + | * Paul Graham, "[Startup = Growth](http://www.paulgraham.com/growth.html)" (September 2012) | ||
| + | * Daisy Onubogu, "[Underrepresented Founders are Merely Collateral Damage](https://medium.com/zebras-unite/underrepresented-founders-are-merely-collateral-damage-cae17f6d3379)" (February 25, 2021) | ||
| - | * Kim-Mai Cutler, "[The Unicorn Hunters](https://logicmag.io/04-the-unicorn-hunters/)," _Logic_ no. 4 (2018) | + | #### 5. Endgames |
| - | * Brad Bernthal, "[The Evolution of Entrepreneurial Finance: A New Typology](https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/byulr2018&i=805)," _BYU Law Review_ (2018) | + | |
| - | * Jennifer Brandel, Mara Zepeda, Astrid Scholz, and Aniyia Williams, "[Zebras Fix What Unicorns Break](https://medium.com/@sexandstartups/zebrasfix-c467e55f9d96)" (March 8, 2017) | + | |
| - | #### Origin stories (10/1) | + | * Peter Thiel with Blake Masters, _[Zero to One: Notes on Startups, or How to Build the Future](https://libcat.colorado.edu/Record/b11042512)_, chapters 4-5 (Crown Currency, 2014) |
| + | * Cory Doctorow, "[Tiktok's Enshittification](https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guys)," _Pluralistic_ (January 21, 2023) | ||
| + | * Constance Grady, "[How Does Elon Musk Get Away with It All?](https://www.vox.com/culture/23833377/elon-musk-image-analysis-acts-of-love-talulah-riley)" _Vox_ (Aug 17, 2023) | ||
| - | * Silvia Federici, "[All the World Needs a Jolt](https://anarchivists.gitbooks.io/caliban/content/jolt.html)," in _Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body, and Primitive Accumulation_ (Autonomedia, 2014) | + | #### 6. Capitalism, all along |
| - | * Venkatesh Rao, "[A Brief History of the Corporation: 1600 to 2100](https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2011/06/08/a-brief-history-of-the-corporation-1600-to-2100/)," _Ribbonfarm_ (June 8, 2011) | + | |
| - | * John E. Elliott, "[Marx and Schumpeter on Capitalism's Creative Destruction: A Comparative Restatement](https://www.jstor.org/stable/1885348)," _The Quarterly Journal of Economics_ 95, no. 1 (August 1980) | + | |
| + | * Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, [preamble and chapter 1](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/ch01.htm), _Manifesto of the Communist Party_ (1848) | ||
| + | * Joseph A. Schumpeter, "[The Creative Response in Economic History](https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2113338.pdf)," _Journal of Economic History_ 7, no. 2 (November 1947) | ||
| ### Phase two: Disrupted | ### Phase two: Disrupted | ||
| - | The core assignment for this phase will be a close reading of an important recent book, Shoshana Zuboff, _The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power_ (PublicAffairs, 2019), along with supplemental readings. | + | Phase two centers around how one company, Amazon, has disrupted US society, through the lens of one book, available in the bookstore: |
| - | #### "Home or Exile in the Digital Future" (10/8) | + | * Alec MacGillis, _Fulfillment: Winning and Losing in One-Click America_ (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2021) |
| - | * Zuboff, Introduction | + | #### 7. The basement to security |
| - | * Rebecca Solnit, "[Diary: Google Invades](https://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n03/rebecca-solnit/diary)," _London Review of Books_ 35, no. 3 (February 7, 2013) | + | |
| - | #### "The Foundations of Surveillance Capitalism" (10/15) | + | * MacGillis, _Fulfillment_, "Introduction" to ch. 3 |
| - | * Zuboff, Part I | + | #### 8. Dignity to power |
| - | * Tim Wu, "[The Battle for Our Attention](https://shorensteincenter.org/tim-wu/)," audio lecture at Shorenstein Center, Harvard University (October 25, 2016) | + | |
| - | #### "The Advance of Surveillance Capitalism" (10/22) | + | * MacGillis, _Fulfillment_, ch. 4 to ch. 6 |
| - | * Zuboff, Part II | + | #### 9. Shelter to overtime |
| - | * Cathy Hannabach, "[Simone Browne on Resisting Surveillance & Creative Collaborations](https://ideasonfire.net/podcast/9-simone-browne/)," _Imagine Otherwise_ (May 4, 2016) | + | |
| - | 10/24: Panel on "Economic Development for Creative District Leaders from Urban and Rural Colorado," UMC Aspen Rooms (2-3 p.m.) | + | * MacGillis, _Fulfillment_, ch. 7 to "Overtime" |
| - | #### "Instrumentarian Power for a Third Modernity" (10/29) | + | ### Phase three: Disruptionism |
| - | * Zuboff, Part III | + | What, then, can we do? |
| - | * Virginia Eubanks, "[The Digital Poorhouse](https://harpers.org/archive/2018/01/the-digital-poorhouse/)," _Harper's_ (January 2018) | + | |
| - | #### "A Coup from Above" (11/5) | + | #### 10. Disrupting work |
| - | * Zuboff, Conclusion | + | * Ben Tarnoff, _[The Making of the Tech Worker Movement](https://logicmag.io/the-making-of-the-tech-worker-movement/full-text/)_ (Logic(s), 2020) |
| - | * Lina Khan, "[Amazon's Antitrust Paradox](https://www.yalelawjournal.org/note/amazons-antitrust-paradox)," _Yale Law Journal_ 126, no. 3 (2017) | + | * Anisia Uzeyman and Saul Williams (dirs.), _[Neptune Frost](https://colorado.kanopy.com/node/12574154)_ (2021) |
| + | #### 11. Disrupting capital | ||
| - | ### Phase three: Disruptionism | + | * Richard Barbrook and Andy Cameron, "[The Californian Ideology](https://monoskop.org/images/d/dc/Barbrook_Richard_Cameron_Andy_1996_The_Californian_Ideology.pdf)," _Science as Culture_ 6, no. 1 (1996) |
| + | * Jennifer Brandel, Mara Zepeda, Astrid Scholz, and Aniyia Williams, "[Zebras Fix What Unicorns Break](https://medium.com/@sexandstartups/zebrasfix-c467e55f9d96)" (March 8, 2017) | ||
| - | #### Natural and unnatural (11/12) | + | #### 12. Disruptive citizenship |
| - | * H. Allen Orr, "[The Descent of Gould](https://search-proquest-com.colorado.idm.oclc.org/docview/233164039?pq-origsite=summon)," _New Yorker_ (September 30, 2002) | + | * Maria Mazzucato, "[The Entrepreneurial State](https://www.proquest.com/docview/912870584/fulltextPDF/86FE0FED4208456EPQ/1?accountid=14503)," _Soundings_ 49 (Winter 2011) |
| - | * From Rebecca Solnit, _A Paradise Built in Hell: The Extraordinary Communities That Arise in Disaster_ (Viking, 2009): "Prelude: Falling Together" ([online at LitHub](http://lithub.com/rebecca-solnit-how-to-survive-a-disaster/)) | + | * Malka Older, "[Temporary Organizations in Disaster Response: Crisis, Temporality, and Governance](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00027642221144847)," _American Behavioral Scientist_ (2022) |
| - | * Naomi Klein, "[How Power Profits from Disaster](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/06/naomi-klein-how-power-profits-from-disaster)," _The Guardian_ (July 6, 2017) | + | |
| - | * Andrew Russell and Lee Vinsel, "[Hail the | + | |
| - | Maintainers](https://aeon.co/essays/innovation-is-overvalued-maintenance-often-matters-more)" _Aeon_ (April 7, 2016) | + | |
| - | #### Work and post-work (11/19) | + | #### 13. Disrupting time |
| - | * Rose Schneiderman, "[We Have Found You Wanting](http://trianglefire.ilr.cornell.edu/primary/testimonials/ootss_RoseSchneiderman.html)," _The Survey_ (April 8, 1911) | + | * Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould, "[Punctuated Equilibria: An Alternative to Phyletic Gradualism](https://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/classictexts/eldredge.pdf)," in Schopf, T.J.M. (ed.), _Models in Paleobiology_ (Freeman Cooper, 1972) |
| - | * Jessica Bruder, "[Driven to Despair](http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/05/the-tragic-end-to-a-black-car-drivers-campaign-against-uber.html)," _New York Magazine_ (May 14, 2018) | + | * Walidah Imarisha, "[All Organizing Is Science Fiction](https://archive.org/details/podcast_umass-amherst-history-departme_walidah-imarisha-all-organiz_1000423858347)," History Department, University of Massachusetts Amherst (November 13, 2018) |
| - | * Miriam Cherry, "[Beyond Misclassification: The Digital Transformation of Work](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2734288)," _Comparative Labor, Law, and Policy Journal_ 37 (2015-2016) | + | |
| - | * Andrew Yang and Derek Thompson, "[Running for President on a Universal Basic Income Platform](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPyAKZWZFyk)," AtlanticLive (November 5, 2018) | + | |
| + | #### 14. Disruption Fantasies | ||
| - | #### Decentralize everything (12/3) | + | * David Edgerton, "Introduction" and "Maintenance" in _[The Shock of the Old: Technology and Global History Since 1900](http://www.wtf.tw/ref/edgerton.pdf)_ (Profile Books, 2008) |
| + | * Stefano Harney and Fred Moten, "Fantasy in the Hold" (pp. 84-99), _[The Undercommons: Fugitive Planning & Black Study](https://www.minorcompositions.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/undercommons-web.pdf)_ (Minor Compositions, 2013) | ||
| - | * Manoush Zomorodi and Jen Poyant, "[Blockchain. Block What?!](https://zigzagpod.com/2018/06/13/episode-2/)," _ZigZag_ (June 13, 2018) | + | ### Further resources |
| - | * Nick Paumgarten, "[The Prophets of Cryptocurrency Survey the Boom and Bust](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/22/the-prophets-of-cryptocurrency-survey-the-boom-and-bust)," _New Yorker_ (October 15, 2018) | + | |
| - | * Libra Association, _[Libra White Paper](https://libra.org/en-US/white-paper/)_ (2019) | + | |
| - | #### The new citizen (12/10) | + | * _[How I Built This with Guy Raz](https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/how-i-built-this)_, NPR podcast |
| + | * [Resources](https://www.theselc.org/resources), Sustainable Economies Law Center | ||
| + | * [Tech Workers Coalition newsletter](https://news.techworkerscoalition.org/) | ||
| + | * [Startup School library](https://www.startupschool.org/library), Y Combinator | ||
| - | * "[Shenzhen: The Silicon Valley of Hardware](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGJ5cZnoodY)," _Wired_ 2016 | ||
| - | * Nathan Heller, "[Estonia, the Digital Republic](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/18/estonia-the-digital-republic)," _New Yorker_ (December 18--25, 2017) | ||
| - | * Zeynep Tufekci, "[How Social Media Took Us from Tahrir Square to Donald Trump](https://www.technologyreview.com/s/611806/how-social-media-took-us-from-tahrir-square-to-donald-trump/)," _MIT Technology Review_ (August 14, 2018) | ||
| - | |||
| - | ### Further resources | ||
| - | * _[How I Built This with Guy Raz](https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510313/how-i-built-this)_, NPR podcast | + | ---- |
| - | * Y Combinator, [Startup School library](https://www.startupschool.org/library) | + | |
| - | --- | ||
| [ [[note:disruptive_entrepreneurship|Notes]] ] | [ [[note:disruptive_entrepreneurship|Notes]] ] | ||