The “Demystifying Networks” article immediately made me think of my interpretation of the Google search engine. The discussion prompts me to understand algorithms as a modern form of a community. This approach lends itself to the idea of digital humanities. I understand algorithms as communities because they dictate exactly what we see on the Internet based on our previous searches. These dictations are different for every individual, and can shield people from gaining a complete and well-rounded view of the world. Similarly, communities of people establish the ways that individuals understand the world because historically they have been sheltered from seeing views outside of their own.
When I type the word “Europe” into Google, I receive links to travel websites and news articles because in recent searches I have been planning my study abroad trips and looking up news articles for my classes. If my roommate who is a Dance Major types the word “Europe” into Google she gets links to performances and travel locations. This difference in results is key. My roommate will not receive nearly as many news articles about Europe and will thus not be informed of global happenings, despite the fact that she is interested in that aspect of society. Even further, if a stranger who has no interest in travel and who could not point out Europe on a map types the word “Europe” into a Google search, their results will be even more different. This reality shows the danger of blindly trusting algorithms. Weingart’s quote “Nothing worth discovering has ever been found in safe waters. Or rather, everything worth discovering in safe waters has already been discovered, so it’s time to shove off into the dangerous waters of methodology appropriation, cognizant of the warnings but not crippled by them” can act as a warning against complete algorithms and be advice to push past what is initially given to us and to discover new information.