Ever since we watched the videos in class about the “Google glass”, I became fascinated with the idea but even more obsessed with the parodies. Who would have honestly thought that technology would evolve the way it did over the past decade. I have a little niece, who is almost 3 years old, she already knows how to use a cellphone, iPad, you name it. Adolescents now know how to use these items better than most adults do. It frightens me to contemplate of what our future generation is being raised upon… technology wise. The “Google glass” may even be one of the utmost technologies created so far, but right now I am not adjusting to the idea. I stumbled upon this article http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2013/04/code-in-google-glass-features/ which is summarizing some of the things Google is trying to accomplish. “Google is working on a handful of cool new features for its smart frames, including two-finger touch-to-zoom and winking to take a photo.” Really? I don’t know if I am being skeptical or what the youngsters these day would refer to as “old school”, but I just can not wrap my mind over how lazy we as people may possibly convert into when even the simplest things like taking pictures with our hands may be taken away from our society.
Homework #2 on the Final Chapter in the Filter Bubble
Due April 25 (by the start of class)
Consider the suggestions that Pariser makes in the final chapter (8) of his book about ways that we can address the problems of the filter bubble. Then, on the course blog, write a long post (1-2 pages) in which you identify what you think is the strongest idea and the weakest idea that he has for combatting the filter bubble and the excesses of personalization. Fully explain and defend the two ideas you select and use quoted material from the book as part of your argument. You will be graded on the quality of your defense, the creativity in your writing, and the polish you put into your writing (i.e., you don’t want to lose points on this because of typos or grammar and spelling errors).
Can you hear me now? Cellphone turns 40.
Did you know that the first cell phone call was made 40 years ago. The first cell phone ever made was in 1984 and it cost about $4,000, it had an LED display and took 10 hours to charge. If you want to try a more vintage look get rid of your iPhone or Android and buy one here. After people became tired of holding a brick, the next big cellphone invention was the flip phone, described by Motorola as “about as thick as a fat wallet at the earpiece while tapering down to half the thickness of a deck of cards at the mouthpiece.” And who can forget the Nokia ringtone, very well progressed during the years (listen here) a dub step version really? The next big thing after the flip phone was the camera phone, they weren’t sold until the year 2002 in the United States, Sony Ericsson’s T68i with its clip-on camera being amongst the first. Before the IPhone and Blackberry were top sellers, there was another phone that everyone had, I remember I got it as my first phone in pink, the Razr. Motorola’s slender, square Razr series, first launched in 2004, was such a runaway hit and sold 50 million phones in the first two years. After the average cell phone era had its run, the smartphone era took over, BlackBerry’s 5810, was the very first Blackberry device to get a cellular connection. The Palm TreoW, also a pocket assistant, was the first phone to run a Windows mobile operating system. These phones started to smudge the line between computer and phone. Last but not least, in 2007 came something that would reinvent a simple phone, the IPhone, an iPod, phone and internet communicator in one device. Since then, flat, skinny smartphones from Nokia and Samsung and HTC have reconfigured our expectations of a smartphone, and they are far from what was the first phone. So what do you think the next phone innovation is going to be? Assuming most of you have smartphones, how has it made your life easier/harder ? Could you live without it?
Congrats we are Behavioral Study Lab Rats!
http://vator.tv/news/2013-04-13-google-picks-up-behavioral-sensing-company-behavio
Yay!! so in order to upgrade and make Google glass practical, Google acquired the company Behavio…this is a company which uses peoples phone signals in order to track human behavior and then make an ‘educated determination’ to predict what we will do next. I used to think all this technology was in order to make our lives easier that was up until I realized what the hell is going on, I kinda want to escape from this world where Im feeling more like a game pawn and lab rat than a person with feelings, thoughts, and ideas. Seriously this Behavio company seems like they are going to make our Filter bubbles even more solid and impossible to break out of or anything new to break into them.
Thoughts anyone? Am I overreacting?
My digital identity after I die? You gotta be kidding…
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9238354/Google_lets_users_plan_their_digital_afterlife
“You can tell us what to do with your Gmail messages and data from several other Google services if your account becomes inactive for any reason.”
“We hope that this new feature will enable you to plan your digital afterlife — in a way that protects your privacy and security — and make life easier for your loved ones after you’re gone,”
Uhm ok, really? This really really got to me, its not enough that they want to control what we see what we buy and who sees us while were still kicking they want to control our ‘data’ after we die? This all seems a little absurd to me. Reading this article doesnt even make me feel human anymore, just another line of 0’s and 1’s int heir computers. What if I dont want anything to happen to my emails when I die, and I dont want there to be an automatic response sent to my friends, and family, my coworkers, my employer.
“Just in case you’re inactive and not actually dead, Google is set to send you a warning via an email to a secondary address, and a text message to your cellphone.”
How nice of them, in all honesty I would love to get a text from google saying “If you are alive please reply by texting “ALIVE” back to this number”…what if I am away and on a lengthy sabbatical for 9 months and change my number? Then according to Google i’m dead? woohoo good to know.
Anyone gonna use this feature? Does this actually make anyone happy to know google offers this?
Google,Samsung,Apple? Now, Soon, Later?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonykosner/2013/04/14/phone-plan-google-now-samsung-soon-or-apple-later/?partner=yahootix
This article I came across seemed rather interesting, me being obsessed with my Samsung Note 2 I am not even remotely excited about any of the phones listed. When getting the Note 2 i saw the nexus and was not impressed, the samsung 4 that is coming out isnt all that crazy and seems like its open to alot of glitches, and finally the iphone is extremely played out. As a apple veteran I can honestly say the iphones no longer excite me, on the contrary since converting to Samsung I get easily irritated by the limited things that Apple offers. Anyway I thought this was interesting that the google phone wasnt selling as much and that people are waiting for the other two.
Thoughts? Would you wait for the Samsung 4, the iphone “5S”/”6”, or go with the google phone?
Facebook Refines Ad Targeting
Based on what I have read from this article, it is clear to see that Facebook is simply trying to increase their advertising revenue from last year. Facebook rolled out a new way to advertise and market products via Facebook. By partnering up with data companies that track online and offline purchase behavior, (Acxiom, Blue Kai, Epsilon, and Datalogix) these Facebook partner categories are able to predict what consumers purchase the most and what consumers would buy again, based on previous purchases. By simply swiping or entering the 16 digits on your credit card, we are basically handing out a whole lot of information to companies without even knowing it. Talk about invasion of privacy. This relates to Pariser’s book heavily, seeing as how social networks are finding more and more concealed and profitable ways to obtain personal information. Coming from a marketing perspective I would say that this is a clever and a different way to increase revenue. However coming from someone who uses Facebook on a daily basis, I would say that this completely invades our privacy, even more than how it already does.
Any thoughts?
Source: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/10/facebook-refines-ad-targeting/
Team 4: Facebook and Racism
Megan Garber’s article, “When your Facebook friend is Racist” had a lot of connections to Eli Pariser’s Filter Bubble. The first connection we saw was in chapter six of the book on page 174, when Pariser explained that “how we behave is dictacted in part by the shape of our environment.” In this quote, Pariser explained that architect Robert Moses was able to regulate people’s behavior through the use of bridges and tunnels. He designed the bridges and tunnels speifically to keep low-income families out of Jones Beach. This relates to the article because Facebook is designed in such a way that if you use Facebook often you are “more positive towards racist content.” For example, Facebook is structured in a way that allows users to “Like,” “Recommend” or “Share”, but not dislike or reject content. So if you come across a racist message you may not like it, but at the same time you are not able to express your dislike. You don’t have that option.
Another connection between Pariser and the article is what Pariser calls the “God Impulse.” (page 167) This is the idea that creative people feel empowered after they create or discover things, they feel as thought they have built their on realm or universe that you can control. Facebook users may feel the God impulse when they create their Facebook page. They have the ability to decide what comments and pictures they will post. Facebook users feel like they can say and do whatever they want on their page.They can also decide who to let into their page. Facebook users are able to influence the behavior of others because their friends are able to view their profiles. If their friend is saying negative or racist statements the other friend may become complacent about it.
Group 1-When Your Facebok Friend Is Racist and The Filter Bubble
We found two connections between the article and The Filter Bubble.
First, on page 235, Pariser discusses how Facebook should add an “Important” button. Combined with the “Like” button, this collaborative filtering will allow news stories to appear in people’s newsfeeds, even though it might not be something they like. Even by seeing the headline, they are made aware of an important news story. In the article, When Your Facebook Friend is Racist, Megan Garber asks, “What will happen if information gets fully social(?)” If we rely on personalized information, and only “Likes,” then we will not be shown news stories that are important or contrary to our beliefs. Also, there is a chance of beng shown stories that are racist, as described in the article. By adding an “Important” button, personalized news feeds can show the most crucial stories.
On page 154, Pariser discuses how its easier to agree and like certain viewpoints of friends due to the fact that they are the indivduals you usually agree with in the past. So the past interactions and talks with your friends affects the present and makes it so that you are more inclined to agree to their viewpoints. The indivdual on your Facebook friend list whom is also a close friend of yours posts a message referring to racism in america, it is unlikely you would just skip over it and more likely you will “like” it for the sake of not disagreeing with them and being in the “outter circle” An event such as this Pariser explains could be a threat to public life itself, because then these Facebook friends would simply be blinded by opposing viewpoints and your rational would be limited to the words of their friends, potentially manipulating your own view.
Facebook Team 5
Frequent Facebook users are more likely to be influenced by persuasive messages on Facebook than less frequent users. The design is such that we can only filter things we like and if we were to dislike something on Facebook we would have to either unsubscribe or defriend someone to not see their posts. Pariser describes Facebook as a design that is more geared towards positivity than negativity in order to avoid confrontation and keep people thinking that they’re engaged when they’re only option is to agree or ignore rather than voice their opinion with a dislike button. Facebook creates an “atmosphere of agreement” as the article points out, filtering out disagreement, and possibly critical thought. The article seems to imply that we are more likely to want to connect and agree with our friends rather than criticize them and their opinions/posts. There’s a tendency to rely on Facebook’s news feed to get your news but the news feed is far too biased based on your previous “likes” and the “likes” of your friends giving you a very limited filter of how you can possibly view the world and news.
Group 5 ~ Google Glass No – No’s
Although, Google Glasses have a strong positive aspect on innovation, there are many major setbacks on owning this new invention:
- Lack of regard for what is going on in your surroundings.
- Obscures the vision of the user.
- May cause major accident while driving.
- People stealing them off your face.
- Too much radiation to the brain.
- People over hear private conversation, such as directions, private places, etc
- People may try to get into personal space bubble, sharing of personal information like address, workplace, etc.
- They’re ugly, non-fashionable, horrendous.
- TOOO expensive
- Impractical because you cannot get wifi everywhere and even if you were to pay for the service(4g) there is a lot of places that do not get signals such as trains, and the service itself would be too expensive.
Google Glass Problems
by Group #3
- Privacy
- Dependency
- Filters – may discriminate smaller businesses
- Technical – rain/eye problems
- Fashion
- Easily breakable
- Distraction
Like Pariser described in chapter 7, the google glasses are an example of augmented reality. With the help of modern technology everyday tasks are much easier to do. It may also infringe in privacy issues, if and when it may record us without any consent.
‘Could be’ Consequences
The could be consequences of Google glass are:
1. It can casue accidents because people cannot do two things at once. For eg. crossing the street while reading on your Google glass.
2. People can take videos or pictures of you without your consent and this is a big privacy issue.
3. This is a serious hazard when driving and is similar to texting or talking on your phone when driving.
4. It may be inefficient, and not work as well as the advertisement puts it. We could relate to the Siri, on how the advertisement made it look so convenient, but in reality it had a hard time getting people’s mixed accents.
5. This could also be a health issue, because of the rays and with it being stationed near your eye and brain all the time. This could cause cancer with the antena stationed so close.
6. A bad fashion statement, however this could be the new norm in the future, which is equally frightening.
7. Google glass is made up of a wire and a freak accident is possible, with the wire splitting and hitting your eye.
Unintended Consequences of the Google Glass [group 2]
1. Privacy issues – Traceable/Facial Recognition
2. The experience of others around you – refer to links
3. Hackers – Easy access to private information
4. Social networking going to take over real life
5. Dependency
6. Distracting
7. Shapes your experience of the world
http://creativegood.com/blog/the-google-glass-feature-no-one-is-talking-about/
http://gizmodo.com/5990787/google-glass-and-the-golden-age-of-creepshots
Group 1- Consequences of Google Glasses
We found a lot of the problems of the Google Glasses come from its ability to secretly photograph. There is a huge potential for copyright infringements at places like movie theaters. Also, it makes it easier for someone to commit identity theft, such as recording someone entering their pin number at an ATM.
Two more consequences come from problems that already exist with cell phones, yet to an even greater extreme. The first is social disconnect. When in a social situation with friends or family, it will be way too tempting to resort to being entertained by the glasses. Also, there will be problems with over reliance. Once the user is used to using the GPS while driving, or the video chat to connect with friends, they will not be able to function without the technology.
The glasses will also exacerbate a problem that Pariser mentions, the lack of serendipity. In the filter bubble, we are prevented from seeing things we might not like when it comes to web pages and the news. Now with Google Glasses, that same effect will happen in real life. We will not try that new, different restaurant because Google will not think we would like it.
China Toughens Use of Internet
I recently read two articles Adding More Bricks to the Great Firewall of China and China Toughens Its Restrictions on Use of the Internet, from the New York Times, that covered China’s growing restrictions on the use of Internet. I was glad that Pariser mentioned this issue in his book, The Filter Bubble and criticized the Chinese government for openly removing a lot certain searches and blocking many leading services, just so as to control the flow of information and manipulate the content that reaches its citizens.
The Chinese government recently strengthened its Firewall, however the daily newspaper Global Times, which is affiliated with the Communist party labeled it as an upgrade; an upgrade that ‘blocks online searches of politically sensitive terms, smothers embarrassing news events, blocks online messages from dissidents and simply deletes any micro-blog posts that it dislikes.’ Pariser mentions similar incidents in his book with the Chinese Internet Police (seriously, one of a kind) vowed to maintain order in all online behavior, stating that the ‘Internet is not a place beyond law’, which is completely understandable in the case of hackers and online hoaxing. Just because you are anonymous online does not mean you have the right to do illegal things, however, since when is wanting to know more about the history of your country a crime? I am still baffled at the Chinese government wanting to stay on top of all these firewall issues and investing millions of dollars in trying to catch users online, while turning a completely blind eye at the growing problems regarding poverty, education and health in its remote areas.
Reading for April 11
Please read the following blog post before class on Thursday, April 11. We will be doing a classroom activity related to it in class that day.
Garber, Megan. “When Your Facebook Friend Is Racist.” The Atlantic. 5 Apr. 2013. Web. 9 Apr. 2013.
Techno Savvy
Technology runs my day from morning to night time:
- Alarm clock
- television
- computer
- cell phone
- car
- bus
- light systems
- heater
- train
- motors of trains and cars
- watch
- coffee maker from dunking donuts
- elevator
- escalator
- tablet
- register
- turn styles(train and at Baruch)
- Baruch database
- store signs
- refrigerator
- microwave
- toaster
- monitors
- memory cards
- gaming systems
- applications on the ipod, ipad, cell phones
Technologies Used on 4/4/2013
I began interacting with technology as soon as my day began. Here are a few in which I encountered throughout the day. First, I woke up to the sound of an alarm on my cell phone. After shutting off the alarm on my phone, for a few minutes I went through my phone (text messages, Facebook, email, etc.) I immediately turned on the radio in my bedroom as I chose picked out my outfit for today. On my way outside the house, I set my alarm/security system for the house. I got to my car and while driving the radio happened to be on. I parked my car by the train station. When I got to the train station, I swiped my metro card and went through the turnstile. During the train ride I used my phone to listen to music. Upon arriving to school I went to the nearby Dunkin Donuts, where I paid for my meal with the credit card in which the card reader obtains a whole bunch of information through that one swipe. When arriving to Baruch, I swiped my student ID card through the turnstiles. When going to class I took the elevator to head upstairs. After class I took the escalators.
Transportation- Metro card swipe, car, car radio, car charger for phone, phone on train for music.
School- elevator, escalators, credit card for food, phone for music,
Home- radio, alarm/security system, refrigerator, oven, house phone, cell phone
Computer- Speaker, monitor, keyboard, mouse, printer
Phone- social media networks, bank accounts
Technology
Lights, running water (sink/shower/toilet), heat, doorbell
Coffee/Espresso maker, fridge, range
elevator, Vespa, turnstile at Baruch (Baruch ID)
cell phone, ipad, cable tv, computer
Just about all of the technology I used today requires electricity. My phone, iPad, and cable tv are all communication channels which allow me to interact with others. The tv is less of a two way communication channel.