a place for my stuff

I recently finished Nora Young’s book - which I highly recommend as a not-stuffy intro to issues around data-mining etc - wherein she suggests that one day consumers will consider the use of our data by commercial enterprises the same way some of us consider the environmental impact of the things we buy, support and consume.

I recently re-acquainted myself with the ethics of is.gd, as I sought to shorten a link. I’m not suggesting is.gd is for everybody, but I wonder how many of us do these small actions now, and what would it take to encourage more of us to do it more frequently?

This place is a mess. Sorry about that.

This year, SXSWi has 9 talks with the word privacy in their titles, and over 30 talks that had the word in their abstract - I’m sure many more also touched on the subject.

One talk had the notable title “Fuck Privacy”. The abstract actually supported more public education, arguing that once consumers were better informed of industry’s practices, they’d better appreciate the personalized service, free stuff, and other benefits that datamining can yield. Sounded promising. but the reviews coming out of the session seemed to suggest that the presenters were underinformed and/or ill-prepared to host a truly provoking panel discussion.

So, at N’s urging, I’m posting a (short) review of “I Know Who You Are and I Saw What You Did” by Lori Andrews.

I was disappointed. The title and thesis of the book struck me as gimmicky. The main premise of the book, as explained in this review by Evgeny Morozov,  is that we need a “constitution” guiding our use of social networks. The specific call for a “constitution” draws from Andrews’ belief that social networks are akin to nation-states. Yah - flawed in ways already outlined; perhaps the biggest reason (for me, anyway) is that social networks are for-profit companies and therefore don’t really care about people (and their dreams, aspirations, well-being) aside from their concerns as customers.

Also, her idea behind a constitution (“an expression of fundamental values”) is not new - check out the archived panel on “A Bill of Rights for Social Network Sites” from CFP (Computers, Freedom, Privacy) 2010.

The strongest part of her book - and something I would have liked to read more about - was where she drew parallels between genetic privacy and online privacy. Andrews is a law professor and bioethicist who has written a number of books on reproductive and genetic technologies so this is where her arguments and writing seem most solid.

So, James Bagnall’s 3-part series on the decline of the Ottawa tech scene got me thinking about where I was during that seminal period of growth that was the late 90s. ‘Cause I wasn’t part of that scene.

I was, without really knowing it at the time, at the heart of a smaller micro-scene, if you will, within Ottawa that was part of a larger discourse on how to do public policy in the age of the internet, and how to ( or even, can you) shape the internet to help advance public debate.

And then I thought, how cool would it be to write about that time?

You know, maybe profile some people and what they’re doing now - I’m lookin’ at you, Russell McOrmond and Jesse Hirsh. Hey, let’s reminisce about the National Capital Freenet.

So. How’s that for a direction for this tumblr - at least, for the time being?

I’ve (not-so-) recently inherited o’s old phone. It comes with a set of pre-written text messages you can select and send easily:

Where u at?

What up?

B there soon.

Tipsy?

I’m gonna B late

What’s the 411?

Booty call

U know u want me

R U up 4 it?

Your place or mine?

Let’s do it.

A recent report released by the Cable and Telecommunications Association for Marketing focuses mainly on the changing habits and tastes of TV viewers - many are turning away from traditional cable (or at least thinking about it), subscribing to over-the-top services like Netflix, watching more online content.

At the same time, 80 % of Canadians say they don’t know their upload and download capacities.

It’s like modern civilization’s relationship with fast food:

We know what we want, but we don’t understand how it’s made.