Apr 03

Walter Isaacson in De Rode Hoed

‘Brutally honest’, aldus Walter Isaacson over Steve Jobs, de man waar hij een ‘alle records brekende’ biografie over schreef. Gisteravond was Isaacson, die een interessante carrière bij CNN en TIME achter de rug heeft, te gast in De Rode Hoed.

Tracy Metz, journalist voor het NRC Handelsblad, leidde het gesprek in met een praatje waarin de nodige superlatieven voorkwamen. Het boek omschreef ze als ‘great’, ‘awesome’ en ‘astonishing’ of iets van die trant, woorden die we ook van Steve Jobs kennen. De Steve-o-fielen naast mij begonnen enigszins te morren toen Metz verkondigde dat een presentatie van Jobs altijd eindigde met ‘One more thing’, maar na de entree van Isaacson hielden de betweters wijselijk hun mond. En daar was alle reden toe.

Eenmaal omgeschakeld van het steenkolen-Engels van de mevrouw van het John Adams Institute naar het Amerikaanse accent van Isaacson, blijkt deze een uitstekend en charismatisch spreker. Gedurende een praatje van twintig minuten zette Isaacson de drie belangrijkste kwaliteiten van Jobs uiteen, rijkelijk geïllustreerd met anekdotes die we ook in zijn boek tegenkomen:

  1. Passion for great products. Jobs’ drijfveer was niet het maken van winst, maar een passie om gave en waardevolle spullen te maken.
  2. Don’t be afraid, just do it. Deze kwaliteit is ook wel omschreven als het Reality Distortion Field: het geloof iedereen voor je karretje te kunnen spannen met een mix van charme, charisma, overtuiging etc.
  3. Simplicity. Isaacson illustreerde dit met een anekdote over de aan/uit-knop van de iPod. Steve vond het lelijk en nutteloos. Op deze manier werd de track wheel geboren: het was design en iedereen zag direct de werking ervan.

Voor sommigen is de biografie een bijbel voor management geworden. Zou je je als manager moeten opstellen als een geniale rebel, of een perfectionistische klootzak? Waarschijnlijk zal dit niet iedereen even goed af gaan. Het is belangrijk te kunnen switchen tussen de uitersten, iets dat Steve goed beheerste. Isaacson schetst dit contrast mede aan de hand van een gesprek tussen Steve Jobs en Bill Gates over het verschil tussen open en gesloten systemen. Gates geloofde niet in gesloten systemen, Jobs niet in open. Ondanks het goede gesprek, noemt Jobs hem in het boek een ‘asshole without taste’.

Rebels, zo kunnen we Jobs en Apple zeker beschouwen. En zo manifesteerde Apple zich ook in de beroemde 1984 commercial, waarin Orwell’s idee van Big Brother door het bedrijf omver wordt geworpen.
 

 
In het afgelopen decennium is Apple uitgegroeid tot het meest waardevolle bedrijf ter wereld. Een invloedrijk bedrijf als Apple is nog moeilijk rebels te noemen. Zij bepalen de standaarden, zij bepalen welke apps in de App Store verschijnen en zij bepalen wat de gebruiker te zien krijgt. Apple censureert en controleert, Apple Stores worden bedevaartsoorden voor juichende mensenmassa’s. Hoe zat dat ook alweer met het rebelse karakter en Big Brother omver werpen? Een interessant vraagstuk, welke ik heb ontleend aan een aflevering van The Daily Show.
 

 

Mijns inziens is er nog niet zoveel aan de hand. Apple wil nog steeds gave producten maken. Volgens Isaacson denkt CEO Tim Cook ook in die geest. Het lijkt me niet aannemelijk dat geld en macht de drijfveer binnen het bedrijf zijn geworden. Zolang de consument kritisch blijft en niet onverschillig alle opgelegde cultuur accepteert, is er weinig reden om bang te zijn voor Apple. Keep questioning, keep critiquing. Ok, flauwe grapje, maar we moeten ons pas zorgen maken wanneer wij zelf Big Brother-achtige praktijken klakkeloos accepteren.

Het werk van Isaacson wordt zowel geroemd als bekritiseerd. Vooral zijn objectiviteit staat vaak ter discussie. Ondanks de goede relatie die Isaacson met Jobs ontwikkelde, bestrijdt hij deze aantijgingen: niemand sprak anoniem, alles heeft een bronvermelding en het boek is niet louter een lofzang. Ook tijdens de interviews was Steve ‘honest, brutally honest’!

Zie ook: Review round-up: Is Steve Jobs’ biography accurate?

 
 

Mar 31

Google Maps 8-bit for NES

Hier hebben we lang op gewacht! Haal uw oude NES van zolder en verbind ‘m met Google Maps!

Alvast proberen? Check Google Maps 8-bit!

Edit: nog een Google 1 april grap: Google Really Advanced Search!
 
 

Mar 26

Orwell meets Duck

Mijns inziens behoeft het geen betoog om te stellen dat het weekblad Donald Duck niet alleen voor kinderen is. De verwijzingen naar cultuur en geschiedenis, de politieke corruptie van Duckstadse stadsbestuurders en de stereotype dames bij de uitverkoop van Het Wespennest behoren tot het klassieke Duck-vermaak. Het in Duckstad populaire boek De Ontdekking van de Zemel van Harry Muesli is een van de bekendste grappen in dit soort.

Op de achterkant van Donald Duck nr. 10-2012 staat een zeer interessante Duck-style kritiek op de hedendaagse media in relatie tot kinderen. De tekeningen zijn van de hand van Mau Heymans, die mij bekend staat om de vele bizarre, maar zeer scherpe Duck-verhalen. In verband met copyright link ik alleen met een plaatje uit de I.N.D.U.C.K.S. database.

Mar 23

Mapping: een warm kunstje

Het in kaart brengen van objecten, routes, landen, wegen en noem maar op kent een lange traditie. Cartografie, ook wel mapping, was behalve een vak ook een kunst. Zeemannen maakten en gebruikten kaarten voor ontdekkingsreizen. Kunstenaars lieten door middel van kaarten de grootsheid van het koninkrijk zien. Een mooi voorbeeld hiervan is een wereldkaart uit 1886 dat de omvang van het Britse rijk weergeeft:
 
Imperial Federation, map of the world showing the extent of the British Empire in 1886

Sinds het internettijdperk is er het een en ander veranderd. Toen in 2005 Google Maps werd gelanceerd, werd het voor iedere internetgebruiker mogelijk om cartograaf te worden. Hoewel de kaarten en satellietbeelden kant-en-klaar door Google worden geleverd, kunnen gebruikers door de kaarten te annoteren hun eigen betekenis eraan geven. Zo kan iedereen zijn eigen vakantiekaart maken, belangrijke plaatsen met vrienden delen en gemakkelijk de afstand van zijn hardlooprondje meten.

Gisteren kwam ik een artikel van eind februari tegen over de gemeente Haarlemmermeer. Om de overlast van hondenpoep aan te pakken, zijn er speciale bakken geplaatst waar hondenbezitters de bolus van hun viervoeter kunnen dumpen. Ter promotie hiervan werd Google Maps ingezet: fijne drol-icoontjes laten zien waar binnen de gemeente de bolusbakken te vinden zijn.
 

Hier uw hondenpoep weergeven op een grotere kaart

De kunst van cartografie is in de loop der tijd veranderd. We hoeven het niet meer over te laten aan een elite. Nu hopen dat er binnenkort een gecrowdsourced project wordt opgestart waarmee we de hondendrollen zelf kunnen mappen. Door middel van een Bolus-app met push-notificaties zullen we in de nabije toekomst worden gewaarschuwd wanneer we in een hondendrol dreigen te stappen.
 

 
Foto credits: Norman B. Leventhal Map Center at the BPL & MartinV20

Mar 13

#NS – Het Online Klachtendepot van de Nederlandse Spoorwegen

Afgelopen week verscheen in het nieuws dat minister Schultz hoge boetes aan de NS en Prorail oplegt vanwege onvoldoende prestaties over 2010 en 2011. Hoewel er nog nooit zoveel treinen op tijd reden, was de reiziger niet tevreden. Deze zouden vooral klagen over slechte informatievoorziening. Volgens Schultz is klanttevredenheid minstens zo belangrijk als punctualiteit en ligt voor de NS daar de uitdaging.

Eind vorig jaar heb ik een mini-onderzoek gedaan naar het gebruik van de hashtag #NS op Twitter. Trending Topicmeter Twirus.nl gaf de hashtag destijds de volgende beschrijving:

Als de NS trending is, smelten de rails van de zomerhitte, verstoppen herfstblaadjes de wielen, of bevriezen de wissels.

Deze claim is inmiddels niet meer terug te vinden, maar gaf toen aanleiding voor een klein onderzoekje. Het doet immers vermoeden dat #NS voornamelijk wordt gebruikt als kanaal waar reizigers hun frustratie over de treinlogistiek uiten. Daarnaast is het interessant om te zien hoe nieuwe media als Twitter gebruikt kunnen worden om iets over het dagelijks leven te zeggen. Hoewel de uitkomsten varieerden, waren er twee voorzichtige conclusies te trekken.

Aan de ene kant laten de tweets zien dat #NS wordt gebruikt door reizigers die elkaar informeren door nieuws met elkaar te delen. Aan de andere kant laat voornamelijk de analyse op individuele woorden zien dat er sprake is van een klaagcultuur. De algemene klanttevredenheid van reizigers is hiermee lastig te meten gezien de tweets vermoedelijk geplaatst worden op momenten van frustratie. De frequentie van tweets zou hier wel een indicator voor kunnen zijn. Met #NS heeft de Nederlandse Spoorwegen in ieder geval toegang tot een breed en openbaar klachtendepot. Ook zien we dat het bedrijf de hashtag gebruikt om reizigers te informeren. Voor Schultz is het in ieder geval niet voldoende. Vanwege ontevreden reizigers en onvoldoende informatievoorziening moet de NS een boete 1.125.000 euro betalen. Minister Schultz, betere informatie via en minder geklaag op Twitter, telt dat ook mee voor de boete over het volgende jaar?

Meest gebruikte woorden in #NS

Geïnteresseerden kunnen het onderzoekje hier nalezen (pdf, Engelstalig).

Nov 02

Interview with Hein Wils: Stedelijk Museum and ARtours

In January 2010 the Stedelijk Museum’s ARtours project started. Hein Wils (43) leads this augmented reality project and is also involved in everything that works with mobility. The project will end by March 2012, but he remains employed as mobility expert. In the last years, the Stedelijk Museum has gained much expertise on mobile concepts combined with exhibiting art. I asked Hein a few questions about the ARtours project and what is coming up.

Why did the Stedelijk Museum decide to exhibit art in augmented reality?
The main reason is that the museum has been closed since 2003 for renovation purposes. We still wanted to keep our collection open to public. The reasons are now more extended. We found out that augmented reality is a perfect tool to add extra information to certain works. You can think of the little description sign under each work. Some people are also interested in the backside of a painting. Augmented reality allows us to show this information without moving anything. Besides, innovation is always good for museums!

Can you tell us something about ARtours?
ARtours is a project for innovation in cultural expressions, supported by several funds like the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. It mainly focus on mobility research as well as finding possibilities to keep the city of Amsterdam in touch with the Stedelijk Museum. One of the first ideas was to work with Layar, but we decided also to look for more possibilities with other applications. We realized different prototypes with different partners. I will name some examples.
The first one was Ik op het Museumplein (Me on the Museum Square). You can still visit this one by going to the Museumplein and load the layer in Layar. We still use this exhibition to demonstrate some possibilities of AR.
We were also wondering what we could do with projection. We digitized 160 artworks and virtually loan them to festivals. By scanning a QRcode, users can pick up one of these works and hang it somewhere they like. Together with festival visitors, we created an augmented gallery on location out of the Stedelijk Museum’s collection.
However, we wanted to do new things specially made for augmented reality as well. Jan Rothuizen used layer to play with the physical location of the Stedelijk. For instance, he put some speech bubbles on the wall and placed a ladder against the building. Imagining the things around and working them out was basically his idea.
Willem de Ridder, a storyteller, created a tour with things you normally won’t see. It’s about the secret details within the building, like cracks, holes, keys and so on. While he is telling you a story, you will be guided through things you normally won’t notice. It is basically an audio tour, but audio is also a form of augmented reality.
Within the ARtours project, we also help other museums to create their own augmented tours by having workshops and congresses. Last summer we raffled two AR tours among participants. One of the winners was the Prison Museum in Veenhuizen. What makes this project very special, is that they physically rebuild the tour for the ones who do not have a smartphone. Thus it became an offline exhibition as well.
The last example I would like to mention is the Augmentizer by Sander Veenhof. It combines both old and new techniques. By photographing people they will be captured in augmented reality. We tried this at Lowlands and it was quite a success. Later we moved the captured people to the museum.


Putting it all together, the ARtours project is very much about experimenting en pioneering. We often attend to congresses and lectures and organize congresses ourselves too. In the future, we would like to do more with image recognition because that could be the killer app in our museum.

With which partners does the Stedelijk Museum work?
We have made the application for support together with Fabrique, which is still an important partner in concepts and interaction. 7scenes is realizing platforms. Of course there is a direct connection with Layar, even though we work separately. TAB World Media, Muzar and many other smaller enterprises often link up.

What feedback do you get from visitors?
The audience responds mixed, but mostly they are very enthusiastic! Sometimes it seems hard to admit to these kinds of new technologies.
Very often there is a lot of admiration, especially with people’s first experience. On the other hand, there is a lot disappointment as well due to small screens, poor internet connections and objects that load very slowly. Fortunately people always understand the experimental aspects. By the way, augmented reality only makes sense when you put additional information in it. You have to think carefully what could be interesting for the audience. Why should they open your application for a second time? Those kind of questions are very interesting!

The museum has been closed since 2003. When will it be open again?
I have to give a diplomatic answer: we hope in 2012.

What has the ARtours project meant to the Stedelijk Museum this far?
We gained a lot of experience with AR. We’ve used techniques that were never been used before. Therefore, we will provide WiFi in the new building. Foreigners must also be able to view everything. Everyone within the Stedelijk Museum now sees the opportunities we can offer visitors with augmented reality. We now work more together and there are better substantive discussions than before. Each of us thinks of themselves about how we can present thinks. A year ago this was almost unthinkable.

Oct 10

App Review: Flitsers.mobi

Are you tired of all those fines in your mailbox because your speed was too high? Are you again surprised by another sneaky hidden speed camera? Those times could belong to the past since the app Flitsers.mobi released in August this year.

Since January 2004, it is forbidden using a radar detector on any motor vehicle in The Netherlands. Radar detectors allowed the driver to detect if their speed is being monitored by the police. Before the police could measure your driving speed properly, the device gives a clear signal so you can lower your speed before getting fined. After the radar is out of range, you can speed up again and continue as fast as you desire. The ban on radar detectors ended this era. The police uses radar detector detectors to detect if you are detecting radars. If so, your penalty would probably be much higher than driving only that few kilometers per hour too fast.

Quickly after the ban on radar detectors, navigation systems like TomTom became popular. Based on your GPS location, several navigation systems were able to warn for speed cameras. Unfortunately, those databases are not always up to date. The new app Flitsers.mobi (part of the mobile website flitsers.mobi) allows you to register a new speed detector yourself. Let’s go for a drive!

When I started the app, a few radars appeared. The one closest to mine was about 30 kilometers away, but this was probably due to the fact that is was already 11pm. Most of the temporary speed monitorings take place when there is a bit more traffic on the roads. Turning on the GPS in the map-view gave me a nice overview of all speed cams on the highways, as well as all known (fixed) ones in my neighborhood. It is only about 250 meters from my dorm to meet the first speed cam. As soon as I hit the road, the app warned me and asked to confirm if the cam is still there. Because it is a fixed one, I pressed ‘Yes’ and got the opportunity to share something on Twitter, Facebook or by e-mail.

During my trip through Leiden, Voorschoten and Oegstgeest I tried to find speed cams which are not in the app yet. I set the app to warn me when a cam is within a range of 250 meters. While I approached an intersection in Voorschoten I really thought I got a missing one, but about 20 meters before I still received the warning message. Since my GPS location was quite accurate and the Flitsers.mobi map view displayed the cam on its right position, the delay might has something to do with the internet connection, which could be much better on that site.

I hoped to add a new speed camera to the Flitsers database so I was able to try the app’s social function. I have not seen a police monitoring on my route, so I tried a place where a new fixed cam was installed about a year ago. While driving and taking some pictures of my speedometer, my iPhone suddenly showed a push notification of the cam I was heading to. Unfortunately I did not need to add this camera! However, the app asked me whether it should leave the GPS on when I switched to the Camera app. GPS usage costs lots of battery power, so you don’t want to leave it on for nothing.

When driving on the highway, the app recognizes the road number and the corresponding hectometer signs. If you spot a new speed monitor, just press the ‘Add’ button and it automatically shows a list of the last positions you passed the last minutes. I gave up my hope to find a speed cam which was not in the list yet, so I decided to randomly add one on this road. In the first place I apologize to all the people receiving a fake speed cam warning. But secondly, it took my phone about five minutes to register due to the poor internet connection. When I finally got the ‘OK’ message, the cam was neither on the list nor it appeared later that evening. So either the social function works very well, or the app was tired of trying to connect to the server and did nothing at all.

Bringing it all together, Flitsers.mobi is a very useful app for notorious speedy drivers. The developers really did a good job in thinking of a smartphone’s possibilities. Besides speed cams, you can also listen to the lastest traffic information, as well as viewing a list with recent traffic jams. On the other hand, if you are regularly acting like a Formula 1 driver, the app warns you probably too late at some points. Flitsers distinguishes itself from other speed cam detectors because it encourages users to contribute actively, as well as it recognizes the direction in which you drive so you will not be bothered by irrelevant speed cam warnings. Some improvements are very welcome, but it is absolutely the best speed cam detector you can get!

Plus

  • GPS automatically switches off after 5 minutes of not moving
  • Add new speed cams yourself
  • Traffic info
  • Up to date database
  • Recognizes road numbers and driving directions

Min

  • Sometimes gives a late warning
  • I have not seen my added cam in the list
  • Warning sound is very low
  • Battery runs fast while using GPS

Final rating: 8,5 (out of 10)

General info:
App name: Flitsers.mobi
Version: 1.2
Available for: iOS
Developer: Flitsers.net / MobilePioneers
Language: Dutch
Price: € 2,39

This review was originally post on Masters of Media

Oct 06

The Administrator

The administrator is the boss. He is the ruler of his community. He has the power to alter his site, remove content or ban specific users. Basically one could consider him as the autocrat, the despot of the community. Internet, or more specific Web 2.0 applications, allows each user to create their own digital empire and being the autocratic ruler. Hence soon we all are king of our digital domain.

Of course is this not a realistic point of view. When you look back in history, people have always been struggling for power. Some are dominating, others are being dominated. Rulers of former times were almost always engaged in war with one or more countries, cities or nations. In order to maintain themselves as the ruler, they had to have a well-trained army willing to fight for them. Niccolò Machiavelli, an Italian political philosopher and diplomat of the Renaissance, analysis in his most influential work The Prince (Italian: Il Principe; Dutch: De Heerser) several kings and rulers that were always struggling for power. Machiavellist is a common word for a politician or manager that subordinates his personal morality to the exercise of power. In The Prince you can read why this is necessary and how to do that. Usually the ruler needs to involve his subjects in a subtle interplay, keeping an eye on the importance of the multitude. The video below explains Machiavelli’s theory a bit more in detail.

The Prince is still a very popular book for a wide range op people, e.g. psychologists, managers, coaches and politicians. However, the book is also seen as a very controversial one. Machiavelli encourages eliminating political opponents in order to manage your power more effectively. After all, it is not about the people and morality, it’s about gaining and keeping power. Yet to maintain your ruling position, you need the sympathy of the crowd.

One remarkable fact is that Machiavelli hardly speaks of money. After the industrial revolution in the 19th century, the money became more important in theories how to organize a certain community. Adam Smith was one of the earliest economic liberal theorists who argued that the role of the government should focus more on maintaining morality while the people should be free to trade. In Smith’s theory, the government is a kind of guard that takes care about the public wealth. The system regulates itself because Smith believed in the ‘invisible hand’; the idea of everyone’s good intensions in making efforts for the highest possible wealth of the nation. Smith describes the idea of power mainly as a matter of the individual and its way of trading.

Nowadays, the ideas of Smith are mostly reduced to the glorification of freedom. The more the multitude is free, the better it is for society. I will come back to that part later. Karl Marx addresses this freedom issue as quite problematic. The capitalistic system described by people like Smith is the established form of economic organization. Marx argues that people are ranked in their mode of production, the way in which one is related to the productive forces like labor, tools, equipment, technology and buildings. The group of people owning productive forces uses the proletarians, which do not have those forces, to make as much profits as they can. Just like Machiavelli’s theory argues, the ruling class keeps their power by taking care of the proletarians. Even though it is done by paying very small wages. One day, Marx predicts, the proletarians will take over the system, creating a socialistic system with a core role for the government. Everyone will be equal. You can see a nice overview of marxism in de video below.

Taking this into account, let’s jump to the modern, digital times and the question of freedom. Isaiah Berlin determined in 1958 two types of freedom: the negative and the positive. Negative freedom is the extent to which a person or a group can do what they want without being hindered by others. Positive freedom is about the extent to which someone can give direction to its life within our society. The first definition is merely about reducing the authority, the second about gaining status and respect, and thus, power. Adam Smith is often misunderstood as a propagator of the right to be left alone. Yet Smith, as well as Machiavelli and Marx, saw a core role for the government to give a certain direction to our lives.

The World Wide Web is often understood as a platform of complete anarchy. On the one hand, everyone is free to speak and publish. Each musician can distribute his music without interference of a producer. Every entrepreneur is able to compete with large multinational companies. Power to the people! But on the other hand companies like Google, Facebook, Apple and so on gaining lots of user information. These commercial players are to a certain extent comparable with the former capitalistic factories Marx described. If you’re not paying for it, you’re not the customer; you’re the product being sold. For instance, Google makes profit by exploiting our data. We are working for Google, and Google keeps us satisfied by providing some nice, individualized services. We can see another example of power floating to a commercial party by looking to the App Store. The regular way to get new apps on your iPhone is by downloading them from the App Store. Even though everyone can potentially make new applications, you always depend on Apple’s approval.

What I am proposing by this blogpost, is not another research about privacy issues. Rather I am suggesting an understanding of those powerful commercial companies in the social-economic context. What happens to morality if money driven companies gain more and more power? What if digital inequalities lead to serious social problems? What if Google’s Administrator eliminates you from access to their database?

References

Kroe, A. van der, J. Yntema. “Leevensberigt van Adam Smith”. Digitale Bibliotheek voor Nederlandse Letteren. <http://dbnl.nl/tekst/_vad003179701_01/_vad003179701_01_0338.php>. 1797. Web. 1 Oct 2011.

Machiavelli, Niccolò. De Heerser. Trans. Frans van Dooren. Amsterdam: Athenaeum – Polak & Van Gennep, 1976. Print.

 

This article was originally published on Masters of Media.

Sep 18

Book review: Peter Olsthoorn – De macht van Google

What does Google know from us? Since search engines are able to track the user’s search queries, personal information can be gathered in order to improve the engine’s accuracy and provide better results. In De macht van Google (The power of Google), Peter Olsthoorn analyses the pros and cons of Google’s increasing influence on the internet.

Since the foundation in 1998, multimedia journalist Peter Olsthoorn follows Google closely. He was one of the first internet reporters worldwide and has grown to an authority on internet criticism. Many of his publications consider topics like society, internet, blogging and innovation. Google has obviously been one of the most innovative enterprises in the last decennium and obtained much influence in the evolution of the digital society. Therefore, Olsthoorn is the right person to publish nearly the first analysis of the Google-imperium, taking a lead to his American fellow worker Siva Vaidhyanathan.

Do you want to find out whether your diet provides enough vitamins to stay healthy and full of energy? Are you still not cured of a cold? Or perhaps you are looking for some new cheap car parts? In almost every cases you start by entering a query into Google’s search field. According to digital measuring agency comScore, Google has a 65.7% share in the worldwide search engine market. Following Olsthoorn’s figures, in The Netherlands this percentage is even higher: 95.6% in july 2010.

Peter Olsthoorn describes Google’s vertiginous growth in the last decade, that only started with a search engine and the built-in ranking algorithm PageRank. This new way of sorting search results led to much attention by several periodicals and the popularity of raised very quick. At the time Google Adwords was launched in 2000, the success was enormous and the company became able to make profits without external fundings. More than 500 projects have been launched since then, and lots of them silently disappeared. Services like Gmail, Maps and Docs are examples of successful projects, funded by the personalized advertisements that AdWords and AdSense provides. The possible impact of all user data Google saves, is the main topic in De macht van Google, subtitled ‘Werkt Google voor jou of werk jij voor Google?’ (Works Google for you or do you work for Google?). The TROS, a Dutch broadcaster, made a nine minute item about this topic and the release of Olsthoorn’s book. Unfortunately, the video is only available in Dutch. The second video contains a brief summary of the same issue in English.

At the time the book was released in October 2010, Olsthoorn held lots of presentations and took part in many debates to promote his work. On the other hand it showed the topic’s actuality and triggered the interest of many internet users, concerning their privacy and the power Google generates by personalizing all user’s input. A brief enumeration of things Google may know from you when using one or more of their services: your queries in the search engines like Search, Images, Maps, News, Scholar etc. including the links you click on the result page; your social life by Calendar and Picasa; the content of your Gmail, your financial behavior by Finance and Checkout and, more recently, your friends by Buzz and Google+. By gathering search queries, Google may know your name age, nationality, residence, hobbies, fantasies, sexual preferences and so on. Even though the data is anonymous, it could not be too difficult to match a profile and a real life person. The question is whether users have to concern about a commercial enterprise owning that much of personal data.

Yet actually this is the way how digital things work. Google is by far not the only enterprise that mines data out of their database. Data mining has been broadly adopted by several commercial industries. Think of your mobile phone carrier: as long as your phone is connected to their network, they know your location and could use it for analytical purposes. Your Internet Service Provider (ISP) knows which sites you visit. Perhaps your favorite supermarket keeps track on your daily groceries by their special customer discount card. Your virtual data body potentially exists at many companies that try to find patterns and create customer profiles, in order to provide a better service and increase the profits.

Olsthoorn analyses several cases among Google and privacy issues. Despite of complaints of privacy protecting agencies, prosecutions, trails and fines, the company is aware not to force privacy laws. The Don’t be evil slogan and the in 2007 introduced Code of Conduct, a list of ten principles to represent Google’s philosophy. However, sometimes it still goes wrong. In 2010, when they launched Buzz to compete with Twitter, all Gmail users immediately gained access and were able to view with whom their contacts were frequently in touch. Especially bloggers complaint about this issue. Could it be worse? Yes, when it came out that Google saved data of unsecured personal home networks while photographing for Street View.

So should we trust Google? On the third page of the introduction, Olsthoorn writes ‘Ik vind Google geweldig’, basically the equivalent of ‘I love Google’. And that is exactly what most people do. Users have a blind trust in the services because they can not imagine the web without Google’s existence, or are not able to find their digital way otherwise. Google makes people able to quickly find what they need to know. On the other hand, Google serves us with our data input. Even though Olsthoorn answers the trust question with a convinced ‘Yes!’, he argues that Google needs a continuous, critical attention in order to stay the ‘most loveliest enterprise on earth’.

Peter Olsthoorn presents with De macht van Google a relatively complete analysis of Google’s services and infrastructure. At some points, the reader might get bored by the huge number of facts and figures. Yet this shows how complex the enterprise is put together. For those who want to get a better insight or understanding about the way Google works and deals with all the power they gathered in de last thirteen years, De macht van Google is definitely a must read!

Olsthoorn, Peter. ‘De macht van Google’. Utrecht: Kosmos Uitgevers B.V., 2010.
http://www.demachtvangoogle.nl

This review was originally posted on Masters of Media

Sep 16

The virtuality debate

Media mention the term frequently: virtual. Think of virtual worlds (Second Life), gaming environments (World of Warcraft) or simply social network sites (Facebook). Those are places that don’t exist in a physical, touchable form, except from the hosting servers. But how virtual are those virtual places?

I came up with this question while writing my BA thesis on an augmented reality topic. Augmented reality opens the possibility to add an additional information layer to the reality, with intervention of some device. Do you remember the Terminator, shooting on a police force and counting the human victims afterwards? An additional information layer in his point of view tells the audience the number of human kills: 0. You can view the scene on YouTube, embedding this video has been disabled.

Despite of the Terminator’s futuristic looking view, this idea is becoming reality, especially through the popularization of smart phones. At the time this film was produced, 1991, theories about virtuality were hardly not about the combination of the real and the virtual. Terms like cyberspace and virtual reality indicated a huge gap between the online and offline worlds. Scientists discussed about the rise of virtual places, e.g. Rheingold (virtual communities, 1994), Negroponte (being digital, 1995), Turkle (virtual identities, 1995) and Lévy (virtual reality, 1998).

The emergence of broadband internet, and mobile internet in a later stadium, changed a lot in the meaning of the virtual. Users were constantly connected to the internet and computer mediated communication (CMC) became more established. Nowadays the usage of digital tools is part of the offline world, since users are able to produce and share content everywhere. After the dotcom crash in the early 2000s, virtual worlds are more understood in a broader sociological context.

Steve Woolgar concludes in his 2002 publication Virtual Society? that virtual worlds are not independent, stand alone places, but depends on the user’s physical environment. It’s more like an enrichment of the offline ways of communicating. Think for example of people asking if you received their e-mail, possibly to avoid an endless textual conversation but to make a clear point in the first place. Daniel Miller and Don Slater consider the internet as an ethnographic place instead of a medium that creates places separate from the offline, social life.

In that context, the virtual worlds as mentioned above are highly connected to the offline world. Even though we can discuss about the real impact of Second Life, it is clear that big multinational companies invested lots of money to represent themselves in the online world. Playing World of Warcraft can make you some real money. People use Facebook to announce real events. But still, Facebook is not a physical place.

Perhaps augmented reality is the most obvious appearance of the online/offline combination. While walking in the real space, you are connected to a database which provides you additional info about your physical location. In terms of Michel Foucault we would call these interlinked spaces a heterotopia: a physical existing space containing an extra layer of meanings, the same idea as when you look into the mirror: you see the reflection in a space that does not exist. Augmented reality objects are represented on a physical location, but are actually not there.

Putting this all together, can we still mention the term virtual, or should we redefine our notion of virtuality as a space that can aslo be part of the real world?

This article was originally published on Masters of Media.

Older posts «