RSS | Archive | Random

About this blog

media + culture + technology

About Me

Nilesh Zacharias

The opinions expressed on this site are exclusively my personal opinions and unless so stated explicitly, they do not represent the views of any past, present or future employer or any institutions and organizations I may be affiliated with.
21 July 10

The future of lifelogging, reputation management and privacy

Singularity Hub had a great post today about the ‘lifelogging’ trend and what we can expect to see in the years ahead. Here’s the bottom line – it all sounds like bad news for people who worry about their privacy. Keith Kleiner does an excellent job of highlighting the potential benefits of having a detailed recorded memory, coupled with the tools to access and retrieve the data efficiently. He also briefly touches upon the fact that lifelogging is a double edged sword (who hasn’t done a thing or two that they’d rather not be reminded of?). Ultimately, Keith arrives at the conclusion that he has to embrace the idea, because as he boldly puts it “The trend is unstoppable”. Unfortunately, he’s right. But there are two key challenges (a.k.a. great business opportunities) that will need to be overcome before we see widespread adoption of lifelogging.

Lifelog analytics tools:  No matter how extreme/ridiculous the idea of lifelogging in its strictest sense (recording every single minute of your life) may seem, we’re rapidly heading in that direction. We may all not know what a lifelogging camera is yet, but most of us already choose to create a record of (and in many cases broadcast) our daily activities and whereabouts via social media platforms, location-aware applications and by using the web in general. Just read Jeffrey Rosen’s excellent article “The Web means the end of forgetting”  that was published in the New York Times Magazine. The difference is, we presently don’t think about what we do in terms of creating a recording our lives for the purposes of retrieving information from it in the future. This is because most of the current web-based services are not designed/marketed for this purpose and lack tools that provide its users with meaningful insights into their recorded activity (whether intentionally or not). I’ve previously written about how location-based social media services can potentially enhance their consumer value proposition by developing personalized analytics dashboards. The purpose would be to provide  users with insights into the data that is gathered about their daily lives (For example, Fred Wilson got people pretty excited today with his Foursquare Google Maps Mashup). If existing social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Foursquare, etc. don’t do this, third parties will eventually step in to fulfill the need for search and analytics features on such platforms. This will unintentionally lead us another step closer to lifelogging nirvana.

Reputation Management: Another potential roadblock facing widespread adoption of lifelogging is that the privacy-sensitive amongst us won’t easily warm up to the idea of maintaining a detailed record of their lives. However, as mediums to create, store and transmit media become more efficient with each passing day, no one will truly be able to escape this trend. You may choose to not use Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare or may even go to the extreme of living life without the web, but unless you give up information technology entirely and live alone in a log cabin in the woods (and avoid any social contact), there is likely going to be a some digital record of you created by others. This is obviously going to lead to several interesting policy questions related to surreptitious data collection and respecting the rights of those that unwittingly get dragged into the lifelogs of others. In an earlier blog post, I wrote about how this impending loss of anonymity caused by social media and the web in general has its benefits and drawbacks. We will all struggle to manage our reputation by curtailing certain thoughts and actions and will eventually have to pay corporations for reputation management services (to help us enforce limits on what others record, say and share about us).

But what about privacy?

Although everything I’ve written so far may sound like privacy dystopia is inevitable, let’s first consider what people are worried about when they lament the loss of privacy in the digital age. The key issue that concerns most people is the loss of control over their data –- specifically, how it is collected, analyzed, used and shared. All the recent attention around privacy issues in the mainstream media can largely be attributed to the fact that people are not entirely sure who has their data, what they know, and how they plan to use. Panic inevitably ensues and a day doesn’t go by without someone discussing the end of privacy as we know it.

The little beacon of hope I noticed rising above all the despair was a recent New York Times article about a start up called Bynamite. They’re trying to develop a product that will give consumers control over their own information. The idea seems to be focused around giving consumers tools that empower them to extract value from their own profiles and preferences. What if this basic idea gains momentum and can be expanded beyond just one’s web surfing activities? Further, what if something along these lines can eventually be combined with sophisticated lifelog analytics tools and reputation management systems? The end result could be a single platform that not only helps us record, retrieve and analyze the most minute and mundane pieces of our online and offline lives, but also manage what is recorded about ourselves by others. Theoretically, consumers could also control their own ‘life’ profiles and (if you really want to get creative) use their own data as currency.

Is this concept too far fetched? Do consumers really want this much control? If Esther Dyson thinks that the time may have finally come for user-managed privacy tools, perhaps this could really happen down the line. I can’t be certain, but it sure beats looking into the future and proclaiming that privacy is dying!

______________________________________________________________

P.S. No post about lifelogging can be considered complete without mentioning Gordon Bell, co-author of Total Recall: How the E-Memory Revolution Will Change Everything. Here’s a short video that accompanied a 2009 BusinessWeek article about his effort to build a searchable digital memory.

19 July 10

Billboards with eyes: smart ads invade the real world

Image Source: http://distilennui.com/photos/space-Subway-10.jpg

A consortium of 11 Japanese railway companies and their advertising partners recently launched a one year trial of digital billboards that use cameras and facial recognition technology to distinguish a person’s sex and approximate age. The data gathered will be analyzed so companies can provide interactive ads which meet the interest of people who may use the station at a certain time (the ads do not instantly update based on who is passing by). In addition, the cameras apparently do not save recorded images, but only collect and analyze data about groups of people at an aggregate level.

This should come as no surprise to people who have followed the digital signage industry and their attempts to implement smart ads in billboards. Three years ago, Mini Cooper launched an ad campaign aimed at MINI owners who chose to ‘opt-in’ to a pilot program called Motorby and share some information about themselves. The result was personal messages displayed on roadside billboards (featuring MINI ads) every time a MINI owner that opted in drove by.

The idea of embedding cameras in billboards and using facial recognition technology to identify who is in fact looking at the ad was first introduced a couple of years ago. Here’s a New York Times article from 2008 that discusses how technology may help address audience measurement limitations of billboards. Quividi (mentioned in the NYT piece) and CognoVision are two companies in this space that are actively trying to solve this problem by offering video sensors (i.e. cameras) and facial recognition technology to count viewers, the length of impressions, dwell time (the time spent near the displays), potential audience size and demographics (age + gender of the audience). Both Quividi and  CognoVision appear fairly up-front about their commitment to privacy and not identifying individual viewers using their technology. However, one can imagine that as facial recognition technology advances and advertisers figure out ways to craft attractive consumer incentives using an opt-in framework; the Minority Report personalized billboards could be a real possibility in the near future. For a deeper look at the privacy issues associated with digital billboards, read this Center of Democracy and Technology’s report on building a privacy infrastructure for the digital signage industry.

For now, at least, it appears that subway commuters in Japan don’t need to be too worried about privacy. Besides, judging form this video, they’re probably too busy grappling with bigger concerns (i.e. the invasion of personal space and getting into the train) to even think about a billboard watching them.

18 June 10

Checking out (of) location-based social networking

After reading some glowing reviews, a group of friends walk into a new restaurant. Prior to being seated, the first thing they do is pull out their Smartphones and “check-in” their location. 5 minutes later, they’re seated and the menus arrive. Not a word is exchanged but the Smartphones are in action again (checking recommendations on what’s good on the menu). I’m not even going to bother getting into all the updates and photo taking that follows during the meal. I hope you get the picture. Do you see anything wrong with it? Depending on whether you’re a social media bee that’s perpetually buzzing (and loves the addition of geo-location, check-ins and mayorships to the mix) or whether you’re not so eager to broadcast your daily whereabouts, your answer may range from “nothing” to “everything”. I personally am intrigued by the location-based social networking trend, but not impressed enough. In fact, I’ve thought long and hard about the present and future data capabilities of location-based social networks, as well as the privacy implications and potential benefits of social media in general. I do understand why people use and love these services, but I just see no value in it for me yet.

I’m obviously no Luddite. I work for an Internet company, I blog, use Twitter, Facebook, etc. and I love my iPhone (probably a little too much). But I’m also very conscious of the big role these services and devices like the iPhone are beginning to play in my daily life. It’s getting to the point where it sometimes feels like my iPhone is a portable life support system that’s there to feed my insatiable need for real-time information. The more apps I use, the more active I get on social networks, the more irresistible is the urge to pull out my iPhone and check in on my digital life and the ever-expanding ocean of information on the Internet (while checking out of my real world surroundings). Currently, the only saving grace is I can still choose where to draw the line between my daily life and my online participation — I can disconnect or “slow down”. The problem with location-based social networking is that disconnecting is not really a viable option when the very purpose of these services is to blur erase the lines between our offline and online lives.

Another problem with location-based social networking is that all the apparent benefits of a data-driven life could easily turn into a burden, where instead of ever living in the moment, we’re constantly attempting to construct the perfect moment or busy “planning serendipity”. As Aldus Huxley put it so well “Even the best cookery book is no substitute for a bad dinner”. Now Huxley was obviously not talking about location-based social networks and their impact on our perception, but he was right about the fact that we tend to put too much weight on symbols, information and knowledge to the point where we start to believe they are somehow more real than what they stand for. Huxley wasn’t the only one who was concerned about the problem of being overtly influenced by words, knowledge and concepts already established. Jiddu Krishnamurti (a close friend of Huxley) said “Freedom is found in the choiceless awareness of our daily existence and activity”. Krishnamurti’s core philosophy was all about liberating the mind from the burdens of memory and allowing it to appreciate spontaneously of the present moment. We’re quickly moving further away from this concept of freedom because not only do we have complete access to our own memories via the Internet and geo-location based services, but we can also tap into the collective memory and knowledge of our friends and social networks. This is obviously a double-edged sword, because the more you know about the everyone’s thoughts, experiences and whereabouts, the more you are influenced to act based on the information rather than follow your instincts.

This is not only about location-based social networks. Unfortunately, we’re marching towards a world where absolute dependence on data will be commonplace and eventually, we will come to accept that there won’t be a clear separation between the “real” world and the virtual universe of information. The price we will pay is having to manage the impact of knowledge becoming an unnecessary weight on our experiences.

It’s probably a futile effort, but I’d rather stick with spontaneity, live in every moment, experience real coincidences and actually discover new things. A discounted latte is somehow not a compelling enough incentive for me to give that up just yet.

19 May 10

Living in a Game

Yes, Game Mechanics is the new black.

Here’s a fascinating talk by Jesse Schell (@ DICE 2010) about the role that games will play in our daily lives the future of advertising.



Related Post: The Social Data Balancing Act

    7 May 10

    The Social Data Balancing Act

    Is life so boring that you need to turn it into a game?  Millions of people seem to think so and that’s why companies like Foursquare, Gowalla, Brightkite, Loopt and others are the new start up darlings. To the uninformed, these services appear to be similar to Facebook or Twitter, but only scarier, because you pretty much broadcast your precise geo-location every time you “check-in” somewhere in the offline world. Facebook may be busy spreading its social graph around the Internet, but foursquare and others are actually building a social graph in the real world (which probably explains why Facebook is also jumping onto the location/check-in bandwagon sometime soon).

    Of course, none of these services are only about boasting about your active social life by broadcasting every place you visit. The gaming mechanics aspect of it turns routine visits to your gym of local coffee shop into a competition with others (and a marketer’s wet dream). The game encourages you to visit new places, add tips to places you visit, learn more about your friends and yourself. Users seem willing to share more data as they get more engaged with the services. This isn’t all about fun and businesses are seeing real value here. Just ask foursquare and their recent partners like the Wall Street Journal, Bravo, Pepsi, Time Out or the Financial Times. The loyalty and location-based marketing opportunities here seem endless. But where is all this heading?

    Data!

    Continuously improving the gaming mechanics involved (adding new badges, rewards, etc.) is going to be an important part of keeping users engaged and attracting new ones, but as the user base of  companies like Foursquare grows (they recently crossed 1 million users), the real  success of these businesses will hinge on their ability to mine the rich data that is being assembled by the minute.

    A lot of people tend to think that the privacy issues here are less important because users proactively choose to broadcast their location by participating in such services. However, it all really depends upon what these services do with the data (or the social graph) they assemble. At this point they can pretty much do what they want, but as we’ve seen from recent examples, those actions are not without its consequences.

    What companies like Foursquare decide to do with the data can either:

    • directly benefit their users: improve their understanding of their city, friends and themselves;
    • indirectly benefit their users: great marketing offers, discounts, freebies etc.; or
    • offer what appears to be zero user benefit: share it with third parties who may in turn do whatever they please (whether good or bad).

    Is this a privacy issue? Yes and no. It’s what I prefer to call the social data balancing act. On one end of the scale is the value proposition for the user/consumer and on the other end is the value proposition for the business. Of course, the two value propositions are not mutually exclusive, but achieving the right balance is the hardest part.

    Here are some of the data choices that lay ahead:

    Enhance the consumer value proposition:  Use the social graph data to generate a personalized analytics dashboard that provides rich insight and context into each users offline activities based on what they share on such services (places they visit, people they hang around with, emotions they feel). I’m not talking about the simple statistics and history they report now, but layering context and insights to identify patterns and make recommendations on how users can act on the data to improve their lives (e.g. recommended things to do or people to spend time with to make their day more enjoyable, based on previous behaviors). Think of it as a secure, user-specific performance dashboard that can help people optimize their lives based on data! Read this fascinating article from the New York Times about the potential value of a data-driven life.

    Enhance the business value proposition: Mine the social graph data in the manner outlined above and assemble detailed psychological and behavioral profiles of all the users of such services with the goal of segmenting them into categories that can be packaged with data assembled from other sources (online and offline) to build rich profiles and insights that can ultimately be shared with marketers and other third parties for a price.

    To be honest, it’s probably not even a question of choice. The real question is how all (or some) of the above will get done in a manner that balances competing interests, while ensuring the growth of the location-based social media business model. No matter how ridiculous the location trend appears to non-users, if you think about where all this is heading, you will realize that there could be some social value here. The bad news is that extracting that value will require some careful maneuvering through the murky and often stormy waters of privacy, consumer rights, responsible data use, the role of advertising, etc.

    Let’s get this right

    Social data will continue to grow no matter what, but we can use it to either enhance or disrupt our lives. If we somehow get this right, location-based social media businesses can not only be profitable, but can also create amazing consumer experiences that help their users live happier and better lives.

    Ultimately, let’s hope we all come to realize that turning life into a game may not be that bad an idea after all.

    Related Post: Managing the privacy impact of Internet microcelebrity culture

    5 May 10

    Say hello to the Zettabyte!

    So, how rapidly is the Digital Universe expanding?

    • Last year, despite the global recession, the Digital Universe set a record. It grew 62% to nearly 800,000 petabytes (a petabyte is a million gigabytes). Picture a stack of DVDs reaching from the earth to the moon and back.
    • This year, the Digital Universe will grow almost as fast to 1.2 million petabytes, or 1.2 zettabytes.
    • This explosive growth means that by 2020 our Digital Universe will be nearly 50 TIMES AS BIG as it was in 2009. Our stack of DVDs would now reach halfway to Mars.**

    What will your job, business, social life, privacy and security look like in a world where all media, knowledge and culture is digital, online, semantically interlinked and in the hands of various data custodians?

    THINK ABOUT IT.

    **For more information, check out this interesting video by market intelligence firm IDC.

    4 May 10

    Beyond Privacy – the need for value sensitive design in social media

    I’ve written previously about the need for a simple volume know-like control panel for controlling information we choose to share via various social platforms on the internet. The basic idea behind this approach is that notions of privacy vary and continue to evolve as personal and social norms and attitudes change. Therefore, it’s important to let individuals manage their own expectations of privacy. Responsible use of data is an empty promise if your users don’t feel confident about the ability to control the flow of  their information in an easy and efficient manner. But privacy and control of data is not the only issue that’s causing consumer confusion and drawing the ire of advocates and lawmakers. It’s part of a much bigger issue that’s the source of a lot of the widespread concern about social media.

    This core issue is the development and release of social platforms and new features that have the potential of impacting millions of individuals across the world with what appears to be little or no consideration paid to human values. Yes, new technologies are not necessarily value neutral. Batya Friedman and Peter H. Kahn, Jr. first shed light on this important issue in The human-computer interaction handbook.

    According to Friedman and Kahn, there are three basic theories about biases in technology:

    • The Embodied Theory — technologies reflect the biases of their inventors.
    • The Exogenous Theory — biases emerge because of the way society shapes the use of such technologies (beyond the influence or control of the original designer).
    • The Interactional Theory — biases in technology are partly caused by the original design (embodied theory) and the social impact (exogenous theory). Therefore, according  this theory, biases in technology emerge because of the biases of the designer and those of the people using it. In addition, technologies themselves have the ability to shape individual and social behavior.

    Value Sensitive design uses the Interactional theory, a tripartite methodology, and emphasis on direct and indirect stakeholders as an approach to designing technology that accounts for human values in a principled and comprehensive manner.
     
    I’m not advocating a detailed research project before developing and launching every new social media system or feature, but here’s an illustrative list of 10 basic questions that should be asked:

    1. What is the intended business purpose of the system/ feature?
    2. What is the intended user-focused purpose of the system/feature?
    3. Are the current and potential business purposes made clear to the user?
    4. What are the potential uses of the system/feature?
    5. What is the potential impact (negative and positive) on direct stakeholders (the users) ?
    6. What is the potential impact (negative and positive) on indirect stakeholders (other parties that may be affected by the use of the system or feature)?
    7. What are the key issues involved? In other words, what human values are impacted (e.g. ownership and property, physical welfare, freedom from bias, universal usability, autonomy, privacy, security, etc.)?
    8. How can the system/feature balance competing values (e.g. cooperation vs. privacy)?
    9. How do users behave when using the system/feature?
    10. What information is provided by design and performance tests?

    If you’re not prepared to ask and answer the above questions before finalizing the design of a social media system or feature (or for that matter any consumer-facing Internet-based product), you better at least have a good communications plan to deal with the PR backlash that will inevitably follow.

    2 May 10

    Gripe, grumble, whine and vent at BLAHtherapy.com

    Random chat sites don’t seem to be going away any time soon. BLAH Therapy  is the latest entrant that’s trying to put its own unique twist to the Chatroulette model. The easiest way to describe BLAH Therapy is that its like Chatroulette, with a specific purpose and no video (for now). You can either choose to be a “Listener” and help another user or be a “Venter” and chat your problems away. The service randomly connects you to a stranger for an anonymous therapy session.

    Psychcentral.com tested BLAH Therapy and has a detailed review (with pros and cons).

    I’m not sure if this is actually going to turn out to be a useful (and popular) social media site. As the review on Psychcentral points out, you can’t be sure that your chat logs will remain private. Further, BLAH Therapy doesn’t seem to make it clear what they plan to do with the chat logs. Of course, this is probably not going to stop people from using it. But a bigger problem may be that the specific purpose is too limiting and that BLAH Therapy may need to add more features to make it entertaining enough for users to stay engaged.

    Time will tell, but for now it seems to be averaging around 300 active users online, which pales in comparison to Chatroulette’s supposed 20,000 active users.

    Looks like shrinks don’t have much to worry about. Not yet, anyway

    30 April 10

    Digital Air and Digital Oil – why privacy matters

    “Data is digital air”, proclaimed Danah Boyd in her riveting keynote at the WWW2010 conference. She makes some excellent points about Big Data, privacy and the importance of context in this highly recommended read.

    So if data is digital air, what does it mean for the future of media? We’ve seen some monumental shifts in the industry during the last few years and we’re currently in the midst of an epic struggle between media and technology companies for control over a fragmented digital media universe. No one has a true monopoly over user attention on the Internet. In fact, content is now abundant and attention is scarce, so how do you find an audience in a media landscape in which no one is truly only consuming, but also creating, sharing and interacting?

    By filtering the digital air supply — by aggregating and curating digital media and building better tools for consumers to create, access and share the media they want. That’s how you can attempt to capture audiences. And in a world where consumers have more choices than every before, the only way you can hope to keep their attention is by building trust.

    As Danah Boyd points out. “Privacy is not about control over data nor is it a property of data. It’s about a collective understanding of a social situation’s boundaries and knowing how to operate within them”. In other words, privacy is all about trust and not violating user expectations around their data.

    If Data is Digital Air, User Data is Digital Oil.  It’s the data that fuels the Internet economy, but it’s also a scarce natural resource that is dependent on the ability to build and maintain user trust. Like oil, user data needs to be managed in a responsible, sustainable manner. If you violate user trust, you run the risk of turning away users and the data that comes with it.

    Let’s prevent a digital oil crisis.

    28 April 10

    Can you disappear in the digital age?

    Erasing David trailer from Green Lions on Vimeo.

    A DOCUMENTARY ABOUT PRIVACY, SURVEILLANCE AND THE DATABASE STATE

    David Bond lives in one of the most intrusive surveillance states in the world.  He decides to find out how much private companies and the government know about him by putting himself under surveillance and attempting to disappear, a decision that changes his life forever.  Leaving his pregnant wife and young child behind, he is tracked across the database state on a chilling joi urney that forces him to contemplate the meaning of privacy and the loss of it.

    In cinemas from April 29th

    Themed by Hunson. Originally by Josh