A Birthday Post and Present

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/facebook-lets-users-buy-real-things-for-friends/?ref=technology&pagewanted=print

In an effort to diversify its revenue sources, Facebook is presenting users with an easy gifting process.  Indeed, those who partake of the social network need only select an item and recipient, type a greeting, and pay.  Offerings range from cupcakes to sunglasses and seemingly span from $35 to $95.  If this project is profitable, Facebook intends to launch a full virtual storefront.

 I have yet to decide if Facebook’s expansion to tangible, paid-for items will prosper.  Here’s the debate:

Facebook’s advantage is that it advertises the likely forgotten birthdays of friends.  Providing an immediate and convenient solution to flustered users as they ashamedly and belatedly recall their friends’ special day is a brilliant idea.

But…  Will this gesture look thoughtful or generic?  Will the gift selection ever expand enough to appeal to gift-givers?  To birthday boys and girls?  Will Facebookers who are accustomed to online deals pay retail prices for presents?

The likely outcome:  If one friend utilizes this service, others will imitate and the trend will take.  After all, the procedure offers ease and immediacy, two attributes expected by Americans.  However, that one friend must initiate this new Facebook feature or it will remain a mysterious service that lacks credibility, and that is greeted with snickers by Facebookers who refuse to overpay for unremarkable merchandise that indirectly funds the social network.

what's hAPPening?

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/27/a-new-google-app-gives-you-local-information-before-you-ask-for-it/?ref=technology&pagewanted=print

This article details Google’s newest app, Field Trip.  The program seeks signals from cell towers to detect the location of users and then offers unprompted historical trivia about the area.  Google likens the app to “a local friend” who guides you on “your way through a city.”

 While this app does seem like a refreshing idea, awakening individuals to the lovely, rare, and titillating sights that comprise their surroundings, I am perturbed by the world this app foreshadows.  As the essay notes, “Google, along with other computers and researchers, dreams of so-called ubiquitous computing or ambient intelligence—computers woven into the texture of life as opposed to being separate machines.”  EEK.

Why do we need this?  Why must we place yet another shaving of unreality before of our eyes?  What information is so vital that it must disturb the serene flora and unfettered fauna the earth willingly and generously proffers?

Those who promote these technologies allege they will provide us with indispensable knowledge.  We will be informed, alert, and equipped for life.

I must ask…  With all of the latest apps, devices, websites, and technologies, do you notice much of a difference in us?  In our literacy?  In our concern for dying people?  In our retention of data?  In our familiarity with United States history?

Perhaps we’re more aware of things, but are we any different?  Any more knowledgeable?  I don’t think so.

Because ambient intelligence offers the same data as the aforementioned technologies, it will offer the same [lack of] benefits as those technologies.  Indeed, though its visibility tops that of the earlier devices, this is the only significant change.  Ambient intelligence will not improve us; it will merely distract, fluster, and aggravate us.

Must this be our future?  Must this app dictate the route of pending technologies?  Let me ask once more..what’s hAPPening to us?

Amazon Branches Out to Tree Huggers

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/amazon-starts-a-shopping-site-for-the-environmental-crowd/?ref=technology&pagewanted=print

As a prideful lover of all things leafy, floral, and natural, I am pleased to share this article about Vine.com, Amazon’s newest website that promotes green products.  Because the term “green” has been applied and misapplied by many, the website offers its own definition.  Items on this shopping website “must be designed to remove toxins, energy-efficient, natural, organic, powered by renewable energy, reusable, made of sustainable materials, or water-efficient.”  The website also offers “fair trade products and products made within 100 miles of a shopper’s home.”  From bamboo cutting boards to low-flow shower heads to locally crafted jewelry, an array of appealing and relatively earth-friendly items adorn the Vine.com website.

Naturally, criticism followed Amazon’s announcement.  Indeed, individuals reminded the corporation of the wasteful packing materials that will accompany these green products.  Naysayers also expressed disgust that Amazon would, through the acquisition of this website, suggest concern for the planet, as the corporation’s daily operations (e.g. its endless e-sludge (see WWW:  Wasteful Wireless Ways post), disposable/ imported items, and generally useless commercialized rubbish) oppose the earth’s vitality.  However, the unruffled site leader responded with the statement, “This is a site that is not necessarily about saving the planet.

Personally, I am befuddled by the responses of critics.  They oppose the packaging of the items?  Does no one understand that it is not the packaging that menaces us, but rather the simple and persistent trend of consumerism?  We buy, we receive, we swap old for new, we dispose.  Just think of the reusable water bottle situation.  If everyone purchased only one of these, perhaps the trend would be nifty and environmentally responsible.  But we buy so many more than one per person!  Now, we have an abundance of bottles composed of far sturdier materials than plastic and we toss those into the bins instead!  Hello people, the packaging is not the problem.

Anyway, my general response to the article is positive.  Indeed, as one who periodically searches for green products, I will feel that the “green content” or the “green function” of items featured on this site are somewhat legitimized by Vine.com’s staff.  I will know that, as far as online products go, these are relatively reputable.  Also, I am confident that, by presenting green products on one comprehensive and popular website, Vine.com will encourage consumers to seek ecological options when they shop online.

Cheers, Amazon.  This tree hugger is delighted you branched out with Vine.com.

Tag! Facebook says you're it!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/22/technology/facebook-backs-down-on-face-recognition-in-europe.html?ref=technology&_moc.semityn.www

In June of 2012, Facebook acquired facial recognition software developed by an Israeli company.  This software eases the picture tagging process by identifying the individuals featured in images and automatically suggesting each name to rushed photo uploaders.

European nations are vexed, as this software compromises the privacy of Facebookers.  In my opinion, their ruffled feathers are merited.  One need only ponder the looming application of the intrusive technology to understand this European distress.

Imagine the year 2020.  Billboards and televisions are equipped with miniscule cameras that detect the faces (and thus, with this new Facebook technology, the identities) of observers.  You amble past a screen and a sensor jumps to the ready and scans you.  As a positive identification is reached, the devices tailor their programming and advertisements to your preferences, enticing you to purchase items and watch shows that appeal particularly to you.

You will squander money.  You will squander time.  You will grant technology further access to your mind, routine, and home.

Not to mention the surveillance implications of this software.  While few of us actually intend to commit a crime at any point in our lives, we can still find it intimidating and off-putting that, with this technology, storeowners, government agencies, and even wealthy individuals with security systems can review their surveillance footage and obtain the identities of unaware passersby.

Fortunately, United States politicians are finally stirring to offer their grumblings and grievances.  Indeed, ‘At a hearing on Capitol Hill last July, Senator Al Franken, Democrat of Minnesota, described Facebook as the “world’s largest privately held database of face prints — without the explicit consent of its users.”’

While I understand that this system marks a reasonable and natural progression of technology, I must condemn its continued use.  Though I have fewer secrets than a reality star, I cannot reconcile myself to this invasion, even in its mini Facebook form.

The solution?

I know.  Let’s all just spend three extra minutes to manually tag our friends and family.

Or, though this is slightly outrageous, we could even stop snapping pictures for a few moments, look up from our screens, and actually offer full presence to our lives!  How about that?

How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood…with a computer?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/technology/computer-precision-for-power-tools-novelties.html?ref=technology

A Ph.D. student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology recently created a sophisticated tech-tool that will thrill those who enjoy crafts and construction.  Indeed, Ilan E. Moyer launched a “computerized addition to power tools that automatically performs precision measuring and cutting.”  Equipped with a camera, motors, and a video screen, the device guides individuals as they overcome the tricky task of shaping wood.

My reaction is scattered.  First, I do applaud those devices that permit everyday men and women to perform specialized and inaccessible tasks.  In a sense, such technologies expand our independence and equip us with the confidence and capacity to develop ourselves and to diversify our capabilities.

How do you feel after you accomplish a notoriously thorny activity?  I feel exceptional.  When I manage to assemble a seven foot kitty playhouse or to untangle an impossibly jumbled necklace, I feel exceptional.

This tool offers us a few more opportunities to feel exceptional.

However, I can never fully rejoice when yet another specialized skill becomes technologized.  Goodbye artisans.  Goodbye experts.  Goodbye Etsy vendors.  Goodbye to all those individuals who make a living carving, sanding, manipulating, and perfecting wooden art, accents, and sculptures.

Goodbye to our differences.  Goodbye to those unique and inimitable talents that distinguish us and that colorfully beautify the mosaic of mankind.

This seems extreme, but isn’t it true?  When everyone can perform a task, we lose our appreciation for it.  I may be making too much of a GPS for woodcutting but I can’t help it.  If When this device reaches the market, the skillsets of men and women will grow in resemblance as those same men and women wither in diversity.

WWW: Wasteful Wireless Ways

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/technology/data-centers-waste-vast-amounts-of-energy-belying-industry-image.html?ref=technology&_moc.semityn.www

http://urthecast.com/blog2/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/tech-and-globe.jpg

This article illuminates an often unacknowledged dilemma:  The tangible repercussions of our intangible wireless activities.

As the New York Times piece notes, online companies “run their facilities at maximum capacity around the clock” and resultantly waste “90 percent or more of the electricity they pull off the grid.”  Additionally, these companies utilize diesel generators and “thousands of lead-acid batteries” to power their computers and back-up systems.

It gets worse.  Read the following statistic with elevated feet and cellphone in hand:

“Worldwide, the digital warehouses use about 30 billion watts of electricity, roughly equivalent to the output of 30 nuclear power plants.”

Stop.  Just stop.

Our cumulative e-sludge is comparable to the suffocating waste of thirty nuclear power plants?

Pick up your jaw now.  It would be thoughtless to rob it of another shocked free-fall as the article wraps up with the following:

The alleged cause of these shameful statistics:  You.  Yep, you.  And me, I suppose.

The piece contends, “That’s what’s driving that massive growth—the end-user expectation of anything, anytime, anywhere…  We’re causing the problem.”

Though no bribe could compel me to promote mankind as irreproachable, I must express my disgust for this ineffective and pompous shift of blame.  Yes, we Google, eBay, and YouTube too much.  However, let’s not forget that we have developed these habits because companies greedily supply us handy and uninterrupted internet access.

Is a company environmentally conscientious if it defies pollution laws to provide better service and attract more customers?  No.

Is a company moral if it blooms as the earth shrivels?  No.

Then is it fair to blame the users?  No.

When we reduce this situation to its elemental makeup, we identify the legitimate cause-effect relationship.  Said succinctly, companies should never have offered us such unsustainable and poisoning internet capacities and speeds.

Think of a situation when a friend recommended a favorite dessert or television show.  You sampled their suggestion and thereafter clung to it with ferocious passion.  As you swallowed the sugars and observed the on-air nonsense, you attempted to hush the truth that the calories and content you so enjoyed were corrupting your wellbeing.

How is this different?  Companies supplied the internet, we gobbled it up, and the earth began to shriek.  We just couldn’t hear it.

But the companies could.  Their meters announced these transgressions in illuminated red block letters.

Their services encouraged our Wasteful Wireless Ways and promoted a communal web-dependent lifestyle that our home cannot withstand.

I saw that profile picture of you jumping off a bridge...so I went and jumped off too!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/13/us/politics/social-networks-affect-voter-turnout-study-finds.html?_r=1&ref=technology&pagewanted=print

http://www.blitzmediadesign.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/jumping-off-bridge.jpg

The cited article addresses Facebook’s ever-expanding influence on the choices and lifestyles of America’s users.  Indeed, one study found that a specialized Election Day message posted to the social networking site “generated 340,000 additional votes nationwide.”  Apparently, the Election Day message displayed to each user images of friends who had voted earlier that day.  Eager to imitate their friends, hundreds of thousands of Facebookers joined the ranks of voting Americans.

Convinced that this is a pervasive issue, scientists are proposing further studies that link weight loss to social networking as well.  As a professor of medical genetics and political science noted, “What we have shown here is that the online world and the real world affect one another.”

With a bombastic flourish, researchers designate this trend the “social contagion effect.”

Truthfully, I am surprised that such an obvious issue merits a New York Times article, let alone independent research at prestigious institutions.  People imitating people…  Why is this suddenly a novel discovery?  What else is man supposed to imitate if not his neighbor?  His daughter’s hermit crab?

If we didn’t imitate one another, why in the world would parents perpetually parrot that wretched bridge expression?  Of course we mimic the actions of our friends.  Of course our mimicry is surging now that we possess uninterrupted cyber-access to the choices and activities of those friends.  Of course, of course, of course.

 Is this a bad thing?

If social networking motivates people to vote and live healthily, then no.  If, however, it encourages users to abandon their true identities and adopt the behaviors and preferences of their Facebook friends, then yes.  Indubitably, yes.