Comments for ROUGH TYPE

Comment on Transparency begins at Home by Tim

Tim — Sat, 15 Jun 2013 19:50:58 +0000

It is only “vastly different” if you perceive the government and facebook as different entities, however, as they are collecting the same information, sharing your data and using that your data in ways that you do not either know about or can control, then I think it is safe to consider them extremely similar if not essentially the same.
I teach at a Junior High and I think the greater worry is how this data-minding is affecting the child. I show them the “Barbie” search -then and now- and we discuss things, yet the sophistication of digital manipulation continues to grow. Corporate goals are not always human, (or humane) goals. Our best humanistic understandings are being pressured through our interactions with media as never before. The secretive nature of the manipulation assists in making it even more powerful.
I live in Canada and we’re in a similar mess with our government syping. The sanctity of personal privacy is supposed to be protected by law. As a result of your Patriot Act we cannot store information on the cloud, nor can we store information on any server located in our own country that is owned by an American company. It is against the law to do so, as we must protect the privacy of our citizens. This has long been the law, however, most our institutions were sleepily accepting of some violations. Now, we have woken up. This means, no google mail, no google docs, no MSN etc…. In essence we are moving back to controlling our own data on site.

Comment on Transparency begins at Home by Artemas Gruzdef

Artemas Gruzdef — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 04:54:52 +0000

I’m sorry, but that’s absurd. I chose to give my information to Facebook, and I could choose not to, or I could choose to give it to a competitor. The government, on the other hand, knew a lot about me before I could make any choices at all, and I still cannot “unsubscribe” from the government even if I want to. The extent to which trust can be abused by Facebook and by the government is so vastly different.

Comment on Transparency begins at Home by mpinco

mpinco — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 04:23:19 +0000

For social media YOU are the product. Given that fact, now let’s begin the discussion on transparency.

The outcome of this discussion is now much different.

Comment on Transparency begins at Home by Cindy Wolff

Cindy Wolff — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 18:01:59 +0000

For years now, librarians have wanted the kind of transparency that Zuckerberg is asking for. I hope we do get transparency, but I am not surprised at the amount of free speech points ($=influence) it took to garner so much attention.

Comment on Transparency begins at Home by Dieter Mueller

Dieter Mueller — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 17:49:51 +0000

It is good to know that the “It’s-not-my-fucking-Problem”-Gag-Reflex hasn’t died out in the digital Age.

“Openness” has become a One-Way-Street for all these Data-Squids.

It is Time that the Public starts to own social Spaces on the Net and demands Open-Source-Tool for their Use.

Comment on Transparency begins at Home by Kim

Kim — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 17:17:03 +0000

I do not know how we can achieve balance between consumers and corporations in control and access to personal data (and I mean access to data about me that apparently I’m not allowed to see or even know about) until the vanguards of what’s possible–those in Silicon Valley–agree to make it so. Users have no say over their data because the technorati have concluded that their job is to write algorithms that do the “hard work” of giving users what they “really want,” rather than creating tools that help users decide for themselves. Users are too stupid, inattentive or unskilled to do for themselves, these software engineers believe, so the only answer is to personalize the services for them, and that requires profiles and that requires personal data. Any attempt to prevent access to personal data on the part of these companies, then, is messing with the business model.

Given that software engineers essentially run the world–what they put into code becomes what’s possible–it’s a bit concerning that these individuals are trained to reduce the control and impact humans have on technical systems in the name of providing simpler, more convenient or faster “smart services.” How about building tools that help me make myself smarter? It’s either a smokescreen or incredibly limited thinking to argue that my personal data is the only path to a better digital future, and that giving me control over it might bring growth to a halt.

Comment on The prism house by John Schoettler

John Schoettler — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 21:29:13 +0000

The PC and the internet that connects them is intrinsically in a civil war between the printed word and the video image. At the PC’s onset it was a typewriter that was bestowed a microprocessor (an artificial brain) and then connected to a TV monitor to display its thoughts. That very fusion of these two different media forms (driven by an artificial brain) is at the root of the conflict between those who use the internet to read and those who use it to watch videos.

Comment on The prism house by Tim

Tim — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 23:44:07 +0000

I had not thought of Solzhenitsyn in many, many years. I thank you for reminding me of him, and of how this so greatly relates to the revelations of the last week. Knowing of Solzhenitsyn, I believe, always meant one was aware of the similarity of power regardless of ideology. The revelations of this week do not seem surprising. Sadly, they are too real, so tangible and frightening, yet so mundanely acceptable to most company. Where is the uprising and protest that were the hallmarks of the late 60′s? Has the internet made us into a brain that is capable of understanding and empathy, yet incapable of ethical action?

Comment on To connect with love by Kevin Ostanek

Kevin Ostanek — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 22:16:19 +0000

Owl, from Winnie-the-Pooh, reminded me recently, as I watched the video with my young son, that a paragraph is “a collection of sentences that form a complete thought.” That is what Facebook doesn’t have: paragraphs – and complete thoughts.

Comment on The prism house by Samir

Samir — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 14:36:36 +0000

And today:

A while back I had a conversation about this with a longtime digital-freedom hacktivist who had initially been a senior advisor in the WikiLeaks project. I asked him what he thought were the most important political projects to protect online privacy and organisational openness. He said that ship had sailed; it was too late to carve out a zone of electronic freedom. The architecture had already been defined; the telecoms corporations and the government can learn whatever they want about you, and there was no way to undo what had been built. So, I asked, how did he plan on protecting himself against America's crusade against WikiLeaks? He didn't, he said. He had a family to consider. He'd dropped out.

- Democracy in America, Jun 6th 2013.

Comment on The prism house by Snottzoid

Snottzoid — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:43:40 +0000

How appropriate, considering today’s news of Edward Snowden and the NSA.

Comment on The prism house by Adam

Adam — Mon, 10 Jun 2013 01:18:23 +0000

“[man]….naturally develops a respect for the people who manipulate the threads, who manage personnel records administration”

We are all guilty of being “fans” of the CIA and holding them in a certain child-like awe. What they do is not awesome. As a matter of fact, people don’t realize that part of how they work is to project a veneer of competence. They are just lazy, bungling, ineffective bureaucrats with enormous power to ruin your life.