DCD ProSeminar 07

According to Brown and Duguid, “one reason knowledge may be so hard to give and receive is that knowledge seems to require more by way of assimilation”(p. 120). What do you think of this “assimilation” term in terms of knowledge management?

From the definitions of information and knowledge, it seems knowledge covers information. I wonder if knowledge management covers information management or are they different management concepts that use different tools?

Considering that first there was data management, then it was information management and now knowledge management is popular term in (especially) business world. So, what is going to happen in the future?

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/15.04/wired40_rip.html

I thought that this was an interesting article that sort of had a different perspective about the future. It thinks of the death of the desktop in a different way, what do you think? Does this article fit into the concept of Everywhere? What about Database Nation, is having all of our e-mail on the Internet through things like Gmail or other web based e-mail clients make us more vulnerable?

Just wanted to know some of you thoughts.

I wanted to share my observations and thoughts on our last evening (4/10/07) online discussion (chat) meeting. Having been exposed to and involved in many similar meetings I did not find much that was unpredictable at the conclusion of our meeting. I observed the group connecting with little trouble and the general experimentation with fonts, colors and emotes to be refreshing as everyone became comfortable with their screen and the flow of messages. After nearly an hour of a few random discussion threads, in spite of Nancy’s gallant effort of offering topics to discuss, a sense of frustration became apparent. Some were working on threads of discussion that had long before scrolled off of the screen while others asked if taking turns was a more structured way to ensure everyone had the opportunity to contribute. Nevertheless this was not such a bad first attempt. I do think that the mode of communication lends itself best to social meetings especially when there are eight persons in the chat room. Usually two or three would break off to a private room for their discussions and afterwards return to the group. If the meeting was to be a formal discussion around specific topics or issues I would suggest some of the following as guidelines. Begin with an agenda, or list of topics to be discussed, before the actual meeting begins. This would allow for group members to formulate some thoughts, answers and even additional questions. Select a moderator/leader to control the discussions and ensure that everyone has an opportunity to contribute. Select one topic or issue at a time and do not wander away during the discussion. Keep focused until that topic is completed and let the leader advance the program. As contributors to the discussion please take a turn on each topic or indicate that you pass so the group can continue in a timely manner. If you have advanced thoughts you could type them and hold before sending until your turn arrives, in an effort to expedite the discussion. I am sure there are other suggestions others will add to this review. I do think it was a good show and --- Well Done Group, with THANKS especially to Nancy for enduring our efforts.

RFF

Please post any questions you would like to ask of John S. Brown, co-author of The Social Life of Information, that we discussed online last evening. Nancy will have the opportunity to meet and deliver our class comments and questions to him in the near future. If we all add them to the comments section of this posting, all the information will be in one place for Nancy to retrieve.
RFF

Assignment four is really asking you to give an account of what kind of subject matter you will be offering on your site and a preliminary sense of its main elements. More or less like what was given to you for Assignment 3. I won't hold you precisely to what you outline for this assignment -- that is, you can revise your plans for your site -- but you should think about what the four pages will have on them.

Just a reminder about class on Monday. Professor Moulthrop will be conducting class in my absence. He will be working with you with an in-class exercise that will help you review aspects of XHTML that have been challenging and will also ask you to apply some of the style techniques you have been reading about and using for Assignment 3. I'll be back for class on April 16 and will cover/review the box model and its implications for CSS then.

Folks, please make sure you look at the revised syllabus. All major changes are in red. You will see that your lit reviews are now going to be due on April 17 and your final proposals and presentations on May 15.

You'll find the changes here: http://iat.ubalt.edu/courses/idia810.185_sp07/syllabus.shtml.

Just a reminder (thanks to Ray) that we are meeting this evening in CR 101 A. See you all at 8:15.

Nancy

After reading about the smart hydro intelligent bath. Do any of you feel as though it’s just too much? Are we allowing technology too much of an invasion into our lives?

Greenfield uses hiking as an example where technology can take all the fun and challenge out of something. If people become so reliant on technology, will they eventually loose their natural instincts?

With every feeling out in the open as Greenfield talks about in online social networks. Will they eventually change how we interact socially?

Greenfield sites MasterCard as one of the companies that will benefit from money being a swipe of a “pass card”. They saw increases of 25% in spending when tested. How will this affect the future? For you, is $200 on the debit card easier to spend than $200 cash?

Greenfield mentions that children who use everywhere for navigation would literally be lost without it. That they would never develop the skills needed to navigate or get a sense of direction. What potential problem does this pose for the future? How could this be avoided and still utilize the technology?

Greenfield talks about the complexity of everywhere and gives and example of a home run completely on everywhere. He talks about troubleshooting problems in that house and whether to call a plumber, electrician, computer person …etc. In business terms, this requires service companies to have a larger staff with more expertise in individual areas. This scenario will make service cost astronomical (as if they’re low today) in the future. What effect will this have on the economy as a whole? Will everywhere never truly integrate into the common household and only honestly be available to the elite?

Greenfield talks about the amount of processor speed needed to run everywhere in a home. Estimates put processor speeds of2GHz at about the cost of today’s minor appliance ($100), by the end of the decade. Will this make everywhere feasible of will 2ghz in 2010 be the joke 800mhz is today?

Greenfield touches on the idea that as a society are we ready for smart yet? He compares a chair with an iPod. The chair really isn’t ever going to fail you and nobody ever had to teach you how to use it. An iPod however is quite different. I think of someone like my father, a very intelligent man, but he would end up tossing the iPod through a window before he took the time to figure it out. Given the generation gap, are we really further away from everywhere than expected. Are we looking at early adaptors not even being onboard until 20 years form now?

It’s kind of quiet out there. Everyone must be enjoying the spring break. Or maybe it’s because my first set of questions didn’t stimulate much interest. If that’s the case, here are a few more morsels to chew on, if you have the appetite. Again, please pick and choose.

“Relationality has its limits,” as Greenfield admits on page 83. What kinds of circumstances might cause ripples that are strong enough to seriously disrupt everyware?

To be human is to err and, at times, people become vulnerable to external influences that impair their judgment. So, just about everyone has made decisions that were later regretted. It’s hard enough for convicts to rebuild their lives even without interference from the omnipresent everyware. Should people be forever marked by their past decisions, which Greenfield says “will follow us around?”

Greenfield mentions the following four technological factors that are converging to make everyware not only possible, but inevitable.
o RFID transponders (to uniquely identify all people, places, and things)
o UWB transmission (to provide a ultra-wide communication channel)
o IPv6 Internet protocol (to supply an almost unlimited number of Internet addresses)
o Inexpensive processors (to make it feasible for computing to permeate the physical
environment)
If any one of the stars in this constellation of factors that will form the outline of everyware were to become dim (i.e., does not materialize or does not live up to expectations), could everyware still become a reality? If not, which factor do you believe is most critical to its formation? Please explain the reason(s) for your answer.

I mentioned previously my personal concern that everyware will create a gigantic case of information overload, causing unnecessary stress in many people. On page 114, Greenfield counters by saying, “the widespread deployment of information-processing resources in the environment paradoxically helps to reduce the user’s sense of being overwhelmed by data.” He backs up his claim by explaining that information will remain in the periphery of a person’s consciousness until it is needed or wanted. As an example of this condition, Greenfield provides Live Wire, an eight-foot curtain of dangling plastic strings that signals the current level of Internet activity by springing to life during high-use periods. In describing how the curtain works, he mentions that not only is it seen in the hallway where it is located, but also can be “heard throughout the suite of nearby offices.” Granted that if something like white noise is heard long enough, the mind stops paying attention to the vibrations hitting the eardrums (satiation), relegating the environmental stimulus to one’s peripheral attention. However, the stimulus doesn’t stop and, as a result, the eardrums keep sending auditory signals to the brain. So, what I’m wondering is: Is such information as the current level of Internet activity valuable, or just so much digital clutter that is just as annoying as junk mail, e-mail spam, and constant telemarketing calls (even if you ignore them by not picking up the phone)? And if so, does the presence of trivial information in the environment cause stress, even though it remains in the periphery of one’s consciousness?

On pages 109-110, Greenfield mentions what he describes as six “social engineering strategies,” developed by MIT sociologist Gary Marx, the goal of which is to “eliminate or limit violations by control of the physical and social environment.” The strategies listed seem to be sensible on the surface and do not appear to threaten civil liberties, and I like feeling safe where I live and work as much as anyone else. However, the term, social engineering, gives me a whole different feeling. Did anyone else have the same, or a different, reaction?

Here are a few questions to get our discussion going. Please do not feel that you have to answer all of them (unless you’re motivated to do that). Rather, just pick a couple of them that are particularly salient to you, or that are related to experiences that you would like to share with the group.

Having read Database Nation, are you comfortable with the concept of everyware (i.e., that your every move and mood could be recorded and become a part of the “datasphere”)?

One of the fundamental differences between present-day computing and everyware is what Greenfield refers to as ambient informatics. That is, a computer is on only when you want to use it, whereas everyware is an ever-present experience. It’s always on. It never goes away. Would you consider everyware to be an intrusion on you life? Why or why not?

One of the most significant distinguishing features of everyware is that information will be everywhere - literally. Would this condition be helpful to you in your daily life, or more stressful in the sense that you might become overwhelmed by the sheer volume of available information? If the latter, could mechanisms be built into everyware to help people avoid information overload?

Think about your daily routine and provide an example of ubicomp (ubiquitous computing). Better yet, reflect on your daily activities to see if you can think of an example of ubicomp of which you were not previously aware. Is this innovation beneficial to you? If so, in what way? How might it be abused?

Are you ready to give up your desktop computer? In other words, have you become so attached to using this tool, or does it serve your present computing needs so well, that you believe it would be hard to part with it, or it would not be worthwhile to embrace a newer technology (assuming everyware were the alternative)? If not, why?

Are gestures and voice commands really any easier to perform than pointing and clicking with a mouse, or is the benefit of the former mode of interaction that it is more natural to humans? (If you’ve ever tried to tell a computer what to do, you know it’s not as easy as it sounds.) Or is there a more significant, practical or social value to the former (e.g., spreading literacy)?

One size fits all is to desktop computer as [what] is to everyware. Please elaborate on your answer.

Of the emerging trends in computing, cited by Greenfield, that support Weiser’s concept of ubicomp, which do you believe is most important or frightening?

Tongue-in-cheek question: What happens to a networked tangible medium, such as a toilet, that loses its computing capability…should you discarded it or continue to use it for its original purpose? In other words, does the value of the computing function of a common object so overshadow its original function that the object becomes worthless when it can no longer serve as a component of everyware?

Chapter 10
Garfinkel is telling a story about talking with a computer program while he was assuming it was a real person from Singapore (p.241.) The creation notion of the computer program was establishing personal relationships with Americans in order to gather information about their financial interests. Do you think machines will take a serious role in the future as researcher, teacher, and police officer, etc?
Chapter 11
Privacy is one of the leading debates particularly in the online community. Garfinkel claims that in the twenty first century, people purchased their privacy by using cryptography (p.266.) In today’s cyber space, it is still in use as digital signatures, licenses, keys, SSL security, etc. Garfinkel also thinks that the future of digital economy depends on cryptography technologies’ judicious use. Do you think only cryptography technology guarantee our privacy or what other tools can be used to provide online privacy? Your answers are also important as technology and communications designers!
Epilogue
Garfinkel says ‘Another piece of e-mail I received was from a woman who lived in an apartment building, and grew nervous when the building’s manager started commenting about the negligee she was wearing to bed. She eventually discovered that her bedroom had been wired with a hidden camera. The woman went to her local police, but was told that hidden video cameras did not violate her state’s wiretap statutes, since the wiretap laws only applied to sound recording devices. She was advised to find a new place to live.’ I can’t believe it. Do you want to live in an apartment with a legally installed surveillance camera? Do you have any idea about the State of Maryland laws on this issue?

Note: I'm posting this a little early; I will be out of town at a conference through Saturday, and I don't know how much Internet access I'll have.

In chapter 9 Garfinkel seems to advocate the surveillance of substances (i.e., radioactive materials) rather than people. What are your thoughts on wiretapping, tracking and surveillance of "possible" terrorists? Is it effective; is it worth the cost and time? Does it serve as a deterrent? How would you feel if you knew your phonecalls were monitored? I just went to a USM meeting on the university's role in CALEA; I don't think that Maryland will, but some universities are interpreting the regulations to see themselves as ISP and will give the FCC access to its users' logs and files. What are your thoughts on university faculty, students and staff email and web traffic being monitored by the university?

As I read this chapter, I kept thinking, "this was written before 9/11." How would Garfinkel react to more recent developments regarding government wiretapping and requisition of phone logs?

Chapter 10 discusses the development of artifical intelligence. At first I didn't see where how this was exactly connected to the rest of the book until I read the final section about the possibility/probability of a computer "scanning" our brains and storing our memories on a hard drive. What are your thoughts on this - a computer system having access to our minds and thoughts? Is this the "final frontier" when it comes to loss of privacy?

Chapter 9

In chapter 9's discussion of E-government, Schneiderman mentions a number of government services offered by the exemplary Access Washington. Which of those services (or others) do you think are the most important for state and local governments to provide? What services have you used via your county's or Maryland's website? Were you actually able to conduct a transaction or was it simply to obtain information? Was the service easy to use? Convenient?

How could state and local departments use government-to-government services to increase their efficiency or to create economies of scale? What are your thoughts on G2G services and sharing of citizen information among local/state agencies, particularly in light of the parallel discussions in Garfinkel's Database Nation?

Schneiderman discusses the use of technology to increase citizen participation (also a topic of considerable discussion in Benkler's Wealth of Networks). Has your own participation in government increased as a result of new communication tools? Have you ever emailed a representative or signed an electronic petition? What was your experience like? We are already gearing up for the 2008 primaries - what role will electronic communication play in the presidential race?

Lastly, Schneiderman says that critics of online politics are concerned that the Internet will actually polarize the debate, and that people will only discuss the issues with like-minded citizens. What do you think - will the Internet open or limit the debate between those with differing opinions?

Chapter 10

Schneiderman describes three perspectives on the nature of creativity:i nspirationalist, structuralist and situationalist. Do you personal ascribe to one of the three? Although Schneiderman gives examples of technological tools for each of the three, do you believe that these tools facilitate certain types of creativity more than others?

In his discussion of creativity, particularly in terms of the situationists, Schneiderman talks of the value of collaboration He describes three directions that technological tools may develop: 1)enhancing existing technologies to expand people's ability to collaborate, 2)creating opportunities for "miniconsultations" with individuals who can contribute to our creative processes and 3)developing tools that allow for "mega-consultations" with hundreds or thousands of people participating. What direction do you see collaborative tools heading? With the availability of more and more peer-to-peer applications, how do you see collaboration among individuals and groups evolving?

Chapter 6
Garfinkel claims that medical records are the most sensitive piece of records for individuals. Donald Moy, General Council of the New York says “if there is a pattern of confidentiality violations, a hospital can lose its accreditations.”
Do you think they are providing efficient security?

The main purpose of the medical records was providing detailed information for future encounters to let them have a higher chance of having a positive outcome says Garfinkel. But today, medical records are used by insurance companies, hospitals and religious organizations for different purposes than its primary purpose.
Do you think it is ethical? Or should we let them continue to use medical records?

Chapter 7
I am pretty sure you are one of the victims of receiving junk mails. Garfinkel says “Change of Address program is actually run by the same companies that send tens of billions of pieces of junk mail each year to hundreds of millions of American consumers.”
Do you remember you have authorized them for using your address or do you think it is a sort of violation?

According to marketing purposes many companies track consumers’ preferences. Most of them are using affinity program cards to track it. They are gaining information from the forms while they are issuing such cards. After we had a baby four months ago, we started to buy diapers, etc. Since then our mail box is full of baby stuff ads, baby magazines subscription offers and nursing product ads.
On this point, two ideas came up to my mind. First, this phenomenon helps us to see available products in the market that we need. Second, this is a privacy violation and offensive to some people. How about you?

Chapter 8
Garfinkel points out some important issues in the chapter 8 such as digital ownership, copyright and current practices on copying materials. He also asks a question to readers. “Watermarks and digital signatures are powerful tools for eliminating the anonymity that until now has been inherent in digital media. Citizens of the future may look back at the last days of the twentieth century and marvel that identical copies of books, compact discs, video tapes and electronic information were ever distributed to thousands, let alone millions, of consumers. They may be more amazed still that machines capable of stamping out limitless numbers of perfectly usable, if not identical, copies. What was there to stop widespread piracy, other than people’s consciences?”(p.204)

Here are a few more things to think about?

Shneiderman says, "the quest to mimic human performance is misguided and largely counterproductive. Computers are not people, and people are not computers. Users usually want to be control and resent the deception inherent in anthropomorphic designs that mimic human form and behavior" (p. 62).
Thinking about this statement, I always imagined that at some point we would actually have Robot maids or other types of human-replicas that could do the things that we really do not want to do. In the quest for these anthropomorphic designs, are human beings actually seeking for the computers to mimic human performance? or are they looking for assistants?

In Chapter 4, Shneiderman comments about the design of Southwest Airlines. In January they went through a new redesign, do you think that this new design makes it easier to use, or does it just look more sleek?

Which website do you think have the best user interfaces?

In Chapter 5, Shneiderman comments about the value of pictures and that if there were better search capabilities, people would spend more time with their photos. What would you think is the best way for us to search through pictures? What about the tagging methods that flickr uses? Is this ideal for finding that special picture?