Apple Debacle

Great Article on CNET's news site: www.news.com (http://news.cnet.com/8301-31021_3-20010472-260.html?tag=newsLeadStoriesArea.1)

In the discussion about how badly Apple has handled the Iphone 4 antenna problem the writer states:

"Complaints about any product are only a couple of mouse clicks away for any customer, especially in light of the lightning-fast spread of product information. This problem was first identified by an iPhone customer who posted a video demonstration to YouTube, which was picked up by Gizmodo and then the rest of the tech press and eventually mainstream news outlets worldwide. It's impossible for Apple, or any company, to hide from product quality issues anymore."

This is the power of Web 2.0.

Pentagon and Facebook

I read in a recent article (http://www.themoneytimes.com/featured/20100227/pentagon-relaxes-restriction-social-networking-sites-id-10101853.html)that the Pentagon (and the State Department)has reversed their policy on using social networking sites stating that the benefits out weight the risks to national security. Specifically, "Though there is growing concern over cyber security, the DOD believes that access to these sites is important as benefits outweigh the risks."

"Defense Secretary Robert Gates said that unblocking access to these sites is imperative to enable Pentagon to interact with young soldiers who are in their 20s."

"David Wennergren, a deputy assistant secretary of defense, was quoted by Reuters as saying, 'The purpose of the policy is to recognize that we need to take advantage of these Internet-based capabilities. These Web 2.0 tools need to be part of what we use.'"

The article goes on to say that this is important for recruiting, family communication, public relations, and collaboration between military personnel. I think we can take a few things from this article. First Web 2.0 has hit mainstream, second, this marks the end of teenagers wanting to use Facebook. I mean if it has gone so mainstream, teenagers will be looking for something else cutting edge, finally, if we are not careful the government will find a way to regulate Web 2.0 so it is no longer useful.

Evan. . .

Self Service

There is a great article in the July issue of wired magazine called "Self Service" The sub-line reads, "Go ahead and tweet your own horn online - just don't be a jerk about it. The article examines the question of: "When you boast online, are you participating in a brave new social future, or are you just being an ass?"

Is bragging part of social networks? Is it one of the things that makes them thrive? Are we so desirous of people knowing not only that we are engaged in fundamental worthwhile activities (small note I am leaving for my internship on Wednesday and will be working on this class at the same time as the internship so pity me) that we are willing to hang anything out there where people will say "good for you", or "loved your post".

Do we need this. Perhaps we do? My psychology classes taught me that everyone needs attention. Perhaps blogging, tweeting, facebooking, etc. is the new way to fulfill these needs. If it is than Facebook may be here for a long long time. . .

Produsage - The Wealth of Networks

I just finished reading the Wealth of Networks by Benkler that Vanessa assigned to us, and I am exhausted (Vanessa is trying to kill us. . .).

However, after reading it I must say that I can more easily answer this weeks prompt: How might the concept of produsage be applied in your life (personal and/or professional) as it stands today?

Until this class I did not consider myself in the produsage category. I was in fact a consumer of information, a bystander. There are several reasons for this:
1. I didn't think I had a unique perspective about anything
2. I didn't really feel strongly about any subject that motivated me to get involved.
3. The fear factor of someone saying Duh. . .didn't you read such and such. . .
4. Time. Not enough. . .
5. I like to ponder information, and pondering and blogging don't necessarily come together at the same time.

However I must admit that I am quite enjoying this blogging. While I am sure very very very few people will read what I have to say (I feel like I am on that almost invisible thread - Benkler Article: sites interconnected)and thus on my own I am free to develop my own voice knowing that I can work on this for quite some time and then when I feel I am ready I will shoot the link to my blog to some of my friends and family.

And do note that I will be starting my Internship on the 19th of this month and then maybe I will have a lot more to blog about.

One other note: Professionaly speaking I wish we had this technology 20 years ago. We constantly went to developers for advice about product issues (I worked in a call center) and I am sure if the developers had blogs they could have spit a whole of of information at us that we could have commented on that would have made us much more effective for our customers. I can see this being a huge help moving forward.

Military Secrets and Web 2.0

Alleged Wikileaks source charged with leaking classified files
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-20009718-83.html?tag=newsLeadStoriesArea.1

Perhaps one group that has been hardest hit with the advent Web 2.0 is the military. It used to be that secrets could be kept unless some well trained spy wiggled themselves up the chain, or someone paid someone inside for confidential information. But now the military is having to deal with a different kind of "threat". Soldiers who are now sending classified documents so they can be posted on Wikis. Public opinion doesn't wait for the official explanation what they see and read from the leaks molds public opinion quickly. And with so many soldiers and so much discussion about the nature of the american military, more stories like this are bound to continue.

Information and deciding whats important.

In his book "Here comes Everybody" Shirky states that "Communications tools don't get socially interesting until they get technologically boring. . .It's when a technology becomes normal, then ubiquitous, and finally so pervasive as to be invisible, that the really profound changes happen. . ."

We stand at a new point in time where the technology of communication is becoming so common place and the tools so easy to use, that the assimilation of information seems to be about to make a radical shift (if it hasn't done so already). The question that needs to be looked at is what kind of shift will it be.

When information was limited it was treated as some prized possession, something to be pondered over and over again. Poems, pros and even entire books were memorized by individuals. Readings were given at social events, and important occasions. Those who had memorized long and lengthy poems were looked on a very learned.

Einstein changed all of that. He didn't bother memorizing things he could look up easily. He assumed they were there for the taking. Instead he used his brain to contemplate new ideas and postulate new theories. He was acknowledged one of the great minds that has ever existed.

Now information comes charging at us like a dozen frieght trains carrying not car loads of information every minute of every day. How do we assimilate it? How do we decide which precious nuggets we are going to remove from those cars and take the time to think about?

This is the challenge that we face today. Yes Google, and Yahoo and many other sites can "filter", but whose to say that they are filtering the items we want filtered.

We are on the cusp of an information overhaul. How we will learn to glean the information that is presented to us will tell us a lot about what kind of society we will have in the future.

Evan. . .

100 Million Hours

There is an excellent article in the June issue of Wired Magazine called: "Cognitive Surplus: The Great Spare-Time Revolution". (http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/05/ff_pink_shirky/)
I encourage everyone to read it. The premise of the article is that Americans who once spent their spare time watching television are now redirecting a lot of that time toward, "activities that are less about consuming and more about engaging.

The article goes on to say that: "All the articles, edits and arguments on Wikipedia represent around 100 million hours of human labor." If you think about that number, no publishing house in the world could have created it.

The question I have to ask is this going to be a fad, or are people really changing their habits from consuming of information to engaging with others in the acquiring and distributing of information. It will be interesting to see how this turns out. . .