Where is the Web Going? (Quick Update)

I just wanted to quickly post Alexis Madrigal's response to the Wired story because as usual it is one of the best. He uses a bit of technological history to explain why the future of the web is more complicated than the Wired article made it out to be.

Alexis Madrigal's Response

Am I too old to say that I want to be like Alexis Madrigal when I grow up?

It Will Be Ugly

On and off again working on the web design. Expect eye pain for awhile until I finish.

Where is the Web Going?

Wired posted an article earlier today titled "The Web is Dead. Love Live The Internet" in which the switch of focus from the web to more specific and closed applications is discussed and analyzed with the prediction that we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the web and an emergent threat to "openness". This article can be found here.

The original article is interesting and definitely worth the long read, but I found the discussion it spawned to be much more interesting. The discussion can be found here.

Toward the end of the discussion, Google's apparent capitulation to Verizon and switch from "Don't Be Evil" to "Unless It Makes Good Business Sense" is discussed and Chris Anderson has a great paragraph toward the end of the discussion that lends an interesting perspective to what many feel is Google's betrayal of net neutrality and the good citizens of a (mostly) open Internet, wired or wireless.

"In short, I have some sympathy for the position Google finds itself in its public stance on network neutrality with Verizon. At a certain point economics trumps philosophy. If business logic counts as “evil,” we have taken our openness imperative too far. At the end of the day, whatever works for all concerned will win. As the Web moves from adolescence to adulthood, idealism is naturally giving way to pragmatism."

- Chris Anderson (emphasis in original)

I think it's a great point that people need to remember when it comes to Google. We all had/have this vision (me especially) of Google as a golden crusader with the best interests of ourselves and the good citizens of the world at heart but in the end Google is a company like any other company. The business world is sadly not the place for staunch idealism.

The Internet, Identity, and Privacy

In my never ending quest to find, see and understand what other people are using the Internet and various other tools for, I've become intrigued by a relatively simple but novel idea.

On the Internet today, your online presence, or rather your "Identity" as far as the Internet is concerned, is probably split up over several different sites. You likely have a Facebook, which contains all sorts of information about you. You may have Twitter, which broadcasts extremely up-to-date information about where you are, what you are doing, and perhaps what your thoughts are at the present moment. You may have Flickr, where people can get yet another view into your life through the lens of your camera. You might also have a blog, which has more detailed but slightly less up-to-date information about you and your life than Twitter.

Every one of these sites, depending on how you use them, contains little pieces of your identity as you've presented it on the Internet. I say presented because the design of your various profiles can probably be likened to the clothes someone wears in meatspace. Some people care enough to learn the ins and outs of how to design and implement a design that matches how they wish to present themselves to the world. Some people don't really care and so long as they have a page that serves the purpose that the site is designed to allow, they are happy. In meatspace, some people take great time and care with what they wear while some people are happy so long as their fleshy bodies are covered and they can get a burger at a restaurant without being arrested for indecency.

This all brings me back to this intriguing idea I mentioned earlier, which is to create a simple web page that serves as something of a road sign. This road sign (web page) points to all of the various pieces of your identity, your online presence, that you've littered across the Internet. In this way, all of the data that you've flung out across the Internet is centralized in a more meaningful way. This road sign is only useful to the people who care enough to have something to do with you, but it's great for your friends and for connecting with people you have befriended through the Internet.

All of these online identities are great because it allows you to participate in the thriving, ever changing and ever exciting world of the Internet in a more meaningful way. These identities give shape and meaning to the streaming bits that form text in response to other text left by others. It gives it context. But all of this has a serious downside.

The thought probably crossed your mind while you were crafting these various online profiles that every text box you fill in that profile creation screen is another piece of data about you that is now accessible to the world at large. Sure there are privacy settings, but here's the catch: the privacy settings stunt the identity you are trying to create and it's efficacy. The more private you are on the web, the less you get out of participating in its various circles. That isn't always true and I don't mean to set it as an absolute, but I do feel certain that the less context you give your side of the dialogue, the less meaningful it is. A statement from a user named Slokky32 with no other identifying characteristics doesn't carry the same weight as a statement from the same user with some added information, such as that Slokky32 is a grad student studying climate science at [insert prestigious university here]. Adding something about how much Slokky32 enjoys the Harry Potter movies might also humanize him/her a little bit, giving further context to his/her statements, making him/her more relatable, and perhaps a little less pretentious.

The problem is that the more information you present, the less privacy you have and the easier it is for would-be employers, schools and other people who might benefit from having more information about you, to find you. This is obviously dangerous for several reasons that I probably don't have to explain. Slokky32 might have looked like a great candidate on paper for some job later in life, but when they see her 10 page rant about her last employer and why her boss was a scum-sucking douchebag, they might reconsider. It might not even be something that serious. Maybe it's just some comments she made that portray her in a light that they don't see as a good fit for their company. I'm not going to bother going over pictures that might show up on Facebook of Slokky32 passed out the floor with marker on his face. If you have such pictures and they are easily searchable, you deserve to be unemployed.

Going back to the start of my post: while following this intriguing idea of creating my own "Road Sign" to bring all of the pieces of my Internet identity together into a more coherent whole, I've become more and more concerned with what that identity is. I've become more and more aware that what I do and say can be traced back to me and that in the future this could be dangerous. I want to make myself as approachable as possible. I want people to know WHO they are talking to, WHAT he does, WHY he does it, and then let them decide whether that person is worth their time to talk/listen to. But in doing that I'm giving up a lot of privacy that I might be better off hanging onto.

(Later thought: 3:55 PM) Another thing worth thinking about is the various other ways that information can be used against you. Advertising is an example. Facebook is not just a social networking site. In fact, it could be argued that social networking isn't even its main function. Facebook is a giant data monster, wrapping its tendrils around every piece of information it can sucker you into delivering it with the premise of allowing you to "connect" with your friends. But who do these connections really benefit? Do your friends, who likely know you fairly well, really need you to express your obsession with Tool? Isn't that something they are likely to already know? As for the various other people you've added on Facebook that may or may not be your friends, do they really CARE that you like Tool? Probably not. But that information DOES benefit anyone trying to sell you crap you likely don't need, and Facebook itself.

So, do the benefits of networking and making friends in cyberspace outweigh the costs to privacy?

First Post: Conversing With Evangelicals

I've always heard about evangelicals coming to your door and preaching the good word, but never actually experienced it. Until today.

I always imagined it would be a painful and annoying experience where I tried my best to disguise my disinterest in their preaching until they got on their way. Instead, I engaged in an actual conversation that was interesting (I think) for both sides.

The conversation that ensued was one of mutual exploration. They found out that I study anthropology, and asked me about other religions and the significance of what they described as mankind's "Desire to worship". Looking back, I wish I had been less worried about offending them because I'm sure they could have taken it in stride. I should have pushed that I didn't agree that men "Desired" to worship so much as they desired to explain the world around them. I find it interesting that he used the word "Worship" instead of "Believe" or something similar. I'm not exactly sure what he meant by worship. He could have meant something similar to believe, but it seemed to me that he was inquiring why men had a desire to appreciate and bow before something greater than themselves.

His next argument came with a quote from Jesus, whom he described as the best teacher who ever lived, and assured me that we could probably agree on that. Again, I didn't press my disagreement but I think that was wise since it was a petty thing anyway. The quote stated that you cannot be happy without accepting your need for spiritual fulfillment. To him, this meant accepting Catholicism. I thought it was interesting that he didn't seem to think there were other ways to reach that spiritual fulfillment, and I described to him to a quick overview of cultural relativism.

What I enjoyed so much about this conversation was the couple's willingness to listen and appreciate what I was saying, rather than simply trying to convert me. For their part, they focused on the bigger questions and how they felt the bible answered them compared to other ways they have been answered. They were genuinely interested in what I had to say on the subject, and how I felt about different answers to the same questions compared to the bibles interpretation. I carefully stayed away from physical anthropology since I was sure it was something we'd fundamentally disagree on with no recourse, and therefore run into a roadblock.

I really enjoyed talking to this couple. I like evangelicals a lot more than I like salesmen.

Nothing Yet

Under construction until I'm settled into my new place.