The role of technology and policy in transforming online culture – chronicled by David Ellis
privacy
Netflix showing way too much love – for your Facebook data
112 days
***
Photo Brian Solis – www.briansolis.com
***
Has Reed Hastings sold us out to Mark Zuckerberg?
I never thought I’d join this crowd of complainers.
In June I wrote 2 blog posts entitled Get yer grimy paws off my Netflix: Ottawa’s big OTT scam. If you didn’t stampede to read them, that might be because they ran a total of 6,400 words. The posts were part love-in. I’ve been a big fan of Netflix since they launched here – for the interface, the support team, the way they handle bandwidth fluctuations (helpfully), and, of course, because of folk hero and CEO, Reed Hastings.
As widely reported since August, our hero has made a number of surprising missteps – starting with the price hike for the combo DVD/streaming pack in the US, and, more to the point, the silly idea of Qwikster as a completely separate DVD service, plus the silly way it was announced. The market hammered them for their sins, pushing their share price down from just under $300 in August to $116 as of last Friday’s market close (Bloomberg).
I thought all the cancelled subscriptions, howls of protest and marketplace beatings were, forgive me for putting it this way, a little over the top. That’s easy to say if you’re Canadian, of course, since Netflix is streaming-only up here – no abrupt DVD service changes to bitch about. But then it was Friday night, I went looking for movies and this unsolicited grab for my attention popped up on the monitor:
David, get the most out of Netflix!
<Click to CONNECT>
- See what your Facebook friends are doing on Netflix.
– Automatically share all your Netflix activity with your Facebook friends, including what you’ve watched.
– Try it—you can disconnect at any time. (more…)
Some context for Jan 27 CRTC/UBB post
372 days
by David Ellis
in affordability, Bell Canada, censorship, data caps, Industry Canada, OECD, privacy, UBB
_____________
On Friday I mass-emailed dozens of my closest friends asking them to read my previous day’s post, on the forces turning Canada into a digital banana republic: the Holy Trinity of Cope, Clement and Chairman von Finckenstein.
Several friends emailed me with feedback quite different from the comments that have gone up with the post itself. They break down into three kinds of reactions:
- Your post is way too long; why don’t you put in a much shorter summary. Fair enough, I’m not famous for brevity, and will follow up on this suggestion. (more…)
Now US Republicans want to scrap their “invasive” census
529 days
What is it about right-wing politicians?
Ted Poe explains why the census is bad to a group of beauty queens
Well, I have a theory. Canadian Conservatives like Tony Clement and US Republicans like Ted Poe (from, you guessed it, Texas), are scared silly of statisticians and scientists and would prefer to see them take a hike… because they deal in facts, not opinions or headlines or the party line. That makes these guys and their facts much harder to manipulate – and when it comes to major issues like global warming, a threat to established business interests.
A story ran in The New York Times recently entitled “Census Survey Asks Too Much, G.O.P. Says.” Hard on the heels of Minister Clement’s mighty gaffe over Canada’s Chief Statistician, we learn his US counterparts are demanding their Census Bureau put a stop to this data outrage – an unconstitutional outrage no less. As The Times reported (Aug. 19):
The Republican National Committee is demanding that the Census Bureau stop being so nosy, or at least stop requiring that Americans comply.
The Republican Party isn’t taking on the census itself, the count of the United States population made every 10 years, but the more comprehensive American Community Survey. (more…)
Pew’s Internet Futures – quotable quotes from me and the experts
708 days
The Pew Internet & American Life Project has released the findings from its fourth experts survey on the future of the Internet. I was one of 895 respondents who took part in this edition. Between Christmas Day and January 15, I blogged my responses to the 10 questions (those posts are all tagged “surveys”). I’ve been doing a scorecard to see how I match up with the other 894 respondents and their predictions for the year 2020. (My thanks to Lee Rainie and his colleagues for a thrilling ride.)
Here’s the setup, from the report’s preface (p.3):
“Respondents to the Future of the Internet IV survey, fielded from Dec. 2, 2009 to Jan. 11, 2010, were asked to consider the future of the Internet‐connected world between now and 2020 and the likely innovation that will occur. They were asked to assess 10 different “tension pairs” – each pair offering two different 2020 scenarios with the same overall theme and opposite outcomes – and they were asked to select the one most likely choice of two statements. [...]
“Please note that this survey is primarily focused on eliciting focused observations on the likely impact and influence of the Internet – not on the respondents’ choices from the pairs of predictive statements. Many times when respondents “voted” for one scenario over another, they responded in their elaboration that both outcomes are likely to a degree or that an outcome not offered would be their true choice. Survey participants were informed that “it is likely you will struggle with most or all of the choices and some may be impossible to decide; we hope that will inspire you to write responses that will explain your answer and illuminate important issues.”
The report concentrates on five of the 10 original “tension pairs”:
1 – whether Google will make us stupid (as alleged by Nicholas Carr);
2 – the impact of the Internet on reading, writing and the rendering of knowledge;
3 – takeoff technologies;
4 – the end-to-end principle; and
5 – anonymity. (more…)
Americans still invading, broadcasters still in charge
734 days
Last week Interactive Ontario hosted its first iLunch of the season, entitled “What is broadcast?” (I was involved in some of the planning.) Buddy Brady Gilchrist moderated in his usual immoderate, provocative and enlightened way. Two things kept jumping out.
First, I was surprised to hear a current of old-fashioned jingoism running through much of an otherwise useful discussion. After radio, TV, movies and magazines, now it’s apparently the turn of Google, Apple and the other US cyber-behemoths to be pouring over the 49th parallel and… messing with our digital media? Apparently we have to face up to this menace or… all is lost?
Apple is a menace because it’s taking money out of the country and creating its own new brand of walled garden. Yes and yes. And so what? Where is the biggest concentration of Canadian movies, TV, music and podcasts on the Web, in one place? If it’s not the Canadian iTunes Store, somebody point the way. There was complaining about rev share (is there another system?) and about the tilt to success for artists who get on the iTunes homepage. Yes, and other artists will be suffering in the background, not doing quite as well. That’s show biz. (more…)
Imagining the Internet (8): the Semantic Web
755 days
This is a tough question because of the many technical complexities related to the Semantic Web. It might have been more accessible if phrased in terms of something generic – say, increasingly automated actions processed through browsers and Web-based agents.
Q.8 – Will the Semantic Web have an impact?
A. By 2020, the Semantic Web envisioned by Tim Berners-Lee and his allies will have been achieved to a significant degree and have clearly made a difference to the average internet users.
B. By 2020, the Semantic Web envisioned by Tim Berners-Lee will not be as fully effective as its creators hoped and average users will not have noticed much of a difference.
[my answer: A]
Please explain your choice and share your view of the likelihood that the Semantic Web will have been implemented by 2020 and be a force for good in internet users’ eyes. (more…)
Imagining the Internet (7): anonymity
756 days
I’m generally very optimistic and boosterish about the Internet. But I’m pessimistic about some features of online life – and privacy is near the top of the list. I see anonymity as one of several privacy safeguards that, on our way to 2020, will gradually fold under irresistible pressure from vested interests.
Q.7 – Will online anonymity still be prevalent?
A. By 2020, the identification ID systems used online are tighter and more formal – fingerprints or DNA-scans or retina scans. The use of these systems is the gateway to most of the internet-enabled activity that users are able to perform such as shopping, communicating, creating content, and browsing. Anonymous online activity is sharply curtailed.
B. By 2020, internet users can do a lot of normal online activities anonymously even though the identification systems used on the internet have been applied to a wider range of activities. It is still relatively easy for internet users to create content, communicate, and browse without publicly disclosing who they are.
[my answer: A]
Please explain your choice and share your view about the future of anonymous activity online by the year 2020. (more…)
