Posted: December 5th, 2013 | No Comments »
This is a follow-up to my blogpost on curious algorithms. I’ll try to post, on a weekly basis, some pointers to projects related with algorithms that caught my attention. It’s clearly messy but these are good signals for an on-going project.
Flying hacker contraption hunts other drones turns them into zombies
“Serial hacker Samy Kamkar has released all the hardware and software specifications that hobbyists need to build an aerial drone that seeks out other drones in the air, hacks them, and turns them into a conscripted army of unmanned vehicles under the attacker’s control.
Dubbed SkyJack, the contraption uses a radio-controlled Parrot AR.Drone quadcopter carrying a Raspberry Pi circuit board, a small battery, and two wireless transmitters. The devices run a combination of custom software and off-the-shelf applications that seek out wireless signals of nearby Parrot drones, hijack the wireless connections used to control them, and commandeer the victims’ flight-control and camera systems.”“
“ Disarming Corruptor, is what he terms “circumvention software”. It scrambles a 3D printed file, encrypting it in such a way that the user will be greeted with a glitched-out visual treat if it is loaded into any 3D editing software. If you’ve got the decryption keys, you get to see the object’s true form. It’s hiding in plain sight, thumbing its pixel-bled nose at the Mary Whitehouses of physible culture. “
ICOMINER: PASSIVE MONETISATION
“Regardless of the solution you choose, our user visible GPU powered bitcoin miner will seamlessly integrate into your game with no interference, earning you cash in perfect harmony with your existing app monetisation strategy. There’s no catch – it’s just awesome.“
Sites Unseen: Are CAPTCHAs Discriminatory?
“while CAPTCHA is a source of frustration for your average John or Jane User, the system can be downright prohibitive for individuals with certain disabilities. Image-only CAPTCHA systems, for example, often bar visually impaired from whatever feature the CAPTCHA is gatekeeping.
This technology is so restrictive that groups are even organizing against CAPTCHA. This past summer, the Australian Communications Consumer Action Network, along with other consumer rights groups,called for an end to CAPTCHA. They requested, in no uncertain terms, that the CEOs of top companies such as Google, Microsoft, Twitter, and Facebook (among others) stop using CAPTCHA in favor of other, non-discriminatory ways of combating spam.“
How Google names its algorithms
“Boston” was the first documented update and was announced at SES Boston. The name was given by Webmaster World (WMW) members. (…) Cassandra, Dominic, Esmeralda, Fritz were also named by the folks over at WMW.
The members decided that they wanted to name the updates similarly to how hurricane names are selected: in alphabetical order, one month male, one month female. Since the previous month’s update was Boston, they went with a female name and voted on Cassandra because “we just liked it.” See below why Brett Tabke, founder and owner of WMW and the PubCon conference, finalized the name.
“Dominic” was actually named after a pizza place in Boston that was frequented by PubCon attendees.
Amit Singhal and Matt Cutts revealed that they used the code name ”Panda” to refer to the update internally. Like Vince, Panda was named after one of the key Google engineers who worked on the update and made it possible, Navneet Panda. “
Some examples of Wikipedia bots:
- User:Cydebot – generally carries out tasks associated with deletion
- User:WP 1.0 bot – works with the Version 1.0 Editorial Team
- User:SineBot – signs comments left on talk pages
- User:ClueBot NG – reverts vandalism
- User:CorenSearchBot – checks for copyright violations on new pages
- User:AnomieBOT – large variety of tasks
- User:DumbBOT – often removes protection templates from recently unprotected pages
- User:Lowercase sigmabot – often adds protection templates to recently protected pages
- User:Mr.Z-bot – will patrol BLP and the edit filters
- User:MiszaBot – archives talk pages
- User:BracketBot – notifies users of mismatched brackets in recently edited articles.
Posted: November 27th, 2013 | No Comments »
If you enter Centre Georges Pompidou, a cultural complex in the 4th arrondissement of Paris, and you wander around the basement, you may run across the clock represented on the right. The device looks rather standard, except for the colorful cogs, perhaps shown here as an echo of the high-tech architecture of the whole building. Another oddity you might notice is the LED display which gives a digital indication of the time, and a mysterious 3 digit number next to an “at” symbol.
This combination (“@ 452″) corresponds to a new way to display time, envisioned by Swatch, a Swiss watch company. The idea was to divide up the mean solar day up into 1000 parts called “.beats” (which means that a “.beat” last 26.4 seconds). Each day begins at @000 .beats, which actually corresponds to midnight in Switzerland (CET: Central European Time) and the Internet noon is thus @500 (3am in San Francisco, 6am in New York). This simply means there are no time zones, and only time scale called “Biel Mean Time” (BMT), based on the city where the company’s headquarters are located.
Besides this big clock, one may find such .beats on Swatch watches as well certain cell phone models, a video game and Linux GUIs. Apart from the company website, this “new” time display is now quite uncommon, but it should not prevent us to wonder about its origin as well as its cultural implications.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the Swiss company first presented the idea for “Internet Time” back in 1998 at the MIT Medialab’s Junior Summit:
“The gathering of more than ninety children aged 10 to 16 from 54 countries was organized to discuss technology’s impact on the younger generation. Swatch is a major sponsor of the Lab and has been for about five years. The idea was that far-flung people would use Internet Time to coordinate their schedules and socializing”
Also, this new time standard was supposed to be used for the Nation.1 project, a conceptual country based on the Internet and owned, populated and governed by the children of the world (!).
Aside from this intriguing origin, this “internet time” based on .beats is interesting from a cultural perspective for various reasons.
First, it is important to frame this project as one of the many initiatives to measure and manage time. Over the course of history, scientific and technical discoveries have led to the design of curious apparatuses to display the “passage of time”. Think about how sand, oil, candles, ropes, sticks, mechanical pieces or nuclear technologies have enabled this. It’s thus not surprising to see “the Internet” as part of an assemblage devoted to measuring time. However, unlike the usage of sand or oil to measure time, the idea here is not to use the technology (network infrastructure). The point is, instead, to benefit from the sort of temporal synchronicity created by the usage of internet platforms (email, Web, etc.) and claim the importance to live in a similar timeframe. Swatch internet time was meant to get rid of time differences and have a common reference. Said differently, it’s as if the Swiss company had declared local time and place irrelevant. This is all good and nice except for a fact: the “origin” .beat (@ 000) corresponds to where their headquarters are located, which is not exactly very egalitarian.
Nevertheless, even if this “internet time” sounds curious and may have looked cool, this new time format suffered from path-dependence: “ how the set of decisions one faces for any given circumstance is limited by the decisions one has made in the past, even though past circumstances may no longer be relevant“. This phenomenon seems always an issue when it comes to changing people’s habits.
Why do I blog this? documenting the subtleties of our everyday life.
Posted: November 26th, 2013 | No Comments »
Being interested in the role of algorithms and their influence on everyday life, i started collecting examples under the #curiousrituals hashtag. Perhaps it’s a follow-up to Curious Rituals, perhaps it isn’t.
Some intriguing cases I’ve found recently (most of them comes from the non-scientific press, as i’m focusing on everyday life):
Music generated with script and played by fake users get a good ranking on online music charts
“Melbourne hacker and payments security professional Peter Filimore, who, it should be mentioned, cannot play or sing a single note, managed to accrue $1,000 in royalties and knock artists like Pink, Nicki Minaj, and Flume off high spots in online music charts through the use of bots.
In an effort to uncover security flaws in online streaming services like Spotify, Filimore decided to send “garbage” tunes to the top of the charts and generate royalties in the process. Filimore started by using algorithms to compile public domain audio and splicing cheesy MIDI tracks together.
Filimore then purchased three Amazon-linked compute instances — virtual servers that are able to run applications — and created a simple hacking script to simulate three listeners playing his songs 24-hours a day for a month, while accruing reviews that described his music as “rubbish.”
Filimore also explained that using a larger cluster of computing instances could potentially generate thousands of dollars in fraudulent royalties. “
Are Face-Detection Cameras Racist?
“When Joz Wang and her brother bought their mom a Nikon Coolpix S630 digital camera for Mother’s Day last year, they discovered what seemed to be a malfunction. Every time they took a portrait of each other smiling, a message flashed across the screen asking, “Did someone blink?” No one had. “I thought the camera was broken!” Wang, 33, recalls. But when her brother posed with his eyes open so wide that he looked “bug-eyed,” the messages stopped.
Wang, a Taiwanese-American strategy consultant who goes by the Web handle “jozjozjoz,” thought it was funny that the camera had difficulties figuring out when her family had their eyes open. So she posted a photo of the blink warning on her blog under the title, “Racist Camera! No, I did not blink… I’m just Asian!”“
Bot wars – The arms race of restaurant reservations in SF
“After a while of running this script I had captured a good amount of data. One day I found myself looking at it and noticed that as soon as reservations became available on the website (at 4am), all the good times were immediately taken and were gone by 4:01am. It quickly became obvious that these were reservation bots at work. [...] You fight fire with fire, so I made my own reservation bot. You can get the code here.
I used mechanize to create a simple ruby script that goes through the process of checking for available reservations (in a given time range) and making a reservation under your name.
With this script I was able to start getting reservations again, but I know that this bot war will continue to escalate.“
“Scans made by some Xerox copiers are changing numbers on documents, a German computer scientist has discovered. [...] He said the anomaly is caused by Jbig2, an image compression standard. Image compression is typically used to make file sizes smaller. Jbig2 would substitute figures it thought were the same, meaning similar numbers were being wrongly swapped.“
Google’s autocompletion: algorithms, stereotypes and accountability
You might have come across the latest UN Women awareness campaign. Originally in print, it has been spreading online for almost two days. It shows four women, each “silenced” with a screenshot from a particular Google search and its respective suggested autocompletions. [...] Guess what was the most common reaction of people?
They headed over to Google in order to check the “veracity” of the screenshots, and test the suggested autocompletions for a search for “Women should …” and other expressions.
This awareness campaign has been very successful in making people more aware of the sexism in our world Google’s autocomplete function.
When Roommates Were Random
As soon as today’s students receive their proverbial fat envelope from their top choice college, they are on Facebook meeting other potential freshmen. They are on sites like roomsurf.com and roomsync.com, scoping out prospective friends. By the time the roommate application forms arrive, many like-minded students with similar backgrounds have already connected and agreed to request one another.
It’s just one of many ways in which digital technologies now spill over into non-screen-based aspects of social experience. I know certain people who can’t bear to eat in a restaurant they haven’t researched on Yelp. And Google now tailors searches to exactly what it thinks you want to find.
But this loss of randomness is particularly unfortunate for college-age students, who should be trying on new hats and getting exposed to new and different ideas. Which students end up bunking with whom may seem trivial at first glance. But research on the phenomenon of peer influence — and the influences of roommates in particular — has found that there are, in fact, long-lasting effects of whom you end up living with your first year.
Why do I blog this? I’ve started collecting examples like this in the past few months. Might be the beginning of something, you never know. What I find intriguing here is that there are various types of influences for such algorithms: sometimes it’s a “framing” where the user’s agency is limited (the racist camera for instance), sometimes it’s not (you’re not forced to use recommendation engines). I’m thinking about building a typology perhaps, collecting these, talking to people, there’s a whole list to be built
Posted: November 19th, 2013 | No Comments »
Last week I gave a two-days workshop about design research. It was part of a week-long seminar aimed at masters students from the two local design schools (HEAD–Genève and ECAL). We went through a quite intense set of activities ranging from lectures to drawing sessions, visit to the library, long arguments and exquisite corpse-like activities.
My first objective was to describe what design research is, and the second to help students come up with “the research question”, which looks like a Holy Grail for lots of them. We had various conversations about what research is, and how it’s related to design. In doing so, lots of issues bubbled up to the surface and it was strikingly intriguing to list them. I took some notes about these and I turned it into a short presentation about the misconceptions about design research.
- Design research is what’s produced when you don’t have a client. It’s personal project Well, this was a common perspective offered by students at the beginning. As we discussed, it seems that the way “research” is used in some of the participants’ background lead them to think that we do research only when there’s no problem to solve, no brief from a client. Research, in the academic sense, is about generating knowledge. What does it mean in a design context? Well, this quote by Bruce Archer express differently: “Design Research is a systematic search for and acquisition of knowledge related to design and design activity.” It’s also a misconception because research projects are not done in a vacuum: there’s a need to refer to the existing knowledge produced by other researchers, and funding bodies definitely influence what they want to fund. Also research can be “personal” but in general there’s more than one person involved (colleagues, research partners…).
- Design research is what you do before designing a prototype, like user research for instance. The problem here is that design research is not limited to field research/ethnography. A relevant model to consider here is the one described by Christopher Frayling with the famous trichotomy of research about (e.g. history of design), for (e.g. ethnography to surface insights for design), and through design (discovering new insights/building theories based on artifact design). Design research corresponds to these three elements, but the third one is the most important… because of the relationship between theory and practice… which leads us to the third misconception:
- Design leads to artifacts (products) it doesn’t produce theories. Yes, design produces artifacts but it doesn’t mean that you cannot derive/generate theoretical insights based on this. The way objects are used, produced, repurposed can offer various perspectives that can be turned into different levels of theories, as showed by this quote from Alain Findeli: “due to his/her involvement in the object, the researcher will raise new questions, discover new approaches, and if he/she has talent, produce new theoretical models. I propose to call this method project-driven research“. To discuss what it means practically, we used “￼Strong Concepts: Intermediate-Level Knowledge in Interaction Design Research” by Höök and Löwgren to discuss this. The paper describes a spectrum of knowledge one can abstract from particular design instances.
- Design research produces bad design. What designers express with this is their disappointment when they see the outcome of design research projects: artifacts which are not in line with the Zeitgeist or with tacit design criteria; and of course it’s also related with certain fonts used on researchers slides, the lack of attention to certain graphic details (someone in class wondered about the 2-columns ACM template) and, above all, the fact that artifacts they see do not correspond to their level of expectations as designers (regardless of the theoretical insights produced). That’s a good one as it’s not so much of a misconception. There’s indeed a lot of bad design outputs in design research and the community needs to do better. However, there are lots of exceptions to this and, the fact that artifacts produced by design researchers are bad does not mean that one cannot do better! As examples, we looked at various cases: Auger-Loizeau’s Carnivorous Robots, Fabian Hemmert’s work, as well as our own Curious Rituals.
Why do I blog this? Nothing better than a skeptical audience to learn how to frame your research topic/contribution. This seminar was highly stimulating. Plus, these misconceptions are interesting not only because there’s a need to correct then. Most of them reveal how research is normative and it’s sometimes good to push the boundaries a little bit!
Posted: November 13th, 2013 | No Comments »
(Someone counting the number of car near a roundabout in Nantes, France)
“Methodolatry and the Art of Measure by Shannon Mattern is an interesting piece that Jan sent me this morning. It addresses the implications of “urban data science”, i.e. citizen scientists, public labs, urban explorers, infrastructural tourists generating and collecting their own data on one end of the spectrum, civic hackers on the other.
Both share the same “way of conceptualizing and operationalizing the city” and an “instrumental rationality/solutionism”… what the author calls “methodolatry,” the aestheticization and idolization of method. The author describes how the relationships between the urban environment and data with different historical pointers showing how cities are “‘machine’ for efficient circulation”. She also refers to different claims by Lewis Munford, Friedrick Kittler and Ola Söderström which are quite relevant.
Some excerpts I found interesting:
“Is there an ethos, a value system, driving these data-generated processes, or is it all just algorithms? Of course, we wouldn’t say that there’s no ideology inherent in the algorithms themselves, but the computers powering these Big Data projects run billions of operations that cumulatively produce substantive transformations in the urban landscape, with little regard for underlying values
sometimes the most readily apparent or accessible way — for students in particular — to gain entry to those complex practices is to take on the aesthetics of measurement: to devise a clever data collection system, to accumulate a reassuringly big pile of data, and to massage that data into a persuasive visualization. That’s a worrisome trend. This isn’t to say that engagement with the affective or stylistic dimensions of measurement precludes engagement with its larger methodological functions; Feyerabend has shown us otherwise. Rather, I hope these concerns are brought into alignment: that the methodological packaging suits the purpose, the form serves the function, the knolling serves the knowledge.
perhaps these methodolatrous projects, in their aestheticization of measurement, are calling our attention to presumptions about scientific rigor, parodying our algorithmic impulses, tacitly asking questions about the ideology of a pervasive culture of measurement and assessment. Perhaps, despite their implicit alliance with CUSP and Cisco and the like, our citizen data gatherers want to highlight the “givenness,” the rhetorical nature of that data, to show its inherent irrationality, to demonstrate that the “science of cities” is also, necessarily, an art.“
Why do I blog this? An interesting addition to the debates about data science and smart cities. Certainly a good complement to Adam Greenfield’s “Against the Smart City“.
Posted: November 10th, 2013 | No Comments »
Being a reggae/dub amateur for quite some time, I always wanted to write about it. The lack of time, and the remote character of this topic wrt to other interests made me postpone this for a long time. Last year, I started becoming intrigued by a sub-genre where artists play reggae with 8-bit machines… and I thought this would be a peculiar research topic for the Geneva bureau of the Laboratory.
So… after conducting a series of interview with musicians, a copious literature review about the history of reggae/chiptune and an analysis of technological artifacts used by performers (things like modified C64 SID turned into dub machines)… it seems the final correction has been made on the “8-bit reggae” manuscript and Etienne (Editions Volumiques) is currently working on the page layout. The idea is to have a paper-booklet on which the reader can use his phone to access media content (music, video); without a QR code (this is important as I find them annoying). To be released at the beginning of 2014!
The book is a description of how the world of reggae/dub collided with the one of video games… and how it led the birth of an intriguing, and original form of culture. It’s the occasion to introduce the idea of “machine creolization” – the role of machines/algorithms in the hybridization of culture – an important feature of contemporary culture. The effort is now on working on other projects related with this concept.
Talking about the book project recently, I’ve been asked several times if I could give “an introduction” or “a playlist” to this subgenre, here it is!
- Jahtari X Uprooted Sunshine: Level Up!
- Disrupt/JAHTARI – They Lie
- Jody Bigfoot – NINTEMPO RIDDIM
- LEGO SOUNDS – Dubologist encephalogram
- Helgeland 8-bit Squad – Psybeam Riddim
- BitBurner – Shroom Roots
- Jody Bigfoot -Kob Dub (cant think of a name for this tune remix)
- Helgeland 8-bit Squad – Pai Mei Riddim
- wellwellsound – Billie jean
- LEGO SOUNDS – Dub Adub Abeba
Why do I blog this? Update on a project rarely mentioned on this blog!
Posted: October 31st, 2013 | No Comments »
One of the best art/design exhibit I’ve seen lately is called “Dissident Futures” and it’s currently at the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts. Curated by Betti-Sue Hertz, YBCA’s Director of Visual Art, it’s described on their website as “an investigation into possible alternative futures, particularly those that question or overturn conventional notions of innovation in biological, social, environmental, and technological structures.”
The exhibit is made of a wide range of pieces based on photography, painting, installation, performance, sculpture, video and film. Operating as an echo of the innovation-focus of the Bay Area, each of these corresponds to three main topics:
- the utopian: “scenarios in which the best possible outcomes are achieved for the greatest number of people”
- the speculative: “consistently pushing beyond the known, even beyond existing systems of logic to locate potentialities that may seem impossible, unreal, or fantastical at the moment.”
- the pragmatic: “groundwork for what the future will look like in the real world”
Some of the projects described there caught my attention for different reasons.
Paul Laffoley’s diagrams (dataviz?) feature planes of higher consciousness or act as a mediation aids; they can be seen as utopian worldviews with a strikingly curious spin:
Some of the best piece IMHO are the ones from Basim Magdy, an Egyptian artist living in Switzerland. His fabulous series of pictures (called “Investigating the Color Spectrum of a Post-Apocalyptic Future Landscape“) correspond to a stunning representation of how what Science-Fiction should be in my opinion: entanglements between the real and the fictional, between the actual and the virtual… with a peculiar and magical aesthetic. Trevor Paglen’s work was also impressive and among similar lines.
Also, Magdy’s series of paintings offer a compelling representation of the future with a representations that may look tongue-in-cheek at first glance… and far more serious when observed longer.
I found Katie Peterson’s Moonlight Sonata very subtle: “For this work Beethoven’s Moonlight Sonata was translated into morse code and sent to the moon via E.M.E. Returning to earth fragmented by the moon’s surface, it has been re-translated into a new score, the gaps and absences becoming intervals and rests. In the exhibition space the new ‘moon–altered’ score plays on a self-playing grand piano.“… which leads to these beautiful framed morse scores:
Peter Coffin’s video of flying fruits was also fantastic. This short film made of fruits flying through a black void has a mesmerizing effect… an impressive representation of how the ordinary can become intriguing and original when observed with a different viewpoint.
The series of pieces by Future Cities Lab were quite convincing, especially the colonisation of the now defunct part of Bay Bridge with suspended habitations/gardens/aquaponic farms:
Finally, Revital Cohen and Tuur van Balen’s 75 Watts project was also revealing in the sense that it ironically frames mass-manufacturing products: “Engineering logic has reduced the factory labourer to a man-machine, through scientific management of every single movement. By shifting the purpose of the labourer’s actions from the efficient production of objects to the performance of choreographed acts, mechanical movement is reinterpreted into the most human form of motion: dance. What is the value of this artefact that only exists to support the performance of its own creation? And as the product dictates the movement, does it become the subject, rendering the worker the object?”
Why do I blog this? I see this show as part of a much larger series of exhibit focused on “the future”… with an interesting and aesthetically-convincing series of weak signals about the possible, the potential and the virtual. The pieces presented here look far more intriguing than what Scifi produces and better frame the discussion about tomorrow’s paths. I’m definitely looking forward to reading the book which is planned to be published by the end of the year.
Posted: October 27th, 2013 | No Comments »
Last week, I was in the Bay Area for a series of events about the future of the book. On Oct 23, I spoke at “Creating Minds” at UC Berkeley, along with James Bridle, François Bon, Bernard Stiegler, Warren Sack or Kathryn Hayles.
Here are the slides of my speech, which basically dealt with the new forms of creolization (cultural hybridization) enabled by algorithmic culture, and its consequences for textual production:
Posted: September 23rd, 2013 | No Comments »
Btw, since I’ve less time to blog here, most of the things I run across (insights, data points and “weak signals” in a very basic/raw way…) goes to my tumblr called “beta knowledge“
Posted: September 9th, 2013 | 1 Comment »
The Open Knowledge Conference (OKCon) 2013 is happening next week in Geneva, Switzerland. An event about Open data and open knowledge conference, running since 2005, it will feature a series of talks, workshops and discussions about the various dimensions of these themes. I took that as an occasion to ask few questions to Hannes Gassert, one of the co-organizer:
NN: What’s OKCon and what are its purposes?
HG: The Open Knowledge Conference is the global gathering of a movement that strives to open up knowledge and make it used and useful. In Geneva, the event is bringing together developers and diplomats, designers and data activists to broaden and deepen the idea of open data. At the same time OKCon marks a major milestone for Switzerland: at the event, Switzerland’s own “data.gov” will be launched at opendata.admin.ch.
I believe that’s a big step for the movement as well as for Switzerland: we don’t have some president saying “I want this”, but a participatory political process touching all levels of governments, and I think that data-driven transparency will eventually emerge as the natural complement to our direct democracy. But I digress.
NN: “Open” culture is here for sometime now, but I always wonder about the difficulties. What’s tough when it comes to Open Knowledge and the use of Open Data?
HG: Openly releasing your pictures, your music or blog posts were personal decisions. Now, as “open” is becoming a movement and a concept as important as “green”, we’re getting into actual politics. When we’re talking about open government data and how, properly done, they foster transparency, accountability and public sector innovation, we’re talking about things we can’t decide on an individual level any more – now we’re talking politics, now we’re talking about data, like spending or crime data for example, whose mastery means actual power.
NN: Are there any areas where open-ness is not possible or relevant? That’s a curious one but it’s an issue I always wonder about because it leads to discussing the pros and cons of that approach.
HG: There’s a clear limit, and it’s given by strict standards of individual privacy. The individual person’s right to “informational self-determination” is paramount. But this is a value to be applied to people, not to corporations or countries. Those too have legitimate interests in secrecy, but they need to be constantly balanced with the public interest.
NN: Open Source and Open Data are interesting but I’m even more intrigued by “Open Knowledge” and open knowledge construction. This is why my tumblr is called “Beta Knowledge” as a way to reflect the idea that our cultural material (science, art, etc.) is always in flux. It also highlights that “releasing knowledge” can be a way to let people do something out of it that is different from the original intention of the persons who created it at first. Can you elaborate on the longer-term consequences of an “Open Knowledge” society?
HG: Open knowledge is what open data becomes when it’s useful, usable and, in the end, actually used – so I’m right with you when it comes to emphasize the empowering aspect of Open Knowledge! “Open” doesn’t mean much if it’s not useful, that is accessible, understandable, meaningful or helpful to solve a real problem, make a relevant point or have an impact on how we think and live. In order to make this actually happen, we will need types of skills, increased data literacy among them, and tools that help turning raw material into knowledge that people can act upon.
Additionally, I do in fact believe that the great power information elites have already today, the great power data analysts, software developers and information visualization experts means great responsibility indeed. There are large groups of highly educated experts both creative and technical that have come to see themselves mainly as “citizens of the internet”. It’s beginning to dawn on everybody that that’s not the case, that real-world realpolitik is indeed shaping both the bits and atoms that make up our world. What we’re seeing in this movement is a chance for these groups to get involved with the society they live in, it’s a chance for an new political awareness. Not using big data and affecting global changes right now perhaps, but using small data, and making a difference right here.
OKCon, in any case, is where many people come together who are committed to bring about those skillsets and toolsets, who are committed to the vision of a global movement building an open knowledge ecosystem. People who want to make a difference. I recommend to come and talk to them. You might be one of them yourself.