This is a most-incredible real-time map of a bus line in Brooklyn. Soon enough they'll expand programs like this to every bus and train in New York and other cities. Why wait in the cold for a bus when you can just head out when it is arriving. Elegant, simple, powerful, how technology should be.
via gothamist
What 'To Kill a Mockingbird' Isn't
Allen Barra writes a critique of "To Kill a Mockingbird" in the Wall Street Journal that is worth reading. We've been having discussions in our school on whether this 50-year old book is appropriate for 7th graders with its inclusion of viciously racist language (the "N" word) and moreover how we choose the cannon that is read at our school. It's an important conversation and a most difficult one. I think that we must recognize the value of tradition while respecting the evolving landscape of our countries, cities, and schools - finding the balance is incredibly challenging but is the real goal of these conversations.
This article on tools to catch/thwart cheating made me sad. This kind of stuff has no place in a school context. If we need video cameras to monitor students we must be designing schools and assessments wrong. Our systems need corrected, not supplanted with monitoring technology. Totally grossed out right now.
Wow, this trailer for Waiting for Superman was difficult to watch. It appears to present a critical eye of how school works, from a parent/student point of view. Real assistance is needed for schools, and I'm at a total loss for what that help might look like. I am hopeful, but nervous all at the same time.
via @cacrandall
MoveOn has created a graphic that shows what parts of your profile are public, whether you like it or not. Helpful visual. The Facebook fan page to connect to is ironic, but may be helpful in lobbying Facebook. Maybe.
As usual the New York Times provides an elegant summary via an infographic - in this case, of Facebook's privacy options. If you're a Facebook user, you've probably stumbled through much of this before, but I bet you haven't seen it all! Sadly, I think I have in my quest to remain somewhat private in parts of my online footprint.
Coming soon, my guide on how to wean yourself from Facebook's grip
Via my school's webmaster
Commentary by Kurt OpsahlSince its incorporation just over five years ago, Facebook has undergone a remarkable transformation. When it started, it was a private space for communication with a group of your choice. Soon, it transformed into a platform where much of your information is public by default. Today, it has become a platform where you have no choice but to make certain information public, and this public information may be shared by Facebook with its partner websites and used to target ads.
To help illustrate Facebook's shift away from privacy, we have highlighted some excerpts from Facebook's privacy policies over the years. Watch closely as your privacy disappears, one small change at a time!
Facebook Privacy Policy circa 2005:
No personal information that you submit to Thefacebook will be available to any user of the Web Site who does not belong to at least one of the groups specified by you in your privacy settings.
Facebook Privacy Policy circa 2006:
We understand you may not want everyone in the world to have the information you share on Facebook; that is why we give you control of your information. Our default privacy settings limit the information displayed in your profile to your school, your specified local area, and other reasonable community limitations that we tell you about.
Facebook Privacy Policy circa 2007:
Profile information you submit to Facebook will be available to users of Facebook who belong to at least one of the networks you allow to access the information through your privacy settings (e.g., school, geography, friends of friends). Your name, school name, and profile picture thumbnail will be available in search results across the Facebook network unless you alter your privacy settings.
Facebook Privacy Policy circa November 2009:
Facebook is designed to make it easy for you to share your information with anyone you want. You decide how much information you feel comfortable sharing on Facebook and you control how it is distributed through your privacy settings. You should review the default privacy settings and change them if necessary to reflect your preferences. You should also consider your settings whenever you share information. ...
Information set to “everyone” is publicly available information, may be accessed by everyone on the Internet (including people not logged into Facebook), is subject to indexing by third party search engines, may be associated with you outside of Facebook (such as when you visit other sites on the internet), and may be imported and exported by us and others without privacy limitations. The default privacy setting for certain types of information you post on Facebook is set to “everyone.” You can review and change the default settings in your privacy settings.
Facebook Privacy Policy circa December 2009:
Certain categories of information such as your name, profile photo, list of friends and pages you are a fan of, gender, geographic region, and networks you belong to are considered publicly available to everyone, including Facebook-enhanced applications, and therefore do not have privacy settings. You can, however, limit the ability of others to find this information through search using your search privacy settings.
Current Facebook Privacy Policy, as of April 2010:
When you connect with an application or website it will have access to General Information about you. The term General Information includes your and your friends’ names, profile pictures, gender, user IDs, connections, and any content shared using the Everyone privacy setting. ... The default privacy setting for certain types of information you post on Facebook is set to “everyone.” ... Because it takes two to connect, your privacy settings only control who can see the connection on your profile page. If you are uncomfortable with the connection being publicly available, you should consider removing (or not making) the connection.
Viewed together, the successive policies tell a clear story. Facebook originally earned its core base of users by offering them simple and powerful controls over their personal information. As Facebook grew larger and became more important, it could have chosen to maintain or improve those controls. Instead, it's slowly but surely helped itself — and its advertising and business partners — to more and more of its users' information, while limiting the users' options to control their own information.
Related Issues: Privacy, Social Networks, Terms Of (Ab)Use
An absolutely elegant document from the Electronic Frontier Foundation explaining how Facebook has continued to back out of their privacy policy with which they solicited users in the first place. It's spiraling to give them more data with which to sell, have people interact, and drive more use to their site.
I'm looking forward to major influencers writing publicly about dropping Facebook and a rash of new sites popping up in its place. I think there is real opportunity here for some entrepreneurs to think about the type of service people are looking for - walled gardens, sharing important memories/information with friends and family, keeping private data private (as much as it can be on the web), etc. Why not build a service that respects individual users? Is that possible? Or is it always about scaling your product as big as it can be?
As a side note: I think Flickr is a beautiful photo-sharing site where I can be public, private, for family, or for friends. Simple, effective. Can social networking sites like Facebook get back to what works?
I had a great conversation with our 7th and 8th graders about formspring a few weeks ago, which I blogged about here. I thought that the article by Rachel Simmons was pretty poor. She starts with, “Last week, a Long Island high school senior committed suicide, and the website Formspring.me is suspected as a cause.” She links to an article which says just the opposite! See these quotes from the article she linked to:
“Alexis' parents downplayed the Internet role, saying their daughter was in counseling before she ever signed up with formspring.me, a new social site, where many of the attacks appeared.”
"I believe in my heart that cyberbullying wasn't the cause of Lexi's death," said her mother, Paula Pilkington. "This is a mistake."
It also didn’t recognize what the site is capable of in a positive way. For instance, I purchased a new dining table that is unfinished wood, and wasn’t sure how best to treat it. So, I went to this wonderful design bloggers website and asked her a question about wood treatment via her formspring. She replied to me within an hour. Problem solved. By an expert. There is a place for every technology tool, and there’s a poor way to use all of them, too. That’s what parents and students have to negotiate.
The bigger issue here is talking to students about “anonymous” behavior on the Internet, and what it entails. I gave the girls a guiding principle that anonymous places on the Internet tend to encourage bad behavior and discourage good behavior. We want them to learn that lesson because formspring will be passé tomorrow (it actually sort of already is), and they have to be able to apply the same principles to the next new thing.
Rachel Simmon's gut instinct reaction and advice to parents is summed up in her point:
So what to do? Here’s what I suggest. Start a conversation with your daughter about Formspring. Ask her if people at school use it (don’t start off by grilling her about what she does or she may scare and fly away). Ask her what she thinks of it. Then ask her if she uses it.
If she says yes, tell her she’s banned for life from the website. Period.
This completely misses the mark. If you think you can solve problems by banning use, you're in for real trouble when kids experience the same problems in new venues - they won't tell you when they stumble into a mess for fear that you'll ban them from it. Prepare them for the world they are living in. Teach them about how it works. Set family expectations and guidelines. Connecting the tragedy of a girl with serious psychological issues to a website is hyperbole, and won't get you very far in setting your kids up for success.
Ms. Simmons, if you're reading, I'd love to talk to you more about this.
Let me tell you what this is about," says Sohn. "This is all about Hollywood and the recording industry wanting telephone and cable companies to filter their networks for copyright infringement.
Via NPR article on new trade agreemetns via @alexragone: I am constantly amazed at how much power big business (in this case, Hollywood) has over the way our government operates. Currently the U.S. is in secret trade negotiations with major nations about how the Internet should/should not be filtered. The Recording Industry of America wants internet service providers (ISP - the company that provides your Internet connection) to be more responsible for blocking illegal file traders.
My best metaphor for ISP's in this case is your water company (or say, electric company). You might use water for cooking, bathing, cleaning, or you might use water as part of your illegal alcohol still. Either way, the water company is not responsible for checking up on your usage. Why then are ISP's supposed to give you a utility and monitor/block your usage. If the RIAA is so concerned about piracy, then they need to figure out a better solution. Don't mess up the Internet trying to deal with your own business problem.
Definitely read the NPR article for more on what is happening in these secret trade deals.
Wide Web of diversions gets laptops evicted from lecture halls
In an unsurprising article an old media institution which is slowly withering away (the newspaper) discusses how a law school has to ban laptops in their classrooms because students aren't listening to the lectures.
"This is like putting on every student's desk, when you walk into class, five different magazines, several television shows, some shopping opportunities and a phone, and saying, 'Look, if your mind wanders, feel free to pick any of these up and go with it,' " [Professor] Cole said."
I can't see how this is any different than these future-lawyers desks are going to be. They'll be in their offices, having to do work, with a computer, Internet access, cell phones, desk phones, e-mail, instant messenger, Skype, etc, all available for their perusal.
Shouldn't law schools being teaching future lawyers how to minimize distraction, use modern tools to be better lawyers (like writing a collaborative brief via Google Docs), and embrace what modern technology has done for the legal field? Or perhaps the bigger problem is the modern legal field isn't moving to take advantage of the opportunities. My sense is that the field is, but the educational institutions training the new lawyers aren't.
I can't believe how unwilling educators are to change their practice. You've got to get to where your kids are, or you'll be irrelevant.
My rant for the day.
