45 lines
3.1 KiB
Markdown
45 lines
3.1 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
title: 'IR 11.1.4'
|
||
date: '2010-10-21T07:08:38-04:00'
|
||
permalink: /ir-11-1-4/
|
||
tags:
|
||
- conferences
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
Session 4
|
||
Networking and Social Sites
|
||
|
||
Robert Joseph Bodle, “Opening the social media ecosystem: the tenuous nature of interoperability, crossposting, and sharing among dominant social media sites, services and devices”
|
||
|
||
— APIs as “the sex organs of open networking”
|
||
— interoperability as key to development of web – prevent vendor lock-in, etc; but tends toward a kind of sharing that results in loss of user autonomy, creation of data monopolies
|
||
— increasingly open Facebook APIs, beginning with Facebook Developer, leading up to Open Graph
|
||
— privacy, autonomy, freedom; Zuckerberg misses the difference between friends and apps/advertisers
|
||
— Facebook achieving a form of lock-in, in which people feel they must share
|
||
— interoperability revisited: transparency, privacy/security, user control, etc
|
||
|
||
Christian Thorsten Callisen, “The Old Face of ‘New’ Social Networks: The Republic of Letters…”
|
||
|
||
— contextualizing the so-called digital revolution within the longer history of the virtual
|
||
— separating the virtual from the digital; virtual as “real idealization” that creates “the illusion of presence”
|
||
— the Republic of Letters as virtual community; relationships of commerce, reciprocal sharing of information
|
||
— techniques of virtuality, means of creating co-presence: props, simulations, rituals
|
||
— mean of media change over time, meanings bound by cultural constraints, must ask not about meaning but about effect?
|
||
|
||
Michael Zimmer, “The Laws of Social Networking, or, How Facebook Feigns Privacy”
|
||
|
||
— new revelation of Facebook privacy breach, but not the first time
|
||
— pattern emerging to how Facebook acts and reacts in these scenarios, a Machiavellian public relations strategy: introduce new “features” that share more and more info, await public outcry, make minor, mostly superficial modifications, say “we heard you, we care about your privacy”
|
||
— laws of social networking:
|
||
— social networking sites have material incentives to promote free and unfettered flow of personal information
|
||
— providing users with robust and easy-to-use tools to control information flows is counter to profit maximization
|
||
— therefore, provide privacy controls only when you must, positioning them as a great sacrifice and something that most users probably shouldn’t bother with
|
||
— i.e., make privacy hard
|
||
— great success at Facebook in monetizing our information flows
|
||
— Zuckerberg’s philosophy of information: it doesn’t want to be free, but it does want to be shared (so it can be sold)
|
||
— claim that providing privacy controls is enough (they don’t have to be easy or usable)
|
||
— Facebook suggestion that users who don’t share don’t have a satisfying social networking experience
|
||
— Facebook view that privacy is a binary: if you don’t want to share (with everyone), don’t
|
||
— skepticism about degree to which Diaspora\* will be able to buck this trend; Google’s founders once proclaimed need for advertising-free search engine; pressures are toward monetization of information
|
||
|