This could not be less true a decade later. We are obsessed with location. Whether we are tracking and IP address for security reasons or looking up Four Square check ins out of curiosity, or simply checking out away messages we are obsessed. But did this Yahoo! case pave the way for the location indulgences we take part in today ? Absolutely. Yahoo! and cases like it that questioned the internet’s role to the nation-state were the catalysts to the GPS, tracking world we live in today.

Gmail recently added a new feature to the monster of location. It is primarily being packaged as a safety/security feature, but it could put a damper on snooping in email accounts that you don’t belong in. Gmail has a feature at the bottom of your email account where you can look up the most recent IP addresses that you account has been logged into. A couple days ago they added the actual location to go along with the IP address.

So if you are creeping around an Gmail account out of state stop. You’re going to get caught.

Everything about the internet is evolutionary. We started with this borderless separate, but not separate entity, to a highly technological, fully integrated space. The nation-state debate and the sovereignty of the internet still remain essentially unanswered questions, but as long as location technology continues the question will remain.

The internet is revolutionary now because it is the more recent change in communication and formation. It owes its success to revolutions before it.

As explained in class, the internet was not envisioned to get people talking to each other, but for computer networks to talk to each other.
people are always going to make something social because it is their nature.

People are especially drawn to the internet because it blends all the aspects of the previous communication revolutions. There is citizen and professional publishing like the printing press revolution offered, static/broadcast aspects that television brought, and blends the audio engagement of the radio.

So the real question remains: Is the internet the greatest media/communication revolution yet ? Obviously, yes, but only because it is evolutionary and contains all previous revolutions. People are naturally social, and whatever communication platform that is created out of practicality they will make social.

So apparently Indonesia is being put on this list because they are thinking about switching to open source software for their government to run on. The positives to this is that it cuts down on copy write violations from software like Microsoft and it cuts down on spending. Critics claim that it will create unequal market access for software companies (because who wants to buy $700 software when your government is utilizing a free version?). The capitalist in me sympathizes with this point, but the ultimately my desire for choice out ways this. The free market is really the right to choose. If open source software is that choice then great, but I can’t help draw on knock-off bags when I think of OSS. Don’t they have the pitfalls?

Isn’t open source software just a watered down knock off of the original? Sure, you aren’t paying 2,000 for the Louie Vuitton handbag and you’re not paying 700 for Adobe Suite, but are your knockoffs going to do the job? In my experience they don’t. That open source software, pirated/cracked version (I know open source and cracked versions are not the same thing, but I find that if you have one you usually have the other), or knock off bag is going to crash or tear and you aren’t going to be able to fix it. There is not a nice warranty to trade it in to or a “knowledgeable” customer service number to call (hey, its better than nothing). So in the end you are left with some free software that doesn’t do the job and a fake, ripped bag that you got on Canal street for 40 bucks. The quality is lowered, and in the end is it worth it? It is probably just easier to put the money out.

This is all very theoretical of course because I don’t see any time in the near future where I am going to be able to buy the real thing, so open source is going to have to suffice.

We hear the same criticisms all the time. The digital or Net Generation is “the dumbest generation”. We constantly hear the same refrains; we are dependent on technology (uhh, that’s a bad thing?), that we are lazy, or that we are impatient. There is nothing new or profound about these statements. At CPAC, and particularly at the said panel, the Net Generation was treated as the most unique and contempt generation. The Net Generation was looked to as a saving grace in repairing our nation. Our innovation and nature of collaboration were relished.

Mark Tapscott and the conservatives at CPAC seem to think that our generation will be the key to winning elections. We are “innovative, collaborative, and productive if given the proper working environment”. Our learning cannot take place in traditional lectures, and we are better suited for fast-paced, challenging, campaign-like environments. The broadcast model of education is outdated and insufficient. There is hope that our generation will improve democracy through technology and critical scrutinizing that promotes transparency.

We are not an apathetic generation. We are a generation that votes. We generation that cares. We are a capable generation and an energetic one. We are the key to future.

The digital divide can be seen or felt in just about every corner on the “information superhighway”. Superficial examples of the digital divide are plentiful. The digital divide can be found between Myspace and Facebook. When speaking about the digital divide it is important to note that it does not just deal with developed and underdeveloped countries, or the poor and the rich. The digital divide is perpetuated through the societal practice of the “glass bedroom”. One example that comes to mind is the fairly new social service (just launched in December) called Blippy. Blippy users can link all their credit cards, bank cards, Amazon accounts (though there has been some issues with this lately, itunes account, netflicks, etc. Users’ purchases are visible to individual “followers” and appear in a Twitter like fashion. Aside from the fact that obviously everyone that has a Blippy account isn’t on the “bad end” of the digital divide, it does have potential for a divide on a smaller level. Users have the ability to see how cheap a person is or how much they can spend. Tension may arise and users may be tempted to manipulate their purchases since they are public.

The digital divide is going social. It is apparent on every front and whether we chose to embrace it (Blippy) or attempt to defeat it (One Laptop Per Child).

So what does this obsession with finding our “double goer” really tell us about ourselves? That we are a self important society who thrives on the next opportunity for identity play? I think so. Doppelgänger week has given the digital generation and the Facebook community a reason to become even more self-involved. We can ask our friends who we look like and brag via picture on how Myhertiage (which crashed by the way) said we are the exact replica of Brad Pitt. We are a society who needs constant feedback and engagement. We are a society who loves ourselves. According to ABCNews we are more likely to vote for a political candidate who resembles us. And while this self love can potentially be dangerous (can you say racism, sexism) it isn’t all bad. This constant self-involvement makes us a more critical generation, a more aware generation, a more collaborative generation (contrary to our natural impulses), and a more creative generation. We are the generations of multitasking and critical thinking. While we are picking out our celebrity counterpart we are also contemplating the societal meanings behind it.

Other than our desire for self love, Doppelgänger week is just another excuse for good old fashion identity play, the kind where we can express a specific facade of ourselves that is usually unexplored. One Facebook status on my newsfeed claimed, “People are being a little too generous to themselves with this Doppelganger week thing.” This statement embodies the spirit of explorative identity play that we as a people partake in so often online. All in all, Doppelganger week promotes self love and gives us a chance to “unleash” new sides of our personality. The metaphor of a glass bedroom is a recurring theme in the life of social networking sites. Doppelgänger week is just one example of many.

attributed to @wwwhatsnew

larger view

2010 has some great opportunities for new forms of identity play. GPS trackers have been pretty mainstream for awhile now. There are many tracking systems in cars and Google maps systems in airplanes. Location and tracking systems are the new norm. Last year the location based social networking site, Foursquare came out. Though not the first of its kind, it is one of the most popular location sites out there. It is a mobile application where people use GPS navigation to “check in”. Sites like Gowalla (which came out in 2007) and Foursquare allow individuals to gather badges which they visit certain places and gain points. On Foursquare you can become a mayor if you visit a place often enough.

Mashable even predicted that location would the next hot thing in 2010. Besides the obvious dangers that tracking systems present (I can save that for another blog post)
These tracking sites allow for identity play and manipulate of one’s online appearance. You chose the places that you publicly check into and the places that you decide to leave “off the grid”. Theoretically you wouldn’t even have to physically be in location you are checking into-just in the general area People can chose to check into places that they are merely walking by or are next door to. An attention loving friend of mine actually checked into multiple clubs on Foursquare that she was across the street from in attempts to get a rise out of an ex boyfriend. She never even stepped foot into the places, but since she was close enough the GPS allowed her to check in. Her online outcry is just one possibility for identity play with the new location phenomenon.

Pearson states that the digital age has a “heightened self–consciousness”. And we do. We are so very aware of each picture that we are tagged in and what our “mood” displays. Location based sites allow this personalization and self molding to evolved even further. Aside from the convenience of having another medium of knowing where your peers are, sites like Foursquare and Gowalla are just different systems of exploring online identity play and shifting perception.

I love music. I can’t go a day without it. I’m also very picky about my music, and the regular radio does not cut it. I love to download music, stream music, and listen to music. This is probably why I still have a soft spot for MySpace. Basically I think internet radio is the greatest thing ever. So why should I have to wait for a commercial or advertisement or suffer through a song I don’t like? I don’t thanks to internet radio unless I am in the car. Plugging your phone or iPod into the radio can be dangerous while driving. Not to mention if you have a call your music is paused. This is why I am so excited about what Pandora has in store for internet radio users. Pandora is currently working with car manufacturers to build Pandora dash controls for the car radio. Pandora has a deal with Ford and is working towards other contracts. Personally I’d rather have Last.fm in my car, but I would take Pandora over any FM/AM or XM radio station.

It is obvious that MySpace’s social networking heyday has come and gone. It has turned into a wasteland with all the advertisements, phishing scams, and pages that resemble an acid trip. MySpace cannot compete with Facebook in terms of social networking so it needs to find another appeal. And it has with music. I still go to MySpace to check out bands and listen to albums. In terms of music I still find MySpace very relevant. MySpace has great interactive band pages, and I prefer them over any Facebook band page. Recently MySpace Music purchased “certain assets” of social networking site Imeem. Imeem was a site where users could stream and upload music. I’m interested to see what MySpace will evolve into. They can compete with sites like YouTube in terms of media. Maybe car radios are the next thing for MySpace. We’ll just have to wait and see.

“If you’re 24 and single it is programmers nirvana” is what one Google employee says of his job. The culture of working at Google has been described as “an extension of graduate school” with an energetic culture of change. It is commonly referred to as the most successful company in the history of the world, and with on site gyms, massages, laundry, professional chiefs, and 4 billion dollars in profit in 2008 alone this isn’t a crazy statement. But how much does 1998 start up from Moutainview, California turned technical juggernaut really know about you ? Last night I watched “Inside The Mind Of Google” on CNBC (there’s a series on Gates tonight if that sounds like a fun Friday night to you ) to see if I should be worried about what I tell to Google. My instincts have been reinforced (Google isn’t going to sell my private chat logs or embarrassing searches), but that doesn’t mean everything is as transparent as I might like.

Google’s presence can be felt everything. There are Google maps/Google Apps, Google Docs, Google mail, Google phones, and of course Google’s hallmark: the search engine. 2/3rd of all internet searches IN THE WORLD are done through Google. That is more than 2 billion searches a day. Just think about what you type into the search engine. People turn to the search engine box and admit things they would not tell their doctor, wife, shrink, or priest without a thought they everything they type is being stored. Google saves EVERY single search query FOREVER. The real question is if theses searches are identifiable to you. If you are signed in to Google or Gmail then they obviously are saved, regardless if you clear your Google history, and they are always traceable to your IP address. Google states that they save these search queries for statistical and advertising purposes, and claims that individual privacy is their number one priority. Though Google is committed to “transparency, choice, and control” this does not protect private citizens from the government.

Once private data is handed over to a 3rd party the 4th Amendment protecting individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures do not apply. The 3rd Party Doctrine states that the government can access these materials if they believe they need to do so. Google is subpoenaed thousands of times per year for information in personal accounts. It doesn’t seem that scary until you really think about it. What if someone read every single search you ever made and solely changed you based on those searches. You could be looking up terrorism out of interest, but if the government has access to this information this could present a problem. Another issue is selling or giving out search queries. This has not been an issue with Google, but AOL had a similar case. Search queries were handed over to an academic study from AOL. Some searches by individuals were even identifiable, especially when the person was from a rural area. It was a less dense population, and thus easier to figure out who made the search.

Ultimately users must ask themselves if handing over their personal information is worth the risk. For now Google seems to be committed to protecting private accounts and information, but who is to say what Google may be like in 5 or 10 years. Currently Google’s privacy policy is very sufficient but it could be altered. So is treating Google as your best friend in your best interest? I think the risks pale in comparison to what Google can offer, but you should always be weary that what you do on the internet creates digital footprints forever.

Google is scary and I like it.