Web Meets World

My talk last week at Web 2.0 Expo in New York was entitled "Web Meets World." I covered this theme from two directions:

1. The idea that in the future, Web 2.0 "collective intelligence" applications will be driven by sensors rather than people typing on keyboards. What's more, this idea is also key to "enterprise 2.0." Dell's integrated supply chain, which takes real time demand feedback from purchasers, and sends that information all the way back to suppliers in a kind of autonomic process, is more Web 2.0, in many ways, than their heralded Dell Ideastorm initiative. The opportunity for big companies is to turn their IT departments from a back office operation into the brains of their enterprise, enabling autonomic response to constant stimuli from their users. Understanding what WalMart has in common with Google is more important than understanding how to apply Facebook to customer interaction.

2. The idea that the big problems facing us as a world renders the outsized focus of developers on lightweight consumer applications a bit silly. "Stop throwing sheep and focus on stuff that matters" was how CNet described this part of the talk, and that's probably a fair summary. In retrospect, though, I realize I need to make the connection between the two parts of the talk clearer: there's a huge contribution that Web 2.0 techniques can make specifically to the world's biggest problems. Instedd's approach to early detection of infectious diseases, Ushahidi's approach to crowdsourcing crisis information, Witness's harnessing of consumer video to report on human rights abuses, and AMEE's APIs for exchanging carbon data between applications, are all part of the "instrumenting the world" trend that I was talking about in part one of the talk. And in classic "watching the alpha geeks" fashion, they are a key part of the early warning signs that have led me to conclude that this is the next big trend. As I delivered the talk in New York, I think I failed to make the connection as explicit as I should have.

One more question: at the end of the talk, I urged everyone to register to vote, and to take the election seriously. In the course of making that request, I let my personal politics show (I am a strong Obama supporter.) Most people in the audience seemed enthusiastic, but some have complained about politics intruding at a tech conference. What do you think? (I think that the current election is going to have a huge effect on our future, and is very much grist for Radar. But I'd love to hear arguments, pro and con.)

Wingman: In-Browser Validation

Rowan Simpson and Koz have released Wingman, a Firefox plug-in that automatically sends the pages you visit to an HTML validation server. This lets you validate dynamically-generated pages locked away behind complex logins. You can tell it ignore certain types of errors, and the website aggregates information about what types of errors are commonly ignored.

I know Rowan and Koz from Kiwi Foo Camp. Rowan was the top tech dude at TradeMe (New Zealand's eBay), and Koz is a core Rails developer who's built zillions of websites in his time. Wingman scratches an itch they've both felt. Congrats on shipping, guys!

Facebook Growth By Age Group: Share of College-Age Users is Declining

With the U.S. now accounting for only about a third of all Facebook users, we are starting to see a gradual shift away from its original demographic of college-age users (18-25): 46% of all users are 18-25 years old, down from 51% in late May. The number of users in the 18-25 segment is growing, but at a slower pace than the other age groups. Among the major Facebook age segments, the fastest growing are teens (13-17) and young (26-34) to middle-age (35-44) professionals, with the growth in teens driven by non-U.S. markets. Also note the strong growth in the much smaller 45-54 and 55-59 age groups:

In the U.S., 51% of Facebook users are 18-25 years old, down from 59% in late May. But when one looks at other large and/or fast-growing Facebook markets, the share of the 18-25 age group is less than 50% in most of them:

ETech CFP Ends Friday (9/19)

Hurry! The Call For Participation for ETech 2009 closes this Friday (9/19). We've got a lot of great submissions so far, but we'd like to see more. The submissions will all be reviewed by mid-October. Below are the major themes of the conference. If you've worked on technology in any of these areas submit a talk.

• City Tech: Our cities are growing, getting bigger faster than ever before. People are rushing to them in search of economic and social opportunity -- jobs, urban living, and access to culture. How can technology help us create livable, prosperous, sustainable cities? What should mass transit look like? How can we infuse urban infrastructure with sustainability? How are cities using citizens data to become smarter? What can economics tell us about the way urban populations will change and behave?
• Materials & Mechanics: Mechanics and materials develop hand-in-hand. The creation of a new, lighter metal enables iPhones and Mars Explorers. We'll examine the latest in mechanics and the materials that enable new developments. What mechanisms will be possible? How will the coming age of materials change our clothes, our products, and our everyday lives? Can they be made the cradle2cradle way or will we simply be clogging our landfills with ingenious, meticulously crafted waste?
• Personalized Healthcare: Medical technology is something that almost everyone comes to rely on, whether it's hopeful, preventive care in the form of Reseveratol, or a new limb. In no other area does the industrialized world have more of an advantage. What legal framework for personal genomics balances innovation and appropriate medical caution? How is medicine changing? How is healthcare changing across the world? Many resources are focused on anti-aging technology and drugs -- is this the right direction?
• Mobile & The Web: The next billion people will come to the Web via connected mobile devices. Currently, many of these devices are humble dumb clients, but the iPhone, Google, and Nokia are bringing smarter clients to the masses with open platforms. How will these mini-computers change our lives? How will these jumbo-sized sensors benefit us? Will we be able to use the third screen to view an augmented world? What data will be collected and who will have access to it? Is the Web ready for the Next Billion? What will their web apps look like?
• Geek Family: Digital native mothers and fathers are starting their own families. How is that changing home technology? Education technology? What does the future geek home look like and how does it function?
• Synthetic Biology: We can't cover the reinvention of living without looking at the new definition of life. Synthetic biology, first pioneered in the 1970s, is becoming a factor in the development of new materials, medicines, environmental cleansing, and energy. How will this technology impact our lives? How can we be a part of it? What will bring it into the hands of the wider public?

But ETech isn't just about "haves" and "have-nots". Some people choose to live with constraints within the abundant world. What trends and innovations are emerging?

• Nomadism & Shedworking: As cities and their suburbs rapidly increase their footprint, there are some who reject the crowded living conditions, but take advantage of the connectedness. They adopt a high-tech lifestyle within the constraints of a smaller space or take their posessions and their bits with them on the road, to the farthest reaches of the globe. How do they do this and what can we learn from them?
• Sustainable Life: The American lifestyle is unsustainable. How do we move to one-Earth economy? What are Europeans doing? Will Dubai be the trendsetter with its newest sustainable city? How will a renewed interest in environmental design affect us? Last year's keynoter Alex Steffen posited that it would be technology driving the change, not a restriction of habits or an energy diet. Right now the abundant world is being changed by rising oil and medical costs, forcing change. What technology will break through?
• Life Hacking & Information Overload: We are bombarded with too much information, but at least some of it is relevant. What are the tools that we can use to process it? How can we identify the subset we actually care about? How do we identify the necessary bits of information that makes us more productive? Can we use cognitive science to help us deal with modern day living? What does neuroscience tell us about our brains and how we should handle learning and processing? Will ubicomp be able to help us stave off the overload or will it hasten our doom?

Apple's Big Location Chance, Or When Is The iPhone Going To Use That GPS?

Apple's iPhone is being heralded for all of its location-aware apps like Whrrl and Loopt. Unfortunately location-aware apps are currently crippled. I want a setting to record my location throughout the day. I want third-party apps that I trust to be able to access it. Until then Apple is crippling these apps' potential and not letting the iPhone live up to this Wired cover.

Right now the iPhone updates my location only when I go to an app that requests it. On my iPhone these include Google Maps, Loopt, Whrrl. WikiMe, and Earthscape (to name a few). For many of these apps this setup works fine; they are geobrowsers. Once the app has my location it lets me know what relevant information they can provide or how to get somewhere. Loopt and Whrrl, though they are part geobrowser, have a very different set of functionality. They want to let me know where my friends are. Right now they can't. They can only tell me where my friends were the last time they logged in and location is information that degrades quickly.

Apple does not allow third-party apps to run background processes. If they did an app could have a "LocationGrabber" running in the background and it would update that app's (and probably only that app's) servers every 15 minutes (or so). The app would also be able to alert me when I wandered near a friend or if there was a Wikipedia article about a nearby statue. This would, of course, kill my battery and slow the system down (especially if I had multiple apps that wanted my location).

Instead of allowing third-party apps to run background processes Apple has promised to provide them the ability to push messages to the client. This is perfect for apps like instant messaging; it can alert me when a friend has pinged me. Or a calendar that can remind me when I have an appointment. However this system will not work for location-dependant apps. How can Loopt or Whrrl accurately let me know that a friend is nearby when it doesn't know where I am? It only knows where I was. Apple has to check my location periodically and make that information available to trusted apps.

Why do I want this functionality? I'd like to get metrics on my daily path (How long do I spend grocery shopping vs. the gym vs. home?). I'd like to let friends know when I am near (and vice-versa). I'd like to be alerted when I am near a virtual note. In theory I'd like to at least have the option of being alerted with a location-based coupon. I want to learn about what I do, not what I think I do.

Aren't I afraid that I'll be tracked? Not really. By using a cellphone my location can already be determined by the government or the carriers or possibly Apple. I have decided that I am OK with sacrificing this privacy for the ability to make a call on the go. Having made this big leap already I am not concerned about the incremental step of sharing my location more broadly. I would expect that my phone and the associated apps would give me full control over my data: what hours I want to be tracked, how I want that shared, the ability to delete my data (basically I expect them to be as respectful as Fire Eagle).

The iPhone has huge mind-share with location-aware apps. I hope Apple uncripples them. Nokia isn't going to pass up this advantage and Android certainly isn't going to come out of the gates making the same mistake.

Image courtesy: jurvetson

Ignite NYC II Tonight!

Tonight on the eve of the Web 2.0 Expo NY we will have 12 Ignite speakers who each get just five minutes on stage. Bre Pettis, the co-creator of Ignite will be hosting a cupcake decorating contest. Ignite is going to be at New World Stages (340 West 50th Street) where we are a guest of the New York Television Festival. They are providing us a ~400 person theatre and free beer (during the cupcake contest).

Here is the speaker order:
Jason Grigsby - Cup Noodle: Innovation, Inspiration and Manga
Jennifer Pahlka - Technology Anxiety: Jello and Web 3.0
Krikorian Raffi - holmz : open database for energy consumption
Sam Lessin - A very brief history of privacy in our data-deluged world
Nichelle Stephens - Cupcakes: The iPhone of Desserts
Don Carli - The Carbon Footprint of Banner Ads, Emails and Websites and why you should care
Andrew Schneider - Experimental Devices for Performance
Audacia Ray - Porn as a front runner in technology innovations... With a twist
Kati London - plant's eye-view of manhattan
Gillian Andrews - The Source Of All Stupid On The Internet
Deb Schultz - Alley vs Valley
Nate Westheimer - Magic at the Democratic National Convention

Here is a rough schedule for how the night will go.
7:15 Door & Bar opens
7:30 Cupcake Contest Begins
8:15 Cupcakes Contest Ends
8:45 Ignite Talks Begin
9:45 Ignite talks end; upstairs bar opens

If you plan on entering the cupcake decorating competition plan on bringing your own decorations. We will have some on-hand but if you are going to be the cupcake decorating champion of NYC then you'll need to bring something unique. You will not be required to use our cupcakes; feel free to bring your own.

Hundreds of people have RSVP'd on Upcoming or Facebook.

Software Freedom Day

Software Freedom Day is free and open source's open day, a chance for the general public who might have been curious about open source to come along and learn more. I'll be in Wellington on Saturday, September 20th, for Wellington's event. There'll be: copies of Linux given out and a WellyLUG installfest to provide any help people need installing Linux on their own machines; a SuperHappyDevHouse hack day; and a Bar Camp (which I'm emceeing). It's going to be a heap of fun, and a chance to make a positive difference to software. If you'll be in Wellington on Saturday, swing by for the 12pm kickoff and join the fun. If not, check out the web site to find out what's happening in your town.

Daniel Suarez: Bot-Mediated Realities

I enjoy exposure to new world views, the feeling of one's brain being stretched to fit a new frame. For that reason, I enjoyed Daniel Suarez's talk to the Long Now Foundation, entitled "Daemon: Bot-Mediated Realities". You can listen to the talk as I did, or read Paul Saffo's summary.

Suarez sees a world in which bots run everything from airplanes and cars to economies and financial systems, and we have decreasing control over them. The automated systems are good for us, enabling us to do more with fewer people, but Suarez reminds us of the downsides: the specialization of knowledge combined with exploitability of software and the easily-imagined situation of still-running code the workings of which nobody understands. It's certainly changed the way I look at the things around me: inside every intelligent object I wonder, "who knows how these algorithms work? How long will it live?". Not in a paranoid tinfoil helmet conspiracy way, just becoming aware of the fragility of the software I took for granted.

It was at this point that Suarez's talk took a turn for the wishful. His solution to the possible nightmarish future of mankind at the mercy of bots that can't be repaired or replaced was "let's recreate the Internet, only with strong crypto and human-vouched IDs, and we'll only permit bots that a quorum of humans have read and validated the source code to, and ..." and I had to ask, "dude, have you ever worked with security people?". The 9/11 terrorists had government IDs, and it's easy to imagine malicious code doing so in the future. Reading the source code is time-consuming, therefore expensive, and no panacea--bugs can still exist in code that has been audited. The solution to fragile technology isn't more fragile technology unless you can failover in a redundant array of inexpensive Earths.

I think the greatest value of his talk was from the long view of software: we're creating actors that live beyond us, and we (software developers and society, the users of the bots) aren't planning for succession or failure. Come for the world view, but leave early to avoid the questionable solutions.

Tim O'Reilly and John Battelle discuss the upcoming Web 2.0 Summit

Beginning on November 5th, 2008 a wide array of thought leaders and practitioners of Web 2.0 are converging on San Francisco to attend the 5th annual Web 2.0 Summit. This year's theme, "Web Meets World" reflects how much Web 2.0 has evolved over the past five years. I recorded an informal conversation with co-chairs Tim O'Reilly and John Battelle to discuss that theme, highlighted speakers and how to get invited to the Summit. Whether you plan on attending or not, the discussion provides insight into the state of Web 2.0 today.

Transcript Follows:

(continue reading)

Experience Syndication: Powered by Zappos

I have been thinking a lot about the new Powered by Zappos service.

According to Zappos:

Powered by Zappos (PBZ) is a feature Zappos.com offers to its partners where we design, host, fulfill and own a partners web site. Our goal is to provide Zappos customers as well as our partner's customers with the best possible service experience. By building partnerships through PBZ we can deliver great service to more people. Ultimately if you are purchasing through a PBZ site you are making a purchase from Zappos, your package with free shipping will even arrive in a Zappos.com box and you will receive all the great benefits Zappos has to offer.

How the Hell Did Matt Get People to Dance With Him?

A couple of weeks ago Matt gave an Ignite talk at Gnomedex about his experiences dancing around the world. If you've seen the video you'll enjoy his talk - plus it ends with bonus footage of 100 of us dancing with him.

Book Review: Nudge

This year has seen a glut of books on topics in that strange area occupied awkwardly by behavioural economics, cognitive psychology, and experimental philosophy. Some fail to distinguish themselves, merely rehashing the many ways in which we aren't perfectly rational creatures. Others, however, find an original angle to tack the last 30 years of work since Daniel Kahneman first thought "but wait, real people don't make rational choices". Nudge (Thaler and Sunnstein, Yale University Press, 2008) is from two leading University of Chicago economists and takes a public policy angle that has been rewarded in the bestseller lists.

The authors (who refer to each other by their last names, even in the blog that accompanies the book, an awkward affectation that makes me picture two 1950s men in suits at a work cocktail party) have coined a new term: libertarian paternalism. By this they mean that policy makers can use your brain's decision-making shortcuts to steer you towards good behaviour while still leaving you free to choose bad. It's opt-out public policy.

Libertarian Paternalism is a brilliant phrase because it has something for everything: libertarianism for the Small Government suit, paternalism for the Smug Liberal. Nudge has been required reading in the halls of English and US power, because it promises that you can have your cake and eat it. You can make decisions for other people, but not be hated by the people who don't like you making decisions for other people! What's not to love?

The book has a simple structure: first the authors walk us through our cognitive biases, the flaws in our decision-making apparatus; then they take us through different real-world scenarios such as social security, healthcare, and education; and finally they deal with objections and suggest future avenues of exploration. In each subject area, the authors suggest "nudges" (the authors endow the word with the same near-religious air that accompanies "social graph" and "RoR" in Web 2.0 circles) that will gently encourage people to do the right thing. For example, we tend to fear losing things more than we anticipate gaining things, so the authors suggest we not immediately deduct money from salaries to increase retirement savings (which would be perceived as a loss) but instead reduce future raises and put the reduction towards retirement. Then backing out would require losing the retirement saving you were doing (a loss, felt more keenly than the gain of the spending money).

Inherent in this structure is the danger that the middle chapters become wishful fantasies divorced from reality ("I, an unbloodied economist, Know How To Solve All The World's Problems Without Pissing Anyone Off"). The authors attempt to avoid this by citing situations in which nudge-like techniques have worked, for example San Marcos, TX, solved the low college enrolment rate by requiring high schoolers to complete an application form to their local community college before they could graduate (in addition to this, kids were sold hard on the personal advantages of college, such as the earning potential to afford a flash car). See, nudges work! Despite these efforts, this reader was left dissatisfied—perhaps by the authors' advocacy of "our proposals" instead of a humble presentation of "what has worked for others".

I also remain dissatisfied with the authors' blithe dismissal of the dangers of bad nudges. After all, the same techniques could steer someone towards an action that's not in their self-interest. The authors shrug and say "sure, but transparency will help this" and provide two paragraphs of boil-the-ocean political reforms to encourage this. I'd be interested to see how many dubious nudges come about as a result of this book. Perhaps it's because of my time on the Internet, my first-hand appreciation of the very real difference between opt-in marketing and opt-out marketing, that I fear bad nudging is all-to-easy and transparency all-too-hard.

In short, Nudge is an interesting take on cognitive biases and behavioural economics but the long, detailed, and ever-optimistic unveiling of the authors' plans to solve the burning questions in money, health, and even same-sex marriages, turn the work into a study of hubris. And that's before it falls into the hands of someone whose political ends you don't agree with ....

Recent Posts

• Where Camp PDX 2008 | by Brady Forrest on September 11, 2008
• Auckland University Bioengineering Institute | by Nat Torkington on September 11, 2008
• PICNIC Network 2008 | by Brady Forrest on September 10, 2008
• Portable Contacts API Starts to Get Real | by David Recordon on September 10, 2008
• Ignite NYC II: Energy, Cupcakes, and Alley vs. Valley | by Brady Forrest on September 9, 2008
• Open Trace and Yammer Shine | by Brady Forrest on September 9, 2008
• Superstruct: Crowdsource the Future | by Brady Forrest on September 8, 2008
• Ignite Boston 4 - Tonight! | by Mike Hendrickson on September 8, 2008
• Twitter Epigrams and Repartee | by Tim O'Reilly on September 8, 2008
• I Am Trying To Believe (that Rock Stars aren't Dead) | by Jim Stogdill on September 6, 2008
• Watch GeoEye-1 Launch Tomorrow; Thoughts on the Imagery War | by Brady Forrest on September 5, 2008
• Microsoft Missing the Boat on Mobile? | by Tim O'Reilly on September 5, 2008