505 Matching Annotations
  1. Apr 2018
  2. gobo.social gobo.social
    1. This fall, my colleagues and I released gobo.social, a customizable news aggregator. Gobo presents you with posts from your friends, but also gives you a set of sliders that govern what news you see and what’s hidden from you. Want more serious news, less humor? Move a slider. Need to hear more female voices? Adjust the gender slider, or press the “mute all men” button for a much quieter internet. Gobo currently includes half a dozen ways to tune your news feed, with more to come.

      Gobo, a proof of concept.

  3. Mar 2018
    1. At the moment, several projects in the space are working to adopt new supplementary protocols, with the intent of building better bridges between one another. The proposed development might end up looking like this:<img class="progressiveMedia-noscript js-progressiveMedia-inner" src="https://via.hypothes.is/im_/https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*3pEK-Fwq7bNOVcnXfVdNuQ.png">Diaspora at this time has no plans for new protocols, having just significantly upgraded its own. postActiv intends to adopt support for Diaspora federation in a future release. Mastodon just released support for ActivityPub, and Pleroma , Socialhome and GNU Social are thinking of adopting it. Nextcloud is also notably getting into the federation space, and Hubzilla and Friendica will likely both support the ActivityPub protocol as extensions.

      Where we discover that Friendica (and Hubzilla) are clearly the best options for navigating The Free Network.

      It's a shame that the connectivity to Twitter and other non-free networks and services is not better highlighted. It's clearly by being compatible with the non-free networks that the Free Network will win in the end -- by allowing people to escape en masse.

    1. For the past 100 years we have been chasing visions of data with a singular passion. Many of the best minds of each new generation have devoted themselves to delivering on the inspired data science promises of their day: intelligence testing, building the computer, cracking the genetic code, creating the internet, and now this. We have in the course of a single century built an entire society, economy and culture that runs on information. Yet we have hardly begun to engineer data ethics appropriate for our extraordinary information carnival. If we do not do so soon, data will drive democracy, and we may well lose our chance to do anything about it.

      We have hardly begun to engineer data ethincs approriate for our extraordinary information carnival.

  4. Feb 2018
    1. “If we just reward content based on raw clicks and engagement, we might actually see content that is increasingly sensationalist, clickbaity, polarizing, and divisive,” she says. A social network that rewards only clicks, not subscriptions, is like a dating service that encourages one-night stands but not marriages.

      sexual/matrimony metaphor

    2. “Social networks enable malicious actors to operate at platform scale, because they were designed for fast information flows and virality,”

      why is virality the goal? venture capital, if you take away venture capital and virality, do you still get info disorder?

    3. If Facebook didn’t start offering a better deal to the publishing industry, Thomson and Murdoch conveyed in stark terms, Zuckerberg could expect News Corp executives to become much more public in their denunciations and much more open in their lobbying.

      worth thinking about before one refers to the "free press"

    4. whether News Feed should be modified to better deal with some of the most complex issues facing the product. Does it favor posts that make people angry? Does it favor simple or even false ideas over complex and true ones?

      complex issues are...complex...and not easily made into algorithms

    5. When new recruits come in, they are treated to an orientation lecture by Chris Cox, the company’s chief product officer, who tells them Facebook is an entirely new communications platform for the 21st century, as the telephone was for the 20th. But if anyone inside Facebook is unconvinced by religion, there is also Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act to recommend the idea.

      when culture and legislation mix

  5. Dec 2017
  6. Nov 2017
    1. Political and interest-based advertising should be under much stricter scrutiny than, say, the advertising of T-shirts or hair products.

      These ads should be listed for all to see, possibly along with their purchaser.

      That was I can see (and ask questions why) my neighbor is getting micro-targeted ads...and I am not.

    2. It’s very difficult, and in many cases impossible, for researchers to independently look at behavior on the platform.

      Also some stories last week about Facebook and Twitter going back and deleting content (and access to content) from the election. Researchers were unpacking this...and then all of a sudden things disappear.

      I believe the Internet is the dominant text of our generation. These discussions on Facebook, Twitter, and elsewhere are public discussions and documents (IMHO). There should be "rules" about deleting and obfuscating these texts...even by the companies themselves.

    3. filter

      Thinking that I'd like to have a slider scale to select the level CRAP you'd like to have in your feed.

      All of the way to one direction for honest, reputable, verified. Slide it the other direction for complete mayhem.

      I think we need to call in Bryan Mathers for a mockup of this.

    4. Facebook could also offer an optional filter that would keep any post (or share) of an unverified account from showing up. I’d use that filter.

      I'd love this for Twitter, Facebook, etc. Some "verification layer" that let's you know if the person went through extra steps and is "real."

      This would save the hassle of reading something ridiculous...and then having to click through to their profile and realizing that ALL of their other content is also ridiculous.

    5. countering misinformation, hate speech and propaganda — can take is to abandon the focus on emotional signaling-as-engagement.

      Ultimately, do they even want to do this? Is there any fiduciary responsibility to do this? Even news agencies (on various sides...all good people) are looking at the tons of revenue in subscriptions, ads, and views.

      My thinking is that they don't, and ultimately this will blow over. Ultimately, I think it depends on the objectives, goals, and whether or not they can engineer their way out of this.

    6. As they stand, and especially with algorithmic reinforcement, “reactions” and “likes” are like megaphones for echo chambers and news outrage.

      This is something that's been nagging at me for the last couple of weeks.

      Does it all matter? Does that tweet, share, thumbs up, like really matter at all? If you/we/I share out of tweet of support, outrage, or indifference, does it really matter on the grand scale.

      Yes, I might have some likeminded individuals value it, read it, use it, share it. But, ultimately aren't we really just shouting into the echo chambers that have been built up for us thanks to these algorithms and networks? We're preaching to the choir.

      I'd like to think that open can/will combat this...but unsure.

      I think this is a post for Hybrid Ped or elsewhere. Lemme know if this resonates with anyone and you want to write it out.

    1. Perhaps a future with great user experience in AR, VR, hands-free commerce and knowledge sharing could evoke an optimistic perspective for what these tech giants are building. But 25 years of the Web has gotten us used to foundational freedoms that we take for granted. We forget how useful it has been to remain anonymous and control what we share, or how easy it was to start an internet startup with its own independent servers operating with the same rights GOOG servers have. On the Trinet, if you are permanently banned from GOOG or FB, you would have no alternative.
    2. The internet will survive longer than the Web will. GOOG-FB-AMZN will still depend on submarine internet cables (the “Backbone”), because it is a technical success. That said, many aspects of the internet will lose their relevance, and the underlying infrastructure could be optimized only for GOOG traffic, FB traffic, and AMZN traffic. It wouldn’t conceptually be anymore a “network of networks”, but just a “network of three networks”, the Trinet, if you will.
    3. What has changed over the last 4 years is market share of traffic on the Web. It looks like nothing has changed, but GOOG and FB now have direct influence over 70%+ of internet traffic. Mobile internet traffic is now the majority of traffic worldwide and in Latin America alone, GOOG and FB services have had 60% of mobile traffic in 2015, growing to 70% by the end of 2016.
  7. Oct 2017
    1. It should also greatly increase the human oversight of ad targeting systems — specifically, oversee algorithmically generated categories (rather than basing them solely on user-inputted interests). Political and interest-based advertising should be under much stricter scrutiny than, say, the advertising of T-shirts or hair products.

      Should this be done internally to corps or should gov have a hand in the regulation?

    2. The key is for Facebook to be upfront about technical challenges, open about its mistakes and willing to answer the tough questions honestly. If it does that, it will continue to earn the public’s trust.

      Feel me.

    3. Companies would need additional levels of verification, and should have a label and scrutiny different from those of people. (Whistle-blowers and dissidents might need to use a different platform.)

      Great example of the tension between social media as liberating/oppressing. Like Twitter can be used by Black Lives and white supremacists. When, in this case, does anonymity become abused versus liberating?

    4. Worthy, beautiful goals, but easier said than done when Facebook is also stuck delivering ever-increasing profits and making its platform serve the needs of advertisers.

      Corporate structure at odds with idealist slogans. This is essentially why I left (Rap) Genius: it became increasingly apparent that despite the company's well-intentioned, truly felt aspirations, there were only so many avenues to monetization and all would in some way compromise the stated mission.

    5. The single most important thing Facebook must do is come clean. Tell us what you know. Tell us what you know but can’t share. Tell us what you don’t know. And tell us what you don’t know that you don’t know

      Transparency.

  8. Sep 2017
    1. connected teenagers  had decreased feelings of well-being. T

      I think this is a central question of our age--does social media make us happier? Increase democracy? Smarter? And the question always changes because the technology always changes. I now wonder about SnapChat. It functions a bit differently but with the same goal of connection. Does it produce better feelings than FB? Worse? More vicitimization? Less?

  9. Aug 2017
    1. Google in my experience knows that there are ambiguities, moral doubts, around some of what they do, and at least they try to think about it. Facebook just doesn’t care. When you’re in a room with them you can tell. They’re’ – he took a moment to find the right word – ‘scuzzy’.
    2. So Facebook knows your phone ID and can add it to your Facebook ID. It puts that together with the rest of your online activity: not just every site you’ve ever visited, but every click you’ve ever made – the Facebook button tracks every Facebook user, whether they click on it or not. Since the Facebook button is pretty much ubiquitous on the net, this means that Facebook sees you, everywhere. Now, thanks to its partnerships with the old-school credit firms, Facebook knew who everybody was, where they lived, and everything they’d ever bought with plastic in a real-world offline shop.[4]​4 All this information is used for a purpose which is, in the final analysis, profoundly bathetic. It is to sell you things via online ads.The ads work on two models. In one of them, advertisers ask Facebook to target consumers from a particular demographic – our thirty-something bourbon-drinking country music fan, or our African American in Philadelphia who was lukewarm about Hillary. But Facebook also delivers ads via a process of online auctions, which happen in real time whenever you click on a website. Because every website you’ve ever visited (more or less) has planted a cookie on your web browser, when you go to a new site, there is a real-time auction, in millionths of a second, to decide what your eyeballs are worth and what ads should be served to them, based on what your interests, and income level and whatnot, are known to be. This is the reason ads have that disconcerting tendency to follow you around, so that you look at a new telly or a pair of shoes or a holiday destination, and they’re still turning up on every site you visit weeks later. This was how, by chucking talent and resources at the problem, Facebook was able to turn mobile from a potential revenue disaster to a great hot steamy geyser of profit.
    3. What Facebook does is watch you, and then use what it knows about you and your behaviour to sell ads. I’m not sure there has ever been a more complete disconnect between what a company says it does – ‘connect’, ‘build communities’ – and the commercial reality.
    4. Particular segments of voters too can be targeted with complete precision. One instance from 2016 was an anti-Clinton ad repeating a notorious speech she made in 1996 on the subject of ‘super-predators’. The ad was sent to African-American voters in areas where the Republicans were trying, successfully as it turned out, to suppress the Democrat vote. Nobody else saw the ads.
    5. A version of Gresham’s law is at work, in which fake news, which gets more clicks and is free to produce, drives out real news, which often tells people things they don’t want to hear, and is expensive to produce.
    6. The mission to ‘connect’ turns out to mean, in practice, connect with people who agree with you. We can’t prove just how dangerous these ‘filter bubbles’ are to our societies, but it seems clear that they are having a severe impact on our increasingly fragmented polity. Our conception of ‘we’ is becoming narrower.
  10. Jun 2017
    1. You might think it’s hyperbole for Winer to say that Facebook is trying to kill the open web. But they are. I complain about Google AMP, but AMP is just a dangerous step toward a Google-owned walled garden — Facebook is designed from the ground up as an all-out attack on the open web.

  11. May 2017
    1. Recently, Facebook tried to introduce Beacon, a program that would broadcast particular purchases on a user's news feed. This kind of covert advertising, what Ari Melber calls "social advertising," was soundly rejected by users (22). While the messages were touted as innocent recommendations, in actuality they served up commodification and commercialism at the expense of homemaking. By analogy, consider the effect of inhabiting a house with a subclause, more or less unbeknown to you, that allows marketers to publish your purchases as endorsements.

      There is a scene in "The Social Network" when Eduardo and Mark are debating whether or not the site should start gaining revenue... would pair nicely here if I could find it...

  12. Apr 2017
    1. The digital social networks that have quickly become ubiquitous have made visiblemany of the patterns underlying existing academic personal and professional relationships,and the ways in which reputation and reliability circulate in these structures. Social andintellectual networks have long constituted the professional contexts of scholars, but digi-tal networks representing some subset of those contexts have exposed more of what takesplace at the margins of those networks.

      Digital Social Networks, particularly Facebook and Twitter.

      Makes an interesting point about homogenisation in Facebook and Twitter (i.e. people are a binary of friend or not friend, categories that collapse all different categories.

      Interestingly, both Facebook and Twitter have taken steps to address this recently.

    Tags

    Annotators

    1. Marketers would prefer to have their own predictive marketing platforms, helping them collect and activate their own proprietary data. Enterprise technology companies want that future as well. They want to be the ones to sell and provision those tech platforms, integrating and packaging them with all of the other systems they sell into the enterprise, from CRM to call center management to finance and sales force automation. Quite naturally, they worry that it will be easier for Google and Facebook to add their own CRM and related systems than it will be for them to replicate Google and Facebook’s digital marketing system.Agencies? They just want to keep themselves in the middle. Whether as consultants, media brokers, system integrators or owners of syndicated data, agencies just want to stay relevant and find ways to reverse their declining margins.

      That is most certainly their wishlist. But it overlooks the reason why Google and Facebook get all the ad dollars in the first place: they have all the users & their data. That's why most advertisers will have to play by their rules as the chances to succeed with their own offerings aren't great.

      Telcos/ISPs meanwhile, particularly Verizon, are to watch indeed (The new FCC rules play right into their hands as well). Since they own many users & their data, they are a force to be reckoned with. But: ISPs aren't global players and regulated differently in each country.

  13. Mar 2017
  14. Feb 2017
  15. Dec 2016
  16. Nov 2016
  17. Oct 2016
    1. Facebook is allowing advertisers to exclude users based on race.

      The ad we purchased was targeted to Facebook members who were house hunting and excluded anyone with an “affinity” for African-American, Asian-American, or Hispanic people.

      When we showed Facebook’s racial exclusion options to a prominent civil rights lawyer John Relman, he gasped and said, “This is horrifying. This is massively illegal. This is about as blatant a violation of the federal Fair Housing Act as one can find.”

  18. Aug 2016
  19. Jul 2016
    1. Here’s a presentation at the 2013 Personal Democracy Forum that provides a little more context for our project.

      Where is the Facebook shareable link for this video? I would like to hit share, for it to look pretty and for you -hypothes.is- to earn and retain new subscribers?

      (If I share this via youtube, the funnel flows to youtube. Do you have a dedicated "landing page" with simply this vid? I'll reply here if I find a "pretty" way.. Thanks Guys!)

  20. May 2016
    1. He realised that if Internet.org took hold in India, Facebook would be the gatekeeper to the web for hundreds of millions who had no idea what the internet was, or what it could do for them.

      The idea that some internet is better than no internet is ridiculous. Poor people in developing nations deserve the same Internet as the rest of the world.

  21. Apr 2016
    1. Telegram's server-side software is closed-source and proprietary. Pavel Durov has said that it would require a major architectural redesign of the server-side software to connect independent servers to the Telegram cloud.[50]

      Does that fact actually make Telegram a real alternative to WhatsApp and Facebook Messenger?

  22. Mar 2016
  23. Jan 2016
  24. Dec 2015
  25. Sep 2015
  26. Aug 2015
  27. Jun 2015
    1. Yet ad-based financing means that the companies have an interest in manipulating our attention on behalf of advertisers, instead of letting us connect as we wish. Many users think their feed shows everything that their friends post.

      This is the crucial point for me: we are not really "connecting" through Facebook if the connection is not on our own terms, so the very concept that underlies the service is problematic.

      The same can be said of Google: our search for information is not authentic if the search results are taking into consideration ad-partners, etc.

      I'm personally much more concerned about this paradox in the latter case as it pertains to knowledge production.

  28. May 2015
  29. Apr 2015
  30. Jan 2015
    1. A client-side Javascript SDK for authenticating with OAuth2 (and OAuth1 with a oauth proxy) web services and querying their REST API's. HelloJS standardizes paths and responses to common API's like Google Data Services, Facebook Graph and Windows Live Connect. It's modular, so that list is growing. No more spaghetti code!

      javascript facebook client