http://www.phonestory.org/ iPhone -­‐ http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/appsblog/2011/sep/14/apple-­‐
phone-­‐story-­‐rejection “In one minigame, while the narrator explains that most electronic devices require the mining of coltan, a conflict mineral in Congo whose demand spurs war and child labor, the player must use the touch screen to guide armed soldiers to bark at exhausted child miners in order to meet the goal in time. … In another, the voice-­‐over explains the suicides at electronics manufacturers in China, and the facile solution of "prevention nets" -­‐-­‐ while the player must catch tumbling workers using a stretched trampoline.” Sepp Blatter: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/world-­‐cup-­‐
2010/7891632/Sepp-­‐Blatter-­‐given-­‐embarrassing-­‐nickname-­‐on-­‐World-­‐Cup-­‐
award.html UMLAUT: http://jonudell.net/udell/gems/umlaut/umlaut.html Ken Lay: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kenneth_Lay&action=historysub
mit&diff=67815734&oldid=67805837 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kenneth_Lay&action=historysub
mit&diff=67818615&oldid=67818386 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kenneth_Lay&action=historysub
mit&diff=70156203&oldid=70156165 Future of the Internet -­‐ Jonathan Zittrain -­‐ Generative Net o features: § Protocol stack § Open Protocols § Open process § Procrastination (make then see how it develops) o results: -­‐
-­‐
-­‐
§ Many people can be involved in innovating for the platform § allows development of unanticipated uses abuse of the generative net o examples: § spam § viruses/etc § malware / spyware o results: § generative net becomes hard to deal with • software security updates, phishing scams, malware, anti-­‐virus protection types of centralized control (non-­‐generative or less generative) o tethered networked devices § examples: • gaming systems • gps • iphone • ipad § properties: • mfg controls what can run on it (can limit new uses) • mfg can update / fix remotely • can be centrally mis-­‐used (privacy, change in tos, etc) o web-­‐based applications/services § examples: • Google Docs • Facebook • Flickr § properties • owner controls what can run on it (can limit new uses) • owner can update / fix remotely • owner can discontinue services, change t.o.s. etc. • can be centrally mis-­‐used (privacy, change in tos, etc) the organizations w/ power will act to block innovation when it runs counter to their interests o (although they may have come to that power because of the open, generative properties of the network) pg 129 “What are the technical tools and social structures that inspire people to act humanely online?” ubiquity of pc + flexibility (can be reprogrammed) + pages can be compiled from many different “unvetted” sources -­‐
Wikipedia = open to contributions, revert pages after vandalism, community investment (editors, people watching over pages), evolution of standards, benevolent (?) dictator (?) Solutions: o Technology: § A lesson from “undo” on wikis: § Roll back of system (implemented in Windows XP & Vista) • Make it more nuanced, track changes to ind. programs § Virtual machines (multiple “machines” in one) • green – trusted, safe, conservative, houses sensitive documents • red – more open, used for experimentation, can easily be reset • “machine” on a thumb drive • how to move data from red to green safely? § Better measurement/reporting of bandwidth • users can become more aware and responsible • collect stats on the status of other computers running certain piece of software (have they become spam robots?) • StopBadware / Herdict (distributed processing) • Open system (generative possibility) not like reporting to OS vendor only § Generativity and limits to End to End Neutrality • 1. makers of generative Operating Systems should be required to provide more transparency about how the machines are communicating (like a speedometer)… you could see if it is sending spam for instance • 2. ISP responsibility o counter to end-­‐to-­‐end principles o ISP can filter out or flag viruses o ISP can identify zombie computers and take them off the service o Stop thinking rigidly about end-­‐middle-­‐end… webservices and other innovations complicate this… o Herdict can use a variety of judgments ie you could choose from different seals of approval (ie like Better Business Bureau, Good Housekeeping, Consumer Reports etc) •
Google in connection w/ StopBadWare – puts the responsibility on the site owner could generate a market for services to monitor/fix/certify