A smarter kind of information
Information as a resource is a concept that is well imbedded into to the daily infrastructure for hundreds of years. We observe, record, and hope that one day we are accredited with being the foundation for vertical progression in society. Adhering to methodology that protects the integrity of new information, along with proper utilization of past information, insures that no discovery is left to question. And striving for globalization means that we’ve spent a great deal of effort in delocalizing what we know, in the hopes that we never see another burning Library of Alexandria.
It’s settled, information has become plentiful, its accessibility is at an all time high, and one can only predict it will grow in both aspects. Though, I would argue that information as a technology is in its infancy. Because we know how to make a lot of different kinds of bricks of varying weight, cost, or utility, doesn’t intrinsically mean we’re quite ready to construct a bridge. But we’re absolutely on the right track:
Some of you out there have already seen this, but without fail, I get a laugh from it every time. I left “information as a technology” without definition because I find it futile to define something so changing and inclusive. You’re more likely to learn the usage and definition of the word “set” from example rather than Webster’s page long multi-faceted qualification that goes to the ends of the earth to leave no stone unturned; likewise, the link above is an amusing anecdote to how I feel information as a technology is integrating into our society.
Assuming that you didn’t take the 180 seconds to read the two pages of boldface type I have linked above, I can summarize the concept relayed while retaining all the artificial embellishments you’ve most likely become accustom but stripped of any real content in hopes that you actually read it for yourself:
Yes, you.
Now that the now arguable lazy and/or possibly paranoid have promptly departed to their respective Netflix accounts and/or bomb shelter, the question of whether or not this is something even worth our attention is at hand. News stories show up on our desks everyday, but often fizzle out to be forgotten for a number of reasons. As you are hopefully already aware of, activity you do on the Internet, through your expenditures, or anything that can be tracked, definitely is tracked, and is probably scrutinized at levels where you would deeply consider the voguishness of tin foil hats. What they learn simply allows the making of informed decisions on how they spend their valuable resources in marketing themselves. It’s easy to think “they should know me pretty well,” but that’s largely because you know you in the perspective of you. They’re blind without our browsing telling them actual demographic of Disney films is not grouped well by age, but by an imaginary, unitless continuum of impressions of ethnically diversity multiplied by whimsicality that is somewhat correlative to how many rainbows and sunshines you “mulanhontus” on a daily basis.
The article is tonally curious (being far from accusative, and not even really inquisitive) of the morality of such action, as does most news article today. While I would love to assume it’s because the author recognizes that it doesn’t matter, and that we’re building the better tomorrow, and that the all powerful Skynet will rise extinguishing life altogether anyways, it’s more likely respect for how awesome it its we’re able to take statistics and information, formulate it, and beat mankind at its own game: surveilling the enigma that is your teenage daughter, as diplomacy had proven ineffective, and thus its study, secondary. Amazon.com is probably a place you’ve encountered some form of smarter shopping. The words
Recommendations for You in…
don’t give you the impression that the computer is thinking intelligently. You simply understand that the computer saw you buy some cowboy boots, someone else bought them and they seem to also have a pretty unhealthy obsession for Kenny Chesney. Before you know it, the “shuffle” function on your iPod has effectively become “play discography of Kenny Chesney with intermittent breaks of Garth Brooks and Carrie Underwood”. Taking it one step further is the small, yet enormous, leap that information has allowed us bridge the gap into something much more personal, and thus opening up a world of possibilities from an information technology perspective:
Recommendations for You, Mitchell R. Sullivan: (age 32, male), in…because you probably had a rough day considering you’ve been laid off for a week, the Bruins got crushed, and you’re still single despite your many online attempts at true companionship over the past 467.3527 days.
I think intimacy just may be that bright future of informed shopping we’ve all been waiting for.
So how does this relate to our Networks curriculum? Well it doesn’t, not in any concrete manner that is. But it should pique the curiosity of how we may build these intelligent and efficient engines given the tools we’re learning in the course. We have made some attempt at quantifying human behavior so that we may build something out of it. If not some equation, then at least some sense. Linked at the bottom of that article is a described “excellent piece,” which, indeed, I am unarguable too lazy/definitely too paranoid to read. I linked it at the bottom and close my argument here. Considering that you’ve read my ramblings to this point, you deserve the peace of never having to listen to my malarkey ever again.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&hp