Quote of the Day

I think that building online communities will represent great opportunity in the next five years and the ones that catch on will have much more value in the form of the byproduct of smart filters than people realize today.

Thomas Hawk

New Orleans & Its Herd

A practical and helpful (and pack-like) approach comes from a surprising source: Move-on is matching homes with the homeless. (via Insta)

On the other hand, Free Will demonstrates what happens when herd mentality reaches the top:

Gov. Kathleen Blanco, standing beside the mayor at a news conference, said President Bush called and personally appealed for a mandatory evacuation for the low-lying city, which is prone to flooding.

This may explain why the evacuation notice came after the declaration of a disaster area. Nor was it only the Governor and the mayor who appear to have waited for someone else to make the decisions.

Read more

First shots fired vs Internet fair use

During the CBS/Rathergate fiasco, Lex predicted a counterattack is coming from the MSM. I predicted the MSM will go after linking/fair use, a la Drudgereport.

Today Drudge has the following headline:

Agence France Presse Sues Over Google News

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) – Agence France Presse has sued Google Inc. (GOOG), alleging the Web search leader includes AFP’s photos, news headlines and stories on its news site without permission.

It’s a shot across the bow, methinks.

Pretty smart move. If they sued a helpless individual, they would get the free speech/uproar factor. Sue another media company with deep pockets, and no one really cares. It becomes a technical fight by lawyers. Fight it out, and get a ruling on the side of copyright protection. Then use this ruling as a saber to rattle down the road.

Anticipating “Internet Fame”

Michael Blowhard speculates:

Are there lessons to be drawn from the episode? It seems likely to me that kids growing up with the Web are going be wrestling with at least one stark choice: does it 1) make more sense to maintain total control over your photographs and videotapes? Or is it 2) more economical (and entertaining) to say “What the hell,” put it all out there, and enjoy whatever consequences ensue?

And why do I suspect that we’ll be seeing a lot of people opting for Choice Number Two?

Just as sensitive online communications that are currently safely encrypted may one day, after technological advances, become public, it may be that someone will eventually develop an effective Internet search engine for images (i.e., one based on something like facial recognition, rather than text as is currently the case). If that happens, a lot of the images that were put on the Internet before anybody expected them to be searchable will become searchable. Photos posted long ago, without accompanying text information, will no longer reliably remain obscure. This is as much true for photos that someone else took of you as it is for your own uploads. The implications for learning about other people in great detail are obvious, though the extent to which this will be a problem will not become clear until we get there.

Michael posits that kids growing up in the new age will face disclosure dilemmas, and they may. But I think it’s at least as likely that most people growing up now and in the foreseeable future will take the lack of privacy for granted. It’s the people now alive who grew up before the Internet who may have the hardest time, because there’s a lot of information out there about many of them that they once assumed would forever remain private.

If you don’t want an image or document to become widely known in the far future, don’t transmit it by or post it on the Internet.