#lis9314

[missquerious]

All Hail the ???? Cloud: Smackdown! Glow Cloud vs. [Data] Cloud*

Today I would like to discuss two potentially harmfull, or possibly benign clouds.

In the first corner we have the Glow Cloud. The Glow Cloud is a physical cloud that appeared one day in the sky of fictional town Nightvale, glowing multiple colours and emitting a low whistling sound. During it's first appearance it rained down small animal corpses before growing to cover the entire town and beginning to drop larger animal courses. It also tends to evoke a certain response in people. All hail the Glow Cloud. Or that might just be the mind control. In later appearances it reappears as a concerned citizen and as the president of the school board to ensure that it's children are going to get a good education.

In the second corner we have the equally impressive [data] cloud! Shortened to just “the cloud” the cloud primarily refers to 'the internet' or how various types of data and software are being stored on outside servers rather than the users device. Consider Google Drive which allows users to save and share personal documents online, or rather on Google's servers which are accessible as long as you have an internet connection. Personal documents are far from the only things that can be stored in the cloud, itunes uses the cloud, and there are computers that are being built around the cloud such as Google's Chromebook. Obviously the cloud has an incredible amount of potential and can be hugely convenient. Being able to access information from anywhere? I'd never have to email myself a document again! Devices such as computers, tablets and phones will be able to shrink as they will no longer need to be able to hold as much data.

If we are to believe Marc Andrejavic the term 'cloud' is purposely being used to “obscure obscure the very concrete shifts in control over information associated with the recentralization of information and communication resources envisioned by the architects of the internet “cloud.” I mentioned Google Drive and the Chromebook earlier, and last week I made a post about Google's privacy policy which was big on collecting user information, and right now the way the business model for the cloud is headed it's going to end up with a similar plan. Remember this includes making use of information such as how, where and when you use these services. Out course this procuring of information can be seen as part of a trade-off, you are able to use these services for free and in return Google is able to use the information that they gather about you in order to make money. It's pretty much a win-win situation. But before you make a decision to reject the Glow Cloud in favor of this flashier more technical model consider that the cloud is still fairly new and there are issues that will be upcoming in the future, who owns the material stored on the cloud (did you know that you don't own your itunes library?), what happens when you can't get internet access? What is the likelihood that you can be identified because of the data gathered by the corporations behind the cloud (see: the AOL fiasco of 2006)?

Now that you know the contenders, who do you pledge your eternal allegiance to? The Glow Cloud, or the [data] Cloud?

*A small understanding of the podcast Welcome to Nightvale might be necessary to understand the audio file and some of the content of this post. It was the last one, I wanted to have a little fun. 

Works Cited:

Andrejevic, M. (2007). Surveillance in the digital enclosure. The Communication Review, 10(4), 295-317

[missquerious]

Duck Duck Google or I'm on the brink of paranoia

The more I think about it the more terrifying the state on information privacy becomes, it's not something that I know a lot about in the first place, and it's not something that I think about all that often beyond who does and does not have access to my facebook profile. But the more I have to think about it the more worried I get, and I don't really know how to deal with that. On one hand the internet allows me to do marvelous things and continues to make my life easier. My Google results have started to tailor themselves to my needs (which is great because otherwise library related results would not usually be anywhere near the top of the results), it knows my location so when I search for a company it shows me the nearest location, and now I'm mostly seeing ads for online stores I visit anyway (I could get ad-blocker but I have reasons okay!). But to actually look at the Google privacy statement and see all of the information that they are collecting (a reminder that this information is being stored by Google, it's not my computer that's doing these things for me but a corporation) is a little intimidating. To give a short list of things listed on their privacy policy page; personal info (ie. Name, address, phone number, email address); information on what services we use and how we use them, this includes the ads; information on the devices you use; your search queries; information on telephone calls; and location information.

Not only is all of this information being collected, we: the user, don't have any control over what is done with this information. 

On the plus side while they can and will share information with their affiliates and partners we know Google is hesitant to turn over search strings to the government or other law enforcement agencies. In 2006 the U.S Department of Justice asked a federal judge to compel Google to hand over records of the searches made by millions of users as part of some plan to combat child pornography. While Microsoft, AOL and Yahoo all complied when compelled, Google resisted the order. So it's nice to know they have our backs in this one area.

On the topic, this isn't the only time AOL has shared its users info. Again in 2006 AOL released over 20 million search queries from 658,000 of its users. The records were released so that they could be studied for academic purposes, but the records were also made accessible by the public. AOL had made efforts to make the records anonymous however by studying the search terms and strings individual users were able to be identified. The database is still available online in a number of places; aolstalker lets you rate how interesting each users search terms are.

Another search engine, Duck Duck Go seems to have taken a different approach, on their privacy statement page (which is just actually kind of interesting) we learn that they don't log your IP address, there is no way to connect your search strings together, they don;t use cookies by default. They do let us know that they will include little pieces of code that let websites like amazon that you came from Duck Duck Go so that they can get a little bit of a commission. The downside of Duck Duck Go is that the search results I've been getting have been a little less relevant. But that's what the MLIS is for right? Knowing how to make better search strings.

[missquerious]

While unfamiliar to a large number of library users, RFID (radio frequency identification) technology is becoming more and more prevalent in library systems. As implied by the name; RFIDs are small chips that are able to emit a signal that identifies the object to which it is attached. Necessary to read these signals are scanners that can receive the signal and computer software that is required to translate the signal into something readable by humans or cataloguing software.

The traditional method of checking in and out books that most libraries have been using for years involving barcodes and manual scanners has been criticized for being too slow, and causing “long queue, bottle necking and complains from dissatisfied patrons (1). RFIDs are becoming more and more attractive as an alternative to the barcode system for a number of reasons; the first being that they are faster. Because they use a frequency rather than a printed code a scanner does not need to be aimed or directly applied, as well a RFID scanner can pick up the frequency of many RFIDs at a time, further speeding up the process. RFIDs can also be used to store data; which can either be written over or read and they can contain a large amount of information. Numerous sources have expressed the ways that libraries can use this function such as to keep track of the; item code, a brief description of the item, and even the circulation history of the item (1). RFID technology has also been a proposed solution to the “information gap” phenomena which is what occurs when the status of a book may be incorrect because of the limitations of the computer system. Essentially, when the computer catalogue says that a library book is on a shelf, when in fact it has been checked in but not yet been put in its place, or another patron either currently has it or has moved it (1). Another function that the RFIDs can serve is a security measure to reduce the threat of stolen library property.

Introducing RFID technology to libraries is not an easy task, it would involve the installation of a large amount of new hardware and software into the library, staff would need to be trained on the new system

and there are a number of privacy and security concerns that arise from the use of RFID technology that will need to be considered. One of the primary concerns is that since the RDID tags have the capability to store information, they will record personal information that can then be viewed by others who have the technology required to do so. There is also concern that the RFID scanners in the library will be able to pick up signals from other RFID chips that the patron might have on them (which is growing increasingly likely as RFID technology becomes more popular, it can be found in a number of common items including; drivers licenses, money, car keys, passports...)

Discussions about these concerns is problematic because there isn't a consensus in the literature as to whether or not these concerns are legitimate. For example in their conclusion Pop et. al. state that,

      “the tags are “powerless”, have a very small read range, store a                minimum amount of data (normally a barcode) and carry no patron          data on the tags. All these factors make privacy concerns almost              non-existent at this time (2011, p. 272).”

On the flip side the list of uses mentioned earlier, “item code, a brief description of the item, and even the circulation history of the item” were taken from an article written the very same year (Wu, et. al., 2011). These fears seem valid when we learn that some libraries the the Oakland Public Library had been leaving their tags unlocked. While this makes sense from the management perspective as having the tags unlocked meant that library staff are able to make changes to the data, it also leaves the tags open to vandals or other individuals who are able to access the tags using commercially produced RFID readers. There are also threats beyond people just accessing the data currently on a RFID chip, Lukas Grunwald, a German security expert has been able to program a tool that would allow him to install “cookies” onto RFID chips. These cookies can be used in the same way that they are online, to track users. For example, “s, a stalker could, say, place a cookie on his target's E-ZPass, then return to it a few days later to see which toll plazas the car had crossed (and when).”

In order to address these concerns a number of different organizations have created various sets of guidelines in order to protect libraries and patrons. But again, very little consensus has been reached in regards to how to protect library patrons and what kinds of information needs to be protected.

Is the convience and time savings that RFID technilogy can offer worth the security risk? Does it really matter when we are already sharing so much informatio about ourselves both willingly and unknowingly?

Pop, C., Mailat, G., & Helera, E. (2011). RFID System and Automation in University Lirbaries. Proceedings Of The International Conference On Library & Information Science / Conferinta Internationala De Biblioteconomie Si Stiinta Informari, 267-272.

Wu, T., Yeh, K., Chen, R., Chen, Y., & Chen, C. (2011). Integrated library service application platform based on the smart book shelf. Malaysian Journal Of Library & Information Science, 16(3), 103-119. 

[missquerious]

Big Brother is Dead, the Cell Phone Killed HIm

Back when I was working in a coffee shop kiosk inside a larger chain store I had a customer come in wearing a t-shirt with a great deal of foreign writing on it. When I asked what the writing meant I was given a lengthy explanation as to how this shirt (in German) said that no person, authority or organization had permission to record the wearer's image and that to do so would be without his permission and an infringement upon his rights. As he explained this to me, I couldn't help but think of the five cctv cameras trained on him at that very minute and that if I looked behind him I could see his image projected onto a security monitor. The cameras didn't care if they had his permission or not.

I've written before about the Panopticon, which while invented by Jeremy Betham, it was Foucault who brought it into the modern consciousness. The Panopticon is somewhat of a symbol of another of Foucault's theories, and that is the “Society of discipline.” The society of discipline is generally what we think of when we consider the ways in which surveillance have been adopted. People will often talk of 1984 and “Big Brother” as being the biggest threat when it comes to privacy and personal autonomy,

that the people and institutions that are monitoring us are few, but massive and have a great deal of power. In reality a great amount of change has taken place, though advances made in technology and the changing nature of society, we have long since surpassed Big Brother. That is to say, while we are still subject to monitoring by the state, and that the monitoring has been much more intensive this is no longer the primary source of surveillance in our lives.

This is indicative of the change that Foucault has imagined, he had written that disciplinary societies were a part of the 18th and 19th centuries, coming to a peak in the 20th, which is when they would be replaced by “Societies of Control” instead. One of the primary differences that we see in surveillance now compared to years before is that society or the masses are no longer being monitored by just a few or even one primary institution, instead there is widespread surveillance. The masses are observing the masses in ways never even dreamed of nor imagined. Websites collect information on visitors and use it to tailor the ads that are seen when browsing online, consumer loyalty and points cards collect data on the items that are purchased, a huge number of people carry cellphones with cameras allowing them to take picture, or video or audio recording at any time without your permission, and there has been a huge amount of worry in regards to the Google Glass and privacy.

This is incredibly alarming, even more so when we consider that because of the nature of the society of control there is essentially no way to shut it down. When there were only a few institutions that were engaged in mass surveillance it was easier to protest or try and counter. Before there was at least the option of seizing a building, but now the web of surveillance is too widespread. Instead resistance has to be done in small acts and gestures of subversion.

Right now there are a number of incentives or movements towards the use of surveillance by the masses in order to protect their own rights and the rights of other citizens, especially in regards to the misuse of power. Right now with the unrest, turmoil, rioting and revolution going on in places suck as Ukraine, Venezuela, and Thailand there is a huge call out to the rest of the world to watch. People with in the Ukraine are being silenced by their own government, social media such as Facebook, Twitter and Tumblr which were being used as tool to spread information are being used to identify and silence.

Another call to arms to use surveillance technology against the abuse of power is to monitor police misconduct and brutality by the use of such tools as smart phone apps. The Vancouver based Cop Watch is one of these apps. When ipened the app will immediately begin filming, afterwards the user will be able to edit the content, and when finished the video will be automatically posted to youtube and sent to The Network for the Elimination of Police Violence. This is a Canadian app and under Canadian Law citizens are allowed to record police interactions. In the US this is not necessarily the case, and other apps have been developed like Police Tape that focus on the ability to hid the fact that the phone is recording in order to protect the filmer. 

Recently two police officers tried to charge a man with damaging a police vehicle and they might have succeeded expect for an apartment owners security camera that caught them going the wrong way down a one-way street and sideswiping the accused man's car (news story).

This kind of whistle blowing is incredibly important in increasing visibility to the abuses of power, but it is the flip side to the same kinds of technology that allow forums such as reddit's /creepshots to exist. I don't think that there is an easy answer, if there is one at all, but is it possible to moderate these kinds of surveillance issues?

References

Deleuze, Gilles. “Postscript on the Societies of Control.” October 59 (1992): 3-7

[missquerious]

Libraries are starting to introduce interesting methods to self publish

I was doing some early research for my presentation on makerspaces/hackerspaces and I found this interesting machine that has been making its way into libraries (for example the Edmonton Public Library).

The Espresso Book Machine is a form of self publishing, you are literally able to print a book right in front of your eyes with just a .pdf. The machines themselves can either be bought or leased, and libraries surprisingly, are actually one of their target audiences.

What do you guys think? An evil ploy to draw more corporations into the library space? An interesting way to connect people with books? A huge drain on library resources? 

[missquerious]

If you don't mind, I want to talk about the Panopticon for a bit. I studied crime, it's kinda my thing.

Jeremy Bentham's panopticon, both as a concept and as a form or architecture have been applied in many fields and setting other than those originally intended (primarily places for the correction of behaviour, factories, hospitals, asylums and schools). The basic idea being that there is a sttructure that allows those with a certain amount of power the ability to watch over an individual or population, now, the population knows that they might be observed but cannot be sure if or when this observation might happen. Then the threat that they might be observed forces them to modify their behaviour, usually out of fear of punishment.

It is easy to see why Bentham's Panopticon is most frequently applied when talking about prisons. While the actually architecture is no longer used, the same idea is carried out though the use of cctv's in prisons. However, Jeremy Bentham had conceived the Panopticon as having much wider applications, such as in schools, hospitals, asylums, factories and workhouses.

Despite the ultimate failure of the panopticon as Bentham had imagined, we can still see traces of it every where, even in places unexpected, let's say for example...the library.

“The need for physical supervision, or over-seeing, of the public in order to deter malefaction was a key ingredient of library architecture. Devices such as the raised superintendent’s platform, radiating stacks, long counters arranged perpendicular to parallel stacks, glass screens, the sparing use of alcoves, and appropriately positioned galleries and balconies were liberally deployed in libraries.”

( Black, Alistair. “The Victorian Information Society: Surveillance, Bureaucracy, and Public Librarianship in 19th-Century Britain.” The Information Society 17.1 (2001): 63-80)

While the text that this passage came from might be dated (1907), please consider the following:

The Library of Congress

The Radcliffe Camera

The State Library of Victoria (Australia)

Stockholm Public Library