Ramblings of an old Doc

 

I love Mike Elgan, and have for years. His work appears in a variety of publications, including Cult of Mac, Computerworld, Datamation, PC World, InfoWorld, MacWorld, ITWorld, CIO, the San Francisco Chronicle and many others, reaching more than a million readers per month. I read his latest on Computerworld.com and felt strongly enough about this topic to base this piece on it.

You all know the saying about “Perception is everything”? Pisses me off everytime I hear or read it. Why? Because there are facts, and then there’s oatmeal, mushy, touchy-feely crap. Or that’s the way it should be. At least some of the time, right?

I was brought up with “There’s reality. We can measure it and dissect and quantify, etc. it.” – you know: Science, math and intellectual freedom/responsibility. You can’t have that when someone is deciding what you see and in what order you see it.

Remember “Portals” (AOL. Yahoo…etc) that kept you inside their “bubble”? Now it’s far worse.

Well, turns out the relativists were right. Try this experiment yourself. Have a friend or two over with their iPads/phones (with net access) or laptops. In fact, they don’t even have to come over. Have them go to Google search (no, it’s not an anti-google rant) or bing or any of the engines… main thing is you’re all on the same one.

Then tell them a topic, and have them make a scrolling screen shot. email them to each other and compare. They’ll be different, as well as the ads they’re seeing before they type in the search subject. They shouldn’t be, should they ?

Google, bing, facebook… many, many sites do the same thing. They “personalize” things for you.

As Sarah Palin (among others) said, “Thanks, but no thanks.” All I signed on for was a connection: Not the connection someone else thinks I should have or the one that makes things ‘easier’ for me.

Why? Because I’m not feeble minded yet (shut up, Smedley biyotch), and because it really isn’t about me or making it easy for me: It’s about making it easier to sell me stuff.

In truth though, it goes farther than that.

Read Mr. Elgan’s article. Please!

I’ll take it one step further:

I think this is a form of wire tapping without a warrant. They collect their indicators (that’s the ‘tapping’ and all of them do) and modify what you see to match their formula.

It’s worse than a wire tap. They narrow your choices and by doing so, shape your thoughts. Eventually, you’ve stopped thinking critically, because you don’t really see what’s out there. It’s like being surrounded by “yes men”.

That’s not a wire tap, folks: That’s a lobotomy. They don’t want you to be educated to think for yourself, or critically. Anything but. Educated? No: Inculcated and tamed.

The Cure:

This is reproduced from Mr. Elgan’s article:

 

 

 

Source: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9216484/Elgan_How_to_pop_your_Internet_filter_bubble_?taxonomyId=167&pageNumber=1


Comments (Page 2)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on May 08, 2011

Kodiak888
quoting post
 
As Sarah Palin (among others) said



 

And here is where I stopped reading, and the writer loses all credibility. It could've been Michael Moore, Glenn Beck, or Dr. Seuss who said it, it's a terrible transition.

 

 

Having ads and websites pandered to you has been around in quite awhile, and is probably as old as AOL itself. Firefox deletes my internet content, as well as makes most of my web browser incognito. If I was especially paranoid that Google was going to learn how much I like video game websites and send me idiotic ads (what idiot every bought something from an ad directly off of google or similar?) I could just use one of the many proxy services around. And the type of people who rave over Facebook and enjoy all of it's features, aren't the type of people who care about internet privacy. Or if they are, and they're not intelligent enough to keep off of facebook, then they don't understand the issue.

Not about Mrs. Palin. I just remember her saying it a lot.

This isn't just about ads, Kodiak888. It's about search results and intellectual honesty, research, education... progress vs. essentially, a version of subversion of the honesty of the search process. If that isn't honest, then how can the results of research be honest?

on May 08, 2011

I don't think legislation will really address this Doc as this is a "service" provided by a business.  If a search engine business was seen as a monopoly or having undue influence you might get some privacy legislation but as to what results they provide--its their product as they want to deliver it.

I don't know of any truly "raw" search engines out there  that have Google's former capability.

What's also scary about this is government officials, politicians and professionals use Google just as we all do and if Google "picks" results for them, it's effectively shaping their decisions or their ability to make them. 

on May 08, 2011

Interesting.

I just used Scroogle for the first time, on my computer using PaleMoon, to search for an item that my wife had previously searched for on Google this morning on her computer using IE7.

The page Scroogle returned showed the site visited on my wife's computer to have been previously visited (the link was in the 'visited' color).  Hmm.  If it's truly stripping out the IP address, would that happen?

on May 08, 2011

@ Sinperium: Precisely.

@ Daiwa: maybe it isn't doing as advertised. It's looking at the ip address for sure.

 

on May 08, 2011

I've sent an email to Scroogle.  Will post back what I find out.

on May 08, 2011

I don't think any of the sites I use besides Google do this. So what I'm seeing here is: If you use all that web 2.0 tomfoolery, you can expect it to contain web 2.0 tomfoolery. Makes sense to me.

on May 08, 2011

DrJBHL
... It's looking at the ip address for sure.


How can an IP address give you a followed-link status? Are there any IPs that answer only to one URL these days?

Could PaleMoon be looking at the same visited-URL list as IE does? I dump all that data so often that I've never noticed a cross-browser thing like that even though I often have two or three browsers working at once.

Re the general issue the OP & Mr. Elgan are on about, I've held a similar opinion since about 2000. It's probably still too early in the history of the technologies involved for detailed legislation to be workable, but it isn't too early for some basic, 'innovation-proof' principles to get laid down, e.g. opt-in as the default for all this tracking and 'personalizing.'

Like everyone else in Big Media, the NYTimes has gotten in bed with Fa(r)cebook and also have recently added a Recommended For You feature that kicks in slowly if you're reading without having logged in. It's not as bad as search results 'cleaned up just for you,' but it is sad to see the tendency towards tunnel vision getting built in to so many web content providers.

on May 08, 2011

GW Swicord
Could PaleMoon be looking at the same visited-URL list as IE does?

When they're on different computers?

on May 08, 2011

Do you use your wife's computer and she, yours?

That would be the only way... I think. Each computer has to have it's own IP address or there'd be an IP conflict rendering one of them unusable for the net... unless there's something odd in your setup....but even then... 

Do you have sync between the computers?

on May 08, 2011

I'm on her login when I use her's and she's on my login when she uses mine; there's no sync of any sort, though her C:\ drive is shared on the network and both computers are backed up to the same USB hard drive every night.

Here's the first reply I (already!) got from Scroogle:

Something on your end is keeping a history of links already visited. Scroogle is not doing this. Scroogle highlights search term words with colors, but it always does this on all links where it finds them. It has no memory of your previous searches.

I've emailed backing asking what that 'something' could possibly be that tracks visited links across two computers each using a different browser.  This was a site never visited on either machine before today.

on May 08, 2011

Your router would be handing out your home network IP address's and both would use the same IP address for the Internet.

As for the browser history showing the sites you've already clicked on, that is done via cookies on your PC, unless you are sharing cookies between machines which is doubtful, someone visited those sites from each machine.

 

on May 08, 2011

More I think about it, maybe that's what it was - the site visited on her computer perhaps coincidentally had the same key words in its header info.

More I further think about it, I don't think that's it.

The furthermore I further think about it, I'm getting a headache.

on May 08, 2011

When they're on different computers?

Missed the possessive pronouns on first read, and definitely interested in any sort of response you get from the Scroogle guy/folks.

The random silliness posted on the scraper page implies that the 'artist' would really hate to see IP-related tracks on a scraper result list. Hopefully, you'll help the coder(s) there sharpen their act.

It'd be very disappointing if Scroogle turns out to be a clever scam looking to rope in folks like me who've nearly given up doing personal searches at Google (or any other big engine) unless I'm on a random public computer.

on May 08, 2011

 

The answer isn't in the computers. It's in the shared router.

The router's RAM is volatile DRAM that holds the working data and files of the router, and when the power is turned off, the contents of the RAM are lost. It remembered... I'd bet that's the answer.



on May 08, 2011

I would think it would have something to do with her shared C drive. Do you have it as a mapped drive on your PC?

Not sure why you would share the contents of your entire C: drive...that's kind of risky ever with great firewalls.

3 Pages1 2 3