Inkwell: Authors and Artists

    
> Mob theory
>  probably got its start with French sociologist's Gustav Le Bon's book,
>  The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind (1885).

Charles MacKay's "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of
Crowds" was written in 1841. Presumably, he based at least some of his
writing on works dating from before that. Tulipomania dates from the
1600s, for instance.
  

    
Could National Security Closet Consumer WiFi Clothing?
An interesting article on the top cover of the business section in the
New York Times today, entitled "Limits Sought on Net Access Without
Wire: Military and Industry Face Off on Frequencies" suggests that
'wireless internet access' might conflict and interfere with various
military devices, particularly radar. "The military officials say the
technical restrictions they are seeking are necessary for national
security."  One could read such demand for such restrictions a number
of ways, depending on one's view on different branches of the
government. <http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/technology/17WIRE.html>


Popular Madness and Crowd Control
Charles MacKay's "Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of
Crowds" is a fun read, and has perhaps been reprinted more than just
about any other non-fiction book. It’s where I began a lot of my own
appreciation of mass delusion.  The book proposes and provides details
for all sorts of 'mass hysteria' - MacKay includes the Crusades,
alchemy, witch hysteria's, etc. And tulipomania.  Since the
fear/contempt of 'crowds' is pretty ancient, one can in fact look to a
number of social 'theorists' and moralists in many cultures and time
periods, particularly by government servants, well before even MacKay.
People look to LeBon as an important mob theorist muscling in on the
theory turf by having analytically laid out an original framework that
argues:  human behavior in crowds is different from their behavior as
individuals.  Social reactionaries like Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821)
thought ‘crowds’ to be irrational, needing the guidance of smart and
noble people like ‘ourselves.’  LeBon, Durkheim, etc., in contrast
propose to examine the tensions involved in emergent, coherent
(group/social) behavior unpredicted by its parts (individuals). All
that talk about ‘evolution,’ that guiding social metaphor in the late
19th  century (and in late 20th century complexity theory) did have
people rethinking issues of emergence.  So, do clothes make the mob, or
does the mob make the clothes?
  

    
That John Markoff of the NYT (I have known him since he was a cub
reporter covering the 1st Hackers conference in about 1982) got it
wrong when he said in todays article that DOD is fighting 'Wi-Fi'
Very technically specifically, 'Wi-Fi' has meant the unlicensed radios
and spectrum at 2.4 to 2.483mhz - the 802.11b standard. And NOT all
unlicensed spread spectrum or UNII. What DOD is arguing over is
the UNII bands at 5.2 to 5.8ghz. They have NO demands on 802.11b areas.

Sloppy reporting.
  

    
John Ross has a good point in the idea that 'local culture' exported
by the net may awaken interest in that 'old' culture in those distant
from it who came out of it. Quite possibly. I suppose I am an example.
Although I am 4th Generation American from Welsh heritage, with
only a few stories and a 100 year old family book to link me to where
my ancestors stemmed, when I thought it time to pass onto my children
and grandchilden their Welsh heritage, it wasover 2 years dialogue
over the soc.culture.wales newgroup in 97-99 with mainly those who
live there, I learned much, was able to put the trials and tribulations
of the 11 generations of Calvinist Methodist Welsh ministers of our
line through the religous wars between 1500 and 1870. Where my
linguistic abilities came from. And down my grandmothers line back to
the Welsh kings, where my warrior tendencies come from. Discovering
via the 4 trips I have taken there, why I 'relate' to the English-oppressed
Welsh, and have been motivated to help them via technology to become
even more independent - partly by exporting their 'culture' via the
net. And partly through vigerous speaking (15 times before hundreds
from Ministers of Government to Geeks) and demonstrating to them that
'they' can do it themselves. A kind of recurisive loop of culture,
part of which travels over distant nets.
  

    
Hi Howard. Enjoyed your books the Virtual Community and Smart Mobs.
Couldn't put Smart Mobs down and read it every chance I got. Really
made me think.

It was really interesting how young people in other countries have
taken to text messaging.  But what got me to really wondering is how
come young people here in the USA haven't taken to it at all?
I asked my 15 year old daughter if her friends have cell phones and
she said most of them do. I then asked her if they text message each
other. She said no. I asked why? She said she just never thinks about
it. I asked her if you need to tell them something you just call them
right? She said yes. I think that is the crux of it. Why message when
you can just ring them up? 

She then told me she used instant messenger and AOL messenger all the
time to chat with her friends. I think that maybe that is the one of
the answers to why kids here in the US don't text message via cell
phones. Text messaging isn't like IMing nor is it as easy to do. They
probably would text message if the experience was more like using
Instant Messager. Maybe the key is real time messaging?

Maybe the two keys here are the fact that cost isn't really a factor
using voice and kids want it to be like instant messenger. 

Just my two bits worth...

Jeff
  

    
Good thinking, Jeff. My daughter (18) has had the same experience -- she 
uses IM a lot, and texting very little. I probably send this before in 
this topic, but there's no need to look for cultural reasons when the 
operators did such a good job of mismarketing texting. First obstacle: 
lack of interoperability (in Europe, the GSM standard and other agreements 
meant you could send sms messages to friends who used different carriers, 
but not, until recently, could you do that in the US). Second obstacle: 
texting wasn't cheaper than short phone calls (we have pretty inexpensive 
phone calls in the US, but sms could have been made less expensive). Third 
obstacle: the carriers tried to market to 25-35 year old businessmen 
instead of 15-25 year olds. 

However, this study says that is changing: 
<http://www.smartmobs.com/archives/000466.html>

Partial quote:

The thumb-typing trend, Telephia says, is especially strong among American 
wireless subscribers between the ages of 18 to 24 — 45 percent of whom 
used text messaging this year, compared with 22 percent last year. Much of 
the growth is a result of technical improvements that have enabled 
customers of different carriers to send messages to each other...
  

    
>The thumb-typing trend, Telephia says, is especially strong among 
> wireless subscribers between the ages of 18 to 24 — 45 percent 
> whom used text messaging this year, compared with 22 percent last 
> year.  

That is an interesting trend Howard. I went to the SmartMob site and
saw the graphs. It got me wondering with virtually no marketing of text
messaging what got that trend started? 
It dawned on me that perhaps the Blackberry and all it's hype got the
younger set thinking about cool it was. As their budgets wouldn't allow
for the cost of a Blackberry and it's services they probably started
thinking how they could do the same thing on the cheap. It probably
dawned on them that the cell phones would let them do text messaging
and they could message their friends sorta like a Blackberry. Though
the Blackberrys are email oriented a short email is like a message.
Hence it's not to much of a stretch to see the connection between the
Blackberry (and it's ilk) and text messaging. 
I know at that age (like in Smart Mobs) I really wanted to stay in
touch with friends and would have really wanted a Blackberry. Heck I
still do! 8-)

Jeff
  

    
The early adopters of texting in the US were the upscale business geeks 
(Blackberry) and hiphop culturati (Motorola Two-Way Pager). There actually 
has been a quite active marketing effort in recent months (you mean you 
haven't had your Catherine Zeta-Jones overdose yet?)

Clearly, there's a fax effect/tipping point effect involved -- when a 
sufficient number of teenagers start texting, then they all start texting.
  

    
One thing that seems to have made texting popular in Europe is the
development of a code, whereby words are reduced to three or four
letters, mixing the local language with English into a mess no adult
could possibly understand. Anything (rock and roll in the mid-'50s
being another good example) that gives teenagers their own secret
language is going to take off. (And this is why I keep telling people
that the next rock and roll might not involve music, but that's
off-topic). 
  

    
We just swapped our cellphones for new ones that have text messaging.  
My son uses it, so we paid $3/month extra for 100 messages a month.  I 
asked him how he uses it.  He says the kids at school use it to 'tell 
each other what will be happening in the near future'.  For example, the 
essay question on a test they'd be taking next period.  

Time for the teachers to start changing those essay questions each 
period.
  

    
A Catherine Zeta-Jones overdose is that possible? 8-)

I saw her commercials but for some reason I just don't remember her
pushing text messaging. Maybe I was looking to much at her. ;-)

Looks like there evidently was a critical mass that was reached and
now it is going to really take off. Like Berliner said they will be
using shortened coded text messages that will be greek to us. Kids
learn and adapt so fast so I am sure they already are doing that. 

> We just swapped our cellphones for new ones that have text messaging

Could you tell us what brand they were? 

I can text message with my Nokia. When I first got it I sent email
from it to my sister in Seattle. She thought that was kinda neat. I
receive Oakland A's sports info on it all the time. In fact I wonder
how many people receive information like stocks,sports, weather on
theirs? 

Oh by the way I just setup wireless networking about 10 minutes ago
and am now typing this in the comfort of my easy chair. No more
fighting the kids for the computer! 8-) I love it!

Jeff
  

    
I wonder whether AOL on phones and PDAs might be more popular with many 
Americans. Two things that AIM has that texting doesn't have: buddy lists 
and presence detection (knowing when your buddies are online).

A couple of years ago, Scandinavians told me (often) that "in the US you 
use metal detectors to keep guns out of schools, but here we need them to 
keep telephones out of schools" (because of the cheating mentioned above).

Poking around on a reputation research site, I recently discovered that 
the value of an eBay reputation is approximately 7.6% of the selling 
price. <http://www.smartmobs.com/archives/000479.html>

I will be gone for a few days. Will check in here again early in 2003. 
Carry on, by all means.
  

    
we got the motorola T720 from verizon.  color screens, downloadable 
games, web browser, mp3 player, pim, text messaging and oh, a phone.  

they have an upgrade deal for $79/phone with a $100 rebate coupon if you 
renew your contract for another 2 years.  
  

    
What I hate about wireless phone text-messaging is the tedium and the
short messages.  What I like is the total anonymity of a pre-paid
wireless phone purchase, where you just make up a name, an address, and
a landline.

That was what got my 24-year-old son into it -- the anonymity of it
all!
  

    
I just read a review of the Motorola T720 and it looks like a winner.
Nice phone to say the least. The problem still is with those phones is
the lack of a thumbable keyboard and instant messaging similar to a
Instant Messager. 
OK I guess there is general agreement that text messaging is for the
young and they are using it quite a bit in some parts of the world. 

What is the next generation of text messaging going to look like or
rather what will it take to take off for the masses in it's next
incarnation?

Current LCDs will be replaced by organic LCDs which are much lighter,
brighter and most of all thinner. Also I believe are able to be molded
somewhat. This will allow phones to be thinner with bigger screens
though limited by ergonomics.

Keyboards will fold down and allow one to thumb type.

3G networks will be rolled out by the cellular networks allowing high
speed internet access.

Web browsing wil be like using a PC at home.

Instant messaging will take off among young and old as Instant
Messenger and AOL Messenger are ported over. 

Web browsing and messaging on cell phones will become what people
experience at home. Something they have become comfortable with.

I can't wait for that to happen! I just hooked up wireless networking
in the house. There are two laptops with 802.11b cards hooked up right
now with one playing music and me typing this. The idea of having a
phone with this kinda of access has me drooling at the idea. 

Jeff
  

    
Texting and US elections: <http://www.smartmobs.com/archives/000497.html>
Mobile telephones and Kenya elections: 
<http://www.smartmobs.com/archives/000490.html>
Texting and Internet in Korean elections: 
<http://www.smartmobs.com/archives/000494.html>

There is an upside and a downside to this. The upside is better 
get-out-the-vote organizing at the grassroots: power to the people. The 
downside is the possible shortcircuiting of deliberation in the democratic 
governance process: power to the mob.
  

    
> downside is the possible shortcircuiting of deliberation in the
> democratic process.

When I read this I thought of the Nigerian riots. Rumors or deliberate
misinformation could easily trigger those kind of respones by "smart
mobs". 
On the other hand there have been cases through out history where a
rapid response by large groups have stopped various plots, bad bills,
goverment misbehavior and what not dead in it's tracks.
Thomas Jefferson would have liked this kind of informational power in
the people's hands.
It's the old yin and yang, good/bad, upside/downside to technology's
uses. Be real interesting to see what it all results in the future.

Jeff
  

    
No powerful communication technology is an unmixed blessing. When you 
amplify human power, you amplify something that has proven itself to be 
capable of angelic and demonic behavior. The question is whether 
foreknowledge of the downside of a technology can ameliorate destructive 
impacts in any way.
  

    
>downside of a technology can ameliorate destructive 
>impacts in any way.

There is quite literally no way to put brakes on it. The very nature
of the fast information makes for fast responses right or wrong.
Hopefully the vast majority of responses and reactions will be for the
common good and not vice versa. 

I am a communicatons technician and I was talking to a friend of mine
who is a RF tech for Cellular company. Right now his company is getting
ready to roll out a 2mb connection for their cell phones. We were
chatting about that I said that instead of doing it that they should
just put antennas up on the cell sites and do 802.11a data. They would
get a LOT of customers at 54megs! He said that better yet they should
do that and transmit digital television. I'm not sure what the
bandwidth of digital tv is but sure is a thought!
I said that I can't help thinking that the flavors of 802.11(x) will
kick the supports out from under data equipped cell phones. Hmmm should
I go with 54meg or 2 meg? I can guess what most will go with. 8-) It's
not pie in the sky stuff but real technology available now! 

Let's get that digital cloud going!!!!!

Jeff
  

    
>downside of a technology can ameliorate destructive 
>impacts in any way.

There is quite literally no way to put brakes on it. The very nature
of the fast information makes for fast responses right or wrong.
Hopefully the vast majority of responses and reactions will be for the
common good and not vice versa. 

I am a communicatons technician and I was talking to a friend of mine
who is a RF tech for Cellular company. Right now his company is getting
ready to roll out a 2mb connection for their cell phones. We were
chatting about that I said that instead of doing it that they should
just put antennas up on the cell sites and do 802.11a data. They would
get a LOT of customers at 54megs! He said that better yet they should
do that and transmit digital television. I'm not sure what the
bandwidth of digital tv is but sure is a thought!
I said that I can't help thinking that the flavors of 802.11(x) will
kick the supports out from under data equipped cell phones. Hmmm should
I go with 54meg or 2 meg? I can guess what most will go with. 8-) It's
not pie in the sky stuff but real technology available now! 

Let's get that digital cloud going!!!!!

Jeff
  

    
I don't know about putting brakes on, but informed design and regulation 
CAN work well -- see the early days of the Internet. The end-to-end design 
of the Internet protocols wasn't accidental. A different design could have 
centralized innovation, we wouldn't have the Web and lots of other 
innovations that came from the edges of the network. In regard to 
regulation and deregulation, we wouldn't have had the Net as we know it if 
the US had not rescinded ATT's prohibition against attaching foreign 
equipment (such as modems) to their telephones.

So I see design and regulation as two possible places where knowledgeable 
intervention can affect the future course of social consequences of 
technological innovation. This is not to argue that all design or all 
regulation has had net positive effects.
  

    
Howard, could you give me some examples of how design and regulation
will affect the consequences? 
Just  plain drawing a blank . 

Jeff
  

    
If the cablecos and telcos get their way, then new regulatory regimes will 
allow them to discriminate at the router level -- content bits owned by 
competitors won't travel on their parts of the network. This will 
compromise the end-to-end architecture of the Net.

If the Hollings Bill and the Broadcast Flag proposal end up legally 
mandating a form of DRM that would include a chip inside computers that 
would shut down the device if non-authorized content is run, then say 
good-bye to innovation in PCs.

If the current regulation of spectrum were changed to allow more of the 
spectrum to be used as a commons by cognitive radio and other new wireless 
technologies, we'll see a very different future for mobile communications 
than we will if the present vested interests maintain the present system.

If the Berman bill and other attacks on p2p cripple the ability for groups 
of individuals to share cpu, disk, and bandwidth, then we'll never know 
what might be done with billions of connected smart devices.

Those are just a few glaring examples of how the wrong kind of regulation 
could -- and probably will -- fuck things up.

To say nothing of "trusted computing."

In regard to design, a very simple question: Is there a privacy switch on 
wearable/mobile devices that broadcast all kinds of information about who 
the user is, where the user is, what the user is doing? And if so, is the 
default "on" or "off?"
  

    
Talk radio audience: smart mob, dumb technology?
  

    
They aren't using mobile communications to organize collective action, so 
I'd say that it would be stretching the term too far.