HUNCH: Quantified Us

QS trackers are essentially conducting research. This research is then studied and analyzed by the individual. But groups such as Cure Together - which we have discussed several times in class - are taking QS data and turning it into a different, and I would argue, more meaningful model. 

My hunch is that this type of re-frame could be an incredibly powerful motivator for anyone tracking their data (or anyone thinking about tracking their data). Imagine tracking and contributing data that could drastically improve someone's life. For those QS trackers who lose interest after a few interactions, or those who see badges and shrug - this could be a new, more engaging incentive that benefits both the individual and the community at large.

The big question is how do you make this incentive not just apparent, but meaningful?

FACT: Facebook's New Experiment

Facebook is getting more bold with how it sells user data to companies, all while still allegedly 'respecting user privacy.'

'To amp up the effectiveness of its ads, Facebook in recent months has begun allowing marketers to target ads at users based on the email address and phone number they list on their profiles, or based on their surfing habits on other sites.'

Privacy advocates are up in arms - especially over the fact that FB is taking part in studies to link FB ads with members shopping habits in actual stores (and won't disclose which companies take part in the studies). 

An interesting twist to all this is discussed in a recent Slate article. Previously, it was impossible to match up FB users to their voter-file identities. With access to individual phone numbers and email addresses, this is so longer the case. The impact of social media on campaigning just got a whole lot more interesting...

A helpful infographic on FB's use of personal data:

DON'T KNOW

In writing up our 1-pager on Personal Info Economy (which we affectionately now call PIE), I was reminded that there are still many things I don't know.

• All these apps - Personal, iAllow, Klout, Ghostery...they indicate an imbalance of control and value. But how useful are they really? And how many people take advantage of these services? Are the numbers growing? They seem so trivial compared to the enormous and still relatively unknown data marketplace.
• If these small steps are unsuccessful at creating change, then where is the real opportunity space for PIE? Is it to create more iAllows? Or is it up to government to create real rules and policies that ensure a balanced economy?
• After the privacy battles that Twitter and other social sites have faced, how involved do we really want government to be? What policies are necessary and which are not?

FACT: Your face as data

'To a computer, your face is a set of points and measurements between features, but to advertisers, these data sets mean lucrative profits and a new way to connect with customers. Facial detection technology is making it feasible to do real-time measurement and analysis of ads in the physical world and predict the products you will want to buy, based on who you are or what you look like.'

Fascinating article on how your physical appearance can be extrapolated to 'data.' This takes personalized ads to the next level. 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/singularity/2012/08/08/billboards-and-tvs-detect-your-face-and-juice-up-ads-tailored-just-for-you/

DON'T KNOW: The privacy conundrum

This article in Wired really gets at the issue of transparency and data collection (or surveillance, depending on your interpretation). 

Sites like Ghostery start to scratch the surface of data analytics. But it goes much deeper than that. Where is the the line between public and private? In the future, will the government need a subpoena for tweets? The more important question is should they?

'There’s an implicit bargain between users and these online services. We trust you with our data and let you use it to serve us ads in exchange for free or cheap services. But trust is rooted in transparency. And right now, there’s no sizable company doing it right when it comes to telling us what data is being stored and how often and how the world’s governments come asking for it.'

Interesting chart on how different companies are approaching this issue.

HUNCH: My QS Trends (early)

I am noticing some patterns and have some hunches about some of my QS results. 

Tracking Meals Out
I was expecting to find that most of my meals out are under $10 and due to 'convenience' (opposed to 'craving' or the even rarer, 'celebration'). So far my findings are very close to initial expectations. My hunch is that this is due to the fact that I'm a broke student who never has time to cook. It does make me extremely aware every time I eat out and it will be interesting to see if it affects my behavior over time.

Mood
This one is tricky. I'm less enthralled with the app (mood panda) and I wonder how accurate a 1-10 scale of 'mood' really is. That being said, I've noticed I'm typically between a 6 and 8. I've been trying to check in at the same times each day, but my hunch is that my mood tends to start out high and drop towards the late afternoon.

Productivity
Again -  not sure how accurate this tool is. For instance - I generally have multiple programs open at once, but may not be actively using all of those. Email seems to suck up a huge amount of time. And (sadly) so does Facebook. 

The big question - what do I do with all this information?

FACT: Gov't wants your tweets

A couple week ago Twitter was ordered to divulge tweets and account info connected to an Occupy protester. The judge stated: "If you post a tweet, just like if you scream it out the window, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. There is no proprietary interest in your tweets, which you have now gifted to the world. This is not the same as a private e-mail, a private direct message, a private chat, or any of the other readily available ways to have a private conversation via the internet that now exist."

According to a report just released by Twitter, the US leads the pack in demanding data. 

DON'T KNOW: Open Data - Safer?

With these calls for open data (like the open data initiatives mentioned previously) are we making a safer digital space or a more dangerous one? Are we leaving ourselves open to cyber attacks? What happens when open data falls into the 'wrong' hands?

And how does this relate to Obama's strategy on Cyber-Security?

HUNCH: Odd Man Out

In class - while we were trying to create one map to explain the relationship between Personal Data, QS and Personal Info Economy - I realized that Personal Info Economy feels like the odd man out. It encompasses so much and it's boundaries are hard to define.

In our map (with QS in the center) I advocated for the Personal Info Economy to be around the outside parameter. It includes QS data, but it also includes Personal Data. And in the grandest scheme is even includes Big Data. It's essentially the exchange of any type of personal data for 'value.' My hunch is that is will always be on the outside of the map (or around the parameter) b/c it's not a commodity - it's a system.

FACT: Pay with a Tweet

One of our team members stumbled upon this site. It is quite possibly the most direct example of a balanced, straightforward information economy - complete transparency, a clear transaction and an obvious value (on both ends). 

Create buzz on a product and receive that product (or element of that product) in return. Tweet about a song and get a copy for free. 

http://www.paywithatweet.com/

FACT: Open Data Initiative

Government utilizing personal data: http://www.whitehouse.gov/innovationfellows/opendata

"Open Data Initiatives program aims to “liberate” government data and voluntarily-contributed corporate data to fuel entrepreneurship, improve the lives of Americans in many tangible ways, and create jobs."

There may be a different type of 'value' here: data = products and services = job creation.

DON'T KNOW: Several Things

+ With personal information, specifically data that is self-reported, how do we determine what's accurate? Are there any studies done to explore this?
+ Today my team talked about value. Comparing values is pointless, especially with something like personal data which is so fuzzy. Instead we agreed to look at where inbalances exist (where one party feels they aren't being compensated for their 'trade'). But I can't think of any concrete examples of this. Is FB inbalanced? Is twitter?
+ Still don't understand US's official policy on data sharing.