Map As Metaphor In a Location-Aware Mobile World 178
mattnyc99 writes "Two weeks after the launch of Google Latitude, your inbox is probably full of requests and privacy advocates probably have even more concerns than they did at first. But some tech pundits are already seeing the bigger picture of a digital lifestyle based around the always-on, GPS-based mobile map. The NYTimes's John Markoff has a great piece in today's Science Times about the map as metaphor for a time when 'future systems will probably begin to blur the boundaries between the display and the real world.' Over at Esquire.com's Tech Therapist, Erik Sofge talks to the geek behind Latitude and offers a similar reality check: 'Latitude will be precisely as annoying as e-mail and social networking sites and cell phones themselves — and just as useful. What won't stop Latitude, or the wider rollout of location-based tracking, is bitching about it. These are juggernauts of free, culture-reorienting technology. And you and me, we are but posts on the massive Facebook profile of history.'"
Hold on now (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Hold on now (Score:5, Insightful)
I can turn it off but I can't turn off the people who turn it on. For example as a result of this connection there are now pictures of me on facebook. Meta data in image files will soon include positioning information. I don't get a choice about this information being distributed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But how would you know if there were pictures of you there if you aren't on facebook, or myspace, or any other thing like that?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And how would you know if some stranger saw you on the street? They'd know what you look like AND your location! And they could take your picture too if they like.
You've just got to do your best to stay out of photos, you can't control them.
Re: (Score:2)
if they are pictures you took
Of yourself. Yes. I suppose that is possible. If you're a scene girl.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck discovering those pictures without a Facebook account!
Go to Google Images and type something like:
bob smith site:facebook.com
into the search field...
Re: (Score:2)
I've expressed to my friends with accounts on facebook that I don't want to be in any picture on facebook, not even a "look, here we are at a table in this pub"-picture. It's been respected as far as I know, an no one has had an issue with it. Maybe I just have reasonable friends :)
Re: (Score:2)
Then your problem is "people". Not "technology"
Re: (Score:2)
Like his sister? Or were you aiming for a non-sequitur there?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know what a non-sequitur is? If Facebook didn't exist (and believe it or not, there was a time when it didn't), his sister would be just putting the pictures up on her website.. or on the wall of her cubical at work. He might well be opposed to that too. Yes, Facebook is in the social networking business to build advertising profiles.. well, actually, they're in the advertising profile land grab business - which is a bubble that will likely pop in a few years time when it becomes apparent that the
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Do you know what a non-sequitur is? If Facebook didn't exist (and believe it or not, there was a time when it didn't), his sister would be just putting the pictures up on her website.. or on the wall of her cubical at work. He might well be opposed to that too.
And those might be annoying but nothing worse.
The reason something like facebook or google is a problem is that ALL the information in the network is owned by one entity, linked together and tagged in ways that a bunch of independant websites and per
Re: (Score:2)
And all so entirely boring that people are happy to provide that information to you over a cup of tea.
What is your point?
Can you please make a point!?
Re:Yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
And all so entirely boring that people are happy to provide that information to you over a cup of tea.
That was just the beginning. And even that is far more than most people would be comfortable with absolutely *everyone* being able to know.
You apply for car insurance, and are charged extra because they analyze all the places your car has been seen parked and decide you are high risk...
You apply for life insurance, and are charged extra because they analyze all the places you have been seen, and decide you are higher risk...
You cut off the wrong jerk on the freeway, and your 6 year old daughter gets a threatening phone call at school...
What is your point?
The there is a MASSIVE difference between being in the background of a picture in someone's cubicle, and having every photo of you ever taken being indexed along with millions of photos of others and thoroughly data-mined. Anyone who suggests they are equivalent is an idiot.
A little data is meaningless. A lot of data becomes information. Facebook and Google have scary amounts of data to mine for information.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You apply for car insurance, and are charged extra because they analyze all the places your car has been seen parked and decide you are high risk...
You apply for life insurance, and are charged extra because they analyze all the places you have been seen, and decide you are higher risk...
If you're a higher risk you *should* get charged more.. because if you're not getting charged more than *I* am getting charged more.
You cut off the wrong jerk on the freeway, and your 6 year old daughter gets a threatening phone call at school...
And? That is possible and scary but not nearly as scary as the idea of your 6 year old daughter having a phone.. freak.
A little data is meaningless. A lot of data becomes information. Facebook and Google have scary amounts of data to mine for information.
And what is your point? What is so terrible about having targeted advertising? If they can ever get the shit to work I might actually have a chance of seeing an ad for a product that I would actually like to buy!
Can you make an argument or do I have to make
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you're a higher risk you *should* get charged more.. because if you're not getting charged more than *I* am getting charged more.
Except that its *you* getting charged more because *you* were deemed higher risk than me. If they get good enough at predicting who will need an expensive payout, they'll just stop insuring those people. Insurance is supposed to be about covering the risk of things you can't control.
And? That is possible and scary but not nearly as scary as the idea of your 6 year old daughter
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Except that its *you* getting charged more because *you* were deemed higher risk than me. If they get good enough at predicting who will need an expensive payout, they'll just stop insuring those people. Insurance is supposed to be about covering the risk of things you can't control.
So you're saying that insurance companies should not access risk now? Please, put down the crack pipe.
No. They'd call the school, moron.
You don't even have kids do ya? Anyone who put a 6 year old kid on the phone with someone claiming to be a parent would not be working with children for long.
The world can easily bend over backwards to make collecting and correlating data about me without my express permission illegal. If other people want to submit information about me, fine, but they don't have to keep it. They don't have to index it. They don't have to data mine it.
No... in order to do that we have to make a law, and enforce it. That aint free. It's paid for by "the rest of us" and we don't give two shits about your preference to be un-data-mined. Go live in the freaking woods. Become a sailor.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No, this is not in general true. Not all measurable risk factors are fair game for variable insurance rates. For example, an insurance company that explicitly used race as a pricing factor would find itself in trouble, no matter how strong of a correlation it could demonstrate between race and cost of claims.
More generally, it is unfair for insurance to be priced according
Re: (Score:2)
And so we make laws that say what insurance companies can and can not discriminate by... we don't put a blanket ban on data mining or the collection of data.
Re: (Score:2)
And? That is possible and scary but not nearly as scary as the idea of your 6 year old daughter having a phone.. freak.
No. They'd call the school, moron.
Are they going to call her to the office to get her threatening message?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Agreed. Some years ago your name and address would mean nothing. Now there are people looking through trash just to find your name and address.
Years later from those only-name-and-address years, more information becomes more useful. First telephone numbers, then email, then social networking info*, then who knows what comes next.
The scary thing with the availability of our information out there is not what product advertisers can offe
Re: (Score:2)
You're just as bad as the other guy. Can't you tell us what you're so afraid of?
I, personally, am not interested in this Facebook crap because its all about "friends" and I'm a fuckin' loner, man. I'm pretty sure there's pictures of me on there, and those annoying tags.. someone with sufficient degrees of separation could go searching with my real name and find them. Meh. You want pictures of me? Bring your camera 'round.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't even have kids do ya? Anyone who put a 6 year old kid on the phone with someone claiming to be a parent would not be working with children for long.
Don't be naive. This happens all the time. I know. I have a six year old.
No... in order to do that we have to make a law, and enforce it. That aint free. It's paid for by "the rest of us" and we don't give two shits about your preference to be un-data-mined. Go live in the freaking woods. Become a sailor.
Really? That must be why Facebook's ToS change i
Re: (Score:2)
You seriously think you're normal don't you? The millions of people who happily post pictures of themselves on Facebook are the ones who are crazy.
Re: (Score:2)
Are they going to call her to the office to get her threatening message?
Yes. As a matter of fact that's exactly what they will do.
Re: (Score:2)
ignorant of what? You've still yet to give a single reasonable example of what there is to be afraid of.
Re: (Score:2)
The reason something like facebook or google is a problem is that ALL the information in the network is owned by one entity
I'd put this the other way around -- if it *was* all owned by a single person, such as the pictures on your sister's cubicle wall, it would be easy to "issue a take-down notice", as it were. As it is, you'll have to address it to some anonymous lawyer deep within a great big network of corporations. And therein, if you ask me, lies the rub.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that the single owning entity is an important factor. In fact, Google is the perfect counterexample here; they are set up to index and analyze tons of data they don't own.
Google's actively taking even more direct ownership of data via youtube, gmail, google apps, streetview, latitude, etc. And then they run behind the scenes on a massive number of websites (google analytics, adsense, etc) and finally they index and cache evrything they can get their hands on, even if it doesn't belong to them.
Re: (Score:2)
If facebook didn't exist, everybody would have a personal website? That sounds really far-fetched, especially because it wasn't true before facebook existed. Websites are far more work than a facebook profile.
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh, how soon we forget. Remember geocities? The whole "template website" business was booming before the social networks took off.
Re: (Score:2)
I remember geocities. I also remember being the only person I knew to have a personal website. I remember it also being much harder to use than facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that you need to force people to listen to what is, to them, essentially technobabble, in order to make them understand how basic principles of privacy are affected by modern technology.
It's astonishingly difficult to talk someone out of the "if you don't have anything to hide" mindset without coming across as a tinfoil-wrapped paranoid total dork.
It's one of the reasons why my (few) real-life friends tend to wonder if I'm a paranoid luddite (which is just fine by me) and my online friends ar
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most privacy is simply privacy via obscurity. By centralizing and organizing the data, privacy is removed.
The question then becomes why do people want privacy. Privacy is effectively protection via obscurity.
Which moves the point on to why do people feel the need for protection from some other people. Once you answer that question, it becomes obvious why people do not want to trust corporations (l
See earlier discussion (Score:2)
None of these systems have a checkbox too stop my idiot sister forwarding crap to me and implicitly enrolling me in her facebook centric lifestyle.
I can turn it off but I can't turn off the people who turn it on.
The only submission [slashdot.org] of mine to make it was about this exact point. Bluntly put, I was told to shut up, quit being such a luddite, and drop any pretence of having any privacy in the first place.
But I'm still not on Facebook, nor do I plan to. On the contrary, I'm looking interestedly at things like the Appleseed project which have the right attitude (but not much traction).
Re: (Score:2)
Appleseed gets it mostly Right on paper -- but it's hardly successful in the real world.
In comparison, projects like Elgg are more successful even though they seem to be designed to be walled gardens. Strange. Well, not really strange, just "only useful within confined spaces". But Elgg is just one example out of many; all of which fail the criterion of being able to talk to each other (the one core feature of Appleseed).
The problem with Facebook, and Google (for all their goodness) is that even though they
Re:Hold on now (Score:5, Funny)
He didn't say friends. He said family.
There is an important difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't believe in Hell, but I wish I did so I could also believe that I was going there for snerting so painfully hard at that...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I had a phone with GPS (which I don't) and I signed up for Latitude, and you even somehow had my cell phone number, you would not be able to find my location (which would be the location I told google to share, which might not be my CURRENT location) that is unless I added you as people allowed to see it... It's similar to IM
On the other hand.. If I have a facebook account, or some other type of online social account that reveals enough details, then you might be able to figure out who I really am, and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I may not be the most up to date, but come on, I've never heard about google doing something questionable with your data.
Gathering it in the first place is questionable.
Re: (Score:2)
Trust companies anymore?
Tell me when was this mythical time when companies could be trusted?
Re: (Score:2)
Time to retire to a remote cave in an uncharted region of the world, then.
It's amusing that techies can be luddites too.
Time to stop wearing pants in public. Also amusing that naifs can be bleeding edge technophiles.
Re: (Score:2)
I enjoy the opportunity to be out in public without pants. [...] It also means I don't have pockets in which to carry gizmos that others might want to use to track my whereabouts.
Giving up trousers in favor of a longer shirt doesn't mean giving up pockets. These shirts [essenceofblack.com] have pockets on the sides and in the front.
Too late (Score:2)
After a lot of looking around, I found the uncharted territory (it was tough, being off all maps, natch) and it has a nice cave, but a weird foreign-looking guy named Mr Bin Laden told me to fuck off, he got there first.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps the US could do a facebook search for Mr Bin Laden, and actually FIND the f****r ?
I find it unbelieveable that after all this time, NO ONE knows where he is (or at least no one bribeable with enough USD knows where he is), yet he still manages to put out audio and video tapes, and post to Al Jazeera.
You won't see me signing up for this (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're talking about a nefarious government abusing the data, they'll just send their stormtroopers round to gather the information by force on the day they come to power if you've not handed it over, so you're hardly safe from that regardless.
Google will never have their own stormtroopers to do the same.
Although, I'm not entirely confident in that prediction.
I signed up for it...... lot of good it'll do them (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's what passes for news these days?
Anonymous Coward Deletes Facebook Account
Values Privacy. Won't Get Latitude
Re: (Score:2)
Of course we won't. This adds no value for my part. If someone wants to know where I am they can send me a text. If we're supposed to meet at a place they don't know, I can send them and address, GPS coordinates, or even a screenshot from my phone's map application. :)
I see few non-scary applications for this. Then again I *am* a little paranoid, YMMV
Re: (Score:2)
This cracked me up going to that link.. "Sign up for Facebook to join How to permanently delete your facebook account."
Am I the only one... (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh sure there's the possibility that a corporation/stalker will be watching me at all times, but hey, stalkers sometimes have free candy (and they offer me rides in their van!).
Re: (Score:2)
And this is only the tip of the iceberg.
Re:Am I the only one... (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I the only one who doesn't mind the small breach of privacy...
Privacy is like Pandora's Box - people are all too willing to open it up when they are blissfully ignorant of the consequences. But once they finally do start to feel the pain of having set their privacy loose on the wind it is too late to try to stuff it all back into the box again.
So choose wisely, just because you can't think of any particularly severe repercussions today doesn't mean there won't be any in the future once your data is already far beyond your control.
Re: (Score:2)
Wait a minute... (Score:5, Funny)
And of course the following joke is now obsolete: A doctor, a lawyer, and a mathematician are all hanging out at the bar. They all went got their undergraduate degrees from the same institution, so they have been good friends for quite while, but their interests were a bit divergent. Somehow or another, they get to talking about relationships. The lawyer proclaims that, while he is not married, he has a beautiful mistress.
"It is far better to have a mistress than a wife," he says. "A mistress is never going to divorce you and take your money, and if you get tired of her, you can dump her and find someone younger and more attractive. I don't understand why anyone would ever want to get married!"
The doctor responds, "I must say that I disagree. I have been happily married for 15 years, and I just can't see any other way to live. I have my wife's nearly unconditional love, and she is there for me whether I am healthy or not. She takes care of me, and I take care of her, and there is no chance that she is just going to leave me one day. I would much rather have the steady, warm relationship of a wife than the flash-in-the-pan mistress."
The mathematician comments, "You are both wrong. It is best to have both a wife and a mistress. Then you can tell your wife that you are with your mistress, tell your mistress that you are with your wife, and you can go into the office and get some work done."
Re:Wait a minute... (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, I beg to differ.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, Locke2005, there's a reason no one is stalking you. You're fucking boring.
You're a PHP developer whose favorite browser is Firefox, you're an armchair scientist, you read Facebook regularly, you live in Oregon, where're you're embroiled in some legal trouble after you called you're kid's teacher a racist, you're into P2P filesharing, you're a fan of open source, and you laugh at WoW fanboys, while not realizing that you yourself spend more time watching porn and anime in a day than the average WoW pl
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know, I think I just learned something. Clearly, my 30 second search was hit-and-miss (mostly miss); the strength of data mining is not its ability to get personal information, but its ability to create associations, and thereby target ads.
I'm a bit less concerned about all the personal information floating around out there about me, now. There's so much false information out there that any stalking attempts are going to be fruitless (just searched for "thepotoo", apparently someone else out there use
Those who don't learn from history (Score:5, Insightful)
What will stop it, is people not using it. Or far more likely, people not using it in ways that the pundits and marketdroids insist it must be used.
History is full examples of technology that simply were not used. But more common are examples of technology being used in ways no one ever foresaw. I have no doubt that location-awareness will be ubiquitous in future culture, but I'm willing to bet good money that it WON'T be used the way the babbling class tells us it's going to be used.
Requests? (Score:4, Insightful)
>Two weeks after the launch of Google Latitude, your inbox is probably full of requests
Mine isn't. I don't think any of my friends have even heard of it. Not everyone jumps on the latest social trend as soon as it's announced. I still don't know anyone who uses Twitter.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know anyone personally that does twitter either. Just that twit on NPR Science Fridays that keeps going on about Twitter and Second Life.. Jesus that's annoying!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I still don't know anyone who uses Twitter.
In fact, I know more people who are aggressively hostile toward Twitter than who use it.
Similarly, I've never heard anybody breathe the words Google Latitude -- if they actually even know what it is -- without the inevitable follow-up, "Eewww! What a creepy thing! What, is it like so people can stalk you?"
I suspect that this is another of the occasional Slashdot stories that seem targeted squarely, and solely, at college students.
People are weirded out now... (Score:5, Interesting)
...but that's because Google has the data. But let me tell you my vision of the future:
In about 20 years, everyone will be recording not only their movements, but basically everything they do. Audio at first and then video. This, however, will not be public information, it will be either stored on a device under the user's control at their house, or with a company that promises not to look at it or turn it over except in case of a warrant. (Google's just a problem because it doesn't promise this.) It will probably be via 'cell phone' at first, although it will probably subsume cell phones in the end.
Why would people do this? To stop crime. Not them committing crime, other people committing crimes against them, and to demonstrate that they were not the person who committed a crime. The first hardware like this will come with a panic button, which would send the last two minutes of audio, plus a live stream, and your location to the police. This will quickly evolve into ways of monitoring to see if you're in distress.
They will also have various other features. By that time, voice recognition should be workable so expect transcribed conversation, and expect the ability to look up information simply by talking about it. Expect a 'distress' code phrase to replace the panic button.
Expect it to automatically recognize when you're supposed to be meeting someone and work with the other person's device to navigate you two together, or even if you're not meeting but happen to be near each other and are friends. Likewise, expect the ability to tell the device to lie so you don't have to talk to that boring guy who thinks you're friends.
And let me clarify that by 'vision' I mean 'What I see happening', not 'Grand and noble scheme'. It's not what should happen or what I want to happen. I'd actually rather dislike it. I'd like the Supreme Court to decide that we have the right to record ourselves without it being subject to a search. At the very least it should be minimized...if the police assert you committed a crime at a specific time you should be able to demonstrate the recorder has you somewhere else without specifically stating where or what you were doing at that time.
Basically, think Brin's transparent society, but instead of society recording everyone, and showing it to everyone, like he hypothesizes, or the police recording everyone which is the worse case scenario, everyone would simply be recording themselves and be able to produce a recording for themselves. And various parts of that would be automatically accessible to other people.
Oh, and incidentally, I know that such a device would be illegal in many states, thanks to laws about audio recording. The laws will very quickly change to let you record anything you could have heard with normal hearing. (Laws outlawing the recording of something you could be sitting there transcribing are pretty surreal to start with.)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think you are being too credulous in assuming that people want these technologies to record an accurate version of their petty lives.
IMO, the future is in technology that will allow people to convince others, and eventually themselves, that they are living the lives they want to live, not the lives they bother to build for themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Basically, think Brin's transparent society, but instead of society recording everyone, and showing it to everyone, like he hypothesizes, or the police recording everyone which is the worse case scenario, everyone would simply be recording themselves and be able to produce a recording for themselves. And various parts of that would be automatically accessible to other people.
Check out Robert J. Sawyers Neanderthal Trilogy ("Hominids", "Humans", & "Hybrids") The premise is that of a bridge to an alternat
Re: (Score:2)
I have read the first of that series, in fact. It was a horrible book with aweird sexist preachy message. And unbelievable characters, to boot.
The 2nd book is worse imo. The 3rd is better. Its not my favorite book(s) either, and like you I didn't care for the characters. I'm not sure they were unbelievable though, the protagonist woman reminded me of people I knew... and don't care for. So I'm not sure whether I "didn't like the writing of the characters"... or simply "didn't like the characters".
But it fea
Re: (Score:2)
Wouldn't turning over your recording fall under "self incrimination" aka the 5th amendment?
Harry Potter's clock (Score:2)
Am I the only one who thought about the clock in the Wesley's kitchen when first heard about these online positioning systems?
Re: (Score:2)
People are very limited in what they can accomplish individually, yet the overhead is dividing up "labor" (especially for knowledge-driven work) is extreme. Communicating and coordinating become the main tasks in themselves, and whatever it was you set out to do in the first place becomes secondary. This is why each advance in communication (printing press, telegraph, telephone, cellphone, email) causes a leap i
Holy Garbage Disposal, Batman! (Score:3, Funny)
GPS is receive only (Score:2, Insightful)
So why must a system which connects me with my friends be centralized? People who treat the internet like interactive TV don't know better, but techies should not get excited about centralized Google services. P2P is the future if you don't want to wake up to Google turned Microsoft one day.
Helio had this two years ago (Score:2)
Helio [helio.com] had this available in 2006 They called it "Buddy Beacon" [ulocate.com]:
Buddy Beacon is the new way for Helio members to synchronize their social lives and tell friends where the fun is. Rather than calling or texting, Helio members can switch on their Buddy Beacon and use satellite technology to broadcast their location to the friends they add to their Buddy List. When they turn on Buddy Beacon, their Buddy List friends can see their location on a map along with a nearby address. Members can add up to 25 Buddie
I already use mobile google maps (Score:3, Insightful)
...So google already has my location data anyway. This new service gives them no more information than they already had. Instead, it simply allows me to share that data with select parties when I find it convenient.
My wife and I plan to give "Latitude" a spin. She gets lost driving in the city now and then, and gets flustered. Being able to see her location in google maps, and give talk her through directions from there should come in handy.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You can use Google Maps on your mobile without location data. You just have to enter the location for which you want a map. (And no, I'm not always at the location I want to map, so Google only knows that I was interested in seeing what's around 123 Main Street, not that I was at 123 Main Street at 8:39pm.)
This is generational (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The concept of technology that can track you every move is not new. The notion that one would submit to it voluntarily, is new. See 1984, for example.
Oh right, reading is old technology that the young techno-vanguard has abandoned in favor of posting pictures of themselves doing bong-hits.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that blogging, tweeting, and doling out the right for others to track your every move is anything other than narcissism.
Re: (Score:2)
The notion that one would submit to it voluntarily, is new.
I didn't say it wasn't new, only that the reaction to new ideas is typical. See also: rock and roll, reading novels (yes, reading novels used to be considered bad form), the telephone (impersonal, don't you know), movies (the downfall of civilization), etc, etc.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that blogging, tweeting, and doling out the right for others to track your every move is anything other than narcissism.
Sheesh. It's called socialization
Re: (Score:2)
So, anyone disagreeing with current net-fashion trends is either dinosaur or mentally ill?
Or is it you rationalizing and emoing any downsides away?
Contrary to what you think, broadcasting massive amount of information about you to wide world can be very dangerous.
But again, I am one of those people who lived in commie countries and who knew that something that is passed like trivia could have cost you your life, job, education ... anything.
Hell, even USians should remember Red Scare. It got pretty bad if yo
Re: (Score:2)
But don't fool yourself that it's anything other than fear of things you haven't grown up with.
Like, having no privacy?
Re: (Score:2)
Every generation uses new technology, while the old generation wrings its hands and whines about the good old days. If you don't want to embrace the future, then don't. It's up to you. But don't fool yourself that it's anything other than fear of things you haven't grown up with.
But not every new technology is better than the old. For many people, it's not fear of change or nostalgia - they have the good sense to realize that the new technology doesn't cut it, or offer anything to make it worthwhile.
Re: (Score:2)
Technofetishists see some shiny new product and are hypnotized by marketers into thinking it's the thing that's going to make everything better forever [...]
I'm sure you would have said the same thing when the telephone came out. Who needs it, when you can just write letters? And you don't have the damn phone ringing all day, and the damn neighbors can hear you talking... [grouch mumble damn kids with their newfangled shiny nonsense ...mumble... just a damn fad, grouch mumble]
Map as a metaphor? predictable! (Score:2)
Nobody reads snowcrash anymore?
It's like so 1992.
Earth, the metaphor... for... all the information useful for people living on earth...
So simple... it's brilliant.
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody reads snowcrash anymore?
It's like so 1992.
Earth, the metaphor... for... all the information useful for people living on earth...
So simple... it's brilliant.
Interesting how cyberpunk, much more than space opera is coming true.
Re: (Score:2)
The thing about Snow Crash is that the Metasphere is a completely different place, and your RL body doesn't have to go anywhere while you're linked up. TFA is postulating a move toward something like the ubiquitous glasses in Dennou Coil, where a digital overlay is projected over the real world.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nobody reads snowcrash anymore?
It's like so 1992.
Nobody reads philosophical texts anymore?
It's like so 1931.
The map is NOT the territory. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
European G1's still don't have Latitude (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I highly recommend "I, Robot" - the book, not the lame movie.
and I highly recommend "Rainbows End" by Vernor Vinge (for the near future anyway)
Re:Privacy (Score:4, Funny)
People are so quick to forget: 9/11 changed everything.
Re: (Score:2)
9/11 changed everything.
0.818181818?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)