Facebook as the new gatekeeper of journalism

Posted on October 28, 2014 by legallysociable

Facebook’s algorithms now go a long way in dictating what news users see:

“We try to explicitly view ourselves as not editors,” he said. “We don’t want to have editorial judgment over the content that’s in your feed. You’ve made your friends, you’ve connected to the pages that you want to connect to and you’re the best decider for the things that you care about.”…

Roughly once a week, he and his team of about 16 adjust the complex computer code that decides what to show a user when he or she first logs on to Facebook. The code is based on “thousands and thousands” of metrics, Mr. Marra said, including what device a user is on, how many comments or likes a story has received and how long readers spend on an article…

If Facebook’s algorithm smiles on a publisher, the rewards, in terms of traffic, can be enormous. If Mr. Marra and his team decide that users do not enjoy certain things, such as teaser headlines that lure readers to click through to get all the information, it can mean ruin. When Facebook made changes to its algorithm in December 2013 to emphasize higher-quality content, several so-called viral sites that had thrived there, including Upworthy, Distractify and Elite Daily, saw large declines in their traffic.

Facebook executives frame the company’s relationship with publishers as mutually beneficial: when publishers promote their content on Facebook, its users have more engaging material to read, and the publishers get increased traffic driven to their sites. Numerous publications, including The New York Times, have met with Facebook officials to discuss how to improve their referral traffic.

Is Facebook a better gatekeeper than news outlets, editors, and the large corporations that often run them? I see three key differences:

1. Facebook’s methods are based on social networks and what your friends and others in your feed like. This may be not too much different than checking sites yourselves – especially since people often go to the same sites or go to ones that end to agree with them – but the results are out of your hands.

2. Ultimately, Facebook wants to connect you to other people using news, not necessarily give you news for other purposes like being an informed citizen or spurring you to action. This is a different process than seeking out news sites that primarily produce news (even if that is now often a lot of celebrity or entertainment info).

3. The news is interspersed with new pieces of information about the lives of others. This likely catches people’s attention and doesn’t provide an overwhelming amount of news or information that is abstracted from the user/reader.

Political campaigns combining big data, ground games

Posted on October 27, 2014 by legallysociable

Close elections mean both political parties are combining ground games and big data to try to eke out victories:

Workers like Ms. Wellington and Mr. Noble are, in the end, critical to any ground campaign, no matter how sophisticated data collection and targeting models are, said Sasha Issenberg, author of “The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns.”

“The great irony of the modern ground game is it’s this meeting of incredibly modern analytics and data married to very old-fashioned delivery devices,” he said. “It’s people knocking on doors; it’s people making phone calls out of phone banks; but the calculations that are determining which door and which phone are different.”…

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee ramped up its commitment, creating the “Bannock Street project,” a multimillion dollar, data-driven effort to persuade, register and turn out voters.

“The easiest way to look at it is our strategy to winning is expanding the voting universe,” said Preston Elliott, Hagan’s campaign manager, in an interview in his Greensboro office. “It’s a little more machineish than just catching a wave and riding momentum.”

Republicans say they are catching up. In Raleigh, campaign workers and volunteers showed off a new smartphone app that helps canvassers target their door knocks. But Republican officials refused to reveal volunteer numbers, paid staff totals, field office locations or a tabulation of voter contacts. Nor would they allow reporters to recount the phone-bank pitch, “the secret sauce,” as they called it.

This is taking new information about voters – something political parties always want – and putting it into real-time (or close) models in order to produce more effective targeted efforts with limited time and efforts before elections.

Two other thoughts:

1. It would be interesting to then see how these new efforts fit with broad appeals politicians make to the public. Does this new kind of information and targeting mean that politicians will spend less time making big claims and instead focus on smaller segments of voters?

2. Americans aren’t always thrilled with the kind of information corporations or tech companies have about them. Are they happy with political parties having more information? Of course, people don’t have to give out this information but this information is going into the hands of political parties who don’t exactly have the highest ratings these days.

Spain’s global lead in elevators tied to housing policies

Posted on October 10, 2014 by legallysociable

Spain leads the world in elevators per 1,000 people and this is the result of certain housing policies:

Compared to other countries, Spain’s elevator supply looks remarkably, well, elevated.

Spain Has Risen to the Top of Global Elevator Rankings

Quartz

At face value, there’s a pretty simple reason why. Spaniards are some of the world’s pre-eminent apartment-dwellers. In 2012, roughly 65 percent of the population lived in apartment buildings, much higher than the euro-area average of 46 percent. (The only other European countries that compare to Spain in terms of apartment-living are Latvia and Estonia, which are both also around 65 percent.)…

Top-down planning gave rise to relatively high-density urban building, often by politically connected construction companies in a building boom that stretched from the 1960s into the late 1970s.

“The dominant form of this housing was estates (apartment complexes) with over 1,000 dwellings,” wrote then Harvard academic Eric Belsky and colleague Nicolas Retsinas, in a paper on the Spanish housing market back in 2004. “These estates replaced many of the shantytowns that developed near cities like Barcelona and Madrid in the late 1940s and early 1950s.”

Thus was the modern Spanish city born.

With the emphasis on agricultural land in the Franco regime, dense cities and elevators were the result.

Given all this, what are the implications?

1. Do all those elevators detract from or enhance walking (taking the stairs versus having denser communities where walking is the norm)?

2. Are there any unique features of Spanish elevator culture?

3. Do the Spanish any sort of edge in elevator technology or maintenance?

Using social media data to predict traits about users

Posted on October 9, 2014 by legallysociable

Here is a summary of research that uses algorithms and “concepts from psychology and sociology” to uncover traits of social media users through what they make available:

One study in this space, published in 2013 by researchers at the University of Cambridge and their colleagues, gathered data from 60,000 Facebook users and, with their Facebook “likes” alone, predicted a wide range of personal traits. The researchers could predict attributes like a person’s gender, religion, sexual orientation, and substance use (drugs, alcohol, smoking)…

How could liking curly fries be predictive? The reasoning relies on a few insights from sociology. Imagine one of the first people to like the page happened to be smart. Once she liked it, her friends saw it. A social science concept called homophily tells us that people tend to be friends with people like themselves. Smart people tend to be friends with smart people. Liberals are friends with other liberals. Rich people hang out with other rich people…

On the first site, YouAreWhatYouLike, the algorithms will tell you about your personality. This includes openness to new ideas, extraversion and introversion, your emotional stability, your warmth or competitiveness, and your organizational levels.

The second site, Apply Magic Sauce, predicts your politics, relationship status, sexual orientation, gender, and more. You can try it on yourself, but be forewarned that the data is in a machine-readable format. You’ll be able to figure it out, but it’s not as pretty as YouAreWhatYouLike.

These aren’t the only tools that do this. AnalyzeWords leverages linguistics to discover the personality you portray on Twitter. It does not look at the topics you discuss in your tweets, but rather at things like how often you say “I” vs. “we,” how frequently you curse, and how many anxiety-related words you use. The interesting thing about this tool is that you can analyze anyone, not just yourself.

The author then goes on to say that she purges her social media accounts to not include much old content so third parties can’t use the information against them. That is one response. However, before I go do this, I would want to know a few things:

1. Just how good are these predictions? It is one thing to suggest they are 60% accurate but another to say they are 90% accurate.

2. How much data do these algorithms need to make good predictions?

3. How are social media companies responding to such moves? While I’m sure they are doing some of this themselves, what are they planning to do if someone wants to use this data in a harmful way (say, affecting people’s credit score)? Why not set limits for this now rather than after the fact?

Explaining phantom cellphone vibrations

Posted on September 25, 2014 by legallysociable

Some recent studies suggest phantom cellphone vibrations are common and here are some possible explanations for why they happen:

A handful of studies in recent years have examined the prevalence of phantom cellphone vibrations, and they’ve come up with impressive numbers, from 68 percent of the medical staff at a Massachusetts hospital to 89 percent of undergraduates at a midwestern university, to more than 90 percent of Taiwanese doctors-in-training in the middle of their internships…

Hallucination may not be the most appropriate term, according to Laramie. “You’re misinterpreting something, but there is this external cue. You’re not totally making it up.” A compelling alternative, he suggests, is pareidolia. “That’s the phenomenon where you see a face in the clouds or hear ‘Paul is dead’ when you listen to the Beatles backwards.” (Or see the Virgin Mary on a grilled cheese sandwich). Essentially, it’s your brain getting a little bit carried away with its normally very useful talent for finding patterns in the world around you…

In his thesis research, he found the two biggest predictors of phantom vibrations and ringing were age (young people experienced them more) and the extent to which people relied on their phone to regulate their emotional state—checking their phone when they wanted to calm down, for example, or get an emotional boost. “My hunch is at this point it’s a generational thing,” Laramie said. Twenty- and thirty-somethings who grew up with cellphones and have them ingrained in their daily lives probably experience the effect more than older people or technophobes, he says…

Like Laramie, Bensmaia thinks phantom vibrations are a result of the brain’s penchant for filling in the gaps to find patterns. A visual equivalent, he suggests, is seeing the outlines of furniture when you walk through your house in near-total darkness, or seeing the image of a Dalmatian in a field of black and white dots (it’s hard to see at first, but once you detect the pattern it’s almost impossible not to see it)…

“What happens, I think, is that because your clothes are rubbing against your skin, you cause activity in the same receptors, and that activity is just similar enough to the activity caused by a vibrating phone that it triggers the learned association and the perception of a vibrating phone,” he said. It’s not clear exactly where in the brain that occurs, Bensmaia says, but it probably involves the primary somatosensory cortex and other higher-level areas that process the sense of touch.

Is it then too far of a leap to suggest that phones are rewiring our brains in certain ways? Granted, lots of objects or behaviors might prompt rewiring but I suspect a good number of people would recoil at this idea as they normally don’t think the connections between objects and actions and the brain.

California issues first autonomous car driving permits

Posted on September 22, 2014 by legallysociable

Several corporations recently received California’s first autonomous car driving permits:

On Tuesday, Audi became the first car manufacturer to receive a California autonomous car driving permit (as of this writing, Mercedes-Benz and Google have also filed for and received permits). The permit was presented to Audi by Sen. Alex Padilla, who signed the state’s new autonomous vehicle laws that went into effect Tuesday; the law will allow for the legal testing of autonomous vehicles on public roads…

One is the specific mention of a visual indicator that clearly signals to the driver when autonomous mode is engaged. Making sure the driver is completely familiar with the technology and understands when the car is under machine control versus human control is something carmakers must get absolutely right. Consider what GM is doing with its Super Cruise technology, which allows the car to take over steering and pedal operations in certain highway conditions. Earlier this month GM announced that Super Cruise will be available in select 2017 model year cars. Those cars will likely have the same indicator that we experienced when testing Super Cruise—a large light bar on the top of the steering wheel that indicates when the car is in control (green), when the driver needs to take over (red), and when the driver has control (blue). Hard to miss that. Oh, and it issues an audible alert as well.

Something else to consider: According to the permit, should the driver be unable to take control of the vehicle during an emergency or system failure while autonomous mode is engaged, “the autonomous vehicle shall be capable of coming to a complete stop.” Pretty important! But also a little scary when you think about a car just stopping on the highway. After all, the permit doesn’t say the car must be able to safely pull off the road and come to a complete stop. And in reality, that’s probably asking a lot for now. It’s a reminder that if we want to test autonomous vehicles in the public domain seriously, we have to understand there will be risks…

Lastly, it’s worth noting that the permit calls for an extra device—separate from the data recorders already required in cars—to specifically monitor and record the autonomous systems and their sensors. On top of that, the information must remain accessible for three years. As optimistic as lawmakers and auto manufacturers are about the potential for autonomous vehicles, they also know that one bad accident could stymie progress and reaffirm the public’s worst fears. In case an accident does happen—and eventually, it will—at least they’ll know exactly what went wrong.

Some interesting extra pieces to these permits. All of this suggests that there are still some important things to sort out before driverless cars hit the roads in large numbers.

A few other possible additions that came to mind:

1. An indicator on top of the car or with the front and back lights that shows other drivers that the car is in autonomous mode. We haven’t heard much how such vehicles would change their behavior based on the drivers around them. Say someone doesn’t like their speed and so they tailgate the car, an action that sometimes leads to the front driver speeding up. What would an autonomous car do?

2. A running set of easy-to-understand output from the autonomous car to the driver. It is one thing to provide an indicator that the car is running itself but another to give feedback to the potential driver. Granted, these vehicles are likely making a ridiculous number of calculations per second but I’m guessing some users would like to know what the car is “thinking” as it acts.

The rise of nomophobia

Posted on September 21, 2014 by legallysociable

Smartphones have greatly increased in number as has our need to have them nearby:

Nomophobia is a term describing a growing fear in today’s world — the fear of being without a mobile device, or beyond mobile phone contact. Among today’s high school and college students, it’s on the rise. An increasing number of college students now shower with their cell phone. The average adolescent would rather lose a pinky-finger than a cell phone. A growing percentage text or tweet instead of actually talking to others.

Nomophobia is everywhere in industrialized nations. The term is an abbreviation for “no-mobile-phone phobia,” which was coined during a 2010 study by the UK Post Office. The Post Office commissioned YouGov, a research organization, to look at anxieties suffered by mobile phone users. The study found that nearly 53 percent of mobile phone users in Britain tend to be anxious when they “lose their mobile phone, run out of battery or credit, or have no network coverage.”

The study found that about 58 percent of men and 47 percent of women suffer from the phobia, and an additional 9 percent feel stressed when their mobile phones are off. The study sampled 2,163 people. Fifty-five percent of those surveyed cited keeping in touch with friends or family as the main reason that they got anxious when they could not use their mobile phones. The study compared stress levels induced by the average case of nomophobia to be on par with those of “wedding day jitters” and trips to the dentist…

A full 66 percent of all adults suffer from “nomophobia.”

Unfortunately, this article is short on citing reputable sources outside of one YouGov study in the UK. However, I have seen other similar findings trickle out in recent years.

As I’ve noted before, if this behavior becomes widespread, particularly among normal adults, is it really a problem or phobia? Perhaps the more unusual people are the ones without smartphones or Facebook accounts (they do occasionally pop up in the college student population) who also may feel odd: peer pressure to join, missing out on information that everyone else seems to have, paying attention to other things more than new technology.

Google wants to build cities and airports?

Posted on September 20, 2014 by legallysociable

Google has its hands in many things but now it is planning to build cities?

Google’s seemingly limitless ambition has seen the company take on drones, self-driving cars and even the problem of aging, but the company’s founders have even grander plans – to build cities and airports.

A report from The Information (paywall) says the co-founder Larry Page has set up a ‘company within a company’ dubbed ‘Google 2.0’ that will look at the tech giant’s long-term future – presumably for when advertising revenue from search traffic (inevitably) dries up.

This could even include building “a model airport and city.” Page has argued that although rival billionaire Elon Musk might be in favour of a ‘hyperloop’ (a train concept that could travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles in 30 minutes), the problem with long-range transport is not that planes are slow, but that airports are inefficient.

It might sound far-fetched, but Google’s executives are already building their own private air terminal at San Jose International Airport for $82 million to handle the eight private jets owned by Page and fellow co-founders Sergey Brin and Eric Schmidt.

It would be fascinating to know how exactly Google would go about planning and building a city. What urban planning techniques would they adopt? Is building a city primarily a way to get more people to see their ads and use their products? At this point, if you Google “what is the best way to build a city,” the top search results focus on SimCity.

I’m sure this doesn’t ease the minds of those worried about the reach of tech companies – they don’t only want your devices and money, they think they have answers for everything…

Meme adding more and more gables to your McMansion

Posted on September 8, 2014 by legallysociable

At MemeGenerator, check out the McMansion gables image:

xzibit-yo-dawg - tonight on "pimp my mcmansion" : Yo dawg! We heard you liked gables so we put gables inside your gables alongside your gables!

McMansions are often known for their multiple gables. These add more volume and angles to the roofline. They are typically not necessary so are considered gauche for simply trying to impress.

This is based on the Xzibit Yo Dawg meme which is described thusly:

Yo Dawg, or Sup Dawg, is an image macro series based on portrait shots of American hip hop artist Alvin Nathaniel Joiner, better known by his stage name Xzibit, and humorous captions that are composed around the recursive phrasal template “Yo Dawg, I herd you like (noun X), so I put an (noun X) in your (noun Y) so you can (verb Z) while you (verb Z).” Since rising to popularity in early 2007, the series has been considered one of the most well-known and longest lasting examples of recursive humor on the Internet…

While Xzibit initially began his career in the entertainment industry as a rapper from Los Angeles, his mainstream breakthrough came almost a decade later as the host of the MTV show Pimp My Ride, which ran for six seasons from 2004 to 2007. In the show, Xzibit gained a reputation for adding luxurious amenities and equipments like fish tanks, clothes dryers and fireplaces into the participant’s car, presumably without consent.

So if Xzibit is known for a show featuring consumption, the connection to McMansions makes some sense.

Legally Sociable

Pleasant Musings on Sociology, McMansions and Housing, Suburbs and Cities, and Miscellaneous Errata.

Category Archives: Gadgets and Technology

Facebook as the new gatekeeper of journalism

Political campaigns combining big data, ground games

Spain’s global lead in elevators tied to housing policies

Explaining phantom cellphone vibrations

California issues first autonomous car driving permits

The rise of nomophobia

Google wants to build cities and airports?

Meme adding more and more gables to your McMansion

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: