Wiki-counter-terrorism & Social Surveillance
An MQ-1 Predator drone returned from a mission to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan with a new paintjob, courtesy of StevenDuque.com.
In his book Wikinomics, business strategist Don Tapscott writes:
“Employees drive performance by collaborating with peers across organizational boundaries, creating what we call a ‘wiki workplace.’ Customers become ‘prosumers’ by cocreating goods and services rather than simply consuming the end-product. So called-supply chains work more effectively when the risk, reward, and capability to compete major projects—including massively complex products like cars, motorcycles, and airplanes—are distributed across planetary networks of partners who work as peers (1).”
According to a recent article in The New York Times, unmanned surveillance drones are currently collecting more video intelligence than analysts are able to handle. The volume of footage taken from last year’s surveillance efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan nearly triple what it was only a few years ago–a grand total of roughly 24 years’ worth of footage, if watched without break. As operations in Afghanistan will certainly escalate in the near future and U.S. troops are withdrawn from both countries over time, the problem of excess, unmanned surveillance will only compound.
What if, as customers of national security, citizens aided the government’s counterterrorism surveillance efforts through mass collaborative online efforts? The government could post snippets of video on a centralized media hub, and citizens could review videos, comment on them, and flag them (if they see something suspicious). The government might even provide incentives for quality interactions — say, a fiscal or honorary rewards for good citizenship. Perhaps other citizens could rate others’ interactions, providing an element of peer evaluation and competition. Government intelligence officers could use the number of unique flags and/or comments to make triage decisions, and users could help screen the verity of flags by giving them a ‘thumbs up’ or ‘thumbs down.’
Citizens would become ‘prosumers’ of national security, adding value to the end product of counterterrorist intelligence because of their vested interest in U.S. national security.
There are undeniably both interesting and disconcerting aspects of this proposition. I’ll address what I see to be the most immediate issues at stake.
The Big Brother Effect & and Society of Distrust. If implemented, social surveillance should be limited to foreign threats, most would agree. Mass collaborative surveillance of faraway lands would foster national antagonism (in addition to a sense of social responsbility) toward threats external to a nation’s society. If focused inward, however, our trust in one another might suffer from fear of Red Scare-like accusations, akin to how many around the world distrust police. Separately, dislike for Americans in the international community may be exacerbated by citizens’ participation in military surveillance efforts.
Securispam and Poor Intelligence. For those of you familiar with the comment boards of YouTube, you’ll find that some of the comments are sometimes, well, pretty crummy and downright idiotic at times, even on serious videos. Inviting open commentary on quasi-sensitive information could result in a deluge of crappy ‘intelligence,’ not to mention create PR-nightmares that may result from less-than-politically correct commentary that media outlets — both domestic and overseas — catch wind of. Additionally, opening up participation to the online world could create security windows for foreign intelligence operatives to spam video surveillance posting boards with faulty intelligence. Imagine how many times you’ve watched a crummy video or read a stupid article because of how many diggs it received.
Needless to say, there are plenty of holes in my half-baked plan for wikicounterterrorism. But, the problem remains: as our government is increasingly inundated with an endless streams of surveillanc edata, a better system of reviewing what could be important information is needed. While creating an open wiki-hub for commenting and flagging video may not be the right answer, I tend to think there is something right in the proposition to incorporate mass collaborative techniques, at least structurally, into the processes for reviewing large amounts of sensitive data. Whether that means opening up the surveillance data to the American general public or limiting who can access the information — e.g., to government officials and/or outsourced private military companies — the excuse that there’s simply too much surveillance out there will not suffice, if national security threats pass under the radar.
To end this post, I’ll leave you with a comment from then-Senator Barack Obama on citizen participation in national security efforts:
“”To succeed [in the War on Terrorism], we must improve our civilian capacity. The finest military in the world is adapting to the challenges of the 21st century. But it cannot counter insurgent and terrorist threats without civilian counterparts who can carry out economic and political reconstruction missions – sometimes in dangerous places. As President, I will strengthen these civilian capacities, recruiting our best and brightest to take on this challenge. I will increase both the numbers and capabilities of our diplomats, development experts, and other civilians who can work alongside our military. We can’t just say there is no military solution to these problems. We need to integrate all aspects of American might.”
Nice post, Steven. I had it open in a tab for some buried amid the wash of information I’m always drowning in and finally got around to reading it. There’s a recent NYTimes article about how today’s youth are ‘jacked in’ all the time these days. I wonder if new generations growing up and learning to live at once in the real world and online won’t miss the experience of living ‘checked out’ completely.
Thanks for reading, Stephen. I’m glad to hear you enjoyed it.
I haven’t seen the NYT article, but would love to check it out, if you don’t mind posting it in the comments when you get the chance. I’m sure the other readers would appreciate it too.
You bring up an interesting point: can one miss an experience s/he’s never had — i.e., of being ‘checked out’? If all experiences of future generations are just different grades of a ‘jacked in’ lifestyle (for them, watching an old-school TV with no cable is being ‘checked out’), can they even empathize with the notion of being completely ‘checked out’?
This question reminds of a question that arises in epistemology: what are ‘genuine’ or ‘veridical’ experiences? What is a ‘checked out’ experience? Who decides what that means? I think the notion rests on a comparative standard of the current state of technological advancements. While our grandparents’ lifestyles may be ‘checked out’ to us, to their grandparents, they probably would seem very ‘jacked in.’ But, in their case, I think the more appropriate distinction would be ‘plugged in’ or ‘unplugged,’ as their technological experiences were much less about interactivity and the free-flow of information.
I was told to leave “cute messages” on your most recent blog post. However, Google Buzz offers me little material to be cute about.
Also, Google owns both Youtube AND Picassa. H:0, W:2498230948278346298.
check out this reaction too– http://www.salon.com/tech/how_the_world_works/2010/02/10/google?source=newsletter
It’s tough to say whether google as a monolith will continue to just be efficient and integrated, or eventually become monopolistic and lazy– certainly, I agree that even though we may feel like the social networking space is saturated (as in, there are plenty more sites out there and I’m not interested in joining them), different levels of convenience and connectivity–including some of the selectivity to target non-professional networks as you describe–seems tempting.
Worth noting that there may be some new security concerns as the Google becomes the repository of everything net-centric (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020304057.html?referrer=emailarticle on the new NSA-Google security access partnership and the potential nice and scary collaboration between FBI and ISPs: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10448060-38.html?tag=newsLeadStoriesArea.1). More subtle Internet offenses that are criminal under 18 USC 1030’s stipulation of “authorized access” may have nuanced Big Brother effects, for example allowing employers to surveil and criminalize employees who use their computer for whistleblowing.
The more dependent we are on Google’s power, the more potential for authorized and unauthorized access to its repository of data– That being said, for as long as their generativity continues, I’ll probably be on board!
M
I want to thank the blogger very much not only for this post but also for all his previous efforts. I found stevenduque.com to be very interesting. I will be coming back to stevenduque.com for more information.
It can also replace E-Reader and Kindles, because it allows you to read books on the iPad. Now publishers and authors need to get on that and make PDF downloads of their books available.
I still can’t afford an E-Reader or Kindle, but I plan to wait for a few more years until it becomes relatively affordable, maybe instead of those two, I’ll get an iPad someday if it still proves to be popular in 2, 3 years.
I am not sure why the current IPhone couldn’t do most of what you have listed above. I am all for bigger and better but the software and monetizing it will lead to better. The device is just an enabler.
Thanks for reading, Scott; I hope you continue following the blog.
Your point, I think, touches on an interesting truth about a lot of Apple products: there many alternative products that can do exactly the same thing, or at least achieve the same core functionality, as most Apple products — e.g., iPods vs other mp3 players. Beyond outright alternatives, you’re also right in highlighting that the iPhone could likely do most of what is described in the article. That said, there is also no reason why a netbook with a wireless card could not perform pretty much the same basic functionalities.
The key differentiators, I think, are two characteristics at the core of Apple’s brand truth: first of all, superior design and, secondly, user interface (which can arguably be subsumed into the category of ‘design,’ though I think that ‘user interface’ has more to do with the operative aspects of a thing, which ‘design’ does not necessarily imply).
While both characteristics knock most alternative products out of competition with the iPad, only the second is relevant to your question. The key difference will be user interface, and your response touched on what will be so different about it. Frankly, size does matter. Having a video chat with someone or creating a video blog is certainly more pleasing on a larger screen, just as it is more desirable to watch a program on a larger TV. Not only that, but the size of the iPad hits the sweet spot in terms of being both sufficiently large to make things visually pleasing, while also being light enough and small enough to be a mobile device. Enough plugging Apple products.
You’re right, though, that the device will just enable or unleash whatever potential lies in the functionalities, which will be applied by developers. But I think we’ll all agree that creating a platform is certainly important too. I think it’s a matter of perspective, too. I’m sure many would probably say that operating systems are more important than computers. But hey — there would be no computers without operating systems.
I hope I’ve addressed your questions sufficiently, and that I didn’t entirely miss the point.
Thanks again for reading, and I hope to hear from you again, Scott!
Can i just say i think you are wrong, in Europe and Asia we have phones and networks which support Video calling
As for the ebook agrument, well thats all it is – The thing is it’s just too big I perosnally think this is the bad apple in the barrel with Apple products and the price point in Europe is way to high for people to buy a nice to have esp when essentially the new phones by HTC etc have 1Ghz processors and just as much memory, plus 2 cameras and it fits in your pocket
First off, Richard, thanks for reading.
And secondly, thanks for throwing your support behind my position on video phone functionality; I appreciate it. I had no idea that in both Europe and Asia there are phones with video calling capabilities. It seems as though you’re truly “living in the future.”
I do think, however, that there are definite logistical problems with creating a vast enough infrastructure to create carrier coverage that’s commensurate to what you have in European countries and parts of Asia (i.e., Japan and HK), where the land area is significantly smaller than the US. I wonder, though, given my experience with using a Mifi device and a laptop, whether this can be surmounted sooner than even I predict.
And separately, again I find myself alone in thinking that the size of the iPad will actually be somewhat convenient, though in a different class than phones. Perhaps I’m off in my intuitions, but I think that the iPad should be classified in an entirely different category. Imagine, for instance, that you can watch streaming video in a static position on a multimedia publication, while also scrolling through supplementary information. Needless to say, these types of publications have not been created yet, but this type of functionality would be extremely tough to do on a cell phone-sized screen.
Thanks again, Richard, and, as with others, I hope to see commenting on the blog again soon!
Im sorry but i disagree about how you feel the Ipad will change things.
The iphone has the same capabilities and is already a success. I feel the limitations on this make it a step backwards.
If the next gen Iphone has the front facing camera you refer to, then i can see your suggestions possible. But w/ the Iphone. Not this oversized machine.
I politely disagree with your thoughts that people would prefer to lug around such a large device. The pocket size iphone is easier to use. I would never carry something around like this to use as a phone in a bag…. thats reverse to the late 80s bag phones — no thanks! :-) I see your point with video phone, but the iphone theoretically would have the same capability.
We are still several years out from video phones, not due to the phone technology, but rather the carriers’ inabilities to support such a thing.
The only thing ipad has “better” in my opinion is a better processor.
Great blog site btw !
Cheers!
Thanks for reading the blog, Matt, and thanks for sharing your thoughts! I hope that, despite our disagreements, you’ll continue to follow the blog.
First of all, I agree that the iPhone has been a success and will continue to be a success. But I don’t think its success precludes the possibility of a larger product, as I think the iPad and iPhone will ultimately compete in different spaces. Instead, I think the iPad is aimed at the myriad netbooks that have emerged over the past few years. As many will note, however, the iPad is much more costly with less juicy hardware. I think, though, that the comparative advantage Apple has in design and user interface, not to mention marketing and culture development around its products, is enough to lure in most.
Secondly, I don’t think the size of an iPad is prohibitive, just as I don’t think the size of a netbook or laptop is prohibitive. I think the versatility of carrying it around will certainly be different than a cell phone, but I think it’s unique functionalities and ability to display multimedia publications will make it more desirable, at least for certain operations, than cell phones.
And thirdly, I think you might be wrong about how far we are from having video phones. This past summer, I traveled across the country with a laptop and Mifi device (essentially a wireless card that can handle up to five users at a time), and I was able to engage in video chat on my laptop while driving in the car, a fact which makes me believe that video phones/pads are not too far off.
I can’t disagree with you about their being nothing, at face value, that the iPad does better than other gadgets (like the iPhone or netbooks), but there was also nothing better at face value about iPods versus other mp3 players — except (and yes, I’m saying it again) design and user interface. These characteristics, I think, are enough to drive people not only to buy the iPad, but also to pay the premium for them.
Thanks again, Matt, and I hope to hear from you again!
This was still a cute message.
You’re absolutely right about YouTube and Picassa. Apologies for the lack of clarity.
I tend to think that with Google’s creativity-spurring work culture, ability to recruit top engineering talent, and giant pocketbook for acquiring brilliant start-ups, they’ll continue to surprise us with good ideas and innovations.
I can only imagine the vastness of Google’s repository of data, and am scared to think of how they will/already do wield it, as you noted. And the notion that that data may be privy to the eyes of cyberterrorists/hackers is even scarier.
Here’s an interesting Times Magazine article about China’s hacker culture that really scared me.
To your point about it being an incredibly vast repository of data, there’s another company that’s really scary, though less heard of called Quantcast. From what I understand, it collects tons of user data by fielding it in exchange for amazing analytics for web publishers. While they haven’t generated any notable revenues yet, their plan, I think, is to ultimately launch one of the most targeted ad networks the world has ever seen.
Who knows — maybe there’ll be Big Brothers?
Thanks for the comment, DIMA.
I definitely agree with your assessment of both the iPad as a superior reader device and the need for publishers/authors to make PDFs of their books available. I’ll be interested to see what interesting user interfaces for viewing PDFs will emerge. For example, issuu.com, displays PDFs as through they’re actually magazines, creating the experience of reading the digital form of a magazine.
But, I imagine that there are going to be a whole new array of novel media formats that take advantage of the iPad’s multimedia capabilities and intuitive user-interfaces. I think it’s going to be the Wild West out there, in terms of developing the most compelling publishing product for the iPad. And I don’t necessarily think it’s going to be a big publishing house that does it.
I, personally, am going to save my money for an iPad. I’m considering getting a first generation one, but I think it’s probably wiser to wait until it’s cheaper and has better specs (like what happened with the iPod).
Thanks, Joe! I appreciate it.
Technology is always changing. while that’s a good thing, sometimes it’s frustrating. One minute I got this gadget and before I know it, a year flies by and I’m being told by the tech wizards that my gadget is old and I need to update it.
The only downside to technology is that you always need to buy something new, but NOT all of us can afford to :-/
I’m keeping an eye out on the iPad… I plan to buy the iPad protection WINGS if I ever buy an iPad :-P
DIMA, as a prototypical early adopter, I can totally sympathize with what you’re saying. Funnily, I still have two iterations of the iRiver, one of the first good lines of mp3 players, which I purchased before ultimately converting to an iPod.
I certainly agree that technology is the product of a consumption-driven society, and I also agree that it’s a luxury to ponder questions of technological trends, not to mention purchasing technological artifacts.
And regarding your last comment,… better safe than sorry. :)