Apologies for the following—buzzwords used indiscriminately:

The introduction of location based services - specifically social networking tools integrated into mobile devices - is leading toward new battle lines being drawn between consumers and social software developers.

(Read this NYT article from last year for background information, or check out this recent Information Week article about a related privacy kerfuffle.)

The basic questions here are ones that have been asked for decades, and certainly have been hotly debated in the midst of web services in the past few years. Everyone is concerned about what’s on their Facebook profile, but that’s still a representation of a person, a construction of their making, a personality meant for a special purpose hosted and shared via remote servers.

Contrast that with social services that connect people on the ground. All of a sudden, the buffer established by your web persona is non-existent. When you’re sitting in a bar and others have access to your location, they can walk up and chat with you physically, which is obviously much different than leaving a casual comment on a blog.

Unless software developers are very cautious about making privacy features that are self-explanatory and effective, there will be widespread concern. It’s happening already, and it will continue. (And what I really mean is, there will be media sensationalism and unnecessary panic en masse.)

The physical disconnect of social web communication is non-existent in meatspace, you don’t communicate with a constructed persona, but your own self in person. (Which is all well and normal, it’s what we all call humanity I believe.) But we now have the tools to receive information boosted by web, GPS, and cellular technologies that overlay a data layer upon that good old meatspace. There you have the power of interconnectedness and instantaneous information retrieval just like the web as a platform, but with the ability to reach out and touch someone physically.

It’s a problem that will be solved. Eventually, but not without a few bumps along the road. Most people today are more comfortable leaving tracks and signs, leaving data in their wake than they are broadcasting it in the flesh.

Candidates for office leave signs on the roadsides to advertise themselves, they don’t stand on street corners proselytizing. (There’s a certain stigma attached to standing on a street corner with a sign isn’t there?) Leaving information about what you’ve done and where you’ve been is much different than broadcasting your location. Layers of trust must be built into the interactive platform and utilized sensibly by the consumers. It will be fun watching the sparks fly.

I just got all my 17mm thumbnails correctly propagating for this Dig Deep redesign. Now you can check out 120-some thumbnails for all the photoblog pics. Huzzah!

I don’t believe in information overload.

I think it’s a term used to explain away losses of productivity or minor inefficiencies, or a scapegoat for whatever you choose to distract yourself with at any given moment. (I should know.) I don’t believe it’s an impossible phenomenon, but for the most part I think its manifestation is really a consequence of information flowing into your brain in the wrong context.

Today, computers are the hub of information retrieval in every home and workplace. A TV is good for information viewing, but it’s passive and not intended for fetching information based on a query, it just spits out what’s sent, whether you ask for it or not. When you want a specific question answered immediately, you always go to a computer.

Mobile devices are slowly cutting into this monopoly, albeit at a snails pace. What is really starting to work are mobile applications specifically designed for the context in which they are used. For example, you want a taco and use your phone for a location-based search of a Mexican restaurant. It’s a map-based interface, and the information is given to you based on your immediate location. That’s all well and good, and is technology widely available today. (App Store anyone?) You can also do that from your computer, but what’s important is that that information is available in the context that you need it in.

The proliferation of this type of information retrieval is the answer to information overload. (If there really is one, that is.) What is important is that there is information there, in the background, available and context-sensitive.

Cooking Up an Example
I’ll give you an example of what I’m talking about. I keep recipes on my computer. Not because it’s convenient or practical, but just because my computer is where I save everything. When I want to cook something, I either print or write down the recipe and take it to the kitchen for prep, or scamper off to the store for ingredients.

Here’s the dream scenario. Recipes are available on my computer, but they’re also available on my microwave, fridge, and above my stove. When a recipe is selected a shopping list is made available in my phone. Better yet, my fridge checks it’s own contents and lets me know what I need from the store. If I have all the ingredients maybe my stove starts preheating. You get the idea.

The point is a computer is more a gatekeeper, or even roadblock, today than ever before. With wifi chipsets becoming ever-more microscopic and flexible OLED displays starting to be practical, it’s nearly possible to have a genuinely useful information cloud out and about in meat-space. More seamless devices (don’t think phones and computers) with more connectivity spread out into their appropriate context could make a lot of sense.

Perhaps even….gasp…reserving your computer just for work. Wouldn’t that be novel?

The more information available in the correct context lets it blend into the background. If the retrieval isn’t a burden, yet another task to complete, that’s where it’s most useful. That’s the goal…providing information in context, perhaps that can make our current concept of computers and information overload slowly go away.

Man-children everywhere finally have representation. With Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly together you know you’re going to get laughs, though considering the length of this movie there should have been a few more.

Anchorman it is not. In the supporting cast, or at least the comedic supporting roles this movie stumbles. They really aren’t given the lines or time needed to shine. Add that with the fact that the movie hardly ever gets past the central joke…39 year-olds living at home and acting like children…and what you’ve got is a solid rental. If you’ve seen all the trailers you’ve seen most of the best parts, and I hate it when that happens.