speaker

Siva Vaidhyanathan on Googlization, "Only the elite and proficient get to opt out"

Posted: November 19, 2009 at 7:13 am  |  By: chris castiglione  |  Tags: , ,

Society of the QueryThe term Googlization, according to Siva Vaidhyanathan, is the process of being processed, rendered, and represented by Google.

Vaidhyanathan’s upcoming book The Googlization of Everything investigates the actions and intentions behind the Google corporation. This afternoon at The Society of the Query Vaidhyanathan choose one issue from his book: the politics and implications of Google Maps’ Street View.

According to EU law: there cannot be any identifiable information about a person in Google Street View. Google’ s standard defense up till now has been that they respect privacy by scrambling faces and license plates, to which Vaidhyanathan commented,

In my former neighborhood in New York there were probably 50 illegal gambling institutions around. Now, imagine an image of me on Google Street View taken in proximity to one of these illegal places. I’m more than two meters tall and I’m a very heavy man. You could blur my face forever, I’m still bald. In New York, usually I was walking around my neighborhood with a white dog with brown spots, everyone in the neighborhood knew that dog. So you could blur my face and it still wouldn’t matter – it’s me, I’m obviously me. Anonymization isn’t an effective measure, as we’ve already found out with data. (most likely referring to the AOL case of user #4417749)

Just this morning Swiss authorities made a statement that they plan on bringing a lawsuit against Google in the Federal Administrative Tribunal because Google isn’t meeting the country’s demands for tighter privacy protection with Google Street View. Vaidhyanathan commenting on the news said, “Google Street View has been entering so many areas of friction and resistance – this brings it to our attention that the game is over for Google.”

Vaidhyanathan’s criticism of Google Street View continued with Google’s trouble in Tokyo. “The strongest reaction against Google Street View has been in Japan,” he said, “Google will scrap all of their data from Japan and re-shoot the entire country. Google mismeasured how the Japanese deal with public space. In the older sections of Tokyo the street in front of one’s house is considered the person’s responsibility, it is seen as an extension of their house. Thus, Google Street View is actually invading someone’s private space.”

Earlier this year Google CEO Eric Schmidt made the following remark about the international appeal of Google,

The most common question I get about Google is ‘how is it different everywhere else?’ and I am sorry to tell you that it’s not. People still care about Britney Spears in these other countries. It’s really very disturbing.

Vaidhyanathan explained this as being a part of Google’s protocol imperialism,

Google isn’t particularly American, nor is it particularly American / Western European. It’s important to remember that Google is much more a factor of daily life in Europe. In the United States it is just barely 70% of the search market, in Western Europe it is around 90% and in places like Portugal it is 96% and I don’t know why.

For Vaidhyanathan the biggest problem with Google is that as it expands into more parts of the world that are less proficient, and less digitally inclined, there will be more examples of friction and harm because more people are going to lack the awareness to cleanse their record.

It’s important to note that Google does offer services for protecting and managing user data:

Vaidhyanathan didn’t specifically mention these options, but briefly acknowledged the existence of such tools before quickly moving onto the strongest part of his argument, “We in this room are not likely to be harmed by Google because all of us in this room are part of a techno-cosmopolitan elite. Only the elite and proficient get to opt out.”

Google Street View Fail

In closing, Vaidhyanathan exemplified the problem with a photograph of a man caught on the side of a U.S. highway and commented, “This man doesn’t know that he is in Google Street View so we get to laugh at him. Not knowing is going to be the key to being a victim in this system.”

More information about Siva Vaidhyanathan and his criticism of Google can be found on his website, and in this lively Google debate at IQ2 and New York Times article from last year.

Lev Manovich: Studying Culture With Search Algorithms

Posted: November 15, 2009 at 8:13 pm  |  By: chris castiglione  |  Tags: , , , , ,

Society of the Query

New media theorist Lev Manovich summarized his latest contribution to the field of software studies: cultural analytics. The idea of cultural analytics was first presented by Lev Manovich in 2005, and in 2007 he released a paper at CALIT2 entitled “Cultural Analytics: Analysis and Visualization of Large Cultural Data Sets.” In his talk today Manovich routinely made comparisons between cultural analytics and cultural analysis, and so it was necessary that audience members understand the distinction between these two (similarly sounding) terms: whereas traditional cultural analysis relies on real-world resources (human interpretation and physical storage), cultural analytics relies on the computer and search algorithms in order to discern and interpret culture.

Within cultural analytics Manovich is looking to answer questions such as: Can we create quantitative measures of cultural innovation? Can we visualize flows of cultural ideas, images, and trends? As a new way to study culture he suggested, “Let’s take principles from search engines (and data analysis in general) + web analytics and Google Trends (interactive visualization of patterns) + Google Earth (continuous zoom and navigation) + Manyeyes (visualization, sharing of data and analysis).”

Manovich’s work is perhaps more easily understood through examples that implement these techniques. He presented the “Interactive Visualization of Image Collections for Humanities Research” project which was developed by Manovich and the Software Studies Institute at UC San Diego. The project explores a collection of Mark Rothko’s paintings: turning the paintings into sets of data that can be graphed, and then turning that data into a collection of paintings (see the video below). Manovich argued, “by extracting and graphing this data it will help us understand patterns and explore trends in a painter’s life and work.”

YouTube Preview Image

This visualization shows changes in Rothko’s painting’s average brightness over his career.

lev manovich mark rothko cultural analytics

This visualization organizes the paintings by their brightness and saturation:

lev manovich mark rothko

Manovich spoke in Amsterdam last May at the Paradiso to which his presentation on cultural analytics raised a great deal criticism [1] [2]. Shortly after his last talk professor and art historian Edward Shanken wrote the following on The University of Amsterdam blog,

“The outcome of the analysis was as underwhelming as the method was problematic. The challenges of accurately capturing the color and tone of a painting in digital form and then representing them on a monitor are well known. The challenges of comparing multiple paintings on monitors is all the more complicated. While there may be insights to be gained by such a method – and I’m not sure how relevant they would be even in the best of circumstances – it appears to be limited to only the most superficial formal aspects of a painting.  And while certain aspects of connoisseurship may be aided by computer analysis of high-resolution digital images, Manovich’s example was far from that. What do we learn about Rothko or about art in general from an analysis of the brightness in his work over time?  Why even bother posing that as a research question?”

This morning Shanken politely asked Manovich,

Your work enables us to ask questions we might have not seen before, but could you tell us more about the particlar insights that this type of data has shown?

Manovich answered,

Every time I make visualizations I see something I have not seen before. The most common ideas about culture get challenged.

He went on to display the following graphic entitled “Seeing How We Play” and commented, “This visualization compares interactivity in ten video games over two decades. It shows very clearly what the relation is per game is: interactive vs. non-interactive times, and patterns of rapid changes.”

lev manovich "seeing how we play"

Richard Rogers, Director of the University of Amsterdam’s Digital Methods Initiative, poignantly followed up,

Have you been Googlized? A lot of critics say Google has taken over industry, over industry. E.g. libraries. Is Google now taking over humanities?

To which Manovich replied,

Good question. It’s not only Google, it’s general ideas and methods. We re-use and apply them for cultural analytics. At the same time we want to understand the methods so we can critique them better.

Later in the day at the Googlization panel Siva Vaidhyanathan asked Manovich a question that many of us were probably wondering,

Isn’t what you do expensive? It’s more than I’ve seen in any humanities lab…EVER!.

Of course the question was in reference to the 287-Megapixel HIPerSpace Wall seen early in Manovich’s presentation, but either Manovich didn’t completely understand or was trying to avert the question with his short reply,

I do most of my work with my laptop using open-source software.

Whether you agree or disagree with his cultural analytics research, Manovich’s allure is that his ideas are often compelling and provocative. He recently released a digital copy of his upcoming book “Software Takes Command” on his website where more information about Lev Manovich and the Software Studies Institute is also available.

Program booklet Society of the Query

Posted: November 4, 2009 at 12:28 pm  |  By: margreet  |  Tags: ,

The Query program is available.
Download here the full program booklet.

colophon: editors: Shirley Niemans and Marijn de Vries Hoogerwerff. Design: Grrr Amsterdam, http://www.grrr.nl. Print: Thieme Media Almere. Publisher: Insitute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam. Supported by: Amsterdam School of Design and Communication, Interactive Media (Hogeschool van Amsterdam, University of Applied Sciences ), Mondriaan Foundation and Foundation Democracy and Media.

A New View On Old Search Engines

Posted: June 16, 2009 at 11:22 am  |  By: dennis deicke  |  Tags: , , , ,

Review of Gugerli, D. (2009). Suchmaschinen. Die Welt als Datenbank. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

In his book Search Engines, The World as a Database (Suchmaschinen, Die Welt als Datenbank) the Swiss historian of technology David Gugerli describes the forerunners of Internet search engines in the second half of the 20th century exemplified by four different case studies. He starts with the examination of two German television shows, which Gugerli considers as early forms of search engines that were providing certain functions demanded for by the society. Furthermore, the author analyses the methods invented by the German BKA (The German Federal Criminal Police Office) in the early 1970‘s. Gugerli then explains the development of search engines using the idea of the relational data bank invented by Edgar F. Codd in 1969.

In the introduction Gugerli depicts the ubiquity of the search engine Google and all its additional services. Then he reminds the reader that before Google there have been different sorts of search engines that worked outside of the Internet. The detection of earthquake-zones or low-pressure systems for example was executed by satellites, sensors and simulations. Superstars and scandals were detected by TV-stations. Managers searched for information in corporate data bases, which were not open to everyone. Gugerli mentions that every type of search engine is situated in an area of conflict, between overview and surveillance. The author explains that search engines are connected with hopes concerning democratization, informational emancipation and complete overview. Contradictory they are also linked with fears regarding the vision of an Orwellian state of permanent observation. Gugerli identifies four functions that all search engines have in common. First of all, search engines premise that the aims of their operation can be objectified. Secondly, search engines operate in a concrete room of addresses. Search engines can only work, if they can link the searched object with an address. Thirdly, search engines follow a certain pattern, from which they cannot divert, but they simultaneously show a fundamental openness for results. Fourthly, search engines feature a special proximity to games and simulations.

The first case-study taken into consideration by David Gugerli is the old German TV-show: „Was bin ich?“ (What am I?), that had been aired between 1961- the year Gugerli was born –   and 1989 and hosted by Robert Lembke. The game-idea of the show was to let the audience guess which profession attendant persons in the show had. These persons had to display four characteristics of themselves at the beginning of the show: a signature, stating whether they are employed or self-employed, gesturing a situation typical of their job and selecting the color of a piggybank. During this procession the profession of the person was revealed to the TV-audience. A team composed of four (more or less) famous persons, who used these four different inputs to find out the person‘s job. They asked questions that could only be answered with „Yes“ or „No“, and for every „No“ the candidate received five DM (Deutsche Mark), which were put into a piggybank, whose color has been selected before. „Was bin ich?“ had been a very successful TV-show for almost 30 years. David Gugerli identifies an interesting reason for this success. He argues that in Germany people demanded for reliability of expectations, the audience had a desire for the certainty that professions and people could be linked. The structure of the show offered a method which was able to conjoin professions with persons exemplarily. Gugerli labels this possibility of linking jobs and persons as normal and therefore concludes that „Was bin ich?“ was a search engine seeking the „normal“ in German society. In a next traceable step Gugerli classifies this desire for reliability into the historic context in Germany. After World War II people searched for a new identity because the old structures of identification had vanished. Gugerli concludes that „Was bin ich?“ supported this process of self-discovery. It showed that the profession was a stable attribute of a person that could be discovered by using the simple mechanism of the show. Later on the society changed but the show stayed the same for almost 30 years and absorbed the complexity which had emerged because of social alteration beginning in the 60‘s. The mechanism of the show reduced the question for individual identity to what someone was, not who and in this way objectified the question.

The second case-study the professor at the Technical University Zurich (ETH Zürich) uses for illustration is the German TV-show „Aktenzeichen XY … ungelöst“. The show went on the air in October 1967 and was hosted by Eduard Zimmermann. In the show Zimmermann presented unsolved criminal cases which were re-enacted by performers. After a shown clip, the host talked to an expert of the police to give additional information to the audience. People sitting in front of the TVs were then requested to provide the police with relevant information. In this manner the show tried to find a delinquent based on the criminal practice and the traces of the crime. The consequence of this procedure was the reliability of expectations concerning the deviant, the aim of the search was connecting criminal work and the associated delinquent and to link his position with an address. In contrast to „Was bin ich?“ this show did not provide the audience with an image of the normal but with an image of the deviant. „Was bin Ich?“ was a search engine looking for the normal in society, while „Aktenzeichen XY“ was searching for the opposite, the deviant. And this is where Gugerli detects the entertaining potential of the show, by searching the deviant the show stabilized the amusing distinction between normal and abnomral. In the show the searched criminal did not fall under the presumption of innocence anymore, the show put everyone under general suspicion. The audience built a giant living network that provided information like a data bank with the advantage that it did not need to be fed with information by the police and Zimmermann before. The show objectified by considering cases and files, then it subjectified the cases again by re-enacting them with actors. After this simulation of the audience being witness of the crime, it was objectified again by the police expert who provided additional and real details regarding the case. 

As the third case-study exemplifying the function of a search engine David Gugerli selected the methods of the BKA (Federal Criminal Police office) that were invented when the new BKA-president Horst Herold started his work in 1971. Herold built up a giant computer data base system containing all information that had been collected by the german police. Using this background Herold created a search engine that should find statistically attestable patterns of the deviant. These results were supposed to serve as arguments for the prevention of crime and were the background for flexible manpower planning. Repression should be substituted by prevention, contention by dynamics, command by control, experience by logics and hypothesis by prognosis. Allocation of police resources followed the results of the analysis and the patterns that had been found out and were adapted flexibly. But in contrast to Zimmermann and Lembke, Herold himself had to create the bases for his search engine: He transformed information on papers into electronic data, facts were linked with addresses and were retrievable constantly. This data could be combined and compared and in this way opened new forms of criminological research, e.g. it was possible to search for „all 19 year old bakers with a Swabian dialect“.

Furthermore Herold‘s search engine became omnipresent and connected all police stations and reduced the distance between the central and the periphery, the system intelligence moved from the centre to the periphere elements. In the end the data base of the BKA was connected with international networks so that there was access to the German data from the whole world. To enable operating of the search engine the BKA implement different steps of objectifying the data. A fingerprint for example was at first captured as a photo, then it was enlarged and its characteristics were fixed as mathematical expressions and saved as a file in the data base. The idea of searching for patterns of social deviant behaviour, to take preventive actions which should substitute the search for the delinquent, was based on substantial objectifying of traces and characteristics of delinquents. Thus an attribute drifting from the norm could result in a decisive information for the police. This system depended on a giant amount on information and therefore started to stagnate because channels of information were overloaded. After describing explicitly how Herlod‘s „cybernetic police“ worked, Gugerli explains that the idea of a „cybernetic controlled, failure-free society“ failed because of the masses of information the system had to deal with. The terror of the RAF during the 1970‘s legitimized and stabilized the work of Herold‘s Engine until the resources of the system were exhausted. 

The last example that is pointed out by David Gugerli concerns the relational data bank as it has been imagined by Edgar F. Codd in 1969 and has more to do with the type of search engine we are used to. His aim was to create a data base which allowed to combine all files with each other and to investigate all kinds of possible connections between them. Codd‘s main idea was that users of future data bases do not have to possess special knowledge to use the data base. In fact it was his view that people have to be protected from depending on knowledge in regards to the internal organisation and functionality of the data in which they are interested. Until Codd‘s time hierarchical data banks had predefined ways of gaining access to the information which they had stored. Hence new kinds of questions were only possible if the user was informed about the saving-structures of the data base he or she wanted to consult. By changing this, Codd expected the users to become more specialized in asking, while the people programming the data base were assuring a reliably operating system. This gave people the opportunity to use the data bank as a black box which they could ask whatever they wanted to. Consequently, the use of the search engine changed from seeking for certain items to an open query for results. Together with his employer IBM, Codd developed the project „System R“ which was the attempt to form a data base usable even for people with less knowledge about computers. To facilitate this, they invented the „Structured English Query Language“ (SEQUEL) which enabled an easier way of querying. In mind they had the idea of a manager who needs information to take a decision independent of his knowledge about programming and data banks. This new type of search turned the computer to an important economic search engine that could be used as an instrument for rationalization. The relational data bases helped the companies to reduce transaction costs and to expand the possibilities of combining resources because it lowered the investment necessary for analysis. In Germany these ideas resulted in an alteration of the culture regarding the usage of data bases, now it was possible to query in real time and users and data were separated through a default software. 

In the end of his book Gugerli points out that western societies of the 20th century are characterized by flexibilization of expectations and the situational recombination of resources. For him, these attributes have been supported by search engines. They made it possible to locate addressable objects and increased the possibilities to access these objects. In this part Gugerli comes to the main issues of this book and he states that search engines produce overviews, determine priorities and create differences between the things they include and things they exclude. Furthermore, Gugerli gives a logic reason why search engines have a political history. It is because they contain the user‘s attention by having a certain structure of data rooms, programs and presentation of results. 

David Gugerli‘s book opens up a new view on the work of old search engines. We usually think of internet search engines like Google but he reminds us that the process of searching has been an important task in the society before the emergence of the internet. By picking the examples he demonstrates the development of search engines and successfully creates a historical room for reflections what has been his intention. The detailed descriptions of the characteristics of each search engine provided by Gugerli facilitate the understanding of how the examples functioned as search engines in their temporal and social context. The examples and explanations given by Gugerli help to consider the nowadays omnipresent Internet search engine differentiated and help to understand how search engines have become an essential base of our modern society.

Links:

This article as a PDF: Review on D. Gugerli

Biography: Inormation about D. Gugerli

More information: Resources

Society of the Query, stop searching start questioning

Posted: April 23, 2009 at 10:39 am  |  By: admin  |  Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Society of the Query conference: 13 – 14 November, Trouw Amsterdam in Amsterdam
With the Society of the Query conference -stop searching, start questioning-, the Institute of Network Cultures aims to critically reflect on the information society and the dominant role of the search engine in our culture. What does the dependency on the engine to manage the complex system of knowledge on the Internet mean? What alternatives exist? How can the increasingly centralized web be regulated? What is the future of interface design? By bringing together researchers, theorists and artists, the conference will examine the key issues that are emerging around web search, and contextualize developments within the fields of knowledge organization and information design.

Introduction to the Society of the Query conference
Search is the way we now live. At present, the reality of the information society is one in which we are increasingly confined to the use of information retrieval tools to create order and value in the vast amount of online data. Web search has taken over from (directory based) browsing and surfing as the dominant activity on the web. With this development, the search engine has become the main point of reference, one whose emphasis on efficiency and service tends to cloud the nature of both the underlying technology and (corporate) ideologies.

In what might be dubbed the ‘society of the query’, this conference asks what this dependency on tools to manage the complex system of knowledge on the Internet means for our culture. As the idea of a semantic web unfolds, the human versus artificial intelligence controversy is regarded with renewed urgency. The increasingly centralized computing grid invites critical questions about power distribution, governance, and diversity and accessibility of web content, while on the other hand promising alternatives to the dominant paradigm arise in P2P and open source initiatives. With large investments in media literacy, what role might politics and education play in establishing an informed and technologically literate user base?

This two-day Query conference aims to examine the key issues that are emerging around web search, and to contextualize developments within the fields of knowledge organization and information design. The Institute of Network Cultures aims to do so specifically by bringing together researchers, theorists and artists, creating room for speculation and open questions, as well as concrete projects and research. The questions this conference raises are:

  • How does the idea of machine understanding influence the fields of knowledge organization and information retrieval?
  • How is the legal framework surrounding search engines changing shape?
  • Is Google’s increased ubiquity affecting the production and dissemination of art and cultural practice?
  • What influence does the existing hegemony of a few large search engines exert on the traditional flow of knowledge and the diversity and accessibility of web content, and in what way might regulation be possible?
  • Considering developments in the fields of art and information architecture, how can we get to more sophisticated ways of interface design and the presentation of search results?
  • What alternative ways of search are visible on the software level, the network level and the user level that challenge the engine as the major search paradigm?

Conference themes

  • Critique of the Information Society
  • Digital Civil Rights and Media Literacy
  • Art and the Engine
  • Politics and Regulation
  • Interface Design and Data Presentation
  • Alternative Search
  • Project Showcase