folksonomy

Volksonomy, and the Democratisation of Surveillance

With the advent of Flickr (and video equivalents like YouTube), the online world is filled with visual information captured from the real world. Meta-information, such as date and time, shutter speed, exposure etc. is stored with each capture. In the future, this meta-information is likely to grow to include the photographer (verified via biometric information), the location (via GPS), the orientation (via gyroscopic devices). The Flickr of the future will be able to stitch together virtual representations of the real world. The most popular tourist attractions will be viewable from all angles, at all times of day or night, at all times of the year, over many years.

Many of us are willing contributors to Flickr's public record of the world, with little regard for privacy. For example, let's say I capture a street scene with my cameraphone. Later my photo is found to contain something of significance. People pay good money for that sort of thing. What would happen if governments started incentivising us to submit and collectively identify images and their contents (volksonomy!). A small tax break later and there you have it: the democratisation of surveillance!

Update: I suppose a scheme like this is a step in that direction (thanks for the link Stuart!).

Kitten War

Those of you who suffer my posts regularly will know I have a strange predeliction for "tagging" things. I'm not referring to the act of creating graffiti, but rather folksonomy. Never mind the thoery now, this is a site for everyone! So, drumroll please... The award for the best practical application of folksonomy goes to... Kitten War, may the cutest kitten win!

Found via the excellent The Librarian in Black.

More folksonomy

Frustrated by your goals? Take them public with 43things. 43things asks, "What do you want to do with your life?", and you reply "go to Barcelona", "drink more beer", or perhaps "swim with sharks".

Much like Flickr, 43things knows what's hot. While Flickr tracks the most popular tags, 43things tracks the "zeitgeist", that is, the day's most popular goals. You may not be surprised by what you find here—"lose weight" is permanently at number one—but it's interesting all the same.

Perhaps more interesting is the ability to track the zeitgeist by city. Compare the goals of Wellingtonians with the goals of Londoners. OK, so a small sample size means a large margin of error, but the idea is there for all to see. Fascinating.

In setting out to achieve a goal it's nice to be able to draw on other people's experience and advice. 86 people have the desire to get a PhD. Five out of six people who have achieved this goal thought it was "worth doing". One achiever is even willing to help! Can one person have enough time to help 86 people with their PhDs? No matter, Google's ad-sense offers links to "Easy American Degrees".

I've signed up: here I am. Those of you who share my excitement about Flickr will notice something very cool. My 43things page shows my most recent Flickr photos. For someone who can still remember the days when the various shards of Microsoft Office didn't even share the same address book, this is very, very nice.

Folksonomy

Once upon a time on the Internet, you typed a phrase into a search engine: "banana guard" for example. If the creators of the banana guard thought like you, and also used the phrase "banana guard" to describe their site (maybe in the page's meta tags) then a match was made, and you got the page you wanted. Easy.

Later, as the web became a means to make money, nasty people started doing all sorts of nefarious things to make you visit their site. These nefarious things included using misleading terms to describe their site. You might enter "banana guard" into a search engine and find yourself redirected to something far more unsavoury. You could no longer trust a site's creator to describe it accurately.

What to do? Search engines started to employ people to think up ways of describing web sites. It was no longer entirely up to a site's creator to match their site with your search terms. Now it was up to the employees of the search engines. You would find your "banana guard" so long as the search engine employees thought like you. In the increasingly competitive world of search engines, that mattered. However, as the Internet got bigger and bigger the search engines became victims of their own success. If you look at the footer of the Google home page you'll see what I mean. How long do you think it would take you to read and categorise 8 billion web pages?

Search engines got cleverer. They got automatic. They used algorithms which took into account the number of hyperlinks to and from a site. They assumed that if I created a link to your site then I must have felt your site had something of value to offer. Now, if you typed in "banana guard", you would get the banana guard site that the most people had linked to; most likely the one true source of banana guards!

A triumph of objectivity over subjectivity? Perhaps, but hey, isn't it really easy to create a hyperlink? Yes, even automatically. Sure enough, comment spam was born. You should see the number of comments posted automatically (i.e. by a "robot") to AtomicMaestro that link to sites peddling various "medications". The automatic search engines can't tell the difference between highly relevant links submitted by loyal human readers, and the irrelevant links submitted by spamming robots.

I just want my banana guard!

Now, in the wonderfully evolving world of the Internet, a new approach to information management is emerging. I like it. A little computing power, a lot of human input, and all the advantages of scale. Et voila. Folksonomy.

For nifty examples of folksonomy in practice, check out:

Syndicate content