ISP's partnering with advertisers, what are the issues?

A company called Phorm in alliance with several UK ISP's, has been put under scrutiny by the EU Information Society Commissoner over the legitimacy of tracking web users habits without their consent in order to tailor advertising.

It begs the question; how far are companies allowed to go in monitoring and accumulating user data in order to target users with tailored advertising. Also, to what degree should users be made aware and given choice?

The utilisation of users content and web habits in order to target advertising is nothing new:

1. Google's Gmail service made popular the tailoring of advertising based on customers email content, users must however grant permission for this to take place, by agreeing to the terms of use.

2. The use of third-party cookies by advertisers and associated websites is also nothing new, though legislation in the US, EU and elsewhere requires that users are made aware of what data is being sought and given the option to deny the cookie. This however, may be nothing other than a link to cookie policy on the page of websites. It doesnt necessarily require actively prompting users.

Pressure on ISP's to form partnership with such advertisers has been increasing as competition drives lower prices in the marketplace coupled with ISP's desire for maximum profitability. This is a legitimate economic activity in itself but conflicts with human values outside the economic sphere, values of choice, autonomy and privacy.

The issue here is about giving the consumers the necessary information and the choice of whether to opt into such a service. Not only (in my opinion) should users be alerted with information of which ISP's carry the service, but users should crucially be given a choice with each ISP ;of an opt in or opt out. This is a key point, because as more ISP's form such alliances and in rural areas where ISP's are limited; users may be left with little to no choice of whether to decide. Furthermore, as ISP's will argue that companies such as 'Phorm' subsidise ISP costs, scrutiny by telecom regulators will be crucial to ensure that the 'price difference' in opting out of tailered advertising is a fair reflection on the difference in ISP's profitiability. Again, the issue of choice crops up here as 'cost' may constrain consumer choice: Those of wealthier backgrounds will be able to choose where-as those of lesser financial circumstances may be constrained thus reinforcing stratification. Of course it is worth noting also, that how companies manage and utilise (for what purpose) user data is also of considerable concern here.

Finally, my last point brings us back to services like gmail. Should such companies like Gmail be additionally required to give users the choice of opting in to tailored advertising? as the same issue of choice becomes resonant here! Is this just a question of the need for 'media literacy' skills by adults and an ever younger online population? Ultimately, the issue is about enabling and increasing the capacity for action by individuals, not constraining it! Regulation that seeks to widen choice seems progress to me and this implies a role for governance and regulators as 'silent guardians' of the people! Agree?

For further details, see news article at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7542810.stm

Copyright © 2006-2009 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.

New research finds 'Soy' may halve sperm count, what are the possible implications?

New research published finds that even modest regular Soy consumption may half male sperm count. However, empirical evidence has yet to show any link between soy consumption and fertility rates. Thus, there has yet to be shown any negative impact on population as a result of widespread soy consumption. Specifically, research needs to be done into whether Asian men who eat significantly more soy based products are affected with higher infertility rates and whether population levels are affected.

This could become pivotal scientific research: firstly, because with widepread media coverage, it may harm the soy industry; curbing demand for soy and soy based products(though soy only reduces sperm count and does't cause infertility).

Secondly and more significantly, imagine the possibilities and implications of such research: For example, policies impacting developing countries could be influenced by such lines of research. Stabilising world population through favouring the production and distribution of soy products (or food stuffs with similar properties) could be envisioned by such policy makers for underdeveloped or developing countries. Are there other foods which adversely affect sperm count? Could such foods ethically be justified and promoted in developing countries where population growth is a problem? In otherwords, here is a clear example of research with unforeseen and possibly unenvisaged consequences. Can policy makers with an agenda remain uninfluenced when such knowledge comes their way? We are it seems, living in an increasingly complex and contingent 21st century, where the expanding 'production' of knowledge 'claims' requires evermore vigilance and cautiousness.

For a detailed news article, see:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7519459.stm



Copyright © 2006-2009 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.

Lidl calls Tesco product's 'Trash' in Ryanair style advertising blitz!

Over the weekend, Lidl 'Ireland' ramped up the ongoing 'battle of the supermarkets' with an explosive 'Ryanairesque' style advertising campaign entitled; "Don't spend your cash on trash", in direct response to Tesco's recent 'cash savers' campaign and promotions; which attempted to position Tesco products on a similar price footing to that of Lidl and Aldi. The campaign accuses Tesco of selling 'trash' food products, by likening the percentage of key ingredients of some Tesco products with that of Lidl. Lidl argument is that key ingredients such as pork content in sausage meat and fruit in Jams and conserves are noticably higher in Lidl products. Tesco had been attempted to compare 'like for like' its own product line in terms of price, with that of Lidl.
The question which needs to be asked is whether Lidl has severely overstepped the mark in terms of 'attention grabbing advertising' (pioneered in Ireland and elsewhere by 'Ryanair'), have standards in advertising been eroded? Furthermore, what are the implications and repercussions of calling food, 'Trash' being sold by Tesco and other supermarkets?

Certainly, Tesco can counter that regardless of the meat content in such products, they remain 'food' and not 'trash'. Furthermore, in many areas where Lidl and Aldi are not available, shoppers who can only afford to purchase Tesco 'cash saver' items, shouldn't be made to feel that they are buying 'trash' because they cannot afford sausage rolls that are 15% percent higher in meat content than that of similar products. (It is worth noting that even the 27% pork content in Lidl sausage rolls seems extremely low in anycase!) In addition, there is a noticable difference between meat which has (for example) been labeled 80% meat content with that being labeled 80% 'lean' meat content. In otherwords, from my experience; 'meat' can be anything from cartilage, grissle and tissue to animal fat. Thus, there is a separate yet related issue of the 'purity' of the ingredients used. Finally, by focusing on just one ingredient of a product and listing it as superior because of a higher percentage; Lidl is ignoring all other ingredients of a product such as the percentage and kinds of preservatives and flavour enhancers used etc.

Thus, the argument I am making is that Lidl's advertising campaign is crude, possibly disingenous and downright offensive to Tesco, its producers and the people who have no choice but to purchase them! What I would like to see is a supermarket war which focuses on the quality and 'goodness' of the products in their totality rather than on one key ingredient. Even then, I object to food being labeled 'trash' on the grounds of semantics, even though I recognise that some 'value' products are limited in terms of 'purity' and 'nutritional content'. Ultimately, do supermarkets really need to stoop to this level? Will this open the floodgates to supermarkets and companies accusing rivals of selling trash? Who knows, but the next 6 months may be an interesting time in the grocery retail sector if Lidl's campaign is anything to go by!

Copyright © 2006-2009 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.

Breakthrough in creating cheap hyrogen using solar cell technology

See full article:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/how-to-turn-water-into-rocket-fuel-ndash-scientists-unlock-power-of-the-sun-882613.html

The technology crucially relies on the discovery of a catalyst which speeds up and makes more efficent the conversion of water to hydrogen from electricity. All thats needed now is the maturation of hygrogen fuel cell technology.

Whats promising about this new breakthrough technology is that it bypasses the need for storage of hydrogen, which has been a problematic and inefficent affair thus far.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7536421.stm

UK deluded over carbon emissions

The UK has for many years prided itself on its progressive policies and economic climate which has been conducive to carbon emissions cuts. However 2 recent reports have highlighted how such claims are based on restrictive calculations and exclude some of the largest culprits of carbon emissions, namely Aviation and shipping.

In addition, the manufacturing sector in many western countries has declined in favour of importing from low-cost countries and thus carbon emissions arrising from such sectors has been 'exported'. At the same time there has been rising levels of consumption with shorter life cycle of products which have increasingly been imported. Because this increasing proportion of imported goods is not subject to carbon emissions calculations by the importer, WWF and others maintain that the present means for calculating a countries carbon emissions is disingenuous.

Overall it means countries such as the UK , who claim to have made significant progress since Kyoto have made nowhere near the total emissions reductions they claim. The UK only in March had reported a 2% reduction on the previous year, on track to meet its 12.5% reduction by 2012 on 1990 levels. It has been suggested that emissions should be calculated for goods based on the country of consumption rather than production and this would in many ways turn carbon emissions calculations on its head. Such thinking certainly have implications for any post-kyoto deal and could improve the situation for developing countries in terms of their responsibility for carbon emissions.

For further details;

Thursday, July 31, 2008

China using advanced technology to fend off rain at Olympics!

An excellent article is found on this at newsweek:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/149000

From an environmental standpoint, this idea is appalling!
From a common-sense perspective this idea is bonkers. From a practical standpoint, the idea is unproven and from an overall perspective, this idea is ridiculous! FACT (and not in the chuck Norris sense)

Online community 'concocts' neighbourhood eatery

See the Washington Times article for details:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/26/AR2008072601978.html?hpid=topnews

I'm particularily interested in this venture because of the grassroots nature of organisation and the role of ICT's (through the online community etc.) in bringing this venture to fruition. The Washington Times operationalises the concept of 'crowdsourcing' in describing the phenomenon of ideas and plans being brought to fruition via outsourcing to interested members with specialised expertise (in many cases assisted through information communication technologies), drawing comparison with the principles of the open-source movement. It will in many ways be a novel approach to planning an establishment . Whether the establishment becomes a success (thus living up to the hopes and aspirations of its community of organisers) will be crucial to similar future projects.

Finally, a few observations on the venture:

- Large community input into the project inevidably means that it will become a rather complex venture; in the sense that a raft of ideas and expection of their implementation will be forthcoming. Whether the project can facilitate and appease the input of its members and go on to efficently manage this complexity has yet to be shown.
-As it's become a community venture, the design of the cafe/eatery will most likely have to accomodate its community by adhering to principles of an effective 'Third Place'. Whether this conflicts with this establishment as a business venture and its desired profitability will certainly be of utmost importance.
-Once the establishment launches, It will be interesting to see how ICT's (such as the existing online community aspect) facilitate's its perpetuation as a crowd-sourced project. For example could a service like LastFM be utilised in providing music which represents the members of the venture etc. How will ICT's faciliate communication and co-ordination with local producers such as the 'Artisans' and 'Organic Farmers'. Can online web 2.0 technologies be effectively utilised in the organising and time-tabling of events etc.

Copyright © 2006-2009 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.

The robot that wants to be loved..

Im sorry, but what a ridiculous idea both in terms of its creators and its intended audience. A robot that mimics human emotions yet does not possess them.

Full details at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7532195.stm

Is this reification gone mad and is there more of this to come?

A machine is a machine and life is life, why do we wish to blur the lines and atoken machines with qualities they do not possess? I certainly would like to see carefully anchored research which finds some real value in pursuing this expensive use of time, money, people and resources!

Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Cuil, the verdict

Having tryed out the well hyped new search engine 'Cuil', I have a few observations I'd like to share:
-The site has got a raft of publicity in the past few days and expectations have been placed on the success of its searches. Such publicity has inevidably meant that 'innovaters' may be inclined to try out the site.
- My concern is that after using the site, I've found it to be slow and its searches to be less accurate than google.
-I must admit to liking the interface and thumbnail style views of results, but its results lack a number of features which I've come to heavily rely on with google: The prominent example being the suggestion of spelling corrections on search terms. I've also come to use cached pages on occasion which are noticably absent.
- All in all, I've no doubt that Cuil will in time iron out many of its flaws but the publicity machine maybe long gone by then and I wonder why now was chosen as its 'official' launch. It seems an extremely ill advised move in hindsight. Naming the site an explicit 'beta' may have alerted users to the early stages of the project.

Friday, July 25, 2008

Mobiles increase cancer risk particularly brain tumors?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7523109.stm

Director of leading US cancer institute warned of increased risk of cancer associated with mobile phone use citing a correlation between recent studies.

Thursday, July 24, 2008

Irelands measure of well being!

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2008/0724/1216741024395.html

Excellent sumation of a recent NCC report on economic success and wellbeing. I particularly am pleased with the use of 'systems' discourse through the article. It is worth noting though that the author distinquishes between 'objective' measures of well being versus 'subjective'. I personally believe the use of the term 'objective' is downright foolish and misapplied. A more appropriate word would be 'institutionally accepted' or 'established norm' etc. I believe (as do many others) that measures of quality of life can be non other than subjective, abeit common subjective at best etc. It's the use of such terms as objective which reproduces widespread belief in 'objective' 'realist' ascertains about QoL.

Copyright © 2006-2009 Shane McLoughlin. This article may not be resold or redistributed without prior written permission.

France ends ban on 35 hour work week

http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0724/france.html

I'm saddened by this move, I've always thought one of frances great strenghts was its emphasis on quality of life. I think this is in many ways a step backwards though France are been squeezed by international economic norms.

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

Great article on health and nutrition

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/healthy-living/use-your-noodle-the-real-chinese-diet-is-so-healthy-it-could-solve-the-wests-obesity-crisis-873651.html

Detailed analysis of western versus chinese diet!

Heating milk makes it tolerable for allegic children

http://uk.reuters.com/article/healthNewsMolt/idUKCOL16767520080721

Interesting article because it seems to go against the belief of the 'raw milk co-ops in the states and in parts of europe who argue unpasterised milk can be tolerated better by those allergic to milk products