Category Archives: Uncategorized

Dump 10 Facebook friends and get a free sandwich!

whopper sacrifice screenshot
Aggressive and creative marketing campaign by Burger King.

What would you do for a free Whopper? Now is the time to put your fair-weather Web friendships to the test. Install Whopper Sacrifice on your Facebook profile, and we’ll reward you with a free flame-broiled Whopper when you sacrifice 10 of your friends.

InsideFacebook reports that in one week, the app was used by 82,000 people to delete over 230,000 friendships on Facebook. Then Facebook placed some restrictions on the application and Burger King decided to conclude their campaign. In fact, Burger King got what it wanted: attention! In few days!
Creative use of social networking marketing!!!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Trento is the capital of Economics from 29 May to 1 June: two Nobel prizes and much more!

It is once again time for Trento Festival of Economics!!! The fourth edition of the Festival of Economics will animate the city of Trento from 29 May to 1 June.
Economists, legal experts, entrepreneurs, managers, politicians, sociologists and journalists will come together to publicly debate a central issue for our future: how to conciliate identity and globalisation in a time of crisis.

Economists of indisputable prestige coming from the best universities in the world will help us to clarify our ideas. They include two winners of the Nobel Prize for Economics. The first to participate in the Trento Festival will be George Akerlof, who will explain how important decisions are often inspired by “animal spirits” and how these instincts represent one of the causes of the current recession, with a sudden collapse in trust, a factor which governments will undoubtedly have to take into account. The second economist, James Heckman, will help us to understand how economics and psychology are the key to understanding our identity and personality.

It is possible to follow the Festival of Economics live on the Web TV!
And if you are coming to Trento you can do it with carpooling (search for a ride or offer a ride to Trento. At the OtherEconomy square there will be also a stand of Jungo!, a dynamic carpooling system that we are testing in Trento!
Ah, and I’m going to host someone I totally don’t know via couchsurfing! So, if you are coming to Trento for the festival contact me, I probably can host you as well!
I think carpooling and couchsurfing are two good examples of an economic system that is finally going to change … for the better! Good! I see you around in Trento!

In the following a copy and paste the program of the festival. But you can also download it as a single pdf file (program).

Continue reading

Iphone and dynamic carpooling

I got an Iphone recently so sometime I wonder through the tons of applications made for the iPhone and often they are very unexpected and crazy.

By the way, today my mind got the “Wow, the iphone is the perfect tool for dynamic carpooling, being GPS-enabled!” (dynamic carpooling being an old interest of mine)

Of course there are already some applications for iPhone for carpooling: Avego and Carticipate seem the most advanced. What is amazing of iphone for carpooling is that you don’t have to enter your common routes by hand but have your iphone do all the work for you.

The app works by tracking a user’s driving habits and then matching them up with people looking for rides. It’s kinda like Match.com for potential serial killers and would be victims. Using the GPS-enabled iPhone, the app will track common routes the user takes. The app then notifies the user of potential victims..er, riders. From there the app will suggest a place they can meet. It will also show a picture of the person so you use a little hot-or-not in your decision making. (from cleantechnica.com)

By the way, we are eventually starting with Jungo in Trento. Jungo is a way to encourage hitchhiking by giving members a card which gives additional security. At the moment it is not empowered by ICT devices such as Iphones but this might change in future. First membership cards are arriving and Friday we were interviewed by the RAI television, and we did some holloywoodesque let’s-mimic-how-jungo-works camera shots. Lots of fun being an actor!

Interestingly for 2 months, 6 volunteers (called Kerouac) have been testing dynamic ridesharing readiness here in Trentino, along the Trento center – Mesiano – Povo route. For the first 4 weeks they have been doing normal hitchhiking twice a day while for the second 4 weeks, after some advertisement about Jungo, they have been doing hitchhiking using the Jungo cards. Overall they collected 750 rides!
Interestingly their average waiting time (AWT) decreased. And interestingly as well, females have smaller AWT. Males moved from a AWT of 22 minutes during the first 4 weeks to 11.4 minutes while females moved from 6 minutes to 2.7 minutes! Well, 2.7 minutes is definitely much less time than waiting for the bus!!!

This difference of performances based on gender reminded me of some research about this I read time ago.
In Sharing Nicely: On shareable goods and the emergence of sharing as a modality of economic production (best paper I ever read by the way, and released under Creative Commons!), Yochai Benkler reports some research from the paper “Mating Habits of Slugs: Dynamic Carpool Formation in the I-95/I-395 Corridor of Northern Virginia” by Frank Spielberg & Phillip Shapiro (a paper I was not able to download because it’s behind a gated journal, can you help me?):

In a deviation from gender-neutral pickup practices, solo women will not usually enter a car with two men already in it. “Unrelated” slugs on a line, however, will match up, whether male or female, irrespective of the gender of the driver.
This underscores the fact that personal security fears may be a serious obstacle to carpooling with strangers.
The matching practices suggest that security is improved by combining more than one rider with each solo driver, where the riders themselves are not preorganized in groups. Each pair—driver plus each rider, and both riders vis-à-vis the driver—provides each individual with some security against an aggressive stranger. The importance of strength in numbers and lack of personal relationship is indicated by the fact that solo women will join two men in a car if the woman and man were both in line and no relationship between the two men is indicated.
Carpoolers on this model seem to assume a prevalence and distribution of aggressive proclivities in the population that places a low probability on two randomly associated individuals cooperating aggressively. Given such a model of the prevalence and distribution of aggressive tendencies, fully impersonal cooperation can then be seen as safer than partially impersonal cooperation, where some subset of participants have a preexisting relationship.

And on a similar line, I read this table from “Car pooling clubs: solution for the affiliation problem in traditional/dynamic ridesharing systems” by Gonçalo Correia, José Manuel Viegas which reports evidence from “Levin, et al. Measurement of ‘Psychological’ Factors and their role in Transportation behaviour” (another paper behind gated journal I need help with):

Research by Levin, et al [5] at the University of Iowa reached the conclusion that gender of the potential poolers was of little consequence when the other part was an acquaintance, but became of great consequence when the other part was a stranger, see Table 1.
As can be seen in the table, the desirability of ride sharing decreases with the increase of strangers in the pool, especially for females. These results suggest that gender and prior knowledge of the potential pooler combine to determine the desirability of the other person for ridesharing. Moreover, different combination of these factors can lead to very different results: when the driver is a Female there’s a great difference between transporting two acquaintances-one nonaquaintance (10.84 points) and three nonaquaintances (3.49 points).

 

Male Respondent

Female Respondent

Single Rider

 

 

Male acquaintance

10.06

12.50

Female acquaintance

10.47

12.32

Male nonaquaintances

7.00

3.29

Female nonaquaintances

9.50

6.53

Three Riders

 

 

Three acquaintances

10.76

12.15

Two nonacquaintances – one nonacquaintance

9.70

10.84

One nonacquaintance – two nonacquaintances

9.03

7.69

Three nonacquaintances

8.16

3.49

Table 1. Carpool Desirability (15 point scale) as a function of gender and Acquaintance-ship of Potential Ridesharers (Source: Levin, et al., 1976)

 

Finally, while browsing for these links I found a two-days workshop titled Real-Time Rides: A Smart Roadmap to Energy and Infrastructure Efficiency held very recently at MIT which contains most of the pointers to researchers and companies currently working on dynamic carpooling and the opportunities opened about it by new GPS-ready devices.

Your friends may depend on your genes.

From the “social network” page on Wikipedia:

Some researchers have suggested that human social networks may have a genetic basis.[15] Using a sample of twins from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, they found that in-degree (the number of times a person is named as a friend), transitivity (the probability that two friends are friends with one another), and betweenness centrality (the number of paths in the network that pass through a given person) are all significantly heritable. Existing models of network formation cannot account for this intrinsic node variation, so the researchers propose an alternative “Attract and Introduce” model that can explain heritability and many other features of human social networks.[16]

[15] # ^ “Genes and the Friends You Make”. Wall Street Journal. January 27, 2009. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123302040874118079.html.
[16] # ^ Fowler, J. H. (10 February 2009). “Model of Genetic Variation in Human Social Networks” (PDF). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106 (6): 1720–1724. doi:10.1073/pnas.0806746106. http://jhfowler.ucsd.edu/genes_and_social_networks.pdf

Designing Your Reputation System and Designing Social Interfaces

10 practical questions for designing a reputation system. This talk was (partially!) given at the 2008 IA Summit. By Bryce Glass on Slideshare

Designing Social Interfaces – workshop talk given at Web 2.0 Expo

Negativity: not shown, not present

From an old paper of mine, note the message by eBay founder.

In fact, Resnick and Zeckhauser (2002) consider two explanations related to the success of eBay’s feedback system:
(1) “The system may still work, even if it is unreliable or unsound, if its participants think it is working. (…) It is the perception of how the system operates, not the facts, that matters” and
(2) “Even though the system may not work well in the statistical tabulation sense, it may function successfully if it swiftly turns against undesirable sellers (…), and if it imposes costs for a seller to get established.”
They also argue that: “on the other hand, making dissatisfaction more visible might destroy people’s overall faith in eBay as a generally safe marketplace.”

This seems confirmed by a message posted on eBay by its founder in 1996:
“Most people are honest. And they mean well. Some people go out of their way to make things right. I’ve heard great stories about the honesty of people here. But some people are dishonest: or deceptive. This is true here, in the newsgroups, in the classifieds, and right next door. It’s a fact of life. But here, those people can’t hide. We’ll drive them away. Protect others from them. This grand hope depends on your active participation” (Omidyar, 1996).

On eBay, whose goal, after all, is to allow a large number of commercial transactions to happen, it seems that positive feelings and perceptions can create a successful and active community more than a sound Trust Metric and reputation system. This means that the fact that a Trust Metric or reputation system is proved to be attack resistant does not have
an immediate effect on how users perceive it and hence, on how this helps in keeping the community healthy and working.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Two talks by David Orban in Trento on April 8th: The Open Internet Of Things, and

The SoNet FBK research group is happy to invite you to two talks by David Orban on April 8th in Trento.
The first talk, “The Open Internet Of Things”, will be about OpenSpime. It will be interesting if you are interested in sensors, positioning devices and memory, social, Web 2.0-style services in the real world, green technology, tech applied to the environment, open hardware and software, communications protocols, and future in general.
The second talk, “Preparing Humanity For The Impact Of Accelerating Technological Change”, will talk about the Singularity University, a recent new initiative funded by Nasa, Google and more.
I’ll wait you on April 8th!

First talk: The Open Internet Of Things
8 April 2009 – at 10.00 – Conference Room – Fondazione Bruno Kessler – Povo (TN) (up in the hills, see the map)
If we want the the forthcoming Internet of Things to flourish, the distributed smart sensor networks which take the current infrastructures for granted and base their necessarily autonomous activities on massive data collection, then we have to adopt an open architecture. Only an interoperable approach to the design of the next generation of hardware and software systems is going to be able and leverage the dramatic effects, and express the value to human civilization that the network of tens, or thousands of billions of new objects, the spime network is going to shape. For more info see http://www.openspime.com

Second talk: Preparing Humanity For The Impact Of Accelerating Technological Change
8 April 2009 – at 15.00 – Conference Room – Fondazione Bruno Kessler – Trento (downtown, see the map)
The impact of advanced technologies on our societies is becoming more and more extreme, exposing new tensions in our models of human relationships, learning, and values in policies, politics, and business. While relinquishment has been recommended by some, it appears that the way ahead will be the use of more, not less technology, as billions of people aim to achieve a high quality of life for themselves, and their children. The Singularity University, recently formed on an open, international and interdisciplinary approach employs an advanced curriculum to analyze how the future leaders of enterprise, culture, and science can best prepare to face the serious challenges ahead.

About the speaker:
David Orban is an entrepreneur and visionary. In recognition of his lifetime contribution to exponentially advancing technologies, he has been honored with the position of Advisor and European Lead to the prestigious Singularity University.
He is a Founder and Chief Evangelist of WideTag, Inc., a high technology start-up company providing the infrastructure for an open Internet of Things. David cuts across the limits of deep specialization to contribute to the new renaissance. He explains, “My vision is at the crossroads of technology and society as defined by their co-evolution.” David Orban’s personal motto is, “What is the question I should be asking?” This concept is his vehicle to accelerating cycles of invention and innovation in order to build the new world ahead.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

One identity (system) to rule them all

Lots of competition and activities for becoming the defacto identity system for the future Web.

faebook connect
Facebook pushes Facebook connect

Google friends
Google pushes Google Friend Connect

data portability
While MySpace Embraces DataPortability, Partners With Yahoo, Ebay And Twitter.

one ring
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.

Flickr was a game but users drove it into a photo sharing site.

The typical example of a socio-technical system heavily influenced by its user (prosumer!) is Flickr. Maybe not too many people know that in the beginning Flickr was a Web-based game, called Game Neverending (GNE). Best summary of early Flickr history I found is in this interview.

The original interface of GNE (see below) was heavily based on Instant Messagging. You could drag game objects into an IM conversation and it would send to all the other members of the chat an image of the object.
THAT was the key feature! The creators of GNE thought “what if instead of game objects, you could drag and drop other digital objects into these conversations, like Word documents, or PDFs? Or maybe photos?”
So the first version of Flickr was just a stripped-down Game Neverending interface, with photos instead of game objects.

I think this is the perfect example of user-driven design. “I created a web game site –> users use it for sharing objects –> then I create a site for sharing photos.”

A screenshot of Game Neverending (from GNE Museum)
GNE flickr screenshot

And there was also a Social network explorer!

social network explorer

social network explorer

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Data mining for judging the values of employees and how to stop it

BusinessWeek publishes an interesting article on how data mining and social network analysys (SNA) are starting to be used by human resources department in order to automatically determine the value of each employee.

The strong-worded beginning (speaking about a social network graph) is:

Each circle represents an employee. Those who generate or pass along valuable information within the company are portrayed as large and dark-colored. And the others? “On a relative scale, they don’t add a hell of a lot,” says Elizabeth Charnock, chief executive of Cataphora, the Redwood City (Calif.) company that carried out the study for a client. The upshot for managers faced with a mandate to downsize: Small and pale circles might be a good place to start cutting.

Is there a way to stop this? I think the correct way is to inform employees precisely about:
* the information the tech tools they use (email, intranet, …) they use is generating about themselves and which information is stored and how
* the use the management can do and cannot do of this stored information (for example, if it can be used for anonymous statistical analysis of performance of tech tools).
* their right to ask the removal of any information about them from the logs (in Italy there is a precise law that gives you this right).

It is surely a tricky topic but the possibilities of control and tracing will only increase with time so it is important to start discussing it asap. What are your thoughts?