skeptical to say the least

I like Google's products and services. I think they're useful and intuitive. I also realize that they're all ultimately tied to the "mother ship" in one way or another. Whether it be for reporting usage statistics for "product improvement" or if it's a web app which is directly hosted by them or something in between like Picasa which is on YOUR computer and manages YOUR pictures, but still logs on to Google via your Google account for enhanced services.

It all seems fairly innocuous, but if you stop to think (and read the EULA) about what you are giving Google access to, you'll realize that your email, (gmail) pictures, (picasa & email) videos, (youtube) chats, (google chat & AIM) voice conversations (google talk) and may other things are all archived and accessible. Even if you opt to keep your profile information private, (or rather non-public) Google and possibly partner companies still have access to it. The recent release of Google Dashboard is an attempt at transparency, but we all know that he who controls the information can also be selective in its disclosure. READ THIS

I guess what a lot of this boils down to is what we're comfortable with being "out there" and how much we're willing to make known about ourselves.

= BEWARE!

Here's where I'm going with this ramble...

The new Google Chrome OS is a new window manager running on a Linux Kernel which basically runs the Chrome browser. This is Google's idea of what an operating system should be. Their video describing the reasons behind it's development even state that. In the video, they say "if you're like me, you spend 95% of your time in your browser" (on the internet) so why not just eliminate everything else? On the surface, it seems like a good idea especially since netbooks are becoming so popular. Why not just make everything a 'net client? Google Chrome OS aims to do just that and make everything we do part of "the cloud" on the internet. People are only fooling themselves if they feel secure in doing this.

By doing everything via 'net app (internet application) you no longer have to worry about losing your data with a hard drive or computer crash. It's always available online from any computer with internet access.

No more massive hard drives with tons of storage for all of your music, pictures, videos, personal documents, etc. clogging up your system and slowing it down. Also, no security patches to be regularly installed because it's just a browser. Nothing else to be hacked right? Wrong.

What about the systems that store all of the data that everyone uses online. That's still online ALL THE TIME and how can you be sure that it's protected from intruders? Who's to say that you're not trusting all of your online life TO the intruders? Don't be so naive as to think that the password to your Google Accounts makes all of the information contained therein YOURS!

It is entirely possible based on profile information, (address, phone #s, etc) blogs, pictures, (picasa facial recognition) geotags, GPS, and many other "useful" tools for the keeper of all of this information to develop a full profile of you to be used however they see fit.

When I did intelligence in the Army, we used psychological profiles based on MUCH less information than we give to our online personas. As much as I hate to sound like one of those loony conspiracy theorists, this information could be used for different types of profiling which leads down a very slippery slope.

Think that idea is a stretch? It's already being done. It's called targeted advertising and is the basis for Google's Adsense and Adwords.

The Dumbest Generation

Recently, I posted some thoughts on inner conflicts I deal with regarding our overdependence on technology.

From the Dumbestgeneration.com website:

"The dawn of the digital age once aroused our hopes: the Internet, e-mail, blogs, and interactive and ultra-realistic video games promised to yield a generation of sharper, more aware, and intellectually sophisticated children. The terms “information superhighway” and “knowledge economy” entered the lexicon, and we assumed that teens would use their know-how and understanding of technology to form the vanguard of this new, hyper-informed era.

That was the promise. But the enlightenment didn’t happen.

The technology that was supposed to make young adults more astute, diversify their tastes, and improve their minds had the opposite effect.

According to recent reports from government agencies, foundations, survey firms, and scholarly institutions, most young people in the United States neither read literature (or fully know how), work reliably (just ask employers), visit cultural institutions (of any sort), nor vote (most can’t even understand a simple ballot). They cannot explain basic scientific methods, recount foundations of American history, or name any of their local political representatives. What do they happen to excel at is – each other. They spend unbelievable amounts of time electronically passing stories, pictures, tunes, and texts back and forth, savoring the thrill of peer attention and dwelling in a world of puerile banter and coarse images."

A few days ago, I posted a Twitter and Facebook update stating that I was "pondering the decline of intellectual curiosity in Western Civilization."
That day, I was thinking about how many issues we face in society could be related to that topic.
Appropriately enough, a friend of mine actually replied to this by saying, "Dude....you are seriously too deep. Are you a half empty or half full fella? Have faith in your fellow man:-)"

A few other replies were as follows:
- "you're wasting your time man, westerners are too indifferent..."
- "We're much better off when society watches the boob tube 5+ hours a day, don't you think?"
- "really? Why? Oh who cares anyway..."

For the last one, I really liked the ignorance and apathy reference.
A lot more on this subject is bouncing around inside my head, but it probably won't come out coherently and I'm out of time for blogging today...

Wisdom though the ages...

thoughts...

Sometimes I struggle with some things that I do in society. I work in the telecommunications industry and help to facilitate and propagate new technologies that make the world more and better connected. That has it's good and bad sides.
For one, I love technology. I play with it at home for fun and feel VERY fortunate to have a job that allows me to earn a living in something that I enjoy.
Another love of mine as most people know, is outdoor activities and in particular, adventure racing. These two interests of mine are very much at odds with each other and reconciling the nature of each in my life and mind is sometimes confusing.
Allow me to backtrack a little.
After leaving high-school, I joined the Army and did Satellite communications and Intelligence Analysis. This was not really that taxing mentally, but often, it was physically demanding being part of a rapid deployment airborne unit at Ft. Bragg. Basically, I was physically challenged, but not mentally.












Upon my honorable discharge and leaving the pride of serving my country behind me, I made the transition to a civilian job working with IBM Global Services in Tampa Florida. This job was the complete opposite of my previous life with the Army in the sense that it was mentally demanding, but offered no physical challenge. As is the case with many people in the corporate world, I needed both types of stimulus. Interestingly enough, Ted Kaczynski touched on this very thing in his "manifesto" and the effects of the industrial revolution on society. If you've never read it, please take the time to do so with an open mind and think about some of the implications of technology on our daily lives. (another similar and fascinating article here)
Back to the present.
One thing that technology does is the enablement of more multi-tasking (based on one's capacity for such) due to ever increasing computing power. This multi-tasking in the networking arena allows for more and faster communications via different mediums. The very definition of communication is the imparting or interchange of thoughts, opinions, or information by speech, writing, or signs. (Dictionary.com) Now that we're able to exchange thoughts and ideas instantaneously with anyone and everyone that wants to know, how much substantially relevant info is being communicated. Obviously the answer to that subjective question depends on the individual perspective, but I feel that the more access we have to entertainment and each other, the less originality there seems to be.
This leads me to wonder just how much ease of information access or communication is necessary.
This is also one of the conflicts that I see in my own life.
Yes, I twitter. I'm on Facebook and MySpace, and obviously, I blog. I love technology and I support my family through the use and furtherment of technology, but electronic communication is (IMO) impersonal and requires less human interaction. Of course face to face communication isn't always geographically possible, but those people who are regionally capable, still lean on electronic means of communicating due to convenience.
The conveniences that technology has created for us has led to more sedentary lifestyles for many. A sedentary lifestyle doesn't fit with my idea of "living." To me, there's a big difference between existing and actually living.
When I'm trail running or mountain biking, I can be alone with my thoughts while being physically challenged. During this time, I am being myself without feeling the need to check or update my electronic "status" with the world.
Don't get me wrong. Communication is essential and I feel that EFFECTIVE communication is falling by the wayside for many reasons. Ignorance and apathy to name a couple.
Perhaps if we as a society had less convenience, we might be better communicators. If we were forced to actually FACE those with whom we wished or needed to communicate with, there might be more empathy and understanding amongst our fellow humans.
Since I'm thinking out loud, I guess it all boils down to a matter of personal choice. This is a problem though because when given the chance, most people with choose the path of least resistance or perceived greatest pleasure instead of the road less traveled.







Are you making the most of life or are you letting life make the most of you before it uses you up and discards you?

On Giving

The following excerpt is from The Prophet by Kahlil Gibran. It's one of my favorite chapters and summarizes my feelings on giving. Much of this book has guided my thoughts and feelings on a few different issues in life and I always enjoy re-reading it because I pull something new from it each time.

Then said a rich man, "Speak to us of Giving."

And he answered:

You give but little when you give of your possessions.

It is when you give of yourself that you truly give.

For what are your possessions but things you keep and guard for fear you may need them tomorrow?

And tomorrow, what shall tomorrow bring to the overprudent dog burying bones in the trackless sand as he follows the pilgrims to the holy city?

And what is fear of need but need itself?

Is not dread of thirst when your well is full, thirst that is unquenchable?

There are those who give little of the much which they have - and they give it for recognition and their hidden desire makes their gifts unwholesome.

And there are those who have little and give it all.

These are the believers in life and the bounty of life, and their coffer is never empty.

There are those who give with joy, and that joy is their reward.

And there are those who give with pain, and that pain is their baptism.

And there are those who give and know not pain in giving, nor do they seek joy, nor give with mindfulness of virtue;

They give as in yonder valley the myrtle breathes its fragrance into space.

Through the hands of such as these God speaks, and from behind their eyes He smiles upon the earth.

It is well to give when asked, but it is better to give unasked, through understanding;

And to the open-handed the search for one who shall receive is joy greater than giving

And is there aught you would withhold?

All you have shall some day be given;

Therefore give now, that the season of giving may be yours and not your inheritors'.

You often say, "I would give, but only to the deserving."

The trees in your orchard say not so, nor the flocks in your pasture.

They give that they may live, for to withhold is to perish.

Surely he who is worthy to receive his days and his nights is worthy of all else from you.

And he who has deserved to drink from the ocean of life deserves to fill his cup from your little stream.

And what desert greater shall there be than that which lies in the courage and the confidence, nay the charity, of receiving?

And who are you that men should rend their bosom and unveil their pride, that you may see their worth naked and their pride unabashed?

See first that you yourself deserve to be a giver, and an instrument of giving.

For in truth it is life that gives unto life - while you, who deem yourself a giver, are but a witness.

And you receivers - and you are all receivers - assume no weight of gratitude, lest you lay a yoke upon yourself and upon him who gives.

Rather rise together with the giver on his gifts as on wings;

For to be overmindful of your debt, is to doubt his generosity who has the free-hearted earth for mother, and God for father. - Kahlil Gibran

Michael Parkes

I'm not much of an art lover or critic, but I love this guy's work. I own the one titled Cargoyles. To see more, check out his site. http://www.theworldofmichaelparkes.com/html/artists.asp