Tuesday, July 21, 2009

A Different Kind of "Wardrobe Malfunction"

Any list of most influential books of the 20th century must include George Orwell's 1984. And the world that is described -- with oversight of private lives, double-speak, and torture -- is one that seems, given the modern world, to be coming closer and closer.

So it not surprising that Amazon, which is trying to convert readers from paper-and-binding physical books to its new Kindle e-book reader, would want to offer the classic work. In keeping with the Brave New World of Web 2.0, Amazon allows alleged copyright holders to essentially self-publish, by uploading works to its Kindle site, to then be purchased by Kindle owners.(*)

(*-The economics of Kindle publishing are interesting, and worth further exploration: apparently Amazon claims 70% of revenue from newspaper sales, and a right to further distribution. Nonetheless newspapers are lining up to be part of this "new revenue stream" despite getting the short end of the proverbial stick. Well, if there's one thing that the last 10 years have proven, it's that newspapers can adapt to a post-local-monopolistic world. Oh wait.)

But self-publishing(**) carries its own risks, including the possibility that a judgment-proof entity can upload content for distribution that it does not actually own. That's exactly what apparently happened when MobileReference, which is owned by an entity called SoundTells, uploaded its version of 1984 and Orwell's "Animal Farm"; unfortunately for Amazon, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, not MobileReference, owns the American rights to both Orwellian works.

(**-Amazon also allows its Kindle owners to effectively "self-publish" but sending themselves via email a text that is then converted to a Kindle-friendly-format. Undoubtedly some of these conversion are of text for which the Kindle user in question does not have proper rights. Amazon's exposure there, however, is not certain.)

What happened next re-defined the oft misused concept of irony: Amazon removed the illicit copies of 1984 from its Kindle storefront, which made sense because Amazon was at risk for copyright infringement damages. But Amazon didn't stop there. It also took the unprecedented step of deleting copies of the books from individual Kindles. Poof! (***)

(***- Amazon did have the common sense to refund its customer's purchases. It should also be noted that even under the terms of its license agreement with its Kindle customers, Amazon did not have the right to delete material because it granted to its customers the right to a "permanent copy of the applicable digital content.")

There is no clear analogy in the 'old-fashioned' world to what Amazon did. If a book seller went to your house to reclaim a illicit copy of a physical book, you would have an action for (among other things) trespass. Even recalls in the case of faulty products depend on customer's voluntarily returning the goods in question to the manufacturer (or retailer) for a new product or refund.(****)

(****-"Voluntary" recalls refer to the voluntary action by the good manufacturer, not the end-user.)

Even given the apparent violation of the terms of its own (self-serving) license agreement(*****), Amazon will probably not face extensive litigation risk; it probably sold very few copies of the illicit texts through MobileReference, and Houghton Mifflin may not pursue the matter.

(*****-In fairness, most 'shrink-wrap' license agreements are self-serving; courts generally have allowed them to be enforced despite the fact that few, if any, users actually read them. Instead, a click-through "I Agree" page is usually binding.)

But the incident does create a business problem for Amazon: one of the the good features about the Kindle is that you keep a record of your reading on Amazon's computers (in case you delete -- either accidentally or otherwise (i.e., for memory space reasons)). But the ability of a corporation to delete your personal reading material -- for copyright or other reasons -- brings to mind its own version of "Big Brother."

It also reminds one of the infamous Justin Timberlake/Janet Jackson "wardrobe malfunction" incident in 2004 at the Super Bowl. At the time, TiVo's flacks rushed out with the statement that the incident was the "most watched" event in the history of the recording device; but in a case of shooting-oneself-in-the-foot, that very metric raised the question of how TiVo's management knew that fact. And what else did they know about the viewing habits of their customers?

A few days later, a more-chagrined TiVo had to reassure its customers that the individual information of viewing habits were not being monitored; but the spectre of such monitoring -- and what it means for privacy -- still lingers in the air five years later.

Amazon can't make such an 'aggregation' claim; its records indicate clearly who bought what reading material, and what material is actively on the particular Kindle device.

It's simply, Jeff Bezos (and Jonathan Zittrain) might say, a question of "trust."

Wednesday, June 24, 2009

Synethesia Part II

Coincidentally, a new video appeared on the motiongrapher site today, from Terri Timely (a directing duo made up of Ian Kibbey and Corey Creasey), depicting the effects of synethesia on two brothers.

Separated at Birth?








MLB Umpire Joe West and ND Football Coach Charlie Weis

If You Are In NYC Tomorrow...
















Stop by the Conde Nast Building at 4 Times Square from 6pm to 8pm on Thursday, June 25th. Friend of AP Erik Rosen has put together an exhibit of art inspired by synethesia, or the visualization of sound as color. He developed the idea while recovering from a stem cell transplant.

The above depicts "(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones. He also has pieces inspired by Bruce Springsteen, the Beatles, and Bob Dylan.

The exhibit will be open through July 20th.






"Thunder Road"

Monday, June 15, 2009

Wired for War


















"Wired for War", by P.W. Singer, is a far broader book that the title indicates (although the subtitle -- The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century does give some indication.) Rather than limit his inquiry into the the current state of the robotics world, Singer covers the entire gamut of how wars will be fought in the next century.

But he does spend some (first) exploring the current state of the world. He identifies two current robots: PackBot, built by iRobot; and Talon and its "pissed-off big brother" SWORDS (Special Weapons Observation Reconnaissance Detection System) built by Foster-Miller.

Singer considers himself a child of pop culture, and references to film, books, and even video games are littered throughout the text. Some of the references are direct, as when he wonders whether Star War's C-3PO will be the future shape of robots; others are more obscure. But Singer is at his best when he can merge the influence of science fiction -- from Asimov to the original Star Trek; from James Cameron (director of Terminator) to J.K. Rowling (the 'invisability cloak' described in Harry Potter is inspiring scientists today -- to show how culture influences scientists and their expectations of and for robotics.

Singer also wonders and writes about the role that robots will play in the warrior culture. Separation of the warrior from his opponent has long been a theme of technologic advance (after all, even Japanese samurai eventually acknowledged that their swords were no match for a peasant with a gun). But Singer notes that the very fact of "going to war" -- heading off to a distant place where the laws of normal society are suspended -- no longer applies when a Predator drone can be flown over Afghanistan by an operator who can finish his mission and be home in time for dinner.

The book also raises the topic related to robotics: artificial intelligence. As systems become more and more sophisticated, human oversight becomes an temporal impediment to resolving a conflict successfully. In other words, if machines are waiting for human approval of a pre-emptive attack, the opportunity will be lost, and the machine (and perhaps one or more humans) will suffer as the result. But the alternative: humans ceding control to machines without "human fail-safe" is a topic that, as Singer records, is not one very many scientists working in the field wish to discuss.

Singer does a admirable job of identifying issues that the new technology will raise. While he doesn't try to predict outcomes, he also points to a future that will continue to challenge us. The book is well-worth reading for those who are looking to quickly grasp a state of the robotics/AI world, as it applies to war-making. And in a post-9/11 environment, defense budgets and political resistance to casualties means that more, not less, resources will be available for placing machines "in harm's way."