Participatory Censorship

Great success.

Don't let it be said that New Media is not able to be policed.

Two Million Dollar Baby Ransom - Exploiting New Media

I just came across a disgusting blog, asking its audience to donate 2 million dollars for living costs, or they will abort their unborn baby. It's outrageous on so many levels, from the "we don't want to give up our careers and university degrees" to the "we'll have to take it to disneyland" and the "adoption is just weird", the bloggers have perfectly designed the most evil, controversial blog they possibly could.

It's obviously a 'joke' - when you go to donate, the fund is called 'My baby's ransom'.

Noone will donate money, and I can garauntee you they don't care about that. I'm willing to bet they are just hoping that the media will pick up on this and bring more and more traffic to the site - increasing their revenue through Google Adsense.

This thing has been up for a day, and the blog already has over 200 comments. Which would indicate thousands and thousands of people have read it. In a day.

I am not providing a link because I don't think they need any more people giving them traffic and if you really want to find it, I'm sure you know how to use Google. If you do check it out, please 'flag' the blog. If you are as disgusted as I am, please go to this link and tell Google what you think of them making money off twomilliondollarbaby.

Click the link:
And here's my suggestion:

I will also link to a Youtube video of Phil DeFranco, who 'broke the story' and was the first commentor on the blog. Some are suspicious he created the blog.

Government's responses to open source

Government Departments taking on open source software has long been seen a great way to encourage and foster development in the local ‘indigenous’ IT industry (Kelly, 2008). Despite strong support for open source by all of the major parties in the lead up to the 2007 Federal election, (ITNews, 2007) few government departments have started using the software, which can be supported and serviced by locals who are not officially affiliated with the original designer of the product.

The Guide to Open Source Software for Australian Government Agencies - April 18, 2005, is a very thorough exploration of the potential uses and threats of open source software being used in Government departments. The document contains this list of current open source software being used:

Arjen Lentz, director of Open Source Industry Australia Limited (OSIA) says, “open source software in government procurement is an essential building block for Australia’s future ICT Industry” (qtd in ITNews, 2007). However, Government Departments still have concerns regarding the support, and the security of using open source software (Tung and Kotadia, 2008) as well as questions around the difficulty of making open source and Microsoft products interact and coexist (Tung, 2008).

Around the world, varying approaches have been made to Governmental uptake of open source software. Malaysia approached the idea with much enthusiasm, but like in other countries, the enthusiasm has since waned (Tung, 2008). Other countries such as South Africa and China are taking large steps to embrace open source technology also (Kelly, 2008). In China, Microsoft and Novell have come together to “build a bridge between Microsoft’s proprietary software and Novell programs based on the Linux operating system” (AFP, 2008). The seemingly unusual alliance was formed to meet the needs of clients looking to use Microsoft products in “heterogeneous environments” (AFP, 2008).

The Brazilian Government’s adoption of open source has largely been regarded as market leading, and it has been suggested they could be saving around 120 million dollars a year by using alternatives to Microsoft (Kingstone, 2005). There are several reasons behind Brazil’s strong support for open source:

• Microsoft products have traditionally been much more expensive (as a proportion of average income) in Brazil than in other countries (Assay, 2008).
• Brazil has a lasting disdain for American products, and will look to benefit their local industry ahead of American companies (Kingstone, 2005).
• There are also questions around the alleged corruption involved in the use of open source software and its servicing by local industry in Brazil (Byfield, 2007).

Given that the IT industry lends itself to outsourcing, the stimulus to local industry that Governmental adoption of open source technology promises, might not be so great. Regardless of the system used, companies will need some truly local support, but for serious issues of programming to fix system bugs or improve functionality, the work can still be done overseas.


References:

AFP. 2008. Microfost-Novell take open-source alliance to China. http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gCel5kFFvQfjpeAjpI9jRoT5cfNQ(accessed May 4, 2008).

Asay, M. 2008. Microsoft gouging Brazilians for 20 percent of income. Cnet. http://www.cnet.com/8301-13505_1-9934964-16.html(accessed May 4, 2008).

Byfield, B. 2007. Brazil’s FOSS utopia image at risk. Linux. http://www.linux.com/articles/59637. (accessed May 4, 2008).

Kelly, B. 2008. SA’s open source acceleration. MyBroadband News. http://mybroadband.co.za/news/Software/3690.html (accessed May 6, 2008).

Kingstone, S. 2005. Brazil adopts open-source software. BBC News. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4602325.stm. (accessed May 1, 2008).

ITNews. 2007. Major Aussie political parties back open source. http://www.itnews.com.au/News/65654,major-aussie-political-parties-back-open-source.aspx(accessed May 10, 2008).

Tung, L. 2008. Open source barred from Australian government. ZDNet Australia. http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Open-source-barred-from-Australian-government-/0,130061733,339287833,00.htm(accessed May 10, 2008).

Tung, L and Kotadia, M. 2008. Department of Defence: Gref Garr, CIO (part one). ZDNet Australia. http://www.zdnet.com.au/insight/soa/Department-of-Defence-Greg-Farr-CIO-part-one-/0,139023731,339288461,00.htm(accessed May 10, 2008).

Sunday Sermon: Saving the world is just too easy.

A common example given in marketing classes is of the origins of cake-mixes. These 'just add milk' concoctions were seen as simply too easy, and housewives felt guilty, as if it were cheating and were embarrassed to be seen using them. So the producers responded by making them less convenient. As a result, you now have to add eggs, as well as milk, to your cake mixes.

Why am I telling you this? Because I think the concept runs parallel to online philanthropic and charity-based initiatives that raise money for a cause, funded by the traffic you give to their advertisers. It is also a basic Web 2.0 concept that the more engaged a user is in a process, the more willing they will be to contribute to the cause. Once users have made some sort of investment - and in the case of charitable causes, establishing an emotional investment is paramount - the user will continue to engage with the process.

Different websites have taken different approaches to this. Websites such as Poverty.com aim to educate their audience into donations. In my opinion, this model serves no real distinct purpose. Existing charities such as World Vision, Oaktree, TEAR and Compassion already run their websites in a similar fashion and have a much more direct connection to where your money is going ie. your donations to poverty.com will end up going to a charity like these ones anyway.

Ripple.org is a very Web2.0 looking website, but definitely lacks user engagement. Users click on buttons to have a look at advertising, which in turn makes 'donations' to the host charities. Once again, the website's connection to helping those in need is quite indirect. Ripple does facilitate some sort of user involvement by encouraging users to make it their homepage (and making it a valid choice by enabling Google searches) and 'share' the website with their friends by adding the 'donation' buttons to their social networking profiles or blogs. It will be interesting to see the "final" result (if any) of Ripple's beta status.

You've probably guessed already from the banner on the side of this page, that I am an advocate of FreeRice.com. FreeFlour.com is another good website, with an almost identical appearance - however, it is just a little less tidy and lacks some of the functionality that I love about FreeRice. FreeRice however, is not perfect - while the website actively engages the user, educates the user and allows the user to share and interact with the content, it does not engage with the user strictly within the area it is operating. A better model, I think, would be one where rather than engaging the user in vocabulatory education (obviously I haven't been playing enough), the website would educate the user in areas that can more directly assist them in helping those in need.

I see a generic progression of users' engagement with a cause:

Engaging the audience is key. I don't feel like I'm accomplishing anything clicking on a Ripple Button, or reading about starving children on Poverty.com, but somehow, FreeRice gives me that extra little bit of engagement that makes me feel like I'm making a difference. Saving the world through Ripple is just too easy - it just doesn't feel right.

References:

Mullen, B. and Johnson, C. 1990. The Psychology of Consumer Behaviour: 96. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=--M82lcLDxoC&pg=PA96&lpg=PA96&dq=cake+egg+marketing+housewives&source=web&ots=oadzEamMty&sig=t4O5RfDfHSNqo5tzY3wqCKazsE8&hl=en(accessed 3 May, 2008).

Smith, P.R. and Taylor, J. 2004. Market Communications: An Integrated Approach: 11. http://books.google.com.au/booksid=rmKoO0U30x8C&pg=PA111&lpg=PA111&dq=cake+egg+marketing+housewives&source=web&ots=xENRaM-8qe&sig=lkfZdj_nlinXijknn0sfWZFZktg&hl=en (accessed 3 May, 2008).

Google Image search to get a whole lot more picturesque

I'm really looking forward to the outcome of this research into enabling users to search the Internet for images....using actual images, not "search terms".
For example, if I wanted to identify a famous painting I knew nothing about, I would upload my picture into the search engine, rather than try to explain the painting in key terms.

The next thing on my list for Google to invent is a similar search engine for music. I'd love to be able to hum something into the computer and Google to come up with suggestions as to what I'm humming. And it would also settle debates on, "you stole that song from _______", "your new song's such a rip off of _____". Maybe the Chili Peppers could use it.