Invisible Yet Necessary

My position paper “Public policy impact on interaction design in networked environments” has been accepted for the workshop organized by the SIGCHI US Public Policy Committee (SIGCHI is the Computer- Human Interaction special interest group (SIGCHI) of the ACM). I need to make some changes to the paper but it basically talks about the possible changes on the Internet infrastructure that could affect the end user experience.

Some of the topics worth discussing:

• Network neutrality (see previous post)
• How network neutrality (or the lack of it) would impact user experience with his activities online
• the opportunity to give more information about the network connection and more control to the user
• Do we need new laws and what should these laws say?

There has been a lot of talk about the state and the future of broadband Internet lately. Since I am looking into the design of ubiquitous systems for my research and the legal perspective, I looked at the concept of network neutrality and its possible impact on wireless network infrastructure design. This year, the US Congress will probably enact legislation about network neutrality that could change the way Internet is, and not just in the US. Because of that, there has been a lot of activity and discussion about what network neutrality should be and how it should be protected.
But first, what is network neutrality?

[Network neutrality] suggests that (1) to maximize human welfare, information networks ought be as neutral as possible between various uses or applications, and (2) if necessary, government ought to intervene to promote or preserve the neutrality of the network. (Wikipedia)

Network neutrality basically means that whatever content you want to transmit over the network, this content will be treated in the same way as any other content by the network infrastructure. The Internet was built on a the principle of best effort delivery, which means it can guarantee you that it will deliver your content but it will do its best.

Best-effort delivery describes a network service in which the network does not provide any special features that recover lost or corrupted packets. These services are instead provided by end systems (Linktionary)

The 2 concepts of network neutrality and best efforts are usually associated to a third concept: common carrier.

A common carrier is an organization that transports a product or service using its facilities, or those of other carriers, and offers its services to the general public. (Wikipedia)

The best example of common carrier are post offices. A post office usually pick up and deliver letters and packages regardless of their content (unless the content is deemed dangerous to transport).

When Internet took off, telephone companies were considered common carriers and will transport the traffic from and to their clients to the Internet Service Provider (ISP) that the client has chosen.

When dial-up was still prevalent:

1. The phone companies like BellSouth, Qwest or Verizon would provide the phone line (the “pipes”)
2. ISP like Earthlink or AOL will provide the Internet service on top of the phone line.

But with broadband technologies like DSL, phone companies could better control both the pipes and the service .

And this is where the problem lies.

More

Today is World Usability Day. So we should think harder today (and every other day too) on how we can make things, systems, services … more useful and enjoyable to use.
For my part, I am:

• researching on how to make wireless networking more easy and natural to use
• searching and accessing information more efficient (especially multimedia)

What are you doing?

Wired has 2 stories about RFID this week.
The first one “RFID: To Tag or Not to Tag ” is a good explanation of what RFID is and what it can be used for.

The second one is about e-Plate, a British project to use active RFID tag to track cars.

The British government is preparing to test new high-tech license plates containing microchips capable of transmitting unique vehicle identification numbers and other data to readers more than 300 feet away.

The point of the test is to see whether microchips will make number plates harder to tamper with and clone, said U.K. Department for Transport spokesman Ian Weller-Skitt.

Many commuters use counterfeit plates to avoid the London congestion charge, a fee imposed on passenger vehicles entering central London during busy hours.

This project has similiarities with the ongoing ODOT research project here at OSU, so it will be interesting to compare the results of both experiments. I will need to look at a more detailled description of their system . For example, I didn’t see anything how they plan to manage privacy, like the use of a privacy bit or similar systems

I found a call for participation (PDF) for a special issue of Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Journal.

For this special issue we solicit contributions that map and report on such developments, and highlight the effects of bringing ubiquitous computing to the real world:

• What are the limitations of ubiquitous systems implementation in the real world in terms of economics, regulation, business realities and market situation and can the cost be justified?
• Which systems can work outside the laboratory? Are the available infrastructures able to cater for the massive data flows created by auto-identification for example? What are the actual systems architectures that have been proven to effectively support the required workloads?
• When ubiquitous systems are deployed what are the changes that bring to people’s lives? What changes are effected in people’s private lives at a personal and family level and what are the changes to social etiquette?
• Is the ubiquitous computing world a utopia, which can never be reached because reality is messy? Can the vision of computing for all turn into a nightmare of surveillance and no privacy?
• Can we reverse decades of technology as conqueror to achieve “calm technology”?
• And above all, is the ubiquitous computing world a world which people seem happy to live in?

More