Presentation concerning draft on findings of interventions done in the center of Rotterdam concerning the experience of different types of camera in that nigthscape.

(click on screenshot for download – 3.3mb pdf)

First notes lecture Adam Creenfield on Cognitive Cities

- networked object
- urban scale design for networked cities
- user-driven close to frustrations and difficulties interface of everyday life
- the connected city – rooted to the experience of everyday life in networked life
- techno- determinism vs social constructionism

- main question: whether artifacts have politics?
- Robbert moses – rammed through infrastructure
- Langdon winner – inscribed his ideas into artifacts. Bridge example
- Winner says : yes

- Latour: that is not example the case; maybe.. (ANT) user + tech
- what about akrich? script analysis? + anti-programs

- in between Latour and Winner
- cities in developed world are populated by physical objects that can manipulation of data/ information. New class of technologies. If winner is right, the impact is mayor.
- you better believe is going to condition our options and behavior
- examples:
- traffic sensor (a talkie)
- sensor-equipped add (a photo machine add: as you walk by, flash-cameras go off) I find this intrusive.
- touch-screen vending machine in Tokyo. A camera +analysis software will show products that link to your profile. This  does gather information. It is very normative
- Video billboard analysis software video reports. Deployed in public space. A billboard with a camera. It is not apparent  that the camera is there. It records responses and attention. You become furnishing data. This becomes problematic. You  are generating value for someone else by using public space. That is not oke with me. By using public sap, the data should be public. Again, it is normative. Public space is more important that advertisement
- networked access objects. The ability to control movement; the are an ensemble?
- we go to surveillance cameras + software!  People votes yes due to function of traffic control. However, function creep.
new analytics package – facial analysis package installed by the police; the physical camera does not change, but the     software was.

- Big flaw about thinking about public space ; it moves to code.
- Lessig; code-law; this is where the ability of the impact resides. Code is where the power and the influence are.  We need new law about public objects
- a set of attempts rules about public objects is mentioned (greenfield, 2008)
- they have to be designed in order to make data open (an api, read/write privileges, non-rivalrous and non-excludable)

there are limitation in thinking this way; if a city is open data objects; the attack service. you unavoidably, you make it more available for bad use. however, benefit is always larger than the risk.

- who gets to use these first; how are conflicts resolved, we have just begun. Case by case learning
- i will argue that we are at a point where public space is at risk. Our pueblos sphere to private, commercial interest. We have an important, generation ability to save public space for commercial
- non consumers, but constituents
- Sloterdijk; city as bubbles;
- fabric open data city – revitalized public sphere – new democracy.
- raise our voices in the networked age – not to extract value of us, but we need a new way of thinking.

- smart city that I would like to live in.

- examples in sharing resources in a positive way? Mega-cities as an example
- regulation  vs competitive rules of these objects.
- potential misuses vs latent value that is bound up in these objects

For an internal PhD day at the University of Twente, I have created this poster. It tries to explain my research at the moment:

The presentation for the WTMC school, January 2010

Here you can find my MA thesis on an Internet of things, which is in PDF and just under 1mb.

The argument summary of the thesis:

This thesis investigates what becomes of objects when networked. Objects we surround ourselves with are undergoing a certain change in their standing, compared to objects of old. With the coming of the electrical network, objects were equipped with new capabilities, and this also holds for information networks. Recently the concept of an Internet of things has emerged. Objects begin communicating with each other over the same network as humans do. The consequences are that this can alter the relationship between human and object. It is important to examine how to our relationship to objects is being rethought, both in scholarly discourses as well as in what may be called speculative media theory. All together, what does an Internet of things imply for the status of objects?

(more…)

The full post can be read here; book presentation

a full post can be found here:

http://mastersofmedia.hum.uva.nl/2008/10/01/powerpointcinema/

The relevancy of performing research into the topic of an Internet of Things lies in the fact that, although seemingly the concept has faded into the background, reality might be catching up.
Where the web 2.0 bubble keeps on growing within the natively digital, a slow but steady growth can be seen in, amongst other things, near-field –communication devices, such as mobile phones, retail, and even passports. Often presented within the argument realm of security, or marketing efficiency, these ‘old’ concepts of ‘connected things’ are emergent.

(more…)

Introduction by Ole Bouman:
At the NAI, values of architecture are defended that we are fond of to defend. Most architects and policy makers do belief that architecture is about shelter and enclosure, occupation and representation. Archiving architecture used to be at the core of the NAi, but it has to look at what is happening with architecture now and look beyond the traditional field. New questions arise about how new technologies affect architecture and what this says about the individual? It is not solely about designing and archiving our world anymore, but also about looking at new possibilities. Discussions with other disciplines here are very valuable.

(more…)