<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>Surveillance on Philip Sheldrake</title><link>https://philipsheldrake.com/tags/surveillance/</link><description>Recent content in Surveillance on Philip Sheldrake</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-gb</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://philipsheldrake.com/tags/surveillance/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>The Digital Life Collective</title><link>https://philipsheldrake.com/2017/01/digital-life-collective/</link><pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://philipsheldrake.com/2017/01/digital-life-collective/</guid><description>&lt;p>&lt;img alt="The Digital Life Collective" loading="lazy" src="https://philipsheldrake.com/images/collective-logo-800-300x181.png">&lt;/p>
&lt;p>&lt;strong>An invitation to build &lt;em>our technology&lt;/em> together&lt;/strong> &lt;strong>… tech we trust for the web we want.&lt;/strong>&lt;/p>
&lt;hr>
&lt;p> &lt;/p>
&lt;h3 id="our-motivation">Our motivation&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>Digital technologies are undermining our privacy, permitting mass state surveillance, enabling censorship, undermining journalism, and spreading fake news. It feels forbidding, uncertain, unsafe – more problem than solution, and far from the original vision for the Internet and Web.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>And yet we’re optimistic that we can join together to fix it. The problem isn’t really the technologies we have to work with of course, but rather the way they’re crafted and who gets to do the crafting.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>Introducing Google Assistant, the Surveillance Interface (SI)</title><link>https://philipsheldrake.com/2016/10/introducing-google-assistant-surveillance-interface-si/</link><pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://philipsheldrake.com/2016/10/introducing-google-assistant-surveillance-interface-si/</guid><description>&lt;p>&lt;img alt="google assistant by techcrunch" loading="lazy" src="https://philipsheldrake.com/images/google-assistant-techcrunch.jpeg">&lt;/p>
&lt;p>A new kind of interface has surfaced over the past five years – artificial intelligence (AI) based ‘&lt;a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_personal_assistant" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">personal assistants&lt;/a>
’.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>&lt;a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siri" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Apple Siri&lt;/a>
started the ball rolling, swiftly followed by &lt;a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Now" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Now&lt;/a>
, &lt;a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortana_%28software%29" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Microsoft Cortana&lt;/a>
, &lt;a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Alexa" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Amazon Alexa&lt;/a>
, and half a dozen others. But it now has a new apogee, a new sector defining moment, a revolution dressed up as evolution. The only thing more alarming than its instrusive, opaque, and society-altering capabilities is the way in which tech pundits have ladled out the accolades, pundits whose worldview appears as limited as a magpie’s regard for shiny things.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>Google Now is now &lt;a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Assistant" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Google Assistant&lt;/a>
, and it comes integrated into Google’s first full-on (i.e. not just a reference design) mobile phone – the Pixel.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>Workfront and the future of work</title><link>https://philipsheldrake.com/2016/05/workfront-and-the-future-of-work/</link><pubDate>Wed, 04 May 2016 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://philipsheldrake.com/2016/05/workfront-and-the-future-of-work/</guid><description>&lt;p>&lt;a href="http://www.slideshare.net/Sheldrake/workfront-leap-may-2016" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">http://www.slideshare.net/Sheldrake/workfront-leap-may-2016&lt;/a>
&lt;/p>
&lt;p> &lt;/p>
&lt;p>I&amp;rsquo;m in Orlando Florida this week with the &lt;a href="https://www.workfront.com/" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Workfront&lt;/a>
team and their partners and customers for their annual Leap conference. It&amp;rsquo;s my privilege to participate in a panel session on the future of work, and to deliver a session with the more grounded title – &lt;em>making work suck less!&lt;/em>&lt;/p>
&lt;p>As you can see from the stack here, the first too common affront I identify and tackle is what I generally call the &amp;lsquo;&lt;em>X steps to heaven&lt;/em>&amp;rsquo; crowd. Those authors and companies proffering clickbait that teases with some relatively short sequence of steps needed to take you from zero to hero – in this context, going from a dysfunctional to awesome organization.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>McVeillance, coveillance, and socioveillance in the context of social business</title><link>https://philipsheldrake.com/2014/10/mcveillance-coveillance-and-socioveillance-in-the-context-of-social-business/</link><pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://philipsheldrake.com/2014/10/mcveillance-coveillance-and-socioveillance-in-the-context-of-social-business/</guid><description>&lt;p>&lt;img alt="Photographic lenses" loading="lazy" src="https://philipsheldrake.com/images/Photographic_lenses_front_view.jpg">&lt;/p>
&lt;p>I was a victim of McVeillance in June this year. I was walking around a shopping mall under systematic surveillance – CCTV everywhere – when I was accosted by security upon taking out my own camera to photograph the mall. (FYI, the mall itself was the subject of my photography and not its customers per se.)&lt;/p>
&lt;p>&lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Mann" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Professor Steve Mann&lt;/a>
coined the expression &lt;em>McVeillance&lt;/em> after he was manhandled out of a McDonalds in Paris where he was eating with his family in 2012 for no other reason than for wearing a computer vision system. McDonalds was watching him. He was watching McDonalds. And &amp;rsquo;they&amp;rsquo; didn&amp;rsquo;t like it.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>I wasn&amp;rsquo;t ejected from the mall as I was actually undertaking a project for the mall&amp;rsquo;s owners, unbeknownst to the security personnel. I was escorted to the security office for appropriate clearance – an act which, per Mann&amp;rsquo;s definitions, officially made me a surveiller.&lt;/p>
&lt;p>The word &lt;em>surveillance&lt;/em> originates from French, from sur- ‘over’ + veiller ‘watch’ (from Latin vigilare ‘keep watch’). It invokes an authoritative orientation where one in authority, metaphorically if not physically above, watches those below. Mann had previously coined the word &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sousveillance" class="external-link" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">&lt;em>sousveillance&lt;/em>&lt;/a>
. The French for &amp;lsquo;below&amp;rsquo; is sous, hence the neologism for watching the watchers.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>