Generativity and the New Economic Model

In his book, The Future of the Internet, Jonathan Zittrain discusses the criteria for a device to be a generative technology.  It must:

1. have the ability to complete many different sets of tasks
2. have the capability to be altered to perform tasks other than what it was intended
3. be easily mastered by contributors
4. be accessible for individuals who want to add to it
5. be easy to use, especially to non-experts

The internet is an extremely generative technology.  What was originally designed to send simple messages from one computer to another has developed into a virtual world that connects each one of us and can be used to complete thousands of tasks.  Anyone can add to it, and all of these changes are accessible and useable by anyone who wishes to use it.  

One example of the generative ability of the internet is Wikipedia.  In the early 90s, as the phenomenon of virtual and free information was beginning to take hold, there became a need for a virtual encyclopedia.  Wanting to make a profit on this virtual information and securing the risk of having individuals copy and pasting the encyclopedia onto web pages that could be accessed for free, Windows created the Encarta Encyclopedia, sold on a CD-ROM for about $1000.  In a virtual society in which free information was floating around, a free encyclopedia was necessary.  After trials with "GNUpedia" and "GNE's Not an Encyclopedia", Wikipedia was born.  The web site was built by outside participants who wrote articles and added them to the site. These articles, once posted to Wikipedia can be edited by anyone.  Although there are some rules and policies, such as a watch on potentially incorrect material and a request that all material be neutral, it is generally open to public alteration and additions, rendering it generative.  

Generative Systems and the Media

This week’s readings focused on the generative nature of certain sites and software’s. According to Zittrain, a system is generative if it has five key characteristics: leverage, adaptability, ease of mastery, accessibility, and transferability.

Zittrain points out that other things besides technology can be generative. Household items such as knives, duct tape and even legos are generative. Basically, they have more than one function versus products that only perform specific tasks. I think its important to understand that generative systems started before the Internet. Even games such as cards are generative.  The development of technology as generative tools derives from people’s want for ease of use and transferability for all products in their lives.

I think this ideal transferred into technology because of people’s wants for possibilities.  Based on this want, the Internet formed and made itself accessible, useful, and generally easy for most users. Zittrain also refers later to Wikipedia and its transition into a more generative program.  Through discussion boards information could be updated and corrected. Sites and systems change to fit the public’s desires.

Zittrain mentions AT&T and how it became a monopoly and forbid consumers and companies to expand on their initial ideas. Also, AOL suffered from this as well. Both banned interference of others and made their product fail in the end.

The Long Tail article helps show that things that go unnoticed matter and can become more popular from another persons’ work. Amazon’s recommendation list caused something that was released a decade later to affect Simpson’s novel.

 As Anderson states, this is part of the new economic model with the media becoming more of a factor. Through the websites feature, something that was almost out of print, is given a new life.

Through Anderson’s article, we see that the media (the Internet, specifically) broadens  the horizon for the future but also past entities to become more popular. Connecting this to Zittrain, the models in which people get information become more generative, and therefore they become more useful for Internet users.

Wikipedia rules

Jonathan Zittrain argues that generativity -- an feature of computers and internet that allows users to create and easily share new softwares and cotent -- led to development and evolution of the internet.Youchai Benkler argues that one of the reason that people are willing to share their innovation or the information for free is that "any new information good or innovation builds on existing information," and it can generate income from other sources than sharing, like services or advertising. Therefore, anyone can start to create any content on the internet. Consumers didn't create the Wikipedia software and its original website, but through information sharing they created a content that gave the Wikipedia popularity and recognition. 

Zittrain writes about the Wikipedia, a website, where consumers generate information for non-commercial purpose. Companies soon realize that Wikipedia is the first thing people look at for a quick description of their company or product. Wikipedia gives me the best explanation about the things I have never heard before, or things I don't understand. After all, as Zittrain noted, Wikipedia entry comes up first in a google search. Companies start to look for opportunities to promote themselves on the Wikipedia, and MyWikiBiz answered these demand and began to create Wikipedia entries that were paid for. Created for non-profit by information sharing, Wikipedia gave a way for others to make money. That brings us back to Benkler's argument that information innovations and goods can create revenue for some in non expected ways. 


Chris Anderson in his article "The Long Tail" talks just about the unexpected ways consumer sharing and internet generativity creates a new market. Let's look at Amazon, for example. Recommendation feature on the websites tells the consumers what they would like based on the previous purchases. However, Amazon knows what to recommend only because it looks on the other users behavior after they have bought the same thing. Amazon analyzes what they have looked at or bought after buying the product. Consumers behavior on Amazon serves as an advertisement for the products that would have gone unnoticed otherwise. 


As we see, all Zittrain, Benkler, and Anderson hint that users information sharing, generativity, and innovation can benefit both consumers and suppliers of the goods. There is no need to apply extra cost for information sharing and innovation technology, because, on one hand, it would slow down the evolution of the internet,  and, on the other hand, the innovation of the internet leads to promotion of businesses and products. 


P.S.  All the links in this article were taken from Wikipedia.org, because it's awesome!  

Zittrain & the Long Tail

In this week's readings Zittrain's Future of the Internet goes into detail on what aspects makes a product generative. He narrows it down to five basic attributes a product should have in order to be considered generative: Leverage, Adaptability, Ease of Mastery, Accessibility, and Transferability. Leverage is an aspect in a product that makes a task easier to do but also capable of doing many things. Zittrain states the more a system can do, the more capable it is of producing change. (p.71) Adaptability is how easily the system can be built on or modified to broaden its range of uses. Examples are: the Internet, Electricity, or a PC. The amount of tasks that can be created with the product or endless. Ease of Mastery, which is pretty self explanatory is how easy a product is for broad audiences to understand and use it. Accessibility is another important factor for a product to be generative. It involves how easy it is to obtain access to a product or object as well as the information needed to master it. Accessibility includes monetary value, availability, regulations, and secrecy. Lastly, Transferability is how easily changes in the product or technology can be conveyed to others, such as updating an application on your computer. How easy is that update going to be transferred?
Zittrain then goes into different theories and philosophies. Towards the end of the reading he discusses the historical beginnings and current process Wikipedia has gone through and how it works today. As well as mentioning the negative effects generative computers and Internet has cost us, such as malware and spam e-mails.  


Another reading, which I enjoyed more was Chris Anderson's The Long Tail because despite it discussing some economic features the Internet has created it discusses a topic most consumer's including myself are apart of. He discusses that lack of range in products physical stores lack, such as full range in movies, documentaries, books, and music. And the consumer market the Internet has created lies outside the reach of the physical retailer is much bigger and only getting bigger.


Anderson gives he's readers three rules to follow when having a marketplace on the web. First, make everything available in abundance and range of genre or topics. Such as the way netflix is with documentaries. Second, have low competitive prices. Lastly, Take into account what your customer likes and suggest similar things. 


As an avid consumer obviously Netflix, Amazon, and iTunes do a great job of this. Another aspect that isn't mentioned in depth that the Internet has created is ease of finding the best price for an item through some of the mentioned websites. For example, the other day I was looking on the Apple website for some speakers to buy for my iPhone and then decided to look for some cases. I honestly thought some of the products were overpriced and decided to look elsewhere for the same brand products at a lower price. When it came to cases, a friend of mine recommended the store Five Below which does not offer anything to be bought online but there was a store close to me. Instead of paying $30+ for a case at the Apple store, Five Below had the exact same brands as Apple for much less, only $5. I also found some of the same name brand speakers on Amazon at a more affordable price. In addition to the economic factors Anderson discusses the Internet has also created more competition that has benefitted the consumer in various ways.




- Nabila C.

Generativity, The Long Tail and Netflix

BRIEF INTRODUCTION:

This week's readings discussed the generative nature of certain internet applications and how certain non-generative network platforms and service providers (like AOL and AT&T) suffered from lack of third party innovation. Drawing on the Zittrain chapter, and The Long Tail article by Chris Anderson, I will briefly discuss Netflix and where it falls on my own "generativity scale," especially in comparison to YouTube.

ZITTRAIN

Zittrain's chapters on the feature of generative systems, clearly outlines five factors to consider when evaluating the essence of being generative:

1. Leverage, or as I would call it, what makes this application useful?

2. Adaptability, or how easily the system can be built on or modified to broaden its range.

3. Ease of Mastery. Do you need a degree in Computer Science to make it adaptable or cultivate that leverage?

4. Accessibility. Can I get on it? Can I afford it? How easy is it to gain access?

5. Transferability. How easily can update in technology be transferred?

(Pages 73-74)

As Zittrain points out, all of these factors reinforce each other, and generative tools will breed generative systems. The internet, of course, provides one of the most generative systems of all times, and the development of generative tools and platforms have lead the growth of, the monetization of, and the rise in popularity of what Chris Anderson would call, the long tail.

THE LONG TAIL

The Long Tail refers to the millions of niche and independent content producers that have flourished, or, at least, had more exposure in a digital age. It's not The Dark Knight or even The Artist. It's that independent film that played in Brooklyn last week. Or to use the example from the article, it's the Hindi Language film Lagaan: Once Upon a Time in India. Such Long Tail films do not have millions of movie theaters and physical spaces (not to mention million dollar ad campaigns) to gain popularity and following but they do have the internet.

Anderson goes on to talk about Rhapsody and Amazon.com as taking advantage of those niche films, books and other kinds of content to let that long tail grow and flourish. The Long Tail is not about 'hit-driven' economics but the distribution of not so widely popular content.

One of the examples championed by Anderson in his 2006 article is Netflix. Especially when compared to blockbuster, Netflix is the poster child for streaming and dvd distribution of independent, foreign and niche films, that your neighborhood blockbuster would never have. Anderson states that a fifth of Netflix rentals are outside the top 3,000 movie titles. Whereas, those three thousand titles would be all that Blockbuster carries.

NETFLIX

These two articles got me thinking about generativity, the digital age and Netflix. So first let's put Netflix up to Zittrain's Five Factor Test. Is Netflix a generative tool on the generative system of the internet?

1. Leverage. Yes. Everyone loves movies, even niche movies!

2. Adaptability, Depending on how those negotiations with movie studios go? It could go well!

3. Ease of Mastery. Yes. It's relatively easy to search and stream or sign up for Netflix.

4. Accessibility. On the internet so it's easy to get. But the recent rise in price is making it harder to afford, especially for this college student.

5. Transferability. Well whatever the Netflix gods put up to stream or rent can be accessed by any internet connected computer with enough broadband.

But is Netflix generative? It's certainly part of the Long Tail which thrives in a generative system. But I can't edit the content. I can't upload my independent documentary about the Hunter College Bathroom stalls for streaming.

In comparing the Netflix business model with that of YouTube's, I find YouTube much more sustainable. Both are investing in exclusive content, although one (netflix) actually licenses studio work. YouTube (Google) holds contests for suscribers to develop their own content. Netflix is producing an original series? What's really more generative? It will be interesting to see what the digital entertainment landscape looks like in 10 years.

Generativity

In this weeks reading of Zittrain's book, The Future of the Internet-and How to Stop It, the topic of generativity and innovation were discussed. In these chapters Zittrain uses the telephone company AT&T, as well as  proprietary internet networks like CompuServe and AOL, as examples of companies that were limited in their generativity. These three service providers are similar in that their systems were not subject to innovation from third parties. Instead, they provided a set framework in which the user was able to operate. Because of this, they were slow to evolve and eventually lost out to network providers that were more flexible to users. Zittrain describes this effect when he explains,

"If anything, we would expect the proprietary networks to offer more, and for a while they did. But they also had a natural desire to act as gatekeepers—to validate anything appearing on their network, to cut individual deals for revenue sharing with their content providers, and to keep their customers from affecting the network’s technology. These tendencies meant that their rates of growth and differentiation were slow" (81). 

This effect is something that I actually experienced first hand as a user of AOL. AOL was for me, and probably for most people my age, a first introduction to the wonders of the Internet. The way I view my experiences with AOL is that it was the perfect system for me at the time, because I was a child and didn't know anything about the internet. The format was simple enough, even fun, for a person of such little knowledge and I didn't want, need, or expect much else. However, I grew up and AOL didn't. As I began to realize the full potential of the Internet I naturally began to want more from it, and AOL did not provide. Unfortunately for AOL, being able to have Christina Aguilera tell me "You've got mail!" every time I logged on was not enough for me to stay.

Zittrain's examples of generative versus non generative tools aided me in further understanding the concept. As an example of a generative game Zittrain lists dice and playing cards. These two games, or toys, are generative because you can make up your own rules and even change them every time you play.  A board game, on the other hand, is not generative because it typically comes in a certain format that requires you to play a certain way. These two examples make it easier to understand generativity in the context of the Internet, as well as the benefits of a generative system. Because the Internet is so accessible, and because it is used by an incredibly diverse demographic, it makes sense that a generative system is preferable over a non-generative one. Flexible networks are the reason why there has been so much beneficial innovation since the days of AOL.

Generative.

Zittrain’s
text goes together hand and hand with the articles The Wealth of Networks and “The Long Tail”. Why is this? Looking at the beginning of Zittrain’s reading, the word Generative is being explored and defined. There are five things that’s make something generative which are “leverage, adaptability, ease of mastery, accessibility, and transferability.”[1]. What makes something generative basically is how easily it can be altered, found, explored and shared. In modern days this is very important, especially in the 21st century, in other the words the century of technology. We live in a world where anything and everything can be managed, found and used all through a phone. In Anderson’s article “The Long Tail” we see a good example of the word generative how it is used in today’s society. Anderson makes a point in which in we have the luxury now in days to simply find something such as, a book or movie, on the internet without even having to go to a
Blockbuster or Barnes and Nobel. People prefer to go online to websites to get
these items instead of going out of their way to a store to find these items
and buy them. Not only does this system benefit people’s busy schedules but it
also helps authors and actors popularity. Anderson uses the example of how
Amazon helped Simpsons book Touching the Void become beyond its normal fan base by simply being a recommended book from Krakauer’s book Into Thin Air.The only problem that can be posed from this new age of generative things is the damage that it does to these actual physical stores that are offering the same items. On defense we can say that information is “public”[2]
and is something that needs to be shared.
In Benkler’s, The Wealth of Networks we see the argument that information is
something that needs to be shared. Authors and researches make it their duty to
attach themselves to certain subjects and to share their findings and opinions
to the public for a cost. Although information needs to be circulated, Authors
and researchers sacrifice their time to present issues to the world; therefore,
they need to get a payment for their information and protection through copyright.
This argument brings us back to the topic of generative. The information being
given is at the buyer’s expense to be updated on topics based on what is
popular and needed in today’s society resulting in generative information. It is
important to have generative information because non-generative information
lacks audiences and the possibility to spread information and sources.

[1] Zittrain,
“The Future of the Internet and How to Stop it”. Page 74
[2] Benkler,
The Wealth of Network. Page 8

The Internet: A Generative Innovator

     Before the advent of the Internet Era, consumers were generally left at the mercy of Brick and Mortar stores to decide what content would be available to them. This is because before the Internet era, consumers were stuck in the model of the Short Head; only what was guaranteed to sell high enough in order to justify its shelf-space was allowed a spot in the store. As a result, if a person was interested in a product that was not a mainstream product, like perhaps Tommy Wiseau's little known 2003 cult classic, "The Room", they would have to painstakingly seek out a niche-type store that would carry such obscure titles. If there were no stores around the area, they would have to try to have it shipped through a catalog, or just move on to watch an easily attainable mainstream film. Therefore, it was the consumer who lost, and the big mainstream stores that won.

     However, the generativity of the internet was able to change all of this by allowing people who have never met to distribute code and content through its Networks. As a result, a new business model was born and became known as the "Long Tail".

     The Long Tail model is what allowed internet based companies like Netflix, Amazon, and iTunes to come into existence. It is because these new companies do not have to worry about physical space as much as their Brick and Mortar competitors. This allows them to carry such obscure titles without having to worry about whether or not it would sell to justify it taking the place of another title that may have done better. As long as it is guaranteed that the product will move at least 10 units annually, Amazon is willing to promote and sell the product. This also allows consumers to discover new content by generating statistics of past purchases and the products they are currently shopping for and is able to recommend other products that are similar, or better suited to their tastes. The generativity of the internet has led to remarkable innovations that have changed the way consumers shop forever, and definitely for the better.

     Not only does the consumer have a wider array of products and content to choose from that was not available to them in the past as a result of the internet, but it also allows them to become informed consumers. For example, if I were to be shopping for a new computer, or something along those lines on a "store" like Amazon.com and Amazon told me that 98% of other consumers ultimately bought another model of computer, I would have the ability to research that other model immediately and look at both professional and amateur reviews. This would cut out the middle man, or the salesman at the local Best Buy that would tell you anything in order to make a sale. Therefore, I would ultimately make the decision that is best suited for my needs.

     The generative internet specializes in innovation. It has changed the way we consume and connect with products and people, among the countless other things it enables us to do. With the generative internet, the end-user, or consumer, has all of the cards stacked in their favor.

To be Generative or Not to be Generative... That is the Question.

According to the Anti-Phishing Working Group's Trends Report for the first half period of 2011, "Data-stealing and generic Trojan malware, typically designed to send information from the infected machine, control it, and open backdoors on it, reached an all-­time high, comprising almost half of all malware detected (2)."
Link: http://www.antiphishing.org/reports/apwg_trends_report_h1_2011.pdf

This chart below displays the statistics of said occurrences:


Due to the aforementioned, early proprietary network corporations such as CompuServe borrowed cybersecurity techniques (E.g: AT&T's Cap'n Crunch rule), to reconfigure their centralized network systems in order to dichotomize e-data (e-mail, downloaded programs, etc.) sent to customers, also known as "dumb terminals," and coding instructions sent to administrative programmers. However, this all changed with the Internet of the late 1980's.
From the first wave of the Internet worm in the late 80's to the lack of malicious experts and rise of unskillful users of the Internet in today's ultra postmodern 21st century, Zittrain makes the critically compelling argument that generative technology leaves a plethora of Internet end-point users open to significant and critical methods of "attacks from within." Now, while the thought of establishing and writing new codes for innovative and creative purposes may seem to have some intellectually sufficient insight behind it, the important matter at hand is that cyberworms, spyware, and viruses have radically contributed to the way in which the Internet and Cybersecurity systems are operated by their end-point terminals.

First and foremost, what I found highly interesting in this chapter was that Zittrain used the Morris worm as the foundation to drive his theory behind the vulnerability of generativity. According to Zittrain, even in the hands of highly trained administrators, these generative networked computers could be reprogrammed to still received and install uploaded codes from malicious hackers due to their generative capabilities of being consequentially more flexible and powerful in comparison to their "appliancized counterparts (38)." Well what does this mean for today's society who equip their PCs with anti-spyware and explore trustworthy sites? From a Zittrain-perspective, essentially those who try to partake in the "safe" method are still prone to even a front door attack (so to speak). Just because your PC is operated via faster network that is always connected to the Internet (with the high rise in Broadband users), does not justify the fact that a malicious software cannot attack your system's hardware and coding silently; some of those "safe" sites that your browse may as well be labeled as "sleeper" sites because they might already be infected but not yet malignant.

Using the theory behind Morris's worm (which was to target the network's computer endpoints), many other malicious attacks, such as the Michaelangelo Virus of 1992, the Melissa Virus of 1999, and the Blaster Worm of 2003 sought to use executable "renegade" codes to compromise the integrity of Internet end-points. Another interesting point that Zittrain further makes here is that "many administrators of these generative machines (of the 90's) were lazy about installing available fixes to known software vulnerabilities, and often utterly predictable in choosing passwords to protect entry to their computer accounts... and thus, there was no way to secure them all against attack (42)." This was possibly due to the fact that "few knew how to manage or coder their generative PCs, much less how to rigorously apply patches or observe good password security (43)."

In the, end generative technology has shown itself to be consistently beneficial with the innovations of the 21st century. Today, PCs operate with Microsoft Office, iTunes, Mozilla Firefox, and much more applications. However, no good dead goes unpunished, right? With the rise in malicious wide-spread attack through the Internet's centralized networks targeted at the network's endpoints, generative PCs have also engaged themselves in a dilemma, one which could eventually destroy the Internet as we know it... or save it (in some twisted, ultra postmodern way of expressing the First Amendment or via the exposing of backdoors in the network's system.)

Only time will tell....