Digital Fingerprints

I found this image on Microsoft Office. It likely appeals to the business professionals and adults in general who have regular exposure to technology. It’s kind of interesting that the most identifying piece of information about us is our fingerprint. Legitimately, with a fingerprint, you can find out where someone was and who they are. It’s one thing to say, she has curly brown hair, or he has green eyes, as, while these characteristics are identifiable, they’re applicable to many people. Our fingerprints, however, are applicable only to us. And as we are constantly- and casually- leaving fingerprints everywhere we go, we leave digital fingerprints as well, and just as constantly and casually. This picture depicts that concept well and shows the interlacing of the real and digital world. As shown, a part of the woman’s identity is being shared with each access on the computer. While she only sees the mark that is left where she puts her hand, it extends out even further, often beyond her control. While a real fingerprint can be found only where it is left, a digital fingerprint is not restricted by tangible space, but swirls off into a free floating whirl of cyberspace, and is stored such that it is accessible by almost anyone. This picture shows only her interaction with her digital reality, but we know the irony of it, because we are now a part of her digital reality. As she is engaging in her own digital life, we are engaging in it, also, as we look at this picture on our screen. We know and are affected by a part of her identity and that of the photographer, and likely with their practical unawareness.

Foursquare shapes our identity but may reveal too much to too many

A couple of days ago, I stumbled upon an article about A&M’s partnering with Foursquare. Previously, I had little to no idea what Foursquare even was (originally, after seeing some things about it on Facebook, I assumed it was another digital snake or Farmville game craze, but of virtual four square). Evidently, as Michael Green, a student at A&M who is largely responsible for the school’s involvement, summarizes, “[Facebook and Twitter] focus on telling your friends what you are doing. Foursquare focuses on telling them where they are." The article continues to explain that, “Users with the most check-ins at a location in the past 60 days are appointed ‘Mayor’… Users can also add tips and information about venues and create lists of things to do when visiting a place.” In general, the concept is a pretty cool idea. Especially as A&M's partnership is to encourage students to find out interesting things about campus and share that with friends. Through this network, users’ identities are shaped by expressing the things they like to do and places they like to go. It also grants the user more control over others’ interpretation of their identity with the capability of leaving tips and ideas of things to do, which could prevent a person from having a bad experience at a place, and then coming back and judging the mayor of that place for being mayor of something lame.

Interested, I decided to check Foursquare out for myself. I was mildly disconcerted, upon reaching the homepage, to find a stream of people who I didn’t know and their frequented locations (i.e., announcement of their new mayoral status). Digging a little further, I found I could see a list of an individual’s locations, the number of times they’ve checked-in, and also a map with a physical address of said locations. I could not, however, find a list of people who have checked in at a location itself. To respect privacy to an extent, the map for places tagged as “Home” shows only the location as a general area, instead of a physical address. Realistically, however, almost anyone could open a local phonebook and find your name and address. As the article summarized, Foursquare allows your friends to know where you are, but it can also allows complete strangers to know where you are too.

Intro to Identity, Privacy and Safety

I find it very interesting how people choose to form their identities, and how others' interpretation of our identities likewise shapes us.

Social networks are a prime example of this. With your profile, you choose which aspects of your personality you want to develop and how you want to relate to others. Inasmuch as you’re portraying yourself, you are also trying to know yourself. You upload of photos of how you think you look your best, and seek reinforcement from others. You want them to say, “Yes, this is you, and you’re wonderful.” It can definitely feed your desire for validation. You want to post things that are interesting and engaging, but a lot of times surface level and predictable. It’s really easy to be liked when there are few visible things to dislike. Naturally, there are always the exceptions: The people who want to be edgy and controversial, and it’s easy to pick them out, making them predictable as well. Often these people will find a community who will encourage them to be controversial or at least think for themselves. You can choose your friends in these networks, and you can also deeply study the lives of other people, and glean from parts of their personality. The funniest part about it, is how nobody really knows who all is seeing what about them. People make jokes about Facebook stalking, but there are a lot of people that I don’t really know that well, but I find that I know an awful lot about. It definitely brings me to wonder who knows what about me. In ways, social networks can bring out you in the rawest form, and in others they can shield you as you present yourself in ways that you’ve determined other people would desire.

A more intense level of this is online discussion groups. These are often made up of people who relatively or completely unfamiliar with one another. The discussions often tend toward a certain topic or direction, and ultimately bring out the best and worst out of the participants. As a person chooses to identify with their opinion, it becomes who they are to those engaging in discussion. Even if, in reality, the topic is only a fragment of their life, there is a level of commitment that comes with forming an opinion, and often you speak more strongly of it than you feel. I find it funny how the more a conversation develops, the stricter the boundaries between various sides become, and the more defensive each person becomes as they seek to prove themselves (not just their opinion) to be correct and justifiable. This is an interesting development, because I feel that in most cases, it’s likely that the participants who are so adamant truly do nothing of the issues but talk about them. However, in that arena, a person will establish their identity on the basis of their particular ideas or opinions, and others will establish their interpretation of that person and have their own perspective of who that person is, particularly as they find themselves agreeing or disagreeing with the actual substance of their ideas or the person’s presumed character through their expression of ideas. This is even heightened with the characteristic anonymity of the discussion groups. You would likely present yourself differently were it among your coworkers or your friends or your weekly social club. There is a freedom and protection with being unknown, because the other participants don’t need to like you or validate you at the end of the day. Often you will find your friends and enemies, alike, as you engage in discussion, but if it’s seemingly you against the world, then you can walk away and engage in real life completely separate of such confrontation.