The mobile data apocalypse, and what it means to you

A very interesting piece on the future of mobile data. The conclusion of the piece is that the cell data network is in trouble, and there’s going to have to be some serious cooperation between parties which have historically not been good at cosying up together.

	But in the last year or so, the attitude has shifted dramatically from "no one is using mobile data" to "oh my God, there's so much demand for mobile data that it'll destroy the network." A lot of this attitude shift was caused by the iPhone, which has indeed overloaded some mobile networks. But there's also a general uptick in data usage from various sources, and the rate of growth seems to be accelerating.

The premise that there are cell data network issues certainly rings true for me: I’ve noticed in Bristol that it’s rare for my iPhone to find more than a trickle of bandwidth from the cell network. So I hope this problem gets proper attention, and fast. —via @timbray

What if they stop clicking?

Talking of social network revenue models, Ethan Zuckerman talks about the funding models for social networks, and how advertising isn’t likely to be a panacea for funding internet ventures in general. It’s an involved article, but worth reading if you’re at all interested in the business and research of the web.

	Internet advertising works extremely well in the context of a search engine. Many searches are intended to lead to transactions, so matching a paid ad to a query is sometimes a good user experience. Advertising can work well in the context of niche content – a website focused on cross-country skiing is a great place to advertise to cross-country skiiers, and there’s a decent chance they’re going to be interested in learning about your ski wax. Ads on sites like Facebook work much less well, and while targetting those ads based on demographics may make them more effective, that targeting doesn’t fix the core problem: people are using social network sites to communicate, not to consume content, and they don’t want to be bothered by ads when they’re communicating.

Danah’s talks and articles are often fascinating, and this one on future information consumption trends is no exception.

I’ve often thought about the money-making strategy sites such as Facebook could use, and have come to the conclusion that advertising just doesn’t work well in these cases: the adverts are not being presented at a time when users are receptive to them (compare with search-based advertising). Danah points out this problem isn’t a new one, however:

Figuring out how to monetize sociality is a problem. And not one new to the Internet. Think about how we monetize sociality in physical spaces. Typically, it involves second-order consumption of calories. Venues provide a space for social interaction to occur and we are expected to consume to pay rent. Restaurants, bars, cafes… they all survive on this model. But we have yet to find the digital equivalent of alcohol.

Well, blow me down. Firefox and Safari render fonts completely differently on the same platform.

The camera on the iPhone 3GS is serviceable, but I doubt anyone would claim it was good. The tap-to-focus feature, which also does some exposure correction I think, is the only real improvement on my old phone’s camera; the picture quality certainly isn’t startlingly different.

I’ve found a few applications to help me produce nicer looking photos than the camera gives in its raw form. These applications are post-processing, so can only work with what the camera gives meaning they cannot perform miracles ¹. I’m sure I could improve the photos from my Ixus using similar apps—-if only they existed for the Mac for so little money.