4 ms·

Node is a really nice word for what the article describes. The word "tracker" doesn't roll off the tongue very well and I think it suffers from the same flaw t

Node is a really nice word for what the article describes. The word "tracker" doesn't roll off the tongue very well and I think it suffers from the same flaw that the article criticizes about "phone", namely that it focuses on a specific aspect of a multi-purpose device. Node seems a much better choice since it connotes all the important aspects of a smart phone: - Connection to a network for the purpose of information sharing - Being identifiable and addressable - Processing capabilities If we choose to find a more suitable name, I'd suggest maybe "Personal Node" or "Smart Node".

bigiain 14y ago
I think the problem is they're not a "personal node", they're nodes working for Apple or Google or your telco. The idea of "node-ness" carries connotations (at least to me) of being more useful as part of a network than as individual devices - and that's way more true for the people/organisations with access to data from the whole network of nodes, than the owner/operator of a singe node. I wonder if Google are collecting geo-spacial data about your social graph? I suspect they could, if they wanted to, work out which section of your online social network are people you meet in real life, and which are people you only interact with on-line?
- bloody_pretzels 14y ago
  If I didn't misunderstand, you're suggesting that "node" carries the idea of being an autonomous entity that connects to a neutral network (i.e. no node is more privileged than any other). In that case a more accurate term might be "slave node" as opposed to the master nodes operated by carriers which control and monitor the communication flow. But I think that's a subjective view. The internet also has privileged nodes which could be used to monitor and control the network or individual nodes. "Tracker" simply ignores all the service aspects of the device and focuses on a single use for one of the parties involved (costumer, carrier, manufacturer). In that respects it is just as misleading a term as "phone".

bigiain 14y ago

I think the problem is they're not a "personal node", they're nodes working for Apple or Google or your telco. The idea of "node-ness" carries connotations (at least to me) of being more useful as part of a network than as individual devices - and that's way more true for the people/organisations with access to data from the whole network of nodes, than the owner/operator of a singe node. I wonder if Google are collecting geo-spacial data about your social graph? I suspect they could, if they wanted to, work out which section of your online social network are people you meet in real life, and which are people you only interact with on-line?

bloody_pretzels 14y ago
If I didn't misunderstand, you're suggesting that "node" carries the idea of being an autonomous entity that connects to a neutral network (i.e. no node is more privileged than any other). In that case a more accurate term might be "slave node" as opposed to the master nodes operated by carriers which control and monitor the communication flow. But I think that's a subjective view. The internet also has privileged nodes which could be used to monitor and control the network or individual nodes. "Tracker" simply ignores all the service aspects of the device and focuses on a single use for one of the parties involved (costumer, carrier, manufacturer). In that respects it is just as misleading a term as "phone".