Haha! Twitter again (and again and again)! New Scientist is reporting on the use of Twitter by private individuals to coordinate and gather critical information during natural disasters.

So What?

Look, it's not my fault--Twitter just keeps coming up in interesting circumstances. If it were a publicly traded company, I'd probably buy stock (except that my holdings are deliberately limited to investment-grade chocolate figurines). Also, most of the stocks I bought jumped off a ledge shortly after I took delivery. So I wouldn't go totally by what I say.

Twitter is a micro-blogging service. "Tweet" messages of up to140 characters and anyone who subscribes to your feed can pick them up, both on the Web and on a cell phone. My colleague, a recently-married programmer and martial arts geek, has more than 40 people following his feed, only 10 of whom he actually knows. What are the other 30 getting out of watching the mutterings of a total stranger? Perhaps it's like listening to police radio--a little excitement to make up for what Tom Lehrer once called your "drab, wretched lives."

In any case. In October 2007, wildfires swept through parts of California (as they are doing today, as a matter of fact). Official information channels tended to ignore rural areas in favor of metropolitan, while the national news media focused on a comparatively small fire in Malibu that might have singed the homes of several celebrities (gasp!) who are of course more important than pond scum such as ourselves. Residents picked up the slack, using Twitter (among other tools) to trade information on the progress of the fire. This was information that simply couldn't be had from conventional sources.

One advantage Twitter has over a website with similar functionality is that it's easily accessible by even the most primitive cell phone--no small advantage in a post-apocalyptic situation when your beloved Mac has become a tragic (though beautifully designed, of course) puddle of molten slag in what's left of your den.

The emergency response establishment is just starting to consider how to exploit citizens as "sensors" in crisis situations--sources of high-quality, on-the-ground information in a rapidly evolving environment. (Concerns revolve around accuracy, of course.) I'm violently in favor of anything that reduces risk in dangerous situations, particularly forest fires. Mostly because (speaking of molten puddles) they could have a dramatic impact on my portfolio.