It would be nice if google+ extended the circle metaphor to include public circles, that people can discover and join, giving us a way to easily make and follow channels with a narrow subject on Google+
What this would solve is the following basic problem:
I don't want to hear mumbles on random topics, from people I follow for one subject in particular. For example, if I follow you for your technology knowledge and opinion, I dont want to hear about the food you're eating on your latest visit to china.
I should be able to join your technology circle, provided you've made it public, and by so doing I should be able to see only the posts you send to your technology circle.
28 July 2011
22 April 2011
skepticism
Questioning our own motives, and our own process, is critical to a skeptical and scientific outlook. We must realize that the default mode of human psychology is to grab onto comforting beliefs for purely emotional reasons, and then justify those beliefs to ourselves with post-hoc rationalizations. It takes effort to rise above this tendency, to step back from our beliefs and our emotional connection to conclusions and focus on the process. The process (i.e science, logic, and intellectual rigor) has to be more important than the belief. —Steven Novella
16 March 2011
procreative racial deconstruction..
RT @AmandlaMedia
Perhaps South Africa needs a voluntary, free spirited, open-ended program of procreative racial deconstruction...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulworth
Perhaps South Africa needs a voluntary, free spirited, open-ended program of procreative racial deconstruction...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulworth
22 February 2011
old interview on NaomiKleinThe Shock Doctrine
@JohnCusack interviews @NaomiKlein on her book "The Shock Doctrine"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rcyb0cDf4aQ& -part1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1u_OTa18Ts& -part2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rcyb0cDf4aQ& -part1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1u_OTa18Ts& -part2
21 February 2011
18 February 2011
Tim Wu, on the monopolization of the Internet, and other things
Recently caught a conversation with Tim Wu, originator of the phrase 'net neutrality', and author of The Master Switch, on the monopolization of the Internet, and other things : interview with TimWu on SearchEnginePodcast
Listen here : http://podcasts.tvo.org/searchengine/audio/800868_48k.mp3
The book sounds important - theres a good review here: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/reviews/2010/12/ars-book-review-the-master-switch-by-tim-wu.ars
Some nice bits on how older technologies had open phases too, before they were closed - as we, the consumers, brought about monopolists and consumptive systems, in tandem with emerging parasitic business ecosystems.
And whether things could be different this time around ..
Whether, if we were aware of the systems and information we 'choose' for ourselves; we could keep it open, and therefore, game-changing
Definitely, some things for us cyber-optimists to think about .
wiki notes are accumulating here: http://jaysen.wikispaces.com/TimWuOnSearchEngine
Listen here : http://podcasts.tvo.org/searchengine/audio/800868_48k.mp3
The book sounds important - theres a good review here: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/reviews/2010/12/ars-book-review-the-master-switch-by-tim-wu.ars
Some nice bits on how older technologies had open phases too, before they were closed - as we, the consumers, brought about monopolists and consumptive systems, in tandem with emerging parasitic business ecosystems.
And whether things could be different this time around ..
Whether, if we were aware of the systems and information we 'choose' for ourselves; we could keep it open, and therefore, game-changing
Definitely, some things for us cyber-optimists to think about .
wiki notes are accumulating here: http://jaysen.wikispaces.com/TimWuOnSearchEngine
05 February 2011
Julian Assange speech at WikiLeaks Public Meeting in Melbourne
30 January 2011
rms on google
http://stallman.org/archives/2010-nov-feb.html#29 January 2011 (Investigating Google)
As for Google, it does some very good things but also some bad things. (For instance, many of its services distribute proprietary software to users.) I would not put Google at the head of the list of large companies that need to be broken up; however, if we start breaking up large companies (as we should), and get that far down the list, I would not say "stop here"
..
i agree
As for Google, it does some very good things but also some bad things. (For instance, many of its services distribute proprietary software to users.) I would not put Google at the head of the list of large companies that need to be broken up; however, if we start breaking up large companies (as we should), and get that far down the list, I would not say "stop here"
..
i agree
12 November 2010
universal folksonomy
This is probably not entirely new. Maybe even not new at all. In fact I've probably just joined legions of people out there who are wondering why ..
There isn't yet a simple plain-text standard for meta-data, that can be applied universally across all services and objects - from web pages and web resources, to documents and files, from books and articles to audio and video files - applied basically, to all digital resources.
Then building on top of all this tagging - all this human-computation and folksonomy - building flexible tools that mine and collate the meta-data from across all possible services, communities, spaces and contexts. Making these tools expandable, so adding another service/context/data-source is as simple as possible.
So, how is this different?
.. possibly more on this later.
some almost related links:
Actually some of these suggest practical tagging standards as well:
There isn't yet a simple plain-text standard for meta-data, that can be applied universally across all services and objects - from web pages and web resources, to documents and files, from books and articles to audio and video files - applied basically, to all digital resources.
Then building on top of all this tagging - all this human-computation and folksonomy - building flexible tools that mine and collate the meta-data from across all possible services, communities, spaces and contexts. Making these tools expandable, so adding another service/context/data-source is as simple as possible.
So, how is this different?
- we use it in the same way, but consistently across all services/contexts/collections
- we use it even when no provision is made for it - wherever we find space for plain text that can be co-opted to meta-data - like in comment fields, sidewiki entries, bookmark notes, mp3 id3 comment fields, etc
- then we build software to collect them from both the formalised meta-data services and the informal - and shape flexible plugins to collect them from wherever the standard can be recognised
- First, the simplest forms of meta-data - tags/labels - flat, informal ontologies - collections of keywords - like those used within services across the so called web2.0.
And when using services that aren't designed to use tags/labels - co-opting plain-text fields by, say, the following:
tags = blog, tagging, ideas, software, socialSoftware - Second, simple key value pairs, like author=JaysenNaidoo; date=20101113; license=gpl3
- Keeping the set of standards as open as possible - but defining them properly in public. Adding any other std that can be represented in plain-text and gains enough ground - depicting hierarchies, semantics, etc.
.. possibly more on this later.
some almost related links:
Actually some of these suggest practical tagging standards as well:
11 September 2010
the Adliberous idea
Adunblock Communities ..updated for clarity:
The idea is to form additional communities around a tool like AdBlock-Plus. Subscribing to exclusion filter lists that tell your browser which ads to disallow; as usual; but also subscribing to a whitelist of ads and servers that will be allowed through.
Communities could collectively maintain such lists, based on a set of criteria, also collectively arrived at.
The criteria could include things like:
• the type of ad , (text-only, no large downloads, no annoying animation)
• political / consumer activism (for example, only advertisers that behave well; with commitments to sustainability, global justice, workers rights.
• advertise within product ranges / what the community is interested in buying. The community could ask for just the type of ads that interest that community (advertisers should be willing to jump through a few hoops for the right to have access to those strongly matched eyeballs)
• optional fund-raising / activism - where advertisers/adservers pay money to, or support in some way, organisations or a list of organisations, in order to be allowed on the whitelist.
Additional ideas / notes:
• The lists of course should be crowd sourced - using the numbers in the community to monitor for bad matched ads and to suggest products/ads/adservers that the community could include
• Communities manage themselves using the new online tools available for organising and arriving at consensus (wikis, forums, voting)
• Encourage forks/branches of communities / whitelists as required.
• Because community asks for just the type of ads that interest it, you know that whatever ads you see, are for products that are in line with your community's values, and that you can purchase with greater confidence.
• to join, someone would only have to subscribe to the appropriate whitelist
• participation should be under open principles
• a possible fundamental shift in the dynamics between consumer, producer and advertiser.
• effective consumer activism
• a community would decide to sell the right to be on its white-list to ad-servers that meet those criteria. Then collectively decide on what the money advertisers pay to be on the white-list is used for.
more on adblocking ..
checkout Adblock and Adblock-Plus - already well working crowd sourced adblocking extensions - which by the way, is very usable in both firefox and chrome)
...
any thoughts, comments ?
The idea is to form additional communities around a tool like AdBlock-Plus. Subscribing to exclusion filter lists that tell your browser which ads to disallow; as usual; but also subscribing to a whitelist of ads and servers that will be allowed through.
Communities could collectively maintain such lists, based on a set of criteria, also collectively arrived at.
The criteria could include things like:
• the type of ad , (text-only, no large downloads, no annoying animation)
• political / consumer activism (for example, only advertisers that behave well; with commitments to sustainability, global justice, workers rights.
• advertise within product ranges / what the community is interested in buying. The community could ask for just the type of ads that interest that community (advertisers should be willing to jump through a few hoops for the right to have access to those strongly matched eyeballs)
• optional fund-raising / activism - where advertisers/adservers pay money to, or support in some way, organisations or a list of organisations, in order to be allowed on the whitelist.
Additional ideas / notes:
• The lists of course should be crowd sourced - using the numbers in the community to monitor for bad matched ads and to suggest products/ads/adservers that the community could include
• Communities manage themselves using the new online tools available for organising and arriving at consensus (wikis, forums, voting)
• Encourage forks/branches of communities / whitelists as required.
• Because community asks for just the type of ads that interest it, you know that whatever ads you see, are for products that are in line with your community's values, and that you can purchase with greater confidence.
• to join, someone would only have to subscribe to the appropriate whitelist
• participation should be under open principles
• a possible fundamental shift in the dynamics between consumer, producer and advertiser.
• effective consumer activism
• a community would decide to sell the right to be on its white-list to ad-servers that meet those criteria. Then collectively decide on what the money advertisers pay to be on the white-list is used for.
more on adblocking ..
checkout Adblock and Adblock-Plus - already well working crowd sourced adblocking extensions - which by the way, is very usable in both firefox and chrome)
...
any thoughts, comments ?
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)