The noise remains the same... or does it? Let's google It...
Creating some noise in the infosphere:
At first some "useful links":
http://www.internetisshit.org
http://www.wibsite.com/wibblethorpe/
http://www.wibsite.com/wiblog/dull/
According to Google's patented PageRank - the Rank of the page depends on number of OTHER pages that contains links (A HREFs) to a page that is being Ranked. [BTW: I think that it is hilarious that Larry Page is an inventor of the PageRank] One of the basics of the theory of information is a concept of signal2noise ratio. I'm wandering, does anyone have some idea about (or even think of it), what is signal, and what is noise on the web...
Clay Shirky is writing about behavioral patterns of a social group. At the same moment RSS-Echo-NEcho-Funky-Shmanky conspiring controversy (a.k.a. collaboration) is going on. Fumes of "semantic web" are floating in the air, creating delusional perseption that information is meaningful in "some" scope. The problem remains the same - what is the scope?
Google's original sin (a.k.a. PageRank) or a Common Sense? Google is a commercial search engine - so it does not make sense to argue "Democratic" nature of the search result. It is not! - because it is commercial...
Interesting subject for thoughts would be attempt to comprehend, what is considered as noise in the information? Is it a spam e-mail - we're fighting it now!, or a junk snail-mail - we hate it, but it still exists, maybe pop-ups - it's a distraction, but the it's been built using features of the browser's software.
Why spam is spam? At first, because it offers something that we DO NOT NEED at the moment. Second, it can be a part of "pyramid" scam or a simply fraud. Now we have something like Google's AdWords that is placing ads using guesstimations based on search terms (I suppose it also uses some information about browser preferences, - I'm getting russian ads too when I select russian as prefereed user interface language). Good guess, but still ads are about STUFF I'M NOT INTRESTED. Pity :)
Perceptional (or perceptual) focus is something 2b considered maybe? [GoogleIt! "perceptional focus" and "perceptual focus"]. BTW: both terms are making sense. Understanding the ones perception usually require some statistical observations, - here we go! it has the name - "spyware". But everybody hates spyware it is more disruptive than pop-ups. OK we're not doing it. Is there any way that can expose ones perceptions without being annoying? It would be nice to stick "commercial" nose into somebody's private mailbox, wouldn't it? Its invasion of privacy. How about blogs! People like to express themself, they collect bookmarks, nowadays people use blogs to make friends and have some "social" life beyound circle of close friends and family. Not everybody blogs, but more and more people like it. It's easy to search blogs. Let's google blogs! It's already happened...
[2b continued...]
At first some "useful links":
http://www.internetisshit.org
http://www.wibsite.com/wibblethorpe/
http://www.wibsite.com/wiblog/dull/
According to Google's patented PageRank - the Rank of the page depends on number of OTHER pages that contains links (A HREFs) to a page that is being Ranked. [BTW: I think that it is hilarious that Larry Page is an inventor of the PageRank] One of the basics of the theory of information is a concept of signal2noise ratio. I'm wandering, does anyone have some idea about (or even think of it), what is signal, and what is noise on the web...
Clay Shirky is writing about behavioral patterns of a social group. At the same moment RSS-Echo-NEcho-Funky-Shmanky conspiring controversy (a.k.a. collaboration) is going on. Fumes of "semantic web" are floating in the air, creating delusional perseption that information is meaningful in "some" scope. The problem remains the same - what is the scope?
Google's original sin (a.k.a. PageRank) or a Common Sense? Google is a commercial search engine - so it does not make sense to argue "Democratic" nature of the search result. It is not! - because it is commercial...
Interesting subject for thoughts would be attempt to comprehend, what is considered as noise in the information? Is it a spam e-mail - we're fighting it now!, or a junk snail-mail - we hate it, but it still exists, maybe pop-ups - it's a distraction, but the it's been built using features of the browser's software.
Why spam is spam? At first, because it offers something that we DO NOT NEED at the moment. Second, it can be a part of "pyramid" scam or a simply fraud. Now we have something like Google's AdWords that is placing ads using guesstimations based on search terms (I suppose it also uses some information about browser preferences, - I'm getting russian ads too when I select russian as prefereed user interface language). Good guess, but still ads are about STUFF I'M NOT INTRESTED. Pity :)
Perceptional (or perceptual) focus is something 2b considered maybe? [GoogleIt! "perceptional focus" and "perceptual focus"]. BTW: both terms are making sense. Understanding the ones perception usually require some statistical observations, - here we go! it has the name - "spyware". But everybody hates spyware it is more disruptive than pop-ups. OK we're not doing it. Is there any way that can expose ones perceptions without being annoying? It would be nice to stick "commercial" nose into somebody's private mailbox, wouldn't it? Its invasion of privacy. How about blogs! People like to express themself, they collect bookmarks, nowadays people use blogs to make friends and have some "social" life beyound circle of close friends and family. Not everybody blogs, but more and more people like it. It's easy to search blogs. Let's google blogs! It's already happened...
[2b continued...]
1:09 PM by igor
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home