Google and privacy
For this assignment, I looked for articles discussing Google and privacy. I searched LexisNexis Academic to find news articles about this subject. I decided that news articles would probably be the most current and plentiful, as opposed to scholarly articles. Scholarly articles might still be useful depending on what, specifically, you were looking for information for. This database allowed me to search a number of sub-databases, with the default, and the one I used, being “Major U.S. and World Publications”.
I found an article from TechWeb called “Google Offers Web Searchers, Chrome Users More Privacy”. It was from an Web-based newswire story and talked about Google reducing the amount of time it keeps server log data and changing its Google Suggest feature to make data more private. IP addresses will be made anonymous on server logs after 9 months instead of 18 months, and will be made anonymous for Google Suggest data within 24 hours, or, as a Google Vice President said, “basically, as soon as we practically can.” The data from Google Suggest is collected from terms that people type into Google search boxes without pressing “enter” or clicking “search”. This is to help suggest possible search terms to users. Most of this data is not recorded, but 2% is logged “to monitor and improve the service. This feature is used in both Google Search and Google’s new browser, Chrome, as well as Mozilla Firefox. I found this information useful because it relates directly to Google’s privacy policies, specifically their policies regarding IP address that can identify those who make specific searches. There is a lot of potential for things such as the government subpoenaing search records, which could have implications for criminal prosecutions, for example. There have already been cases of people’s Web searches being used against them in court. In the case of Google Suggest, information could be used that people did not even technically “search” on Google.
The keywords I used for this search were “Google and privacy”. I used them because they were the simplest and most likely to get me useful information. The “and” operator limited results to those that dealt with both Google and privacy. The information was created and published by TechWeb. It seemed to try to be convincing me at the end of the article that Google’s previous privacy practices were poor, but it might now be improving. Its point of view was that Google had not been very concerned about privacy previously, but now seems willing to take privacy advocate’s concerns into consideration. I am not aware of any publisher bias, but I am also not very familiar with the publisher.
The information was created fairly recently. The publication date on the article is September 9, 2008. The information is not too old to use because it reflects recent developments. It might be too old to use if there have been any major new developments since publication, especially those that would substantially affect the information in the article; for instance, if Google decided to reverse their decision.
Add comment December 8, 2008 jenniferirb
Web 3.0
What will the Web look like in 10-15 years? I feel that some of the alternate search methods we have looked at this week will definitely become more mainstream. I can see search results becoming more and more visual, as we move into an increasing visual world. Things will be mapped out to make it easier to see relationships. It will also be easier to target exactly the kind of results that you want. We have already seen this early in the semester, with Google replacing less effective search engines with a different formula. Now, some of Google’s experimental search tools help you to target not only the subject you want, but the kind of information you want about it, such as dates, locations, and measurements.
“Web 3.0” is a response to the Web 2.0 (a Web with more user-driven content) that has been in the news lately, but it draws on early predictions. A big part of Web 3.0 is the so-called Semantic Web, which will make it easier to find the information on the Web, by making search tools that read Web pages more like humans do. We will be able to program applications to automatically do search which now take much human effort. As it was originally conceived, it required a change in the format of Web pages, adding metadata for machines to read. This type of redesign is already being used on many sites, but is very labor-intensive. According to a quote in the article: “‘The Semantic Web is a good-news, bad-news thing,’ says R. David Lankes, an associate professor at Syracuse University’s School of Information Studies. ‘You get the ability to do all these very complex queries, but it takes a tremendous amount of time and metadata to make that happen.'”As a result, a newer approach is to build search tools that can more intelligently search Web pages as they already are. Alex Iskold, the CEO of Adaptive Blue, a browser plug-in that retrieves Web pages related to the ones you visit, “Web pages already contain semantic data. We can understand them, so why shouldn’t computers? Why not build a technology that can parse and process existing services and databases?” I feel that a combination of these two approaches is best. We can both make pages easier to read and search tools more capable of reading them. I think that this is definitely the direction the Web will move in.
Another part of Web 3.0 includes better understand of natural language queries. Jeff Bates, co-founder of Slashdot, says, Right now, search engines can’t tell the difference between Paris Hilton and the Hilton in Paris.” I find this to be one of the main problems with search as it stands today. When I search for one thing, I find a lot of other things with similar names, and have trouble narrowing down my search. Other parts of Web 3.0 include 3D search such as Google Earth, and the ability to search for media with other media instead of with keywords. I find this idea really fascinating. There are already early sites that allow you to find pictures with pictures, or music with music, making it easier to find things that would be hard to find with traditional keywords. This kind of search will probably soon become Web-wide, instead of limited the way it is now.
Add comment November 26, 2008 jenniferirb
RSS, blogs, and delicious
RSS, blogs, and delicious are various ways to find information online. I find them useful in different ways. You can find a blog on pretty much any subject. There a few blogs that I follow regularly or semi-regularly. I find them to be useful for following a particular subject or author I am interested in. For example, I regularly follow trivia, humor,and political blogs. I see this as similar to reading a favorite newspaper column every day. I have a general idea of what will be covered and the writing style that will be used. I generally don’t search for blogs, but happen upon them through links. Therefore, if i was searching for information, I would probably check blogs I already knew rather than doing a blog search. I have used blog search on a few occasions, but I find it hard to find useful information this way. The results are usually rather haphazard. It is useful for finding out what the public is saying about a particular subject, especially pop-culture subjects.
I was not really at all familiar with RSS or delicious before this assignment. I had some sort of vague idea of what they were, but had never used them before. I found RSS sort of interesting. I can see how it could be convenient to look at all your blogs, news sites, and other information in one place, but that’s not really for me. I like to check my sites directly and have them all open in different tabs. That’s just sort of my surfing style. Maybe in the future, if I continue to use Google Reader, I might get used to it. It could definitely help me in remember to check certain sites.
I find the idea behind delicious to be an interesting one. I like the idea of being able to search sites that other people have found useful. With Google, I often have to search through a lot of “chaff” to find the “wheat”, unless I have used very precise search terms, which is often hard to do. With delicious, the results are based on tags, which can make it easier to find relevant results. It can also be bad in a way, if the tags have been applied carelessly. I will probably use delicious again in the future.
Add comment November 18, 2008 jenniferirb
Copyright
I believe that copyright law is in need of change. I believe that it is very important to protect the intellectual property rights of authors, songwriters, artists, etc., but I also think that copyright law as it stands now is too restrictive, and actually restricts creativity and the exchange of ideas. I think that an author has the right to protect his work from being unfairly copied, but not the right to have total and complete control over how her work is used. I believe that once you publish your work, you have to expect people to want to use it in certain ways.
One example is the subject of the Opposing Viewpoints article that I read, online music sharing. One of the articles mentioned that when radio first started, the recording companies tried to stop that, too. Now it has turned out to be a huge benefit to the music industry in terms of publicity. I believe that if the recording companies were more reasonable in allowing licensing deals with P2P file-sharing networks, like they finally did with radio, they could get the best of both worlds: they could receive more exposure for their artists, and still make money off it. The head of RIAA wrote in his essay that file-sharing hurts up and coming artists, but I think they actually have the most to gain off it. P2P networks can expose consumers to artists they may not have otherwise heard of, and they may buy their music in the future.
Another example is derivative works. Obviously, if I write a book, it is not write for you to write a book that is a total ripoff of mine. But what if you add a new spin to it? An example of this is the lawsuit J.K. Rowling filed against a librarian who wrote a Harry Potter encyclopedia. When it was online, she not only allowed but even endorsed it. But when he wanted to publish it as a book, she sued to stop it and won. One could certainly argue that he was adding enough to her work to make it permissible. He spend a great deal of time organizing information from her books in encyclopedia form and adding analysis. The book performed a very useful function as a reference tool. If I had a question about, say, Hippograffs, instead of having to go through each Harry Potter book looking for my answer, I could consult the Harry Potter encyclopedia. Rowling’s lawsuit seemed to be mainly motivated by plans to write her own encyclopedia. One could argue as author, she should have “first crack”, as it were, they librarian had spent countless hours compiling this information before she even announced plans for her own encyclopedia, and I would say that most fans who bought his version would still buy the “official” one whenever it came out. I don’t know if it would be “competition” so much as a complement to her version.
Add comment November 11, 2008 jenniferirb
Google Books
I read two passages from Emily Dickinson: Selected Poems on Google Books. The first was “HOPE is the thing with feathers That perches in the soul, And sings the tune without the words, And never stops at all, And sweetest in the gale is heard ; And sore must be the storm That could abash the little bird That kept so many warm.” The second was “After great pain a formal feeling comes — The nerves sit ceremonious like tombs ; The stiff Heart questions — was it He that bore ? And yesterday — or centuries before?” I find reading on the screen to be a different experience than reading on the page, but I think it is good to have the opportunity. I would not like to read a whole book of the screen, but it is useful for scanning a book to see if it is one I would like to read in paper form. For example, I subscribe to an email book club. I read 20 or so pages of a book in my email, and then decide if I would like to check it out of the library.
I generally find Google Books to be more effective for research than CUNY+. One advantage is what I have already mentioned: that I can often preview a book to see if it is useful to me. In ENG101, I had to do a research paper on an urban legend, and I choose a topic that was rather obscure and hard to find information on because it was a local legend. It was very important for me to be able to see some of the book to determine if it was going to be useful to me. Some books may have made brief reference to the legend, but not contained enough information to use in a paper. I can even search within the book for specific terms. Although most books are limited preview rather than full view, I can usually see enough of the book to determine if I want to find it in paper form. Also, since it was a rather unusual topic, the CUNY library system did not have the books I needed. With Google Books, I was able to search many libraries at once, and found my books at the New York Public Library Main Branch. Google Books allows you to search all public and academic libraries within a given distance of your ZIP code, as well as locate the book in both online and brick-and-mortarbookstores. This way, I do not have to search CUNY+, Brooklyn Public Library, New York Public Library, Queens Library, Amazon, Barnes & Noble, etc, all separately. Google Books essential gives me what CUNY+ does, but with more added.
Add comment November 5, 2008 jenniferirb
My News Habits
I receive my news from a variety of different sources. I watch CNN and MSNBC for general and political news. I watch NY1 for local news and read the Daily News and New York Post. I recieve entertainment news on AOL. I find all types of news on cnn.com, msbnc.com, ny1.com, and Google News. Message boards that I visit frequently have links posted to news stories, including news from other parts of the world. I also like to read Slate, Salon, and the New York Times online, as well as online magazine articles, including Time and Newsweek.
1 comment October 14, 2008 jenniferirb
John McCain
I found this site through a Google search for “john mccain”. It appeared on the first page of results.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000303/
Site: washingtonpost.com
Publisher: The Washington Post Company
Audience: This information is intended for voters.
Timeliness: Updated through October 1st.
Sales hook: This site presents a list of all of McCain’s Senate votes, along with the Democratic and Republican position on each vote. Also listed are his percentage of missed votes, his percentage of votes with his party, and biographical, state, and financial information. There is no commentary or analysis.
Add comment October 6, 2008 jenniferirb
Barack Obama
I found this site through a Google search for “barack obama”. It appeared on the first page of results.
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/o000167/
Site: washingtonpost.com
Publisher: The Washington Post Company
Audience: This information is intended for voters.
Timeliness: Updated through October 1st.
Sales hook: This site presents a list of all of Obama’s Senate votes, along with the Democratic and Republican position on each vote. Also listed are his percentage of missed votes, his percentage of votes with his party, and biographical, state, and financial information. There is no commentary or analysis.
Add comment October 6, 2008 jenniferirb
Future Reading
The main idea of the essay “Future Reading” by Anthony Grafton deals with methods of cataloging information. These methods have taken many different forms over the years, from sorting clay tablets in ancient Mesopotamia through ancient libraries to modern libraries, and into the digital age. Digitization will provide the largest change in cataloging since the invention of the printing press. However, this will take a different form than many people have suggested. It is not likely that there will soon be a single online database of all printed material. The articles gives several factors that will limit this from occurring.
One limitation is copyright. According to the article, it is estimated that up to 75 percent of ever printed are both out of print and still protected by copyright, making them essentially “orphans”. They cannot be easily accessed in print editions, but also cannot be published on the Internet. Another major limitation has to do with the restrictions imposed by money. Very old and rare books are expensive to copy, and the most popular ones are instead copied for use in libraries. Others, especially those from developing countries, are not cataloged either online or in libraries because of poverty and lack of interest from wealthy companies. Access to archival documents may be limited merely by their sheer volume.
More and more documents will eventually become available online, but in separate databases rather than one “universal library”. According to the author, “Neither Google nor anyone else will fuse the proprietary databases of early books and the local systems created by individual archives into one accessible store of information.” It seems highly impractical for everyone who is adding material to online databases to merge them into one mega-database, as some have predicted. However, these separate databases are increasing rapidly in both span and quality. There are all type of specialized databases, including materials in various languages and original formats. New search engines are better than ever at delivering relevant results. The Internet is delivering information to people that they never could have accessed before. At the same times, the Internet will never replace libraries. Seeing a book in person gives you information you could never get from a computer screen. Bindings, marginal notes, and even smells can provide crucial research clues.
Therefore, the main idea of this article is that libraries and digital databases will and should continue to coexist and complement each other. Just as digital databases provide what libraries cannot, libraries also provide what digital databases cannot. Digital databases expand access to important information. Libraries provide access to materials that cannot be digitized. Libraries provide the physical presence that computer screens are lacking. The article talks about libraries in the past destroying books and newspapers because they had been converted to microfilm. Perhaps this is intended as a warning against similar things happening today. While digitization is in a far different category than microfilm (it is much more accessible, for one thing), it is still not a replacement for books; instead, an important complement.
2 comments October 1, 2008 jenniferirb
An Introduction
Hi, my name is Jennifer Hughes, and I am in my third semester at LaGuardia, majoring in Liberal Arts: Social Science and Humanties. I am taking this class to meet a liberal arts requirement, and I picked an online section to better fit into my schedule. I hope to get a lot out of this class by improving my internet research skills to help me with other classes. I also find this class very relevant because I hope to one day be a librarian. The other classes I am taking this term are Ethics and Moral Issues, Fundamentals of Professional Advancement, General Psychology, and East Asian Civilization.
1 comment September 9, 2008 jenniferirb
Jennifer's Internet Research Blog 