I've been term paper oblivion for the last few days. I have a big, weighty term paper due for all of my three classes, while I don't dislike my classes, I certainly don't find two of the three final assignments at all helpful.
The one assignment I am excited about is using semiotics to help understand folksonomies and/or social bookmarking. I chose semiotics as I previously hated it (as mentioned in an earlier post) and thought this would be a cool way to grow as a person and researcher. How foolish I was!
I don't know if I'll have anything earth-shattering to say about it, but once it's complete - and if I don't fail - I'll post it (or highlights) here.
In the meantime, for those asking me what semiotics or folksonomies are, here are some good short primers I found on YouTube.
Intro to Semiotics
Intro to Social Bookmarking and Folksonomies
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
CBC.ca most popular items last year - a telling look at Canadians
CBC.ca, Canada’s predominant online news source, has published the most clicked-on and most emailed stories of 2007.
While our news surfing isn't a national disgrace, our emailing habits may be.
Most clicked-on
The top 25 most clicked-on stories are mostly legitimate news stories and not a single item about Paris Hilton or her ilk. I’m proud to say of my fellow Canadians that of the 25 top items, only two were not legitimate news stories. One of them, which was the second most popular article, was Vancouver patient oozes green blood which I must confess I remember clicking-on when it originally came out in June. But how can you not click-on something of such World Weekly News caliber appearing in staid CBC?
There was only one story had an entertainment focus, the Chris Benoit murder/suicide, but this is hardly coverage of Britney Spears latest driving incident (though Canadian Keifer Sutherland’s drunk driving conviction and continued commercials for Ford didn’t crack the top 25 either.)
While the top story, hitting positions 1, 7, and 16 was the Virginia Tech slayings (#16 being coverage of a Canadian victim), the story most fixated on is the rising loonie. Guess Canadians were either excited to gloat at the Americans or looking forward to cross border shopping (BTW, there has never been a better time to shop at American websites – we’ve got some great deals!).
Also, of the 25 articles all except for two (which were about Virginia Tech) had a prominent Canadian angle. I’m not sure if CBC.ca visitors are largely looking for Canadian news or if items with a more local bent capture more interest.
Most emailed
I will make no attempt at any lofty explanations of the top ten most emailed stories on CBC.ca.
Only one was a legitimate news item. Clearly, people only email friends of the most offbeat, bizarre nature.
Back to my World Weekly News theory – everyone loves these freakish stories, and all the more so when CBC reports them.
These items were so much fun I had to list them here:
1. Thomas & Friends toys recalled for lead poisoning danger
2. Moles linked with slower aging: study
3. Left-handedness gene linked to mental illness, suggests study
4. Vancouver patient oozes green blood
5. Don't poo-poo technique: Fecal transplant can cure superbug, doctors say
6. Winnipeg pizza place serves up side of porn
7. Scientists make gut-brain connection to autism
8. Catholic Church only true church, Vatican says
9. What the ...? Workplace profanity boosts morale: study
10. Diet soft drinks linked to health risks: study
I must say #5, #6 and #9 really caught my attention and made me click through, so I can't take any moral highground either. I'd like to say I read all of CBC.ca excellent political and foreign coverage. I'd like to say that. Their technology coverage is very good and I read it regularly, so it's not all green blood and pizza porn.
While our news surfing isn't a national disgrace, our emailing habits may be.
Most clicked-on
The top 25 most clicked-on stories are mostly legitimate news stories and not a single item about Paris Hilton or her ilk. I’m proud to say of my fellow Canadians that of the 25 top items, only two were not legitimate news stories. One of them, which was the second most popular article, was Vancouver patient oozes green blood which I must confess I remember clicking-on when it originally came out in June. But how can you not click-on something of such World Weekly News caliber appearing in staid CBC?
There was only one story had an entertainment focus, the Chris Benoit murder/suicide, but this is hardly coverage of Britney Spears latest driving incident (though Canadian Keifer Sutherland’s drunk driving conviction and continued commercials for Ford didn’t crack the top 25 either.)
While the top story, hitting positions 1, 7, and 16 was the Virginia Tech slayings (#16 being coverage of a Canadian victim), the story most fixated on is the rising loonie. Guess Canadians were either excited to gloat at the Americans or looking forward to cross border shopping (BTW, there has never been a better time to shop at American websites – we’ve got some great deals!).
Also, of the 25 articles all except for two (which were about Virginia Tech) had a prominent Canadian angle. I’m not sure if CBC.ca visitors are largely looking for Canadian news or if items with a more local bent capture more interest.
Most emailed
I will make no attempt at any lofty explanations of the top ten most emailed stories on CBC.ca.
Only one was a legitimate news item. Clearly, people only email friends of the most offbeat, bizarre nature.
Back to my World Weekly News theory – everyone loves these freakish stories, and all the more so when CBC reports them.
These items were so much fun I had to list them here:
1. Thomas & Friends toys recalled for lead poisoning danger
2. Moles linked with slower aging: study
3. Left-handedness gene linked to mental illness, suggests study
4. Vancouver patient oozes green blood
5. Don't poo-poo technique: Fecal transplant can cure superbug, doctors say
6. Winnipeg pizza place serves up side of porn
7. Scientists make gut-brain connection to autism
8. Catholic Church only true church, Vatican says
9. What the ...? Workplace profanity boosts morale: study
10. Diet soft drinks linked to health risks: study
I must say #5, #6 and #9 really caught my attention and made me click through, so I can't take any moral highground either. I'd like to say I read all of CBC.ca excellent political and foreign coverage. I'd like to say that. Their technology coverage is very good and I read it regularly, so it's not all green blood and pizza porn.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Best of Webslinger 2007
With 2007 soon to be finished, I figured it would be a good time to revisit my blog postings from the past year.
These blog postings still offer some useful insight into Internet trends and best practices.
I tried to keep it to one post per month, but Webslinger is just too jammed-packed with goodness to follow that arbitrary limit.
January
Coming Soon: The Death of the Web Page
The Missing Quick Link
February
Can a million penguins typing away create the great novel?
March
Site index - to do or not to do?
April
Facebook is cyber-crack
Breadcrumbs help hold a website together
May
Website Accessibility Full of Barriers
June
Relaunch Post-Mortem
July
Keep your homepages clean
Caught Up In the Semantic Web
August
Quality Ingredients Make Bookmarks Del.icio.us
September
Second Dot Bomb To Hit Any Time Now
October
Biggest Canadian Internet Success Stories
November
On the Royal Roads (critique of e-Learning)
December
Browsers Wars Wage On – 1 Dead (Netscape), Opera Fights On
I'll be working on term papers (including a semiotic analysis of social bookmarking) over the next few days, but if you have some time before the holidays are over then please check these out.
These blog postings still offer some useful insight into Internet trends and best practices.
I tried to keep it to one post per month, but Webslinger is just too jammed-packed with goodness to follow that arbitrary limit.
January
Coming Soon: The Death of the Web Page
The Missing Quick Link
February
Can a million penguins typing away create the great novel?
March
Site index - to do or not to do?
April
Facebook is cyber-crack
Breadcrumbs help hold a website together
May
Website Accessibility Full of Barriers
June
Relaunch Post-Mortem
July
Keep your homepages clean
Caught Up In the Semantic Web
August
Quality Ingredients Make Bookmarks Del.icio.us
September
Second Dot Bomb To Hit Any Time Now
October
Biggest Canadian Internet Success Stories
November
On the Royal Roads (critique of e-Learning)
December
Browsers Wars Wage On – 1 Dead (Netscape), Opera Fights On
I'll be working on term papers (including a semiotic analysis of social bookmarking) over the next few days, but if you have some time before the holidays are over then please check these out.
Friday, December 28, 2007
Browsers Wars Wage On – 1 Dead (Netscape), Opera Fights On
Huge news regarding web browsers
Netscape is officially dead as of today. (See Netscape’s blog or CNET for details)
Netscape was practically dead once AOL purchased it, and then buried when AOL decided to use Internet Explorer as its default browser. Now the tombstone can be engraved.
The browser wars have waged for years. A couple years ago it seemed like Microsoft’s Internet Explorer had won. But spunky Netscape went open source, becoming Mozilla and thus Netscape’s scion Firefox was born to continue the familial battle.
Netscape continued on, but the battle was essentially fought by Firefox, who made some significant ground in the last couple years.
Yes there Apple’s Safari, but it hasn’t been a serious player – rather more a Switzerland figure in holding their own cloistered territory but not penetrating beyond their rather neutral ground.
As a web developer, I loved the simplicity of programming for one browser. Sure made testing a lot easier and you knew what you were going to get. So I didn’t mind the IE monopoly, until years went by without any improvements in the IE browser.
During the years between Netscape’s demise and Firefox’s glorious rise, Opera kept up the good fight. Their browser introduced improvements and proved that we all didn’t have to settle for a static IE.
Opera continues to fight valiantly
This month Norway-based Opera filed an antitrust compliant with the European Union. As Opera states their grounds for this complaint:
While I can see a case for bundling IE with Windows, I’m not sure how not following web standards is antitrust?
I’m all for web standards. In fact, during my efforts earlier in the year to make my company’s website accessibility, I decided to drop some good techniques because IE doesn’t support them. Almost all our visitors use IE, so there was little point.
It is instances like this that give cause to the fight. I look forward to seeing the outcome of Opera’s recent attack.
I mourn the loss of Netscape, but thanks to Opera and Firefox the war is not lost!
Netscape is officially dead as of today. (See Netscape’s blog or CNET for details)
Netscape was practically dead once AOL purchased it, and then buried when AOL decided to use Internet Explorer as its default browser. Now the tombstone can be engraved.
The browser wars have waged for years. A couple years ago it seemed like Microsoft’s Internet Explorer had won. But spunky Netscape went open source, becoming Mozilla and thus Netscape’s scion Firefox was born to continue the familial battle.
Netscape continued on, but the battle was essentially fought by Firefox, who made some significant ground in the last couple years.
Yes there Apple’s Safari, but it hasn’t been a serious player – rather more a Switzerland figure in holding their own cloistered territory but not penetrating beyond their rather neutral ground.
As a web developer, I loved the simplicity of programming for one browser. Sure made testing a lot easier and you knew what you were going to get. So I didn’t mind the IE monopoly, until years went by without any improvements in the IE browser.
During the years between Netscape’s demise and Firefox’s glorious rise, Opera kept up the good fight. Their browser introduced improvements and proved that we all didn’t have to settle for a static IE.
Opera continues to fight valiantly
This month Norway-based Opera filed an antitrust compliant with the European Union. As Opera states their grounds for this complaint:
The complaint describes how Microsoft is abusing its dominant position by tying its browser, Internet Explorer, to the Windows operating system and by hindering interoperability by not following accepted Web standards.
While I can see a case for bundling IE with Windows, I’m not sure how not following web standards is antitrust?
I’m all for web standards. In fact, during my efforts earlier in the year to make my company’s website accessibility, I decided to drop some good techniques because IE doesn’t support them. Almost all our visitors use IE, so there was little point.
It is instances like this that give cause to the fight. I look forward to seeing the outcome of Opera’s recent attack.
I mourn the loss of Netscape, but thanks to Opera and Firefox the war is not lost!
Sunday, December 23, 2007
The Cult of the Amateur Web 2.0 Critic
I got an early Christmas gift of "The Cult of the Amateur" by Andrew Keen and I have already finished it.
The book is short and offers little original or insightful web 2.0 or even web 1.0 criticism. There is some good, topical commentary on the downside of user-generated content, blogs, citizen journalism, and online copyright chaos. But a lot of the book rehashes tired, old Internet (and granted legitimate) criticisms about Internet porn and gambling, with some saccharine lamentations for the death of newspaper classifieds and others. Then much of the book simplistically blames the Internet for the death of record stores and identity theft as if the Internet was the only factor in their demise. The book also glazes over things with vehement tunnel vision.
Still, I don't regret having read it.
There has been so much hyperbole about the web lately and particularly web 2.o (I have not been alone in predicting this bubble 2.0 to burst soon.) I firmly believe that boosterism doesn't ultimately help - it pushes both the good and bad aspects forward. Acknowledging the shortcomings as you go and addressing them builds something much stronger and much greater.
When Keen's book came out in caused a stir in the blogosphere. By and large, I heard critics denouncing the book with the one-sided fervour of Keen. There was no insightful dialogue going on either way.
I understand that Keen wants to sell books and he does this by being sensational. You don't make a buzz with a treatise showing both sides of an issue. So, Keen takes a stand and single-mindedly argues it.
Keen does raise some very good points that need to be discussed and acted upon.
For instance, why do so many people believe - or at least want to believe - so much rubbish news that comes out of the blogs? Why do people need to have news fresh by the minute instead of waiting for the facts to come in. Why would I want my news or commentary from someone more opinionated than knowledgeable (I don't want any comments on this point - it's a rhetorical question!). These are the main reasons I so rarely read blogs. But then again, many people blog about things that no other sources would cover.
Keen is also critical of the low quality of most YouTube content. And again, why so many people watch it (mystery) and believe it all to be true (stupidity). Again, I almost never watch YouTube except that it has allowed some small-scale companies to distribute content otherwise not feasible, such as CommonCraft's educational & entertaining videos. And yes, I have been known to watch a few irresistible memes/fad stuff on YouTube. It's not like everything on TV or in magazines is all enlightening fare either - why should Mark Burnett and Rupert Murdoch have the monopoly on manufacturing crap?
Like Keen, I also find the flagrant copyright violations that the Internet enables to be troubling. Not all Web 2.0 fans are digital communists. Obviously, people should be compensated for their work, although more reasonable pricing would help everyone.
There is a lot of things wrong with what's happening on the Net, but I believe that even greater, more positive things are happening on it. I think it's important to address the problems. Although I wish it were a better book, I applaud Keen for proclaiming that the emperor has no clothes.
The book is short and offers little original or insightful web 2.0 or even web 1.0 criticism. There is some good, topical commentary on the downside of user-generated content, blogs, citizen journalism, and online copyright chaos. But a lot of the book rehashes tired, old Internet (and granted legitimate) criticisms about Internet porn and gambling, with some saccharine lamentations for the death of newspaper classifieds and others. Then much of the book simplistically blames the Internet for the death of record stores and identity theft as if the Internet was the only factor in their demise. The book also glazes over things with vehement tunnel vision.
Still, I don't regret having read it.
There has been so much hyperbole about the web lately and particularly web 2.o (I have not been alone in predicting this bubble 2.0 to burst soon.) I firmly believe that boosterism doesn't ultimately help - it pushes both the good and bad aspects forward. Acknowledging the shortcomings as you go and addressing them builds something much stronger and much greater.
When Keen's book came out in caused a stir in the blogosphere. By and large, I heard critics denouncing the book with the one-sided fervour of Keen. There was no insightful dialogue going on either way.
I understand that Keen wants to sell books and he does this by being sensational. You don't make a buzz with a treatise showing both sides of an issue. So, Keen takes a stand and single-mindedly argues it.
Keen does raise some very good points that need to be discussed and acted upon.
For instance, why do so many people believe - or at least want to believe - so much rubbish news that comes out of the blogs? Why do people need to have news fresh by the minute instead of waiting for the facts to come in. Why would I want my news or commentary from someone more opinionated than knowledgeable (I don't want any comments on this point - it's a rhetorical question!). These are the main reasons I so rarely read blogs. But then again, many people blog about things that no other sources would cover.
Keen is also critical of the low quality of most YouTube content. And again, why so many people watch it (mystery) and believe it all to be true (stupidity). Again, I almost never watch YouTube except that it has allowed some small-scale companies to distribute content otherwise not feasible, such as CommonCraft's educational & entertaining videos. And yes, I have been known to watch a few irresistible memes/fad stuff on YouTube. It's not like everything on TV or in magazines is all enlightening fare either - why should Mark Burnett and Rupert Murdoch have the monopoly on manufacturing crap?
Like Keen, I also find the flagrant copyright violations that the Internet enables to be troubling. Not all Web 2.0 fans are digital communists. Obviously, people should be compensated for their work, although more reasonable pricing would help everyone.
There is a lot of things wrong with what's happening on the Net, but I believe that even greater, more positive things are happening on it. I think it's important to address the problems. Although I wish it were a better book, I applaud Keen for proclaiming that the emperor has no clothes.
I Don't Get Google's Holiday Logo!!!
I love Google's changing logos, particularly around the holidays. Some of them are really cool, funky, or clever.
The current one is too clever for me though.
I don't understand it at all! Mousing over it reveals "Happy Holidays" so it definitely was intended to represent Christmas. There's some sort of Santa-like figure made out of ribbon, this I can discern, but why is Santa being whipped around by a crane? And why is the crane hanging some poor construction worker? How does this all wish me a merry holiday googling?
I feel like Elaine on Seinfeld just not getting the cartoon in The New Yorker. If you can figure it out, please let me know below!!!!
BTW, Yahoo copied Google awhile ago and started changing their logos every now and then. As a victory for Canada (as if the higher Canadian dollar lately wasn't enough) Yahoo Canada's logo is much nicer than the main Yahoo logo! (Ah who am I kidding, it's not like anything Yahoo Canada does anything in Canada. Their tiny office on Toronto's Front Street I've heard doesn't do anything except sell ads.)
Dec. 23 Update: Google changed their logo to another weird construction holiday logo and I'm more mystified! It appears they may be working towards something, click on the logo to see the others in the series. But I still don't get it and it's not making my yuletide festive, rather frustrating!
The current one is too clever for me though.
I don't understand it at all! Mousing over it reveals "Happy Holidays" so it definitely was intended to represent Christmas. There's some sort of Santa-like figure made out of ribbon, this I can discern, but why is Santa being whipped around by a crane? And why is the crane hanging some poor construction worker? How does this all wish me a merry holiday googling?
I feel like Elaine on Seinfeld just not getting the cartoon in The New Yorker. If you can figure it out, please let me know below!!!!
BTW, Yahoo copied Google awhile ago and started changing their logos every now and then. As a victory for Canada (as if the higher Canadian dollar lately wasn't enough) Yahoo Canada's logo is much nicer than the main Yahoo logo! (Ah who am I kidding, it's not like anything Yahoo Canada does anything in Canada. Their tiny office on Toronto's Front Street I've heard doesn't do anything except sell ads.)
Dec. 23 Update: Google changed their logo to another weird construction holiday logo and I'm more mystified! It appears they may be working towards something, click on the logo to see the others in the series. But I still don't get it and it's not making my yuletide festive, rather frustrating!
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Cyberchondriac or healthy surfing?
The CBC, my favourite online news source, ran a story three days ago on how people obsessively look up their medical ailments on the Web. The article, while pointing out some legitimate concerns, tended to depict these people as crackpots and hypochondriacs. Indeed, the article was even called Cyberchondriacs.
The article, I believe, missed some critical points:
I do see the problems cited by the CBC. Among the problems of researching health issues online are people relying on inaccurate websites and also those who decide to treat themselves and don't go to a doctor.
Another problem, which I experienced two months ago, is that it's easy on the Web to find worst case scenarios and horror stories. When my daughter had to be put under anesthesia for dental work, we found stories of children dying as a result of similar work. It did make me REALLY worried. But we were able to contextualize the rarity of these situations and to ask the dentist about precautions. The dentist, unlike some others, had taken extra steps (eg. hiring two extra specialists) that reassured us that he was better option than other dentists who did the procedure alone. I'd rather have known the risks and accounted for them than to not have known at all.
Without the Web, we would have been in the dark on this issue and many other vital health concerns.
The article, I believe, missed some critical points:
- People are forced to turn to the Internet as our current medical system is so inadequate.
For one, doctors spend scant minutes with a patient. Even our current doctor, who is less hurried than most, does not spend more than 15-20 minutes per visit at the most. There is little time for doctors to even get all the symptoms, let alone spend time educating their patients on the issue, full treatment options, and alternatives. Actually, alternatives are rarely mentioned - it is just pop a pill and call me in a few days if things don't get better. Information on the Web, and there are some great health websites that present reliable information, gives the details doctors do not provide so that patients can make informed decisions about their health. Maybe I have a trust issue, but just getting a pill and going on my merry way doesn't work for me - I need to know the issue in more depth, like should I avoid certain foods, not travel, try this natural remedy as well, etc. - The article points on those who constantly think they are sick, but there are those who don't seek medical attention either at all or in timely fashion. Getting a sense of the severity of an issue from online sources can help encourage someone to seek medical attention.
- Second opinions - why our society think doctors are gods is beyond me. They are human and apt to make mistakes, not have time to fully look into something, or not know about all the details or latest research of certain issues. While one is often encouraged to "get a second opinion," it's not so easy to get another doctor and not practical for more minor issues. The Web can help be that second opinion. My wife has many times successfully diagnosed health ailments online that were later confirmed by the doctor. This made me trust the doctor all the more.
Well over half of online Canadians — 58 per cent — search the Internet for health information from home, up from 46 per cent five years ago, according to Statistics Canada.
I do see the problems cited by the CBC. Among the problems of researching health issues online are people relying on inaccurate websites and also those who decide to treat themselves and don't go to a doctor.
Another problem, which I experienced two months ago, is that it's easy on the Web to find worst case scenarios and horror stories. When my daughter had to be put under anesthesia for dental work, we found stories of children dying as a result of similar work. It did make me REALLY worried. But we were able to contextualize the rarity of these situations and to ask the dentist about precautions. The dentist, unlike some others, had taken extra steps (eg. hiring two extra specialists) that reassured us that he was better option than other dentists who did the procedure alone. I'd rather have known the risks and accounted for them than to not have known at all.
Without the Web, we would have been in the dark on this issue and many other vital health concerns.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)