The development of new technologies, social media is taking an important place in our everyday life. People, especially young, are intensely monitoring their world and their peer’s. They constantly feel the need to see and know what their friends do about their life and to be seeing and approved by their friends also. The rapidity in which information is shared nowadays makes it almost impossible to catch up with daily information and news. This advancement also plays an invaluable role in the way information is shared around the world; it connects the world of information and allows people from everywhere to get the same news at the same time. One of the most important examples is Twitter. Twitter played a big in the Arab Spring that started in 2010 in Tunisia and sprayed across the Arab world. In times where information is crucial, in the future, information will change the way people interact and will considerably bring change to the world.
The fact that Google is the most used search engine explains the reason why a lot of people trust its services. These services include devices (Android, Chromebook), browsers, search engines, and online services such Gmail, Drive… When people subscribe to those services, we provide some personal information that Google has some rights over. Even though, we have a choice of using other services, Google’s ability to provide fast, and sometimes more reliable resources, to our inquiries, for instance, when it comes searching, is what makes it trustworthy compared to its competitors. Over the past few years Google has changed the way people search information, and the way that information is shared online. With Google’s ability to browse over millions of online databases in a very short amount of time and suggest related information, has stepped up its trustworthiness. Even though the satisfaction we get from Google using their search engine, for example, does not reflect reality. I do trust Google compared to other services, such as Yahoo or Bing.
The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) states that any person has the right to request an access to federal agencies records or information. Each federal government agency is required under the Freedom of Information Act to disclose records requested in writing by any person. This is beneficial to citizen because it requires agencies to inform citizens on what is going on, also to make available for public inspection, opinion and statement of policy. It is necessary for government information to be available to the public; an unclassified document should not remain secret since people have the right to access the information in order to improve the culture of transparency. Citizens request records to learn more about their government and government officials. Citizens are concerned about transparency in the government.
Posted in Uncategorized
Martin’s ideas about knowledge and how it is distributed and consumed are far important for him than charging money to whoever wants to read his chapter. It goes against his beliefs and the fundamental that knowledge should available and free of charge to anyone seeking it. His personal views about knowledge and its characterization denounce the way that certain authoritative establishments that control and dictate how knowledge is perceived within different institutions. It underlines the egotistical drives behind research and lays out the impacts of the different results often driven by funds, disciplines, hierarchy and competition. Often the influence of the systems that fund research is so considerable that it clouds the judgment of the researchers implicated. Research is so institutionalized that the few who hold keys to expert knowledge are dismissive of outside groups who could contribute greatly to research causes.
In his search for solutions, Martin suggests different ways of conducting research. He suggests that research could involve the community where no restrictions are permitted, allowing everyone to contribute in their own ways rather following hierarchy and competition. He also proposes independent scholarship where independent researchers like him conduct their own studies and publications, which exemplifies the availability of his chapter online for free.
Infrastructure knowledge can refer to the relation between data, information, knowledge and wisdom. This pyramidal hierarchy defined by Weinberger explains how data can become wisdom, even though it does not necessarily reflects the way the new era interprets information. When a lot of data is presented to us without any structure, that data becomes senseless and irrelevant; however, data put together in relevant manner develop into coordinated information. A well put together information can be defined as knowledge and since knowledge could be interpreted different depending on the subject matter, knowledge itself can be vague and meaningless.
As data and information become more and more available, a sense of information overload has developed over time. The technological advances have enabled information processing services to ensure the availability of a wide range of information. As mentioned in the reading, “…too much information can hurt our ability to think…”, which can clearly relate to our daily life, where everybody uses search engines, like google, to answer the easiest questions instead of analyzing it and doing research about it.
As information technology evolves, it is becoming hard to process all the information we receive, and sometimes our knowledge is not expanding to understand the world.
Although classification refers sometimes to categorization, the term carries more complex forms in terms of research. While it seems simple to search online and find relevant results on what we are searching for, a lot of details go into interpreting or finding those results. As suggested in the book and the article, when we search, we search different ways depending on the search engines we use, sometimes we get more results than we need, sometimes we get irrelevant results or sometimes we do not get any results, as underlines Badke in the book, “-search is a messy thing, often leaving us with far more results that we don’t need than the few we do”. Noting that all the information from the search is already classified in databases, this classification can be proper to specific search engines. However, the classification used in the databases is important because it determines the efficiency of the results we get and their organization, for instance, as recommends Badke, adding metadata helps categorize data, narrow and specify our results, which results in a much-sophisticated retrieval capability. He states that “any database is only as useful as its retrieval capability”. The article “Folksonomy: a game of high-tech (and high-stakes) tag” and Badke both highlight the difference between a classified information where someone decides the different classifications, which results in a better search (controlled vocabularies); and a more flexible way of organizing the information using tags where everyone can create their own classification. In the later one, there is no organization, for example in Flickr, people use different tag names for the same category of photos.
Every person should have a right to choose whether or not any information related to personal life, family or work should be available to anyone. The “right to be forgotten” should be enforced to protect people from being misrepresented or even discriminated against due to some misinformation pertaining to their personal life, views, values or beliefs. Freedom of speech does not necessarily mean using a person’s personal information to attack their privacy.
Digital identity could refer to any information on someone adopted in cyberspace by an individual, organization or electronic device. This information could be an email address, a date of birth, an address, a credit card number or even a social security number… Organizations or individuals to whom we voluntarily or involuntarily subscribe by filling an online form or opening an online account can control our digital identity.
Questions from: What the “right to be forgotten” means for privacy in a digital age?
1)-Why corporations could buy, sell or share people’ personal information without their consent?
2)-How is it possible that the United States find it hard to adopt the same privacy policies as Europe?
3)-How one can assure that their personal information remains private and that a company would erase the information as soon as their account is deleted?
Questions from: Learning from Gawker’s Attempt to Erase the Past
1)-As mistakes happen in publications, why should unproven information be published information?
2)-Do journalists think about the consequences of publishing unverified information?
3)-Do you really think removing an online false article with no explanation would hurt a newspaper’ credibility?
The daily information we receive is often tinted by corporate influence in such that sometimes we wonder if we should trust many news agencies. The fact that a lot of news agencies are financed by big corporations or are themselves corporate affect the veracity of the information that they report and the investigative journalism that they provide. The conflict of interest that arises between corporations and news agencies makes the readers question the sources of the information. For example, recently we have seen a lot of coverage of the protests against the Pipeline project in North Dakota, but we don’t know exactly the big players behind the project. “Democracy now”, which is an independent news agency reported the interest that big banks and corporations were financing the project even though they claim to help the protection of the environment. As the report indicates, after an independent investigation by Food & Water Watch, how these corporations are investing a lot of money for future profits; this information was not reported by big news agencies.