Tag Archives: WEB ARCHIVING

Can I have both?

Leave a reply

In the article “The Reading Brain in the Digital Age”, Ferris Jabr writes about the unique advantages of reading on paper and the disadvantages of reading on digital screens supported by research studies across the nation. The results of these studies show that, because of the taxation on the brain from reading on screens we do not gain as much understanding when compared to reading on paper. The article also talks about how reading on screens may be better for scanning or short readings of digital texts while books are better for in depth reading. But why are we comparing when we can have both. Just like having CDs and digital music, the concept is the same, where CDs are like books and digital music is digital text. With that in mind, it’s been a while since the introduction of digital music and yet the CD is still relevant, so we see that nothing can take away the good old school–but to add on it because of the ever changing world. An example of this is given in the  article “The Cobweb.” by  Jill Lepore. Just like the famous library of Alexandria we now have a web of all webs which is a sort of digital version of the library of Alexandria. Thanks to this Internet archive there is now an alternate and/or additional way of storing, researching and finding information. Notice also that this Internet archive does not take away from a traditional library but uses it as a blueprint to create new avenues in this modern technological age.

“The Wayback Machine” and “The Reading Brain”

Leave a reply

The article entitled “The Cobweb” by Jill Lepore was a very interesting and informational read. When I hear the word “Cobweb” I automatically think about the network of treads spread by a spider; indeed I was incorrect in this case. This article revealed information about archiving the web. I was never aware of the fact that webpages has a life span. It was of my belief that everything that is online will be there forever.
In my opinion this can be good or bad because many important information can be found online that may become a part of history in the further which is good. But the web page with incorrect scholarly information for example, should not exist.
With the use of “The Wayback Machine “ the deleted post by Ukrainian separatist leader mentioning taking down an airplane was archived. This machine is a great idea but as mentioned in the article it is not very well kept; as the machine stores webpages and sites by its Uniform Resource Locator (URL) which can be major pain when retrieving archived information. Additionally, will this machine every be available for everyone to use or its it going to be housed under security in that church. Either way, it was fascinating to know the life span of webpages and websites and become aware of “The Wayback Machine”.
The article “The Reading Brain” by Ferris Jabr gives insight on the differences in reading actual paper materials including books and magazines and reading on from a monitor or e-reader. In my opinion we live in an era where it is tedious to carry several books at a time as students for example; when you have the option of having those severals books as Electronic books; it definitely makes life easier.
The study mentioned in the article revealed that people comprehend information less on screens than on paper and studies published later on showed inconsistencies in that result. Personally, I would rather use electronic media because it is more effective for me, than the actual book. Additionally, I believe electronic media will replace books in the future; as technology evolves.

TRUTHS, OR MYTHS ABOUT THE WEB?

Leave a reply

While reading “Cobweb”, I was both a little confused and shocked. I am/was one of those people that believe that everything that is on the website will remain there to haunt you years later. To hear that it doesn’t was actually relieving to me. And no, it’s not just in regards to social media accounts. When she speaks about the court cases and information rotting and being overwritten, I was shocked. I feel like that corrupts the way cases are looked at and the way decisions are made. If information, proof that is vital in the case is here today and gone tomorrow, how can you prepare for your court hearing not knowing if it’ll be there? Some information can be printed, obviously going back to paper form of proof, which I think is great. I thought electronic methods of information cannot get lost. What happened to that proposal? I have mixed emotions about going “paper-free”.

I am not sure if I understood correctly, however it seems like archive.org, technically does have gatekeepers. “The Internet Archive is also stocked with Web pages that are chosen by librarians, specialists like Anatol Shmelev, collecting in subject areas, through a service called Archive It, at archive-it.org, which also allows individuals and institutions to build their own archives”. So unless someone, gets a hold of a URL and wants to archive it, that URL can be rotted within days, months, years, or decades – who knows!

Who knew there is so much controversy and confusion in this era of technology and the World Wide Web! We have got a lot to learn.

In the article, The Reading Brain in the Digital Age”, I agree and disagree with some points. Then again, some points had me thinking. The article states that people reading on screen read “slower, less accurately and less comprehensively”. I happen to read faster on screens that on paper. As I stated before, for textbooks, I prefer having paper form and I never knew why. Maybe the studies are true- unconsciously I understand the material better if I read it from the paper, compared to the screen. “…people approach computers and tablets with a state of mind less conducive to learning than the one they bring to paper”. This was another point that I never quite thought about. If it is outside of school, I prefer reading news articles, magazine articles and short pieces of information on screens.