Group items tagged

This is a completely pointless website that kind of made me laugh. I'm one of those people of 50% of the time uses "Google" as a verb ("Just Google it") and who 50% of the time still asks an actual human being the question first but inevitably gets: "Well, did you Google it?" So...this isn't an article. But still kind of funny. Digital technology is certainly changing our language: Just Google it, Wiki it, I friended her the other day, when I was Pinning, I wish I had a "Like" button right now!, and so on...

Google spent $5.03 million on lobbying in the first quarter of the year, almost matching its entire 2010 lobbying budget of $5.2 million. In comparison, Apple spent $500,000 and Microsoft spent $1.79 million during the same quarter. If Google maintains this pace, it will outspend the entire tobacco industry ($17 million) and the combined spending of JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup ($18 million).

Google is offering a Chromebook and cash prizes totaling $1 million for anyone who can hack its Chrome browser at the CanSecWest security conference next week: $40,000 for "partial Chrome exploit" and $60,000 for "full Chrome exploit." This event illustrates a concept from this week's readings: community collaboration can increase a service's effectiveness and bolster a company's success. The Google Chrome Security Team even stated that the contest provides "a big learning opportunity" and ultimately enables them to better protect users by revealing bugs and providing information about hacking techniques.

It is like at the start of Sneakers when they are paid to break into banks and show the various security issues. Also, it would be pretty sweet to log $40,000-$60,000 in that short a period of time. I suspect there would also be a job offer that came along with it.

We look over the world through Google.But who looks over Google?

Another shrouding tactic is to use the search engine DuckDuckGo, which distinguishes itself with a "We do not track or bubble you!" policy. Bubbling is the filtering of search results based on your search history. (Bubbling also means you are less likely to see opposing points of view or be exposed to something fresh and new.) *I don't particularly care about my privacy (nothing to hide and honestly don't care whose watching), but I do care about the information being fed to me through search engines. I pride myself on doing all the research I can before supporting or criticizing a position. If google is simply feeding me what I want to hear, how do I know I have the full story? This seems like a particularly nefarious form of censorship--one that makes sense in an age of "truthiness" and pandering to ignorance. Bad google. No bubbles.

Nature Valley has definitely put a spin on what it means to explore the great outdoors. We've had a few conversations in class about the difference between reality and virtual reality. While I strongly argue that Watching a video or seeing pictures does not come close to first hand experience, sites like this are good for exploring places you might like to go or to remind you of favorite places you've been. It also makes me wonder if there's anything that Google doesn't dabble in.

According to Google, over 20 million books have been digitized thus far.

This is a google book that discusses some of the same things I mentioned in my post regarding the use of wikipedia and other networks and how that shapes our ideas of freedom.

The changing privacy policy for Google came up in last class (I think Dibs mentioned it), and I thought this was an interesting article that talks about how difficult it is to navigate around the changes.

I know the semester has come to a close, but I still thought this was an interesting article that ties in with our last section on video games.

Google's New Search Algorithm to Crack Down on 'Black Hat Webspam' By Ars Technica By Matthew Braga, Ars Technica Nefarious search engine optimizers be warned. Google is coming for you-again. Following previous changes to Google's ranking and page layout algorithms, the search giant is pushing yet another update to its algorithm this week with the hopes of curbing "black hat webspam" from creeping into search results. * Google thinks that by increasing the complexity of its algorithms, it can weed out malicious intent. Funny thing about complexity is that it tends to breed more complexity. This reminds me a bit of Bogost's book on games. This cat and mouse scenario between Google and fake SEO creators seems to lead to ever evolving code much like in natural systems where the adaptations of the prey animal to take advantage of an environment are eventually matched by a predatory animal with adaptations designed to match or exceed the prey's abilities...

A neat -WIRED- blog documenting new developments in software (mostly Internet based), also offering some tips-and-tricks kinds of features too.

Whoops

The new Google CEO, who has been on the job for a year talks about the privacy policy which garnered a lot of criticism. Interestingly and not surprisingly, he presents this case a week before the announcement of Google's first quarter earnings

Questions of names and online identity come up in this article, which talks about how Google Plus has changed its policy of requiring people to use their real names when registering for accounts.

Even though Dibs is right in saying that erasing your history does not essentially change anything, if you want to access a utopian fantasy, this could be helpful.

Well, they didn't have anyone nag the $1 million prize for a full compromise, but security analysts did find a few things to patch up anyways.

This seems like a smart commentary on many of the issues we're seeing in the book and it helps modernize the Miller v California debate. It's again, largely focused on the idea of policing rights which focuses on freedoms of expression.

Interesting in terms of issues of ownership. Once our identities are "published" online, who owns them? Who "owns" our search histories? Google owns most of mine, I'd say, but it also allows me to supposedly delete items. Are our search histories too public now to be hidden? And who ever said we had a right to privacy on the world wide web? It does seem contradictory to the nature of a "web."

A provocative article that claims : "We will never have Web 3.0, because the Web's dead."

Careful who you de-friend! I was interested in any news around the changing of language based on our use of technology - things like using "Google" or "Wiki" as verbs, for example - and thought of "friending." When I Googled this and looked at News, there were several stories to this effect!

While sites like Facebook and Google seem to be taking over the world, it would be nice to be able to eliminate some of the sites we all are constantly having to check or update or interact on or remember logins and passwords for! Just think: no more Blackboard, you're already on Facebook all the time-why not post for class while you're there? :-)