Group items tagged

We often talk about how our customers (a.k.a. users, researchers, authors, readers, etc.) are being overwhelmed by the flood of information available today. Let's not forget that we are consumers of information as well. How are we handling information overload? How are we finding the "must-reads" in our profession?

Very interesting. The answers from this blog actually correspond with a conversation I recently had with a customer (I am a librarian). He said his first source of keeping up in his field (computer-human interface) is via Twitter, the same as several people said here.

Twitter as a source of information about information.

A great resource on curating ideas created by Corinne Wiesgerber, a professor at St. Edwards University, for her communications class. Includes a slide-share with helpful definition of curation. You can follow Corinne on Twitter: @corinnew.

Thanks for sharing this! I particularly like the emphasis on using social search in addition to a standard google search. Thoughtful curation is a critical part of effect learning networks.

Who owns the Data or the question should be, who is manipulating the Data? The article by Alistair Croll on who owns the Data asks big questions but fails short to highlight the fact that there is someone out there manipulating the well intended, innocent data into their own profit motive agendas. Many times, I have received emails, phone calls and SMS from sales people trying to sell me something. How they got my contact details is definitely my guess that someone is busy manipulating the data, I gave away for profit motives. At the end of the article the writer makes an opinion that, we are using the internet for free? Which I disagree, because our data makes and runs the internet. Without our data, the internet will not be the internet. Without our data on Facebook, facebooks or twitter will be blank, no value and worthless. If companies are paying people to participate in surveys and opinions, then it means our free data we upload on the internet, facebook and twitter is a payment for us to use the internet. After all we have to pay to the internet service providers for us to access to use the internet, and face book. Or someone is even suppose to pay for our data, in fact we have made things easy for the marketing people who now just sit behind their laptops and manipulate our free given data for their own consumptions. Or maybe I should console myself that, since the article is old, maybe someone has answered my question?

A mi me pareció que el artículo señala dos puntos centrales, aunque resolver el tema es una empresa peliaguda. El asunto de lo gratuito en un sistema basado en la ganancia y la capacidad de aprovechar los resquicios que abren las situaciones nuevas y una buena dosis de desorientación generalizada: 1. As we use the Internet for "free," we have to remember that if we're not paying for something, we're not the customer. We are in fact the product being sold - or, more specifically, our data is. 2. The important question isn't who owns the data. Ultimately, we all do. A better question is, who owns the means of analysis? Because that's how, as Brand suggests, you get the right information in the right place. The digital divide isn't about who owns data - it's about who can put that data to work. Tal vez, como menciona natashasana, el problema sea más complejo, y reducir la manipulación al negocio deje temas relavantes fuera. Y la información que usan/manipulan es la que todos aportamos. Cierto, pero no todos la usamos o aprovechamos de la misma forma.

I think more and more people are leaving the real world and going to the World Wide Web

This was from back in August, but is again timely in light of recent events.

The bot was created by an 18 years old programer. The objective is monitor the wikipedia changes made by government IP address. For exemple, guys from a public bank made some changes in the "Cimorelli" wikipedia page. Here an article (in portuguese) to explain how it works: http://gizmodo.uol.com.br/brwikiedits-wikipedia-governo

Description: "How 'bridging elites' help on Twitter, perceptions of news by a skeptical public, and Wikipedia pages as newsmaking destinations: all that and more in this month's roundup of the academic literature."

What happens when you troll Tor developers hard? You get unmasked. Towards the end of last week, a troll who had sent various aggressive tweets to a host of security experts and privacy advocates associated with the Tor project and browser, which enables online anonymity, had his identity exposed.

It is important to stand up against all kinds of bullying, in this case it is cyberbullying. But what is the difference when it comes to someone bullies you, and you bully that person back? It is still bullying. Although I think some actions should be taken to tackle the people trolling, it is difficult because of the massive amount of people who are leaving angry or horrible responses. To monitor every netizens activity is impossible and inefficient, it also violates privacy rights (even when we know we are monitored at some point). What do you think about creating filters? I think that will restrict the freedom of speech people have. So is having freedom and open access such a brilliant thing? Would it not cause moral conflicts? Education and moral standards would not always relate, because emotions is one of the measures too.

Thanks for your sharing. A lot of people have been the victim of cyberbullying, the reason of cyberbullying has become increasingly common might has some relationship with the advanced technology and also due to people can say whatever they want to say by hiding behind their digital identities, so they do not care about moral standard any more. And it's true that it's really hard to take action to everyone who involved in cyberbullying because the amount is huge.

This recently published book, by a University of British Columbia journalism professor named Alfred Hermida, questions how the new culture of sharing and collaboration-and the pace of change that sharing enables-changes our lives. It's particularly interesting for us because it doesn't back away from the challenges that open access poses for us: how does being both creator and consumer change us? How does blurring the lines between these two change the way we think about the balance between copyright and the public good? Hermida doesn't tackle these last questions directly, but he provides a useful lens for thinking about our changing roles and how open knowledge and sharing need to reflect that. Considering the book's focus on sharing, it's somewhat ironic that it's not open access, but I highly recommend checking it out. It's received significant attention in the Canadian press and is exactly the kind of mainstream attention that can get conversations about open access started.

Not everything can be shared. Aside from the 14 reasons what makes people share knowledge is because they are trust each one with the knowledge that they will share will be beneficial to the receiver of the knowledge or learning. Knowledge is power when shared.

Most of materials available in libraries are copyrighted. On the other hand, it requires copying and digitizing these materials to enable research,...

"Every day we face challenges - from the personal, such as the quickest way to get to work, or what we should eat, to global ones like climate change and how to sustainably feed and educate seven billion people on this planet. At Open Knowledge we believe that opening up data - and turning that data into insight - can be crucial to addressing these challenges, and building a society in which is everyone - not just the few - are empowered with the knowledge they need to understand and effect change."

really good! I think this is a very good summary about what we are learning in this course: "We need to create a culture of "open data makers", people able and ready to make apps and insights with open data. We need to connect open data with those who have the best questions and the biggest needs - a healthcare worker in Zambia, the London commuter travelling home - and go beyond the data geeks and the tech savvy to make data be useful to all."

Es un comentario de los foros de discusión que me parece importante leer y compartir El autor es: RaulViveros

An online twitter chat for language educators LangChat hashtag. We'd love to have you join the conversation. We keep a live stream going here on this site as a courtesy for our colleagues. Visit the archives or summaries to glean from the insights shared during our weekly conversations.

"Showing "The World of Science", the map below portrays global research production as expressed through science journals' publishing in the early 2000s. It makes a dramatic point about the complexities of global inequalities in knowledge production and exchange. What would it take to redraw the knowledge production map to realise a vision of a more equitable and accurate world of knowledge?"

The research environment in the global South faces many pressing challenges given resource inequality. Technical and financial issues aside, Laura Czerniewicz asserts it is the values and practices shaped by the Northern research agenda which contribute just as much to the imbalance.

This is old, but still relevant to the discussion of module2. Twitter made a big difference in tracking down the suspects of the Boston bombing.

Trends in the production and distribution of self-published ebooks.

Very interesting. Let me share on twitter. Thank you.

Un artículo muy interesante en relación al debate de la calidad de la información proporcionada por profesionales y amateurs desde el enfoque del sector profesional. Interesante para sostener un debate desde ambos enfoques.

Los periodistas ciudadanos cumplen algunas funciones de los periodistas profesionales como buscar, recabar y compartir noticias, pero les falta la profesionalización, en muchos casos mejorar su redacción, corroborar las notas que comparten y publican. Los medios como blogger, facebook y twitter están plagados de noticias falsas, sin fuentes de investigación. Los periodistas ciudadanos no tienen la ayuda de un editor que revise sus publicaciones, corrija su redacción, opine y ordene las notas. Sin embargo, están haciendo uso de su libertad de expresión. Si alguien no esta de acuerdo con alguna acción, por ejemplo, una ley que discrimina a las personas por su codición económica, escribirá su opinión en un foro opinando sobre dicha ley, en otros casos escribirá una nota en su blog personal y compartiendola a través de sus redes sociales. Aunque esto también puede traer problemas, no existe el derecho de réplica,una corroboración de los hechos como lo puede haber en una investigación periodística profesional.

"UNA ÉTICA AUTORREGULADA PARA EL PERIODISMO CIUDADANO" http://redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=68712863002