The “power law distribution” or “long tail” phenomenon, as seen in behavior online on the Wikipedia, suggests that the concept of an average user of wikipedia is meaningless. Support your answer: how do you think a local, “JMU only” version of the Wikipedia would compare to the worldwide version? Would it be very similar? Higher quality? Less quality? Why?
Wikipedia is run by a phenomenon called the power law distribution. This is defined by a huge imbalance between participation. In the wikipedia example found in chapter five of Shirky's book, out of the 129 contributing writers for the page on asphalt, six of them can take credit for about a quarter of the edits. This means that the average user of wikipedia has very few edits. A local version of Wikipedia, lets call it Dukepedia, would compare on several levels to the worldwide version. Major trends would be similar whereas the sheer volume of entries would have to be smaller.
The phenomenon of the power law distribution would still take place within a smaller community like the JMU community. If it was narrowed down to one class on campus this theory would hold less true. Just a few students would make up for most of the articles. However there would be a variety of articles, because of the variety of majors at this school. I personally may only write one article or edit a couple articles, whereas media, communications, and english majors may contribute more because it is something that they are interested in doing.
I feel that the quality of Dukepedia would be similar or comparable to that of Wikipedia. It does not take an expert in a certain field to write a quick article about a topic, especially when someone else can come later and add to it. It would take a while to catch on and really become reliable, but so did Wikipedia. Once it became known around campus people would want to join and put their two cents in. This would allow Dukepedia to get on Wikipedia's level, quality wise.
The main difference I see is the number of articles and number of contributers. The other possible problem is the type of article. Many topics are not relevant to a college atmosphere and would therefore most likely not be written. This is affected solely by the restrictions of a local community. More people in the community allows more people to edit and write more article. More writers would equal more articles. This creates a quality versus quantity argument in a way. Quality wise they would match up whereas quantity would suffer in the local version of Wikipedia.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Why Scratch?
After reading the article about Scratch and exploring the Scratch website, what are some observable benefits in creating a space to share student work?
After I began reading the article I decided that I wanted to visit this site. I then spent almost an hour exploring and playing some games that had been created, some better than others, but all were unique. I enjoyed this experience and believe that the fun I had just messing around for a bit must be amplified for the people that create their own games and presentations then look at other people's programs. Not only is this site fun and filled with mini games but it also has intelligent presentations and school projects.
One benefit is that students can use this space a means to get creative and learn all at one time. No matter what the student is creating they are learning basic programing skills. If the student must do research to create the project then that student is also learning about that topic. Students would get excited about this type of project for school and really enjoy working on it, which would in turn produce higher quality work.
The fact that it is online programing add to the student's experience. I feel that in today's society understanding and learning about technology is vital. This website allows for technological education at the same time as other learning can be taking place. The website also allows for student to edit the work of other programmers. If a student uses an incorrect fact or other misconception, comments can be left so that the creator can fix it or that same person can download the program and make edits themselves.
Along the same lines of collaborative work all users can see all the other user's published work. If an educational presentation is looked at by other students that same information can be learned by others. Teachers could even download a presentation to use in class if it was good enough, which many seemed to be. Teachers can also createv there own presentation or educational game and provide a link to the class so that they could learn that way.
I feel that using this website students are opened up to a new branch in education. They are not just using online resources but also creating them. It is a fun and educational experience to create their own program. The website breaks down many barriers including the language barrier and the barrier between subjects. When creating a program about history students would be using computer science and technology skills, language skills, and also the history skills.
After I began reading the article I decided that I wanted to visit this site. I then spent almost an hour exploring and playing some games that had been created, some better than others, but all were unique. I enjoyed this experience and believe that the fun I had just messing around for a bit must be amplified for the people that create their own games and presentations then look at other people's programs. Not only is this site fun and filled with mini games but it also has intelligent presentations and school projects.
One benefit is that students can use this space a means to get creative and learn all at one time. No matter what the student is creating they are learning basic programing skills. If the student must do research to create the project then that student is also learning about that topic. Students would get excited about this type of project for school and really enjoy working on it, which would in turn produce higher quality work.
The fact that it is online programing add to the student's experience. I feel that in today's society understanding and learning about technology is vital. This website allows for technological education at the same time as other learning can be taking place. The website also allows for student to edit the work of other programmers. If a student uses an incorrect fact or other misconception, comments can be left so that the creator can fix it or that same person can download the program and make edits themselves.
Along the same lines of collaborative work all users can see all the other user's published work. If an educational presentation is looked at by other students that same information can be learned by others. Teachers could even download a presentation to use in class if it was good enough, which many seemed to be. Teachers can also createv there own presentation or educational game and provide a link to the class so that they could learn that way.
I feel that using this website students are opened up to a new branch in education. They are not just using online resources but also creating them. It is a fun and educational experience to create their own program. The website breaks down many barriers including the language barrier and the barrier between subjects. When creating a program about history students would be using computer science and technology skills, language skills, and also the history skills.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Wiki-Wiki
Ward Cunningham came up with the software to make Wikis possible through an application called HyperCard
-HyperCard
-Created by Bill Atkinson
-Used on Macs only
-Grandparent of Wiki's
-Hyper text- meaning clicking on a term or picture will take you to another item
-Used on only one computer not a network
A Wiki...
-promotes meaningful associations between pages
-is not a carefully crafted site
-seeks to involve visitors in an ongoing process of creation and collaboration
-is a simple page
-is free form
Wikis can be...
-meeting agendas
-collaborative spaces
-internal blogs
-focused compact groups
-documentation
-a collection of action items
-focused on the existing community
Wikipedia...
-is the largest most common wiki
-has 3.4 million articles (Encyclopedia Britannica has about 500 thousand)
-is easily searched and edited (if not locked)
-put quality information into the hands of the people
-is far from finished
Other wiki services
-Wiki Spaces
-PB Works
-Google Sites
-Media Wiki
It's for my safety...okay thats fine
Some news reports have suggested that the Bush administration used the USA Patriot Act to look at the e-mails of American citizens without a warrant. What’s your position if this was indeed the case? Should citizens be willing to give up their privacy? Does it bother you to know that your online communications are very potentially semi-private instead of private?
I believe that the government does things in order to help and protect the citizens of the United States. The government does not need a warrant to check what I am saying. They are not taking away my freedom of speech, they are just listening to what I am saying. I feel that the government is staying with in the boundaries of my civil rights even when they filter through my emails that are sent, and so I am okay with it.
I feel that when it comes to the safety of another American we should be willing to give up a small piece of privacy. If the government needs, for national security reasons, to filter emails, I am all for it. If looking through the public email record can help stop terrorist attacks and other major crimes then I believe that this "spying" is essential.
It does not bother me at all to know that my conversations are only semi-private. If I decide for whatever reason that I need to talk behind someone's back and I do this via email, the chances of that person knowing is still very slim. The government is not looking to expose drama between two people, they are looking for threats to the State. I do not send any form of communication that might be of use to the government. I feel that most of the people who were strongly against this act had something to hide.
People must also understand that with in a company the emails are monitored more closely than the government monitored. This was partially because of shear numbers I am sure. If I send my dad an email at his work or vice versa the subject line must have something to do with his job. Most emails I send to him, about any topic, have a subject of, "possible meeting" and start with, "Paul" not "Dad." His company blocks non-work related emails. I cannot use words like dad, love, and even dinner. Pictures are also blocked in his email service.
I feel that as long as the government tells us that our email is being watched it is fine. I am in support of the Patriot Act and believe that in some cases loosing a little privacy can be a good thing. A completely secure network that spans the globe seems like a dangerous idea to me.
I believe that the government does things in order to help and protect the citizens of the United States. The government does not need a warrant to check what I am saying. They are not taking away my freedom of speech, they are just listening to what I am saying. I feel that the government is staying with in the boundaries of my civil rights even when they filter through my emails that are sent, and so I am okay with it.
I feel that when it comes to the safety of another American we should be willing to give up a small piece of privacy. If the government needs, for national security reasons, to filter emails, I am all for it. If looking through the public email record can help stop terrorist attacks and other major crimes then I believe that this "spying" is essential.
It does not bother me at all to know that my conversations are only semi-private. If I decide for whatever reason that I need to talk behind someone's back and I do this via email, the chances of that person knowing is still very slim. The government is not looking to expose drama between two people, they are looking for threats to the State. I do not send any form of communication that might be of use to the government. I feel that most of the people who were strongly against this act had something to hide.
People must also understand that with in a company the emails are monitored more closely than the government monitored. This was partially because of shear numbers I am sure. If I send my dad an email at his work or vice versa the subject line must have something to do with his job. Most emails I send to him, about any topic, have a subject of, "possible meeting" and start with, "Paul" not "Dad." His company blocks non-work related emails. I cannot use words like dad, love, and even dinner. Pictures are also blocked in his email service.
I feel that as long as the government tells us that our email is being watched it is fine. I am in support of the Patriot Act and believe that in some cases loosing a little privacy can be a good thing. A completely secure network that spans the globe seems like a dangerous idea to me.
WPA, the smart choice
If your mother uses wifi at home to send you e-mail, and your home network is not protected by WEP or WPA, what reasons would you suggest to her for enabling one of these two protocols at home if the liability of reading those e-mails still exists once her message leaves your home, on it’s way to school?
Having some form of privacy system on your wireless internet is important for anyone. Especially for my mom whose lack of a secure network could lead to problems for me! Having a secure WEP or WPA (WPA is better) network protects not only your own computer from being attacked but also those whom you correspond with via the internet. If a hacker or thief broke into your information a simple email can lead them to you or send a nasty virus in your direction.
If my mother can protect her own computer she protects aspects of her own life not just the information she included in the email to me. My mother uses online banking and without a secure network this would not be a smart choice! Anyone siting in their car in front of my house can then be a part of my network and can gain access to that privy information. Password and other such items are for my mother only not to be share with even the most trusted neighbor.
Another reason it is important to have a secure network is because you are paying for the internet. If you have an open wifi connection then your neighbors and anyone else close to your house does as well. It may sound a bit selfish but your internet is not something to be shared. This is true from both an economical and safety standpoint.
My mother wants to protect the aspects of her life and is smart enough not to put any of that information into an email and if she did I would suggest to her to not do I again. There is no information in emails from my mother that is worth stealing, unless they cares that my brother got a girlfriend or that she had to suspend a kid from her class. The WPA secured network is more to protect her own computer. If nothing can hurt her computer then nothing can hurt my computer through an email I received from her.
I believe it is important to secure your network. It allows for safer internet surfing. The system is not fool proof so everyone should still be mindful of what they click on or what internet form they fill out but overall the system seems to work.
Having some form of privacy system on your wireless internet is important for anyone. Especially for my mom whose lack of a secure network could lead to problems for me! Having a secure WEP or WPA (WPA is better) network protects not only your own computer from being attacked but also those whom you correspond with via the internet. If a hacker or thief broke into your information a simple email can lead them to you or send a nasty virus in your direction.
If my mother can protect her own computer she protects aspects of her own life not just the information she included in the email to me. My mother uses online banking and without a secure network this would not be a smart choice! Anyone siting in their car in front of my house can then be a part of my network and can gain access to that privy information. Password and other such items are for my mother only not to be share with even the most trusted neighbor.
Another reason it is important to have a secure network is because you are paying for the internet. If you have an open wifi connection then your neighbors and anyone else close to your house does as well. It may sound a bit selfish but your internet is not something to be shared. This is true from both an economical and safety standpoint.
My mother wants to protect the aspects of her life and is smart enough not to put any of that information into an email and if she did I would suggest to her to not do I again. There is no information in emails from my mother that is worth stealing, unless they cares that my brother got a girlfriend or that she had to suspend a kid from her class. The WPA secured network is more to protect her own computer. If nothing can hurt her computer then nothing can hurt my computer through an email I received from her.
I believe it is important to secure your network. It allows for safer internet surfing. The system is not fool proof so everyone should still be mindful of what they click on or what internet form they fill out but overall the system seems to work.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Give me side effects or give me death!
The official website for the drug Olanzapine probably didn’t mention the fact it might cause diabetic symptoms in patients. Another website obviously did. Commercials on TV now are required to mention possible side effects. Should drug companies be required to come clean about situations like the one with Eli Lilly’s Olanzapine in their commercial websites? Why or why not?
I am a believer in consumer rights and consumer protection. As a consumer I want to know exactly what I am purchasing. I believe I deserve to know details about every product that I buy. I should be informed about what any given product is made of and what are possible results of using the product.
Drug companies should give full disclosure about the medicinal substances that they produce. Customers need to know what could happen to their bodies if they consume the drug. In some cases it could be a matter of life and death. If a person takes a drug and one of the side effects effects reaction time it would not be smart for that person to get behind the wheel of a car. There are numerous negative results if this person did not have access to all of the information about the medicine.
I do not feel like this information needs to be put in headlines and in large bold face print, but it needs to be available to those who wish to know. Websites should include a link to a listing of ALL possible side effects. This link can be small and off to one side or at the bottom of the page, but still should be present. Similar to a privacy policy link inconspicuous but easily found if a customer is looking.
I would guess that companies would want to point out these side effects without laws being in place in order to protect themselves. If the information can be found then the company is less likely to find itself in a legal battle with someone who is suffering from one of the listed side effects. I feel that the risk of a legal battle is worth the cost of including side effect information. As in the Abelson book, the news of a "secret" side effect can easily be leaked. The confidential document in that example is now online for all to see. Many times the customers will find out about a side effect from each other or the news, so companies should simply issue a list of side effect themselves. The extreme speed at which information can be spread over the Internet should cause drug companies to want to disclose all information. If a single person wins a lawsuit against a company, many others will quickly follow suit.
I believe the same rule of advertising should apply regardless of where the advertising takes place. Television commercials must be informative about the side effects and ads in a magazine about a medicine usually contain a full page of disclosure about the medicine. These things are optional to read or listen to, but they are present. It takes some responsibility of the customer, the drug company is responsible for providing the information but the customer is responsible for finding and reading it.
I am a believer in consumer rights and consumer protection. As a consumer I want to know exactly what I am purchasing. I believe I deserve to know details about every product that I buy. I should be informed about what any given product is made of and what are possible results of using the product.
Drug companies should give full disclosure about the medicinal substances that they produce. Customers need to know what could happen to their bodies if they consume the drug. In some cases it could be a matter of life and death. If a person takes a drug and one of the side effects effects reaction time it would not be smart for that person to get behind the wheel of a car. There are numerous negative results if this person did not have access to all of the information about the medicine.
I do not feel like this information needs to be put in headlines and in large bold face print, but it needs to be available to those who wish to know. Websites should include a link to a listing of ALL possible side effects. This link can be small and off to one side or at the bottom of the page, but still should be present. Similar to a privacy policy link inconspicuous but easily found if a customer is looking.
I would guess that companies would want to point out these side effects without laws being in place in order to protect themselves. If the information can be found then the company is less likely to find itself in a legal battle with someone who is suffering from one of the listed side effects. I feel that the risk of a legal battle is worth the cost of including side effect information. As in the Abelson book, the news of a "secret" side effect can easily be leaked. The confidential document in that example is now online for all to see. Many times the customers will find out about a side effect from each other or the news, so companies should simply issue a list of side effect themselves. The extreme speed at which information can be spread over the Internet should cause drug companies to want to disclose all information. If a single person wins a lawsuit against a company, many others will quickly follow suit.
I believe the same rule of advertising should apply regardless of where the advertising takes place. Television commercials must be informative about the side effects and ads in a magazine about a medicine usually contain a full page of disclosure about the medicine. These things are optional to read or listen to, but they are present. It takes some responsibility of the customer, the drug company is responsible for providing the information but the customer is responsible for finding and reading it.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Advantages of Going Proprietary
Some states and some companies are turning to open source software for a variety of reasons, some mentioned in this chapter. Some companies (say Microsoft) have gone on the record against open source software. Explain some of the advantages of using proprietary software and cite your advantages with websites that take or mention these positions.
According to businessdictionary.com, proprietary software is, "[a] computer program[s] that are exclusive property of their developers or publishers, and cannot be copied or distributed without complying with their licensing agreements." There is also something called open source software. This is, according to the same website, "software that is available free of charge with its source code for modification and redistribution." Both types of software have obvious and slightly more subtle advantages and disadvantages. There are many websites, blogs, news articles, and essays devoted to arguing that one is better than the other. Proprietary software has many advantages over open source software.
Some advantages are for the developer or publisher. These advantages, according to kedah.edu, include two main ideas. First is income. The creator of software could then sell the created software for others to use. This creates a revenue which can then be used to create better services and improvements to the software (freesoftwaremagazine.com). Kedah.edu also mentions setting the license use as a benefit to the producer. If one sets the use requirements then there is more control over distribution and it also allows the developer to monitor the use of his or her product.
Many advantages are directed toward the consumer, as those are the people that the developer is trying to attract. One of these advantages is a stable support system if the software fails or malfunctions (kedah.edu). This support system is usually not available for open source software but when it is, it is generally not professional or reliable (ivertech.com). Another advantage is the ease of mind that proprietary software gives the user. Companies put great effort into making the software safe and effective for the user. There are few bugs and no viruses. When a bug does appear the developer offers a free update with the latest information, or the latest improvement to the software (kedah.edu). The final main advantage to proprietary software has to do with image. According to linux-magazine.com people have a tendency to stay with proprietary because of brand names. Brand names are know and trusted. Many smaller pieces of open source software have the same features but not the label and to many the label is important.
Disadvantages to open source software is just as beneficial to the argument as advantages to proprietary software is. According to ivertech.com, open source software has no professional support. This makes it hard for a user if something goes wrong. Other disadvantages include a lack of release coordination and erratic updates. This can cause problems to users that do not have the knowledge that programmers have. If a bug were to appear the user has no one to contact and no one that can offer an update or improvement. If there is an improvement it may not come until long after the user gave up on the software or the user may never be able to find that improvement. As shown proprietary software has many advantages over open source software.
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/proprietary-software.html
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/open-source.html
http://www.kedah.edu.my/sahc/a_portal/portal_tekvok/ict/nota_com_sys/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20les_57.pdf
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/1446
http://software.ivertech.com/_ivertechArticle13894_OpenSourceSoftwarevsProprietarySoftware.htm
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/Blogs/Off-the-Beat-Bruce-Byfield-s-Blog/The-Prestige-of-Proprietary-Software
According to businessdictionary.com, proprietary software is, "[a] computer program[s] that are exclusive property of their developers or publishers, and cannot be copied or distributed without complying with their licensing agreements." There is also something called open source software. This is, according to the same website, "software that is available free of charge with its source code for modification and redistribution." Both types of software have obvious and slightly more subtle advantages and disadvantages. There are many websites, blogs, news articles, and essays devoted to arguing that one is better than the other. Proprietary software has many advantages over open source software.
Some advantages are for the developer or publisher. These advantages, according to kedah.edu, include two main ideas. First is income. The creator of software could then sell the created software for others to use. This creates a revenue which can then be used to create better services and improvements to the software (freesoftwaremagazine.com). Kedah.edu also mentions setting the license use as a benefit to the producer. If one sets the use requirements then there is more control over distribution and it also allows the developer to monitor the use of his or her product.
Many advantages are directed toward the consumer, as those are the people that the developer is trying to attract. One of these advantages is a stable support system if the software fails or malfunctions (kedah.edu). This support system is usually not available for open source software but when it is, it is generally not professional or reliable (ivertech.com). Another advantage is the ease of mind that proprietary software gives the user. Companies put great effort into making the software safe and effective for the user. There are few bugs and no viruses. When a bug does appear the developer offers a free update with the latest information, or the latest improvement to the software (kedah.edu). The final main advantage to proprietary software has to do with image. According to linux-magazine.com people have a tendency to stay with proprietary because of brand names. Brand names are know and trusted. Many smaller pieces of open source software have the same features but not the label and to many the label is important.
Disadvantages to open source software is just as beneficial to the argument as advantages to proprietary software is. According to ivertech.com, open source software has no professional support. This makes it hard for a user if something goes wrong. Other disadvantages include a lack of release coordination and erratic updates. This can cause problems to users that do not have the knowledge that programmers have. If a bug were to appear the user has no one to contact and no one that can offer an update or improvement. If there is an improvement it may not come until long after the user gave up on the software or the user may never be able to find that improvement. As shown proprietary software has many advantages over open source software.
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/proprietary-software.html
http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/open-source.html
http://www.kedah.edu.my/sahc/a_portal/portal_tekvok/ict/nota_com_sys/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20les_57.pdf
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/1446
http://software.ivertech.com/_ivertechArticle13894_OpenSourceSoftwarevsProprietarySoftware.htm
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Online/Blogs/Off-the-Beat-Bruce-Byfield-s-Blog/The-Prestige-of-Proprietary-Software
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)