Title: Google's iPhone app gets a voice: Yours
Posted: November 13, 2008 9:25 PM PST
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10092525-2.html?tag=mncol;txt
By: Josh Lowensohn
This article details a application that iPhone users will soon be able to get from the applications store on their phone. This new application is used for searching Google through voice commands. The article states that the phone “can tell when you're lifting the phone up to your face” and it will allow you to tell it what you want to search for.
From the article’s description of the application, it seems that it works in a similar fashion to features on other cellular phones that allow you to “voice dial” from your contacts list. The article states that the application will give you options based on what you say. This will allow you to verify what you have said to get the information you are seeking.
However, the application is not entirely voice directed. The article states that you must still “click” on the link once the search has been performed. This still seems easier and less time consuming to me than trying to type out the entire search request on your phone.
This article also states that there is a video available to demonstrate the use of the new application. The video is also on the page with this article. The video demonstrates the features of this new application. It also states that this application is location sensitive and will give you results based on where you are.
According to the article, Yahoo also released a similar product for its search tools. This application is also made to use voice recognition. This article is mainly about the Google application coming out for the iPhone, but a link is provided where you can find more information on Yahoo’s new product.
Other update articles on this application have stated that the application was still not available on Friday as originally planned.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Reading Report #5
Title: Web Hoaxes, Counterfeit Sites, and Other Spurious Information on the Internet
Date added: 12/15/2004 11:11:07 AM
Author: Paul S. Piper
Source: Web of Deception, Randall Library Course Reserves
The idea that the internet holds all the answers seems to be popular among many. It is easy to access pretty much any information one could think of, but the information is not always the truth. In fact, as this article states, there are many people who put up sites with incorrect information. Whether it is intentional or accidental, this information needs to be evaluated before it is used or given much weight.
The article talks about “web literacy.” This means that before you count on the information in a website as correct information, you need to be able to evaluate it. This means determining who put the information on the website, where the information comes from, and other things that can help determine the accuracy of the information. If the source is not reliable or is heavily biased, the information is probably not the most dependable.
No matter how “real” the site may seem, anyone willing to put in the time can create a site that looks authentic. While many mentioned in this article seem to be aimed at influencing political views, there are hoax sites for all kinds of subjects. After all, anyone who wishes to create a website can. There really aren’t any laws against putting up a website, or that govern the information and its accuracy. This is why blogs and opinion articles are allowed to exist. If you read a blog, you know you are getting someone’s opinion, but when you think you have found a reliable website, you may not always know if it is opinion or not.
This is why it is important to know how to evaluate the information and the website itself. I have to admit that I usually just look for the information I am seeking, and I don’t usually pay attention to the bottom of the page where the author, site maintainer, or other source information is present. By paying attention to this information, you could evaluate the information’s source for better accuracy. At the same time, the article states that it is important to pay attention to the URL of the website. They state that there are sometimes links that seem to be related to the information and the website you start on, but they can lead you to a new site that is only hyperlinked to the original site. This means that the new site may not be as reliable a source as the original site you thought you were visiting.
By taking a little time to dig into the information about the origin of the website, you could save yourself a lot of trouble. It could save you from trusting incorrect information. The article states that some of the internet resources have even been used to incite panic after tragedies. This proves that the internet holds great power over its users, but by know how to evaluate the information presented to you, you take back a great deal of that power into your own hands.
Date added: 12/15/2004 11:11:07 AM
Author: Paul S. Piper
Source: Web of Deception, Randall Library Course Reserves
The idea that the internet holds all the answers seems to be popular among many. It is easy to access pretty much any information one could think of, but the information is not always the truth. In fact, as this article states, there are many people who put up sites with incorrect information. Whether it is intentional or accidental, this information needs to be evaluated before it is used or given much weight.
The article talks about “web literacy.” This means that before you count on the information in a website as correct information, you need to be able to evaluate it. This means determining who put the information on the website, where the information comes from, and other things that can help determine the accuracy of the information. If the source is not reliable or is heavily biased, the information is probably not the most dependable.
No matter how “real” the site may seem, anyone willing to put in the time can create a site that looks authentic. While many mentioned in this article seem to be aimed at influencing political views, there are hoax sites for all kinds of subjects. After all, anyone who wishes to create a website can. There really aren’t any laws against putting up a website, or that govern the information and its accuracy. This is why blogs and opinion articles are allowed to exist. If you read a blog, you know you are getting someone’s opinion, but when you think you have found a reliable website, you may not always know if it is opinion or not.
This is why it is important to know how to evaluate the information and the website itself. I have to admit that I usually just look for the information I am seeking, and I don’t usually pay attention to the bottom of the page where the author, site maintainer, or other source information is present. By paying attention to this information, you could evaluate the information’s source for better accuracy. At the same time, the article states that it is important to pay attention to the URL of the website. They state that there are sometimes links that seem to be related to the information and the website you start on, but they can lead you to a new site that is only hyperlinked to the original site. This means that the new site may not be as reliable a source as the original site you thought you were visiting.
By taking a little time to dig into the information about the origin of the website, you could save yourself a lot of trouble. It could save you from trusting incorrect information. The article states that some of the internet resources have even been used to incite panic after tragedies. This proves that the internet holds great power over its users, but by know how to evaluate the information presented to you, you take back a great deal of that power into your own hands.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Reading Response #4
Title: Can WIKIPEDIA Ever Make the Grade? Chronicle of Higher Education, 00095982, 10/27/2006, Vol. 53, Issue 10
Author: Brock Read
Database: Academic Search Premier
This article talks about Wikipedia. While this is a popular source of information, as the article stated, many professors look down on it. Because of the fact that this is open to editing from the readers, the facts may not always be true. However, this article proves that such sites on the internet can be nearly as correct as popular written encyclopedias like the Encyclopedia Britannica.
By stating that Wikipedia is checked regularly when new additions have been made to an article, the author shows that Wikipedia can be an accurate source of information. However, the fact that it is open to editing by the general public leaves many uneasy. That is why Larry Sanger decided to create “Citizendium.” The article states that this is like Wikipedia because it can be edited by its readers, but Citizendium will have more academic editing. This resembles peer reviewed scholarly journal articles. They are written and reviewed by those who are knowledgeable in the particular area.
The last major problem mentioned in this article is the fact that the internet is always open to change. This means, as stated in the article, that an entry you cite may not be there or be the same when someone else goes to check your source. I think that even with scholarly review of such websites, there is always going to be misinformation out there. The article itself stated that even well known encyclopedias have a few errors in them. This means that they are only slightly more reliable as sources than internet websites like Wikipedia.org.
Author: Brock Read
Database: Academic Search Premier
This article talks about Wikipedia. While this is a popular source of information, as the article stated, many professors look down on it. Because of the fact that this is open to editing from the readers, the facts may not always be true. However, this article proves that such sites on the internet can be nearly as correct as popular written encyclopedias like the Encyclopedia Britannica.
By stating that Wikipedia is checked regularly when new additions have been made to an article, the author shows that Wikipedia can be an accurate source of information. However, the fact that it is open to editing by the general public leaves many uneasy. That is why Larry Sanger decided to create “Citizendium.” The article states that this is like Wikipedia because it can be edited by its readers, but Citizendium will have more academic editing. This resembles peer reviewed scholarly journal articles. They are written and reviewed by those who are knowledgeable in the particular area.
The last major problem mentioned in this article is the fact that the internet is always open to change. This means, as stated in the article, that an entry you cite may not be there or be the same when someone else goes to check your source. I think that even with scholarly review of such websites, there is always going to be misinformation out there. The article itself stated that even well known encyclopedias have a few errors in them. This means that they are only slightly more reliable as sources than internet websites like Wikipedia.org.
Monday, October 27, 2008
News Article #4
Title: IT pays the price for your fun at work
By: Elinor Mills October 27, 2008 5:00 AM PDT
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10075190-83.html?tag=mncol
The main point of this article is to show that workers are using office computers for “personal purposes,” and it is costing the company money. The article states that a majority of the personal usage is involved in emailing friends and family, but a great deal of time is also spent on other websites. The three most popular websites reported in this article were Facebook, YouTube, and MySpace.
The article states that the usage of office computers for personal reasons is opening them up to a greater risk of intrusions. Technology departments are seeing a rise in “viruses, Trojans, worms… and spyware.” These are all adding up to a cost reported by the article to be about $50,000. The article states that this cost is due to the amount of time it takes to remedy each individual situation and the salary of IT workers for the company. It also stated that there are an average of “34 incidents per month.” This means that there could be a higher or lower number depending either on month or company. If this number is greater, the cost would also be much greater.
While allowing workers to have personal freedom during breaks or down time might be good for morale, it is not good for the company’s wallet. The company is losing money while trying to combat problems that would not exist in such a high number if the employees were not allowed to use the computers for their personal entertainment. If companies limit personal usage of office computers, they would face the possibility of losing morale among the employees. In either case, they are facing a possible problem. However, having viruses attacking your office system could hold more potential to harm the company than lowered employee morale.
By: Elinor Mills October 27, 2008 5:00 AM PDT
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10075190-83.html?tag=mncol
The main point of this article is to show that workers are using office computers for “personal purposes,” and it is costing the company money. The article states that a majority of the personal usage is involved in emailing friends and family, but a great deal of time is also spent on other websites. The three most popular websites reported in this article were Facebook, YouTube, and MySpace.
The article states that the usage of office computers for personal reasons is opening them up to a greater risk of intrusions. Technology departments are seeing a rise in “viruses, Trojans, worms… and spyware.” These are all adding up to a cost reported by the article to be about $50,000. The article states that this cost is due to the amount of time it takes to remedy each individual situation and the salary of IT workers for the company. It also stated that there are an average of “34 incidents per month.” This means that there could be a higher or lower number depending either on month or company. If this number is greater, the cost would also be much greater.
While allowing workers to have personal freedom during breaks or down time might be good for morale, it is not good for the company’s wallet. The company is losing money while trying to combat problems that would not exist in such a high number if the employees were not allowed to use the computers for their personal entertainment. If companies limit personal usage of office computers, they would face the possibility of losing morale among the employees. In either case, they are facing a possible problem. However, having viruses attacking your office system could hold more potential to harm the company than lowered employee morale.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Reading Assignment #3
Title: The Infodiet: How Libraries Can Offer an Appetizing Alternative to Google
Chronicle of Higher Education, 00095982, 2/20/2004, Vol. 50, Issue 24
Author: Bell, Steven J.
Database: Academic Search Premier
This article makes a good point. We, as students, take the easy way out. Instead of using the library’s database searches and resources, we tend to be lazy and aim for the quickest and easiest form of instant gratification by finding thousands of results. We would rather use information that is subpar than put forth a little more time and effort to find more relevant information in the form of reviewed scholarly materials.
Using the databases provided through the school’s library can lead to information that is more reliable and pertains more to the topic at hand. However, these databases can be difficult to navigate. Without taking a library information class or asking for help, it can be hard to figure the databases out. Most students don’t like to take the time or admit they need help, so they go for the easiest search they know of. This leads the students to use search engines, such as Google, that are easier to navigate. The ease of navigation is counteracted by the fact that the information found through one of these search engines is not narrowed down to scholarly information only.
However, if library databases were to become “Google-ized,” as the article calls it, a search would flood the student with more results than they could wade through. With an extreme number of results, students would find themselves in a similar position as if they were using a general search engine. They would not want to take the time to weed through the information in the results, and would probably wind up leaving out the information they were really looking for.
Current databases may be confusing to use until you have some guidance and practice, but they ultimately result in better quality information. They give more relevant results and consist of information that is of a more scholarly nature.
Chronicle of Higher Education, 00095982, 2/20/2004, Vol. 50, Issue 24
Author: Bell, Steven J.
Database: Academic Search Premier
This article makes a good point. We, as students, take the easy way out. Instead of using the library’s database searches and resources, we tend to be lazy and aim for the quickest and easiest form of instant gratification by finding thousands of results. We would rather use information that is subpar than put forth a little more time and effort to find more relevant information in the form of reviewed scholarly materials.
Using the databases provided through the school’s library can lead to information that is more reliable and pertains more to the topic at hand. However, these databases can be difficult to navigate. Without taking a library information class or asking for help, it can be hard to figure the databases out. Most students don’t like to take the time or admit they need help, so they go for the easiest search they know of. This leads the students to use search engines, such as Google, that are easier to navigate. The ease of navigation is counteracted by the fact that the information found through one of these search engines is not narrowed down to scholarly information only.
However, if library databases were to become “Google-ized,” as the article calls it, a search would flood the student with more results than they could wade through. With an extreme number of results, students would find themselves in a similar position as if they were using a general search engine. They would not want to take the time to weed through the information in the results, and would probably wind up leaving out the information they were really looking for.
Current databases may be confusing to use until you have some guidance and practice, but they ultimately result in better quality information. They give more relevant results and consist of information that is of a more scholarly nature.
Thursday, September 25, 2008
News Article #3
September 24, 2008 11:05 AM PDT
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10049963-2.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5
Posted by Josh Lowensohn
GooseGrade lets readers copyedit your blog
GooseGrade is a new online feature that can be added to your blog by simply inserting the code for it into your blog’s template. This will place the GooseGrade stamp on your postings. Then, if a reader notices an error, all they have to do is click the icon and tell you what they think the error is. Instead of getting multiple comments on your mistakes filling up the comment section, this allows you to find and fix your errors.
Each time this feature is used, the rating of your blog goes down a little on the scale until you view and either accept or decline the changes. With the fact that many time you encounter spamming when people may find mistakes, it makes it annoying to deal with having comments. However, with GooseGrade, spamming is not a problem. The system actually rates the people who are suggesting corrections so that you will know who to trust. It gives them an accuracy rating based on the number of suggestions they have made on blogs and the accuracy of their suggestions. The problems that are spotted are easy to fix. GooseGrade notifies you of every suggestion. You decide whether you accept the proposed change or deny it.
This program also tracks the history of the GooseGrade for each blogger. This helps employers or group members figure out who may need more help in editing before posting. This is still in the beginning steps. It is being released in private beta, but developer John Brooks Pounders says it depends on the response to this (how many people make use of it) as to whether or not the program will become a success.
I think this is a good thing to have when blogging. I have read several posts from people who made mistakes. Maybe they were in a hurry or they didn’t realize they were making the mistake, but as the article said, it would be better to have it fixed by someone than for everyone who reads it to notice you made a mistake. By notifying you of the problem early, you can fix your errors quickly. It’s also great that this program helps to avoid spammers. I get really annoyed with trying to see comments on blogs when there is one person who posts repeatedly about a mistake. With this program’s ratings system, I think people will be a little more careful than they are with the comment posts. They will be easily dismissed if they are continuously inaccurate.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10049963-2.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-5
Posted by Josh Lowensohn
GooseGrade lets readers copyedit your blog
GooseGrade is a new online feature that can be added to your blog by simply inserting the code for it into your blog’s template. This will place the GooseGrade stamp on your postings. Then, if a reader notices an error, all they have to do is click the icon and tell you what they think the error is. Instead of getting multiple comments on your mistakes filling up the comment section, this allows you to find and fix your errors.
Each time this feature is used, the rating of your blog goes down a little on the scale until you view and either accept or decline the changes. With the fact that many time you encounter spamming when people may find mistakes, it makes it annoying to deal with having comments. However, with GooseGrade, spamming is not a problem. The system actually rates the people who are suggesting corrections so that you will know who to trust. It gives them an accuracy rating based on the number of suggestions they have made on blogs and the accuracy of their suggestions. The problems that are spotted are easy to fix. GooseGrade notifies you of every suggestion. You decide whether you accept the proposed change or deny it.
This program also tracks the history of the GooseGrade for each blogger. This helps employers or group members figure out who may need more help in editing before posting. This is still in the beginning steps. It is being released in private beta, but developer John Brooks Pounders says it depends on the response to this (how many people make use of it) as to whether or not the program will become a success.
I think this is a good thing to have when blogging. I have read several posts from people who made mistakes. Maybe they were in a hurry or they didn’t realize they were making the mistake, but as the article said, it would be better to have it fixed by someone than for everyone who reads it to notice you made a mistake. By notifying you of the problem early, you can fix your errors quickly. It’s also great that this program helps to avoid spammers. I get really annoyed with trying to see comments on blogs when there is one person who posts repeatedly about a mistake. With this program’s ratings system, I think people will be a little more careful than they are with the comment posts. They will be easily dismissed if they are continuously inaccurate.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
News Article #2
Title: Google buys South Korean blogging software companyPosted By: Associated Press 09.12.08, 6:46 PM ET, San Francisco
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/09/12/ap5419345.html
The major web search engine “Google” has just acquired Tatter and Company (TNC). This is a Korean company that runs blogging software. The article states that this was done because Google was interested in expanding in Asia. According to the article, they also wanted a bigger market in which they could run their ads.
One problem with the market in Asia, though, is that they are more restricted in what they are able to access on the internet. This raises the question of whether it was a good idea for Google to make this purchase. If the people of Asia are not allowed to view certain sites, especially those that allow free reign with opinions, will they be an effective market for Google and its ads?
Google also owns the “Blogger” blogging software company. According to the article, it made this purchase in 2003. As Google continues to buy up other software companies for its benefit, it will continue to become more powerful.
Just think about the last time you had to find something quickly on the internet. I know if it were me, I would just type it into the Google tool bar that is on my computer. It has almost become second nature to many of us to use Google. When you stop and think about it, it almost becomes a little scary. One company that continues to grow, become more powerful, and become so widely used can easily grow out of control. I think we need to take a closer look at Google and the possibility that it could one day hold a monopoly over internet search engines, and many other features, if it is not kept in check.
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/09/12/ap5419345.html
The major web search engine “Google” has just acquired Tatter and Company (TNC). This is a Korean company that runs blogging software. The article states that this was done because Google was interested in expanding in Asia. According to the article, they also wanted a bigger market in which they could run their ads.
One problem with the market in Asia, though, is that they are more restricted in what they are able to access on the internet. This raises the question of whether it was a good idea for Google to make this purchase. If the people of Asia are not allowed to view certain sites, especially those that allow free reign with opinions, will they be an effective market for Google and its ads?
Google also owns the “Blogger” blogging software company. According to the article, it made this purchase in 2003. As Google continues to buy up other software companies for its benefit, it will continue to become more powerful.
Just think about the last time you had to find something quickly on the internet. I know if it were me, I would just type it into the Google tool bar that is on my computer. It has almost become second nature to many of us to use Google. When you stop and think about it, it almost becomes a little scary. One company that continues to grow, become more powerful, and become so widely used can easily grow out of control. I think we need to take a closer look at Google and the possibility that it could one day hold a monopoly over internet search engines, and many other features, if it is not kept in check.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)