The main division of folksonomies according to T. V. Wal
Narrow Folksonomy
The main point of narrow folksonomies is, that author create an object andmake this object accessible to other users. At the same time author indexing a content by one keyword, which is the most suitable for his object. According to representation of one tag for concrete content we are able here to determine the „power“ of tag. For example, web page facebook.com will assign to tag „social network“ 200 people, „friend searcher“ 50 people and „comunicator“ assign 20 people, than in this case will be „social network“ the most strong tag, in tag clouds.
Broad Folksonomy
The main idea here is, author create an object and make this object accessible to other users. Others taging this object by own keywords and they are using the keywords to search this object at the same time. In comparison with narrow folksonomy, here not so many people assign the same tag to object, so it´s very complicated to determine the „strong“ tags.
Tag, Tag clouds
TAG- term which determine the category, that users assigning to the concrete sources. The main idea of tag clouds, is connect folksonomies for more users in concrete community. Representation of tags- the most occurrence tags are accentuated and the most popular tag cloud is del.ico.us.
Very good and practical visual explanation you can find here.
The main idea of this project is to show another possibility how to search for information on the internet. I met a lot people, which usually don´t have any idea about folkosonomies. This project is devoted to them. I create also power point presentation which can be used like support for learning people about folksonomies. Everyone knows Google, Yahoo …, but this searching working at absolutely different principles (results are created but machines).
In case of folksonomy searching, users received a results which were in generally created by other users (human beens) and I guess, that human been could 100 times better understand to needs of other human been than every machine or searching engine based on machines. I think, that folksonomies are now only at beginning of their truly possibilities.
What are folksonomies??
English term „folksonomies“ was created in 2004 by informatical architect Thomas Vander Wal. Explanation- folk (people) taxonomy (from Greece word „taxis“-„ arrangement“ and „nomy“-„method“. It is a method, which presenting organization of information to tags. Tags are assigning by users of social networks. Mainly we can say „Folksonomy (also known as collaboratively tagging, social classification, social indexing, and social tagging) is the practice and method of collaboratively creating and managing tags to annotate and categorizecontent.Folksonomy describes the bottom-up classification systems that emerge from social tagging.“ quoted from Wikipedia. Allowing categorization lot of different sources like blogs, video, web page,pictures but also rss. They are creating a connected structures of conception maps, which are representing terms in people minds. They became popular arround 2004.
In this context, as we have seen,cyberspace is often talked about as the latest
in long line places where humanity is destined to screw up (WHITE NOISE, p. 160)
We can say that title corresponding with content. Author basically see every attribute, possibility, of the cyberspace in two diametrically different ways, which is visible from first look on every chapter for example Anarchy/Authority. Main sources and references presented in this is book are from printed matters, because how author saying, the main reason for this was a good job of editors.But this can be debatable, in one hand author things that editors are doing good job, but in other hand he criticized emendation of this authors.
The most thing that I appreciating on this book is that author give to the readers possibility to see every contradiction from two different angles (positive, negative) and It is up to the reader too think about it, and make your own conclusion. Author giving us some facts about the topic, and If you are interested you can do your own research and after that, you are able to said what is point of view for the topic. I think that is the best way how the bring the people to the critical way of thinking, not just accepting of things how they are served up to us in this days (newspapers, TV, Radio).
We can see only positive ideas how is social networking, internet, blogging good for in every corner, but what about the contradictions, and negative side of things. Everything have also a negative side. Don´t forget about it. Think! Make some researching before you say your opinion on the things. I like especially chapters FREE/FEE, OVERLOAD/INFORMATION, and JOURNALIZM/PERSONALIZM.
FREE/FEE
Chapter is mainly about the idea, that internet would (not) remain outside the market economy, and there is one more idea that internet should not be only the money making machine. Very interesting fact -The 10 largest telecoms giants made bigger profits that 25 largest banks!!!
OVERLOAD INFORMATION
Very simple explanation “ Information overload can hurt your healthy!” It is good to have unlimited possibility to find informations, but every extreme is bad, don ´t forget about it.
JOURNALIZM/PERSONALIZM
Author describing here light side (personalization, timesaving,…) and dark sides(no editors-no control of objectivity and truthfulness, passive mode of existence..) of narrow casting. I really like especially his negative view, because some people think that, narrow casting is very useful tool but, they don´t see a things behind, like passive mode of existence, people only reading and not thinking and talking anymore.
But you can see also in the book that some facts in the book are absolutely bullshit. One example, author saying „“quoted p.Actually in 1989, during the velvet revolution in Czechoslovakia nobody knows about existing internet, maybe only few people had a connection at that time. I know that because I from Slovakia, even you ask anyone about that thing, you will always get the same answer. Interntet in that time, are you kidding me??
I was disappointed about lack of informations, blogs,.. on the internet. Maybe it is realated with date when the book was published, but anyway if your are writing about topic like cyberculture, you have part of cyberculture! Topic of contradictions in cyberculture is very wide and, what i really appreciate is perfect organization into chapters, and reduction of facts to optimal level. This book is designated for people which are deeply interested, and we can say, that language is little bit heavy-footed.
„The web´s underlying the culture of sharing, decentralisation and democracy makes it an ideal platform for groups to self-organise, combining their ideas and know-how, to create together games, encyklopaedians, software, social networks, video-sharing sites or entire paralell universes. (WE-THINK, p 7.)
What is impressive on this book is fact that, the draft version was published on-line for people to make a comment, they have a possibility to change a text (wiki version). Result in 35 days, 150 comment, 250 blogs, 200 emails, 65 000 hits by google and very important fact, that sales not suffer by this. This is perfect presentation of way how to combine professional and amateur collaborative ways of working. The point of this book how author saying is to havea conversation. You can find a 4 minute video on-line about this book in YouTube and also on author webpage.
History of this project is begining with post/pre/anti industrial culture. We can see in first chapter a lot of examples of successful projects likewiki (wikipedia) and also opensources project (LINUX), project FunTwo etc. Author using a lot of comparisons and in book is a lot connections with history (Newton, Descartes, Einstein,..) He is describing all this projects in details. That is good in one way, but in other it makes a book a chaotical, disorganized and very boring. 35 pages like preface, wtf is this?? What I like here, in this book?? That is a good question. I like especially author´s dividing internet users according to their opinions on interner to 4 groups :
- positive
- negative
- impact is already here
- mainly good for us and good but can turn bad.
Also very good was a dividing of models of WE-THINK project in to 3 groups. And I must agree.
Low model- Flickr, Youtube, Blogging
Medium- Social newtworking and social tagging (Technorati, delicious)
High- World of Warcraft and worm´s genom project
I like mainly two chapters, which are describing in next lines.
In chapter„HOW WE-THINK WORKS (AND NOT)“ author describingof the most famous project of the mass collaboration in cyberspace, project of maping of the genom and what is most important here is his vision of effective self governance. He see this success in making of decision in a small groups.
In chapter „THE WE- THINK BUSINESS” author describing of successful project like World of Warcraft (point- 15$ subsciptions), The Sims (now in third version!) and saying all we need is motivate, co-ordinate and innovative. It is kind of recipe for a success of massive cooperation. We can see a clear difference in the examples- H. Ford model = mass production, Linus Toralds project = mass innovation. I think is very difficult to make a profit if we are using model “WE-THINK” in everyday life, but author see a success in the open/closed model of business and he describing impacts on sectors of life.
“If people with different skills cooperating together 1+1 means 12. ”
In the book is a lot of examples from countries all around the world (Germany, Estonia, Ukraine, Georgia, Yemen, Philippines,..) what I really like, because in my previous which I was reading and commenting author describes only situation in UK and USA and the main title was ” WHITE NOISE, An A-Z of the contradictions in cyberculture”. Yes cyberculture you can find only in UK and USA. JIn the end of the book author describing light (evolution, democracy, working for people goods) and dark sides (paedophils,terrorism, censorship) of many various project applications, but conclusion is that, this project have much more positives than negatives. Sometimes I think that, the book is pretty optimistic. WE-THINK idea have a big problem with current capitalistic principles of life, and people still thinking about material matters, so we can say, some possibilities are here, but only some.
I read also the SZU blog, and I think that is very good (especially I like her comparison book with cookbook ) but, sometimes is little bit pessimistic. I think that success of project like this always up to people, to decide if they are able to change the way how they thinking and we can´t lose the hope for change. And we can see that is possible (open source systems is Brazil, Peru, Venezuela, Argentina), but I guess this countries thinking maybe more about the people goods, than the others.
I already finished the book and now I making summary of the book. Tomorrow i will start look arround for book from my classmates.
Project
Power point presentation is already done, and I´m in half of text of project. It really hard to put only important things there, but also my point of view and stay objective. I will do my best :)
