"Fact or Crap?"

This is a follow-up to my Nov. 16 post, "User Generated Flubb," in which I expressed skepticism toward the validity, verity, and usefulness of user generated content.

In scouring digg just now, I've come across several very interestingly-titled articles:

Is There Really Such a Thing as Time Travel? Creepy! watch!

Burger Kings's Condom Whopper Lands New Lawsuit

Huckabee called homosexuality "dangerous public health risk"

I am not suggesting that any of these articles are not fact-based, credible, and/or a benefit to society.
_____

In considering UGC as a whole, how much is our society benefited by its creation? I wouldn't say that it makes us smarter off... By reading digg rather than a non-fiction book, we end up learning a little about a lot, rather than the other way around. In my opinion, so long as you know a lot altogether and are able to use that knowledge, you're smart. Citizen journalism, micro-blogging, and social networking sites like digg, del.icio.us, and technorati impart on users information. In general, you're going to be informed, but not educated.

A lot of information is no good if there isn't any glue to hold together the pieces. Linking pieces of information together is what creates knowledge. Books link information and impart knowledge, hence my preference for them. However, perhaps the lack of knowledge is what excites readers of digg. The random bits of information are entertaining, and really not much thinking is involved because there's no need to remember anything that's read.

What baffles me is simply why so many people have such a fixation on collecting information in this fashion. I wish there was a way that they could do more than just learn a few facts in an article, but rather actually be smarter off afterwards for having read an article. When citizen journalism and UGC are guaranteed to impart knowledge and even wisdom, then I'll lose much of the skepticism that I have for it.

SPAM - Part 2

About a month ago I wrote a post highlighting how much I dislike receiving spam, and how large a problem spam really is. If you have 2 minutes 4 seconds, then watch this video that Google's spam-czars put together. It highlights ways that Google software engineers are able to filter out so much spam. From the chart on the original blog post, it looks like 67% of the e-mail that enters Google's servers is spam. But, look at how improving the Google spam-fighting algorithm has paid off over time! Hardly any spam actually makes it through the filter any more.

SPAM

No, not the faux-meat. As much as I don't like SPAM the faux-meat, I dislike e-spam even more. Hearing from the CTO (Chief Technology Officer) of AU last year, 95% of the e-mail that comes through AU's servers is spam. I'd say 95% of the e-mail I receive in Gmail is spam too... thank goodness for the spam filter! I believe that spam has become a great detriment to the system of e-mail, because in some cases, it simply cannot be controlled.

Howard Rheingold, in "Smart Mobs" (See Below), talks about having signed up for a text message service in which members of specific groups could send mass text messages via cell phones to other members in their group, all at once. The groups had specific purposes, like celebrity sightings in NYC, or terrorist attacks, pop-star fans, etc. After reading about this kind of service, in my mind I immediately dismissed it as almost entirely pointless. If you ask me, someone who is a real jerk is bound to sign up for the service and spam everyone's phone with useless messages that either contain false content or don't at all relate to the group. If your cell phone plan does not afford you unlimited text messages, then your monthly bill is going to be huge, in addition to the separate monthly bill for just belonging to the groups service. Talk about a waste of money!

Rheingold mentions (on page 167) that he joined a group of a Lil' BowWow fans. He says he received a text from "a fifteen-year-old lil bowwow fan in Brooklyn [that] just got out of school." Honestly, who gives even the slightest hoot? Rheingold also mentions that he had to switch over to receiving e-mails rather than text messages, which most likely was because of the quantity or [lack of] quality of the content he was receiving. Talk about a waste of time and technology.

If, in the case of the terrorism group, you only receive one text message every three months regarding a very widespread (and not isolated) incident that may actually impact your life, then I can see this system being useful. Otherwise, I don't see the point in wasting my time and money on a service that will, in my opinion, make me dumber for using it.

"Smart Mobs" by Howard Rheingold: http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&EAN=9780738208619&itm=1. His personal page: http://www.rheingold.com/.