via hackr; pdf auf uniserver, mal auf reader laden: so allgemeine überlegungen richtung lebenshilfe2.0, aber nicht immer doof, einzelnes mag brauchbar sein
"Der Versuch einer Antwort auf "Mainstream der Minderheiten" anlässlich der aktuell, verhandelten "Krise des Popdiskurs" (siehe "Pop am Nullpunkt"; Disko in de:bug, 131) ." habs nicht gelesen, klingt aber interessant
it's filters, not info overload, stupid nin gutenberg galaxy editors were filters, now we need others (since info overload ain't the problem but how we treat info) privacy/public now is a technological question (eg fb etc)
it's filters, not info overload, stupid +++ in gutenberg galaxy editors were filters, now we need others (since info overload ain't the problem but how we treat info) + privacy/public now is a technological question (eg fb etc) universität: before: teachers asked questions not because they wanted to know the answers but they wanted their students to learn finding out the answers, now: that doesn't make sense, you have to ask questions you don't know the answers yet
digiom on selbsttechniken/identiy im web2.0: Es ist ja nicht einfach so, dass das ganze Web 2.0 und Social Web einen großen, technophilen Identitätskult darstellt, es leiden in eben solchem Ausmaße die BeobachterInnen, die einen solchen feststellen, unter den Folgen einer zugerichteten Perspektive, die vor allem die identitätsgestalterischen Aspekte ins Auge fasst. Aus dieser Perspektive wird jeder Videoblogger zum Selbstdarsteller, jede Microbloggerin zur Narzistin, als wären die Selbsttechnologien erst im Web 2.0 erfunden worden, als würde nicht jede unserer Äußerungen und Aktivitäten Zeugnis von uns selbst ablegen, uns zu einem Selbstverhältnis zwingen.
twittteruser recommendation system based on algorithms We've found that the power of suggestion can be a great thing to help people get started, but it's important that we suggest things relevant to them. We've created a number of algorithms to identify users across a variety of clusters who tweet actively and are engaged with their audiences. These new algorithms help us group these active users into lists of users by interests. Rather than suggesting a random set of 20 users for a new user to follow, now we let users browse into the areas they are interested in and choose who they want to follow from these lists. These lists will be refreshed frequently as the algorithms identify new users who should be suggested in these lists and some that are not as engaging to new users will be removed
A. Pfeifer. Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät der Universität Passau, Passau, Dissertation, (März 2004)Referent: Kleinschmidt, Peter (Prof. Dr.)
Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 09.12.2003.
I. Mierswa, M. Wurst, R. Klinkenberg, M. Scholz, and T. Euler. KDD '06: Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining, page 935--940. New York, NY, USA, ACM, (2006)
S. Ghosh, M. Mundhe, K. Hernandez, and S. Sen. Proceedings of the Third Annual Conference on Autonomous Agents, page 434--435. New York, NY, USA, ACM, (1999)
E. Santos-Neto, M. Ripeanu, and A. Iamnitchi. (2007)masses may not only support folksonomies but may also hinder their
usage for individuals, efficiency of tagging systems decreases with
growing population,.
N. Noy, S. Kunnatur, M. Klein, and M. Musen. Third International Semantic Web Conference, page 259+. Hiroshima, Japan, Springer Berlin, (November 2004)