Archive for the ‘Web 2.0’ Category
Press release from the NLM:
The National Library of Medicine (NLM) has launched a Web content collecting initiative. The Library is selecting Web content as part of its mission to collect, preserve, and make accessible the scholarly biomedical literature as well as resources that illustrate a diversity of philosophical and cultural perspectives not found in the technical literature.
New forms of publication on the Web, such as blogs authored by doctors and patients, illuminate healthcare thought and practice in the 21st century. In launching this initiative, the Library is capturing and providing a unique resource for future scholarship.
The collection can be accessed from http://www.nlm.nih.gov/webcollecting.
With this initiative NLM has taken a major new step in its mission to collect pertinent healthcare information of today for the benefit of research in the future. Increasingly, that information is found on the Web, which is a rapidly changing environment where valuable and interesting materials can surface and then quickly disappear. The Library is working to ensure it can effectively collect new material in a Web environment, and guarantee the material’s permanence and availability to current and future patrons.
Further info on the project:
An impressive inventory of the Googleplex by Arthur Weiss, speaker at the next ILI 2012…
“Internet searching and Google have become almost synonymous. Google, however, has moved far beyond basic search since its 1998 founding. Google’s mission statement says that it aims to organise the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful. In an effort to fulfil this ambition, Google offers a lot more than straightforward search. Google+ is the social media tool of choice for people whose lives circle around Google. Gmail now has over 425 million accounts, Google’s Chrome is one of the top three browsers (alongside Internet Explorer and Firefox) and there are more mobile phones running Android than Apple’s iPhone iOS. ”
Read the full article at:
Weiss, Arthur. The unknown Google. Information Today Europe, 28th of september 2012. Available from:
According Medical News Today, a new study, published recently in the Journal of Consumer Research, that propose using the internet to self-diagnose can be unwise because we tend to focus on symptoms rather than the risk of having the illness.
For their study, the researchers looked at two pieces of information that influence people’s decision as to whether they have a disease or not: the base rate (the rate of the disease in the general population), and the case information (eg the description of the symptoms).
They had a theory that how much reliance a person places on base rate and case information depends on the “psychological distance” to them of the person who is ill (self being the closest of all, strangers being very distant).
Their theory was that when assessing themselves (psychologically very close), people would place more importance on case information, and the influence of base rate would be weak. But when assessing others, especially strangers, then the influence of symptoms would be weak and base rate would be strong. (…)
The researchers said this study and others like it are important because, if consumers are more likely to misdiagnose themselves, then this could lead to them taking up treatments and buying drugs that are not appropriate, which has a wider impact on public health.
The easiest answer, they conclude is to get rid of the bias by seeing a real doctor instead of “Dr Google”.
Real doctors will take the prevalence of the disease into account, because they are viewing the patient from a distance, they say.
Paddock, Catharine. Dr Google And The Unwise Practice Of Self-Diagnosis. Medical News Today, 23 Jul 2012. Available from: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/248145.php
DO NOT TRACK in IE10 : the end of Web 2.0 business model ?
When the Do Not Track feature of a browser is turned on, a user’s surfing habits and visits can’t be tracked across Web sites, making it more difficult for Web sites, advertisers, and marketers to create personal profiles of people and target advertising at them. Do Not Track is supported by privacy groups.
“Privacy advocates cheered when Microsoft announced that it will turn on the “Do Not Track” privacy setting in Internet Explorer 10 by default when it ships with Windows 8. It was clearly a strike for privacy” but also a direct assault on the “free” 2.0 business model, especially the Google one.
“The debate highlights the difficulty of disabling the online tracking powers much of the $30 billion online advertising industry. The idea of a “do not track” system was proposed in 2010 by the Federal Trade Commission in its report on online privacy.”
Don’t expect Microsoft’s decision to change things much for now, but in the long term, it could make a dramatic difference… In the long run, though, it’s going to be hard for competing browsers not to turn on Do Not Track by default. People are increasingly concerned about privacy, and there will be tremendous pressure for browser makers to follow Microsoft’s lead. Whether part of Microsoft’s motivation was to harm Google is in a way beside the point. Microsoft did the right thing, and other browser makers should follow suit.
Angwin, Julia. Microsoft’s “Do Not Track” Move Angers Advertising Industry. The Wall Street Journal, May 31, 2012. Available from: http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/05/31/microsofts-do-not-track-move-angers-advertising-industry/ [Accessed 7th of June 2012]
Gralla, Preston. Do Not Track in Internet Explorer 10: A boon for privacy or a strike against Google?, Computer World, June 4, 2012. Available from: http://blogs.computerworld.com/20263/do_not_track_in_internet_explorer_10_a_boon_for_privacy_or_a_strike_against_google [Accessed 7th of June 2012]
If you’re not paying the for it, YOU are the product…
Below a digest of some discussions reported in 2 blogs:
- May 2009, Rest in peace RSS: It’s time to get completely off RSS and switch to Twitter. RSS just doesn’t cut it anymore. (…) Suddenly everyone and their dog was convinced RSS was dead and we should all move on.
- In early 2011 RSS still wasn’t quite dead. (…) To me, anytime someone says a tech is dead it usually means that tech is not very interesting to discuss anymore, or isn’t seeing the most innovative companies doing new things with it.
- April 2012 – RSS still wasn’t quite dead (…) There’s a veritable explosion of companies removing RSS from their products … for whatever reason. Usually because it doesn’t directly benefit the bottom line – they prefer proprietary formats
- RSS will never die because of a simple reality: power users. (…) RSS is here to stay for at least a while longer – all those people doing most of the sharing? A lot of their stuff comes from RSS.
- Twitter is not a replacement for RSS. Not by a long shot. It’s too busy! (…) Consequently, RSS offers bigger exposure to your content.
- Twitter seems to be the place to have conversations now rather then on blogs. That’s not to say blogs don’t have a place in both finding information and having discussions, but it would appear they’re being used for more reflective posts, which individuals can comment on, rather then short conversations involving lots of individuals
Teller, Swizec. RSS will never die. Zemanta Tech blog, April 26, 2012. Available from: http://www.zemanta.com/fruitblog/rss-will-never-die/ [Accessed 4th of May 2012]
Mulla, James. The role of RSS and RSS readers. FUMSI, 30th of April 2012. Available from: http://web.fumsi.com/go/article/manage/68689 [Accessed 4th of May 2012]