Google: Searching for the Right Results

Today in EIT...
Chris Nolan raised some interesting points about the structure of Google's database and how it makes money as a monopolistic firm in the market. Statistics show that Google is the most popular search engine today, and is used by over 66% of all U.S citizens. Not surprisingly, over 90% of all of Google's revenue is from advertising. There is some controversy around this idea because Google is so widely used. Although Google claims they do not alter searches based on advertising (i.e. type in a search and get first page of results), there are a lot of things that slip through the cracks. Google tries to prevent spam but because the database is so large, there is a lot more room for firms to manipulate the database.
How It Works
Ever wonder how search results come up? The mechanisms used to find information are very complex and highly technical. Strategic algorithms, page quality and "web crawling" are all used to compute a result from the search engine. Web crawling defines how sites have links from page to page. There is also an invisible algorithm that is being developed on social networks as well as Google. For example, the more information you provide on these various networks, the more they tailor to your interests. All of these mechanisms work together to produce a result from your search. Ranking algorithms are evolving every day. Today, there is an occupation called search engine optimization (SEO), where firms try and research the best ways to advertise a product based on search results in Google.
NEW TERMS 
 "internet junk food" defines pop culture information that floods websites and is fun to read (usually false information)
"information bubble" is defined as the bubble that social networks and other internet filters place around you based on your personal interests and frequent searches

Next time you type a search, ask yourself: is internet is telling you what it wants you to see? Or are you telling it what you want to see?

5 Reasons Why Powerpoint Can be a Drag....

TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MUCH TEXT

• Presentations should not be overwhelming with text. If you want the audience to read it
• Text can be distracting and taking away from the overall point of the slide

NO Interaction

• It is important to interact with audience rather than just talk at them
• Bring visual aids, conduct demonstrations and ask questions to engage the audience

Linear/ Lack of Unique Mediums

• Dynamic presentations are always better than static ones
• Include transitions, videos and cool graphs to change up the flow of the presentation

Irrelevant

• Presentations should be focused as if you were presenting a paper. 
• It should be formatted with a beginning, a middle and an end!

Unorganized

• Organized presentations are easier for the audience to follow and stay tuned in
• avoid tangents and unnecessary info.

The Misconceiving Eye: A commentary on True Lies by Suzanne Salvo

How much a photo can be altered aesthetically and still be within the bounds of reasonable ethical standards?

 IF the intention of the person in the image is distorted, I feel that it would be unethical. Even if the artist was making an aesthetic adjustment, I think it is unreasonable to alter the perception of said person in the image. For example, if there was an image of a female that was taken at an unflattering angle, the artist may distort her figure to look thinner. This does not seem unethical in certain contexts. However, if the image was suppose to be used as a real life example of a woman's figure for a poster titled "body awareness", then the adjustment alters the intent of the person being photographed, which in my opinion is unethical.

Without editing, photos can still be taken in a certain context with an artistic perspective or an aesthetically pleasing view. There are examples when this can be unethical as well. For instance, if the photographer is capturing images of a forest that has an abundance of waste and habitat degradation but decided to only capture areas in which these non-aesthetic aspects are removed, then the image is misleading. This does not necessarily mean the image is unethical depending on what context it is used in. If this image was used in a scientific paper representing a forest that is unharmed by waste and deforestation, then I would consider it unethical.
Ethics are a set of rules that we invent that define what we think is good and bad. The dictionary says ethics are "a set of moral principles or values" and that ethical means "conforming to accepted professional standards of conduct". 

Ethics and Art have a complex relationship. Whether or not an artistic piece is unethical or not is dependent on the intent of the artist as well as the context in which the photo is used.

Learning from Technology: CLT

I have been to CLT before, but this past visit really added a layer of depth to what I previously knew about the advanced forms of technology this wonderful facility offers to trinity students and faculty. Every time I come to CLT I tell myself "Im going to start doing homework here", because the computers are really sweet! One of the most exciting new additions to the CLT supply are the 3-D printers and scanners. The amount of potential for creative ideas and applied use of these printers are endless. I am really excited to get more involved with this technology in the future for both classes and personal use.

Thanks again Gregory!

Photo Manipulation: Distortion and Enhancement

pt(I) - Distortion
Coincidentally, I had been discussing our countries' criminal justice system with my roomate and the infamous O.J. Simpson trail came up. Although we put minors in jail for life for manslaughter, we let famous celebrities off scott-free...

The above photos are both mug shots of O.J. Simpson the night of his arrest. On the left in Newsweek, the image is not edited. On the right, it was manipulated to make O.J.'s face darker with a vingette edge around the image-- adding a shadowy effect. These subtle dark addtions add to the overall  give off a troubling and guilty look. OJ becomes the shadow of the night that he "allegedly" killed his wife. The photo editor probably believed that O.J. was guilty and felt that the picture needed some darkening and menacing effects. Although some digital  alteration can be harmful to the person in the photo, I have no sympathy for O.J. and his mugshot in this situation.

 

pt(II)- Enhancement

I really enjoyed watching this short artsy clip on photo manipulatino. Oringinally a picture of a Burlesque dancer, the photo becomes something quite astonishing and supernatural at the end of the clip. The addition of galaxies and stars as the backdrop as well as the brightly colored hair and lips transforms this photo into something out-of-this-world!

Avoiding Artificiality

Situation A.

A first-year medical student in California whose personal blog is hosted by a large weblog content provider posts explicit directions on facilitating an assisted suicide in the interest of “serving the rights of competent, terminally ill adults.”  Is this legal? Is it ethical? A teenager in another state who is being treated for depression reads the post and succumbs to a fatal, self-administered overdose of drugs, crediting the blogger for “helping her do it right” in her last note to her family.  Who is responsible for the tragedy?  The teenager herself? The medical student? The weblog content provider for allowing the blog content to be posted? The parents for not monitoring their emotionally fragile child’s Internet access closely enough? What, if any, crime has been committed and who can and should be prosecuted?

Suicide is clearly not a matter of black and white, such as many situations under the copyright law. If you torrent a song, you downloaded it illegally and that is wrong. If you provide information on how to properly kill yourself is that wrong? Intuitively I say yes. Then I step back. If I were dying of stage 4 malignant cancer, how much longer would I want to be around? Life seems to be about quality over quantity. If the situation is reversed however, and this information gives a teenage girl the necessary tools to end it all, this information is harmful. Then I step back even further. In my generation, we have complete access to an abundance of information that connects us to the global sphere. People everywhere are on the Internet voicing their opinions on blogs, providing falsehoods on Wikipedia and exercising their rights. With an exponential amount of voices and opinions, you are bound to find the answer to life’s questions that you are looking for. Meaning, this teenager could have just as easily researched a suicide-watch hotline online or a site that gives helpful tips on how to deal with depression.

This is where my argument shifts. The information itself that the teenager used to commit suicide is not inherently evil. It is on the part of the medical student to state explicitly how the information should be used (ex: this webpage is designed for terminally ill adults battling cancer).  It also falls on the parent’s shoulders to regulate how much time their daughter spends on the Internet as well as making a daily human-to-human interaction with her. There are too many situations where young adults feel disconnected and isolated and then look to the web to find artificial relationships. It is also critical that schools begin to address how to use the Internet at a young age. Understanding that not everything you read is true is helpful when you are still absorbing everything you hear and see. On a larger scale, the government needs to regulate what citizens can and cannot put on the web. Too many sites provide false information or justify acts that would be deemed unconstitutional.

So there may not be one right answer to whether this website is a crime under copyright law, but I am arguing that all of these people, institutions, and connections in this teenager’s life played a critical role in her suicide. Last semester, I had a close friend commit suicide and I was confused and heartbroken. But most of all, I was angry. I was angry with myself for not seeing the signs. I was angry with her parents for not allowing her to follow her dreams and forcing her to take certain classes. I was angry with the school for not acting quickly enough when she went missing. However, underneath all this anger was sadness. Over time (and with the help of therapy), I had come to realize that this situation was clearly out of my control. There was nothing I could have done that would have changed her mind. Nevertheless, I had influenced her in some way because she was apart of my life. Every day gets easier. I remember the good times and integrate all that she has taught me into my daily life. I make a conscious effort to acknowledge and smile at people when I pass by them. I do not ignore my intuition when a situation does not seem right, I take action. Life is a beautiful gift, that’s why its called the present. Living in the moment is the hardest thing to practice, but consciously practicing has been very rewarding and I look forward each new day.