Lisa Bu's J676 Blog

Wednesday, December 20, 2006

Response to Group 6's reading

Well, I'm part of group 6. One revelation I had after the research is that we need both the top-down and bottom-up models to do a good job in preserving and sharing human knowledge. The top-down model provides more quality control, the bottom-up more diversity insurance. They complement more than compete against each other.

Response to Group 5's Reading

In my previous life as a computer programmer, I had used lots of open source software (Apache, Tomcat, ect.) and supported the movement. But there's one big barrier that makes it hard for people including myself to use more open source software: the pain of switching from a good old commercial software to a new open source one. At the beginning of this semester, I was determined to use open source as much as possible, so installed OpenOffice, a free open source office package, instead of Microsoft Office in my new computer. Initially OpenOffice seemed very easy to use and similar to Word, even allowing exporting/importing document in Word format. But inconvenience started to emerge: I can't incorporate EndNote into it as easily; I can't use some of the shortcuts I've mastered in Word; It's a pain to write a paper in group when we had to email draft back and forth. When most other people you work with use Word, when other essential software integrates well only with Word, I find it hard to stick with OpenOffice. Under the deadline pressure, I gave in and installed Microsoft Office again.

In principle, I support open source whole-heartedly. But in reality, it's harder to do than I thought. So how can open source overcome the barrier? What can make it more adoptable?

Tuesday, December 05, 2006

Response to group 4's reading

I can't open the first link. The second article tells the story of a young blogger who has achieved some fame in the TV industry by being a quick and reliable broker of inside information, i.e. gossips, rumors, tips, etc. That blog reminds me of Drudge Report where I check daily for gossips of news. Oftentimes stories show up there before appearing on their official web site. These kind of web sites and blogs earn users' trust through word of mouth and testing of time, a little like in the old days how a coffee house became an unofficial information center in a village.

Friday, December 01, 2006

Response to group 3's reading

The most memorable part of the reading is what Henry Jenkins said in his blog, Digital Land Grab: "Copyright law was originally understood as a balance between the need to provide incentives to authors and the need to ensure the speedy circulation and absorption of new ideas."

If we interpret and update the copyright law in that spirit, what would the law say about content that used to be in our journals but now on the web for non-profit sharing purpose? What does "fair use" mean?

Response to group 2's reading

For me, the fight about net neutrality is really a fight about the control of net access. It's an internal conflict within big corporations. Each side frames the fight in a way to portray themselves as the good gatekeeper looking after the interest of the public. The scene is really murky for me.

Factually, how big a problem is the net neutrality? I'm relieved that the fight is not about content creation. About net access, I think there should be broad competition thus plenty of choice for internet users.

Response to group 1's reading

I always admire Feingold's courage and wisdom in casting the only "no" vote against the Patriot Act. The strength of the United States in large part is dependent on its adherence to rule of law and democracy. At time of fear and war, it's very tempting for people to consider abandoning those principle in exchange for immediate gain of security. But that may put the country on a slippery slope toward authoritarian rule and loss of freedom, the very reason why we fight the war. Feingold's speech gives us an insightful historical perspective: we should not act recklessly and hastily; we should consider the Act's long term implication very carefully.

The debate of the Act also reminds me of the Star War movie. A great hero, Anakin Skywalker defeated many enemies from the dark side. But when facing his mother's death, he was seized by the urge of revenge and abandoned the code of Jedi. That's the start of his downfall. He lost his soul gradually and finally became Darth Vader, the much feared one on the dark side. I hope this country has a strong backbone to resist the temptation of fear, and wisdom to always look far and long term.