I always wondered how Facebook prioritizes your friends to the twenty or so that show up on your news feed once in a while. When logging into your account, Facebook automatically publishes the news of friends that are correctly relevant to your social life. I mean, lets face it, I'm not bffs with everyone of my 800+ friends, so how does facebook know which friends I'm actually interested in reading about?
I feel that Facebook's algorithm on the news feed is based off of two things. 1) the people who you stalk and 2) the people who stalk you. Admittedly, I am guilty of the occasional stalker personal. Like everyone else on facebook, I go throught the pictures, walls, and even now, friendships of people that I feel are worth stalking. While many people think that their stalkerish lifestyles are their own little secret, clearly, someone in working for facebook knows who you are looking at, and how many times your looking at them. There are applications on facebook (not legitimate or detail-based ones) but applications non the less that claim to tell you who is your stalker. These applications get 1000 hits daily simply because people want to know who is looking at them, and their everyday life. You know who has the real answer? Facebook!
So, how do you think the general people (i.e. all facebook users) feel about looking at random people's profiles now? Do you feel about look up that cute girl from highschool and ALL her pictures knowing that someone out there knows that you are looking at her profile every single day without a single facebook relationship other than just being friends? I know that I'm going to think twice next time I do so. I feel that the bottom line of this post is to say, stalk those who only want to be stalked; or rather, only look at people's profiles with no fear of getting caught. Who knows if one day, a hacker will break the algorithm and produce an application that shows your real top 10 stalkers with how many times they've seen your profile? Imagine gaining access to that app and number 1 is some dude you haven't talked to in years. I would feel totally and utterly violated. WATCH WHO YOU STALK BECAUSE ONE DAY THEY MIGHT FIND OUT!!!!
My curiosity found this site. the article is a great read on the dynamics of facebook's code.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-10-18/the-facebook-news-feed-how-it-works-the-10-biggest-secrets/
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Monday, November 29, 2010
Aiming to Learn as We Do, a Machine Teaches Itself
Today, I presented my current events article from the NY times. My article was about NELL (the Never Ending Language Learning system), and how this super computer is breaking boundaries in terms of technology mastering semantics. It is actually quite superb when you read the article and see how amazing technology is getting these days. Researchers at the Carnegie Mellon University developed NELL with intentions of bringing human language to the world of computers. NELL revolves its “knowledge base” around 290 semantic categories such as actors, universities, cities, sports teams, etc; and connects all of these categories through various “relations”. NELL currently has 280 relations and scans hundreds of thousands of textual patterns and phrases to match up categories based on their relations to other categories. I thought it was quite amazing how NELL was highly automated, meaning that it could perpetuate its own curiosity and have endless knowledge with the millions of web pages out there. With NELL’s progress, we can actually have a computer that teaches itself based on the knowledge that has already been established through human establishment. I might just be a little paranoid, but while reading the article, I couldn’t help thinking about sci-fi horror films with dangerous super computers. Some movies that came to mind were Eagle Eye, and of course, Terminator’s Skynet.
But jokes aside, I asked the class if it was safe for NELL to be basing its knowledge base off of something as bias as the world wide web? From our midterm project, we determined that there are sources out there (Wikipedia) that are just not reliable. So, what if NELL were to get false information from sites like Wikipedia? Could NELL be identified as a credible source of information? I feel that one solution to the problem could be that the same or similar algorithm could be used, but instead of using the WWW as reference, it could narrow its database to credible sources such as ESPN for sports, CNN for news, etc. I understand that its knowledge wouldn’t be as extensive, but it wouldn’t be so volatile to false information or bias entries.
All in all, NELL is a great idea with a ton of potential. It’s algorithm is shaky, but with work, I’m sure that its future is bright. With NELL in mind, I am curious to find out where the future of A.I. is going. We now have a computer that can think for itself, what’s next? Robots?!?!
But jokes aside, I asked the class if it was safe for NELL to be basing its knowledge base off of something as bias as the world wide web? From our midterm project, we determined that there are sources out there (Wikipedia) that are just not reliable. So, what if NELL were to get false information from sites like Wikipedia? Could NELL be identified as a credible source of information? I feel that one solution to the problem could be that the same or similar algorithm could be used, but instead of using the WWW as reference, it could narrow its database to credible sources such as ESPN for sports, CNN for news, etc. I understand that its knowledge wouldn’t be as extensive, but it wouldn’t be so volatile to false information or bias entries.
All in all, NELL is a great idea with a ton of potential. It’s algorithm is shaky, but with work, I’m sure that its future is bright. With NELL in mind, I am curious to find out where the future of A.I. is going. We now have a computer that can think for itself, what’s next? Robots?!?!
Sunday, November 28, 2010
The Facebook Effect Part 2
The second part to The Facebook Effect by David Kirkpatrick was very interesting. Starting with chapter 5, Kirkpatrick details the impressive financial offers by wealthy venture capitalists of the west coast. The portrayal of the battle of loyalty between Accel and The Post was very intriguing and quite astonishing. (Kirkpatrick 116) I don’t really know too much about venture capitalism, but reading chapter 5 opened my eyes to how risky these people really are. For a company that was less than 2 years old to be getting offers in the millions was very very impressive. How did these venture capitalists know what they were getting themselves into? And how did they know that facebook was going to be so big? Companies usually take decades to build their capital up to the millions but facebook did it in such a short amount of time. Towards the end of chapter I read that Accel, being the bigger firm, eventually got the deal over The Post and valued facebook at 80 million.
I have already seen the movie The Social Network, and therefore know the brief history of Facebook. So, I find it really interesting when I find conflicting information, or information was wasn’t seeing in the theaters. In the movie, Zuckerberg is portrayed as a cocky intellectual with all the right answers with a fearless attitude. However, Kirkpatrick displays several points where Zuckerberg was scared and frightened – breaking down in tears. Kirkpatrick explains “he did agree to start seeing n executive coach to get lessons on how to be an effective leader.” (Kirkpatrick 164)
Zuckerberg eventually was receiving offers at 1.5 billion dollars. Even at this point, Zuckerberg refuse to even glance at these documents. What I find impressive about Zuckerberg, and account him tremendous success is his composure when it came to big business deals. He knew that the money was going to be coming, but he continued to focus his success on the opportunities, and not the money. I also found it cool how facebook was recruiting employees from established corporate giants. In fact, facebook was actually taking employees from other giant computer companies such as Amazon and Google. Of course this is when facebook was beginning to make a name for it, but I still found it extraordinary that in the public eye, facebook was beginning to make a good, long-term name for itself in terms of employment.
I have already seen the movie The Social Network, and therefore know the brief history of Facebook. So, I find it really interesting when I find conflicting information, or information was wasn’t seeing in the theaters. In the movie, Zuckerberg is portrayed as a cocky intellectual with all the right answers with a fearless attitude. However, Kirkpatrick displays several points where Zuckerberg was scared and frightened – breaking down in tears. Kirkpatrick explains “he did agree to start seeing n executive coach to get lessons on how to be an effective leader.” (Kirkpatrick 164)
Zuckerberg eventually was receiving offers at 1.5 billion dollars. Even at this point, Zuckerberg refuse to even glance at these documents. What I find impressive about Zuckerberg, and account him tremendous success is his composure when it came to big business deals. He knew that the money was going to be coming, but he continued to focus his success on the opportunities, and not the money. I also found it cool how facebook was recruiting employees from established corporate giants. In fact, facebook was actually taking employees from other giant computer companies such as Amazon and Google. Of course this is when facebook was beginning to make a name for it, but I still found it extraordinary that in the public eye, facebook was beginning to make a good, long-term name for itself in terms of employment.
Friday, November 12, 2010
The Facebook Effect Part 1
David Kirkpatrick's book, The Facebook Effect, describes the history of Facebook and its creator, Mark Zuckerberg. Kirkpatrick's book shares a very close representation of the movie, The Social Network. The book starts by introducing an interesting story about Oscar Morales and his opposition to FARC, a guerilla group of Colombian terrorist who take citizens and outstanding political figures to make their point more disturbing. Morales, an avid Facebook user used the site to create a group opposing the hostiles. To his (and my) surprise, the group attracted followers by the thousands in a very short amount of time. Soon enough, action was in store, and Morales organized a global march against the group with participants reaching to the millions. This one example exemplified the exquisite power of the social networking tool known as Facebook. Facebook was originally meant to just be social networking site has become a very powerful political tool. As Kirkpatrick stated, “Despite decades of fear and intimidation, Facebook gave Colombia’s young people an easy, digital way to feel comfort in numbers to declare their disgust.” (Pg. 5)
The author then goes on to describe the origins of the sites creator, Mark Zuckerberg. Describing him as a “geek”, Zuckerberg was also a genius. He was the graduate of a very prestigious high school and was highly involved with the innovation of highly intricate software. Before facebook, Zuckerberg had created several other forms of software that was very addictive and promoted loyalty among its users. The software use ranged from studying for an Art final to linking similar music together (much like Pandora.)
Kirkpatrick eventually got to the creation of thefacebook (pg. 27). This was obviously the star of Zuckerberg work as it was a collaboration of past social networking sites like Friendster and MySpace. Other creations of Zuckerberg included facemash and course match, all of which shared a similar algorithm with that of facebook. Many of his friends blamed the creation on his introverted personality (pg. 29)…as the Kirkpatrick states, “of you’re a geek who is a little uncomfortable relating to other people, why not create a website that makes it easier.”
What I find so interesting in this book, and in the movie, is Zuckerberg’s composure when it came to making expensive business decisions. As a college kid with little money, how can you deter advertising deals that are priced in the thousands or even millions!? As indicted on page 33, Zuckerberg wanted to keep the seriousness of facebook exclusive, while making it more fun than anything…
The author then goes on to describe the origins of the sites creator, Mark Zuckerberg. Describing him as a “geek”, Zuckerberg was also a genius. He was the graduate of a very prestigious high school and was highly involved with the innovation of highly intricate software. Before facebook, Zuckerberg had created several other forms of software that was very addictive and promoted loyalty among its users. The software use ranged from studying for an Art final to linking similar music together (much like Pandora.)
Kirkpatrick eventually got to the creation of thefacebook (pg. 27). This was obviously the star of Zuckerberg work as it was a collaboration of past social networking sites like Friendster and MySpace. Other creations of Zuckerberg included facemash and course match, all of which shared a similar algorithm with that of facebook. Many of his friends blamed the creation on his introverted personality (pg. 29)…as the Kirkpatrick states, “of you’re a geek who is a little uncomfortable relating to other people, why not create a website that makes it easier.”
What I find so interesting in this book, and in the movie, is Zuckerberg’s composure when it came to making expensive business decisions. As a college kid with little money, how can you deter advertising deals that are priced in the thousands or even millions!? As indicted on page 33, Zuckerberg wanted to keep the seriousness of facebook exclusive, while making it more fun than anything…
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Auditing a Wikipedia Article
This past week, I was place in a group of 4 pretty cool guys and we were assigned the tedious assignment of auditing a Wikipedia article about Polygamy in North America. My group consisted of Phil, Tom, Max, and Hussain. We all worked very well together, and got along nicely considering half of us did not know each other..
The breakdown consisted of the entire group coming over to my apartment and crafting a game plan on how to tackle the project. Tom initiated the idea of starting a Google documents account seeing that we all have Gmail accounts. This allowed all of us, even when apart, to edit the presentation with whatever suggestions we all had. To make sure we were all on the same page in terms of how to audit, and pin point exactly what we were suppose to be looking for, we decided to work on the first section of the article together. We found several discrepancies such as mismatched dates relative to the footnote [1] and an evident bias that did not talk about Mexico and very little about Canada. Another bias that we identified was that in the article, the authors mostly discuss males having multiple wives, and not the other way around.
After going over the first section, Phil created another Google word doc where we could add our suggestions and ideas about references and footnotes that we found problems or discretion with. With this, we parted and worked on each section by ourselves keeping in contact through text messages and the accessible document that Phil set up.
Again, the auditing process that we established as a group would go along the lines of this, 1. Read the article 2. Check reference list for dead links 3. Check existing sources against their claim 4. Determine bias within the article 5. Scan article for missing information. After that, we evaluated the source into 4 different categories. 1. Off-topic 2. Barely Relevant 3. Good Quality 4. Inaccessible.
After, separating the 36 different sources into their associated categories, we determined that the Wikipedia article proved a decent source to obtaining information about polygamy in North America. However, in terms of gaining comprehensive knowledge about the subject, the article did have several loose ends that did seem iffy. Some sources had dead links; some were based off of religious websites that were extremely skewed.
The breakdown consisted of the entire group coming over to my apartment and crafting a game plan on how to tackle the project. Tom initiated the idea of starting a Google documents account seeing that we all have Gmail accounts. This allowed all of us, even when apart, to edit the presentation with whatever suggestions we all had. To make sure we were all on the same page in terms of how to audit, and pin point exactly what we were suppose to be looking for, we decided to work on the first section of the article together. We found several discrepancies such as mismatched dates relative to the footnote [1] and an evident bias that did not talk about Mexico and very little about Canada. Another bias that we identified was that in the article, the authors mostly discuss males having multiple wives, and not the other way around.
After going over the first section, Phil created another Google word doc where we could add our suggestions and ideas about references and footnotes that we found problems or discretion with. With this, we parted and worked on each section by ourselves keeping in contact through text messages and the accessible document that Phil set up.
Again, the auditing process that we established as a group would go along the lines of this, 1. Read the article 2. Check reference list for dead links 3. Check existing sources against their claim 4. Determine bias within the article 5. Scan article for missing information. After that, we evaluated the source into 4 different categories. 1. Off-topic 2. Barely Relevant 3. Good Quality 4. Inaccessible.
After, separating the 36 different sources into their associated categories, we determined that the Wikipedia article proved a decent source to obtaining information about polygamy in North America. However, in terms of gaining comprehensive knowledge about the subject, the article did have several loose ends that did seem iffy. Some sources had dead links; some were based off of religious websites that were extremely skewed.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Made to Break (Ch. 7-9)
The last chapters (7-9) of Slade’s book, Made to break, prove for some very interesting reading. Slade first makes it apparent in his discussion on emulation. To describe this, he brings up IBM and their key role in the development of micro technology in the earlier half of the century. Slade describes how IBM avoided the scary ‘Turing Tar Pit’ founded by Alex M. Turing. IBM outlasted the competition with their innovative, system/360. This was a new microprocessor that was compatible with older IBM computer models. Much like an exchangeable part, the system/360 made older computer models as fast and advanced as new models…much like a system update or a reconfiguration for your PC. Slade states that, “in order to distinguish the system/360’s dynamic processing feature from earlier attempts to imitate or stimulate the applications of obsolete computer models, Larry Moss of IBM called this new ability, ‘emulation’” (Pg 186)
My interpretation of emulation was that people could simply keep their products for longer despite upgrades and advancements basically because old models could perform nearly as good as new ones. I feel like a lot of companies do this present day. Nearly all software made these days is compatible with every running computer. Sure, people are always looking for faster computers with higher ram and processing power for video games and what not, but for the most part, simple applications and daily tools are all made for computers dating back 5-6 years ago. I’ve concluded from Slade’s book that the life of certain technologies have become in fact LONGER. Once someone has bought the newest and most advanced thing, its bound to last a few years on the market in terms of the sufficiency that it provides to its users. Right now, I currently use a droid incredible, and a mac book pro, and I honestly cant see any reason why I might want to replace either one in the near future.
Slade goes on to discuss DEC’s equivalent to IBM’s system/360, PDP-8. PDP was a minicomputer that paved the way for subminiturization…and eventually the micro module. He also discusses how Kilby from Texas Instruments developed the solid circuit. Slade does this for some time in the book which I regret to say , was a little bit boring. I felt like I was reading ‘computers’ again, and we all know how much I loved that book.
Slade ends on the note that all technology eventually becomes e-waste and this idea in its entirety perpetuates the foundation of obsolescence. What did I think of the book? I liked it in the beginning where economics was Slade’s main point of focus, but when we begins to discuss the history of computers and how they came to be…is when my attention span begins to wander. Overall, good book, I shall be more mindful of the master plans and marketing strategies of firms and companies next time I decide to make a serious investment in something new.
My interpretation of emulation was that people could simply keep their products for longer despite upgrades and advancements basically because old models could perform nearly as good as new ones. I feel like a lot of companies do this present day. Nearly all software made these days is compatible with every running computer. Sure, people are always looking for faster computers with higher ram and processing power for video games and what not, but for the most part, simple applications and daily tools are all made for computers dating back 5-6 years ago. I’ve concluded from Slade’s book that the life of certain technologies have become in fact LONGER. Once someone has bought the newest and most advanced thing, its bound to last a few years on the market in terms of the sufficiency that it provides to its users. Right now, I currently use a droid incredible, and a mac book pro, and I honestly cant see any reason why I might want to replace either one in the near future.
Slade goes on to discuss DEC’s equivalent to IBM’s system/360, PDP-8. PDP was a minicomputer that paved the way for subminiturization…and eventually the micro module. He also discusses how Kilby from Texas Instruments developed the solid circuit. Slade does this for some time in the book which I regret to say , was a little bit boring. I felt like I was reading ‘computers’ again, and we all know how much I loved that book.
Slade ends on the note that all technology eventually becomes e-waste and this idea in its entirety perpetuates the foundation of obsolescence. What did I think of the book? I liked it in the beginning where economics was Slade’s main point of focus, but when we begins to discuss the history of computers and how they came to be…is when my attention span begins to wander. Overall, good book, I shall be more mindful of the master plans and marketing strategies of firms and companies next time I decide to make a serious investment in something new.
Friday, November 5, 2010
The Facebook Movie
I saw this movie last night during the 11:15 showing. Despite my skepticism and inability to find things interesting, the movie provided some well recognized entertainment on one level, and revelation on another level. The movie's plot boldly describes Mark Zuckerberg, and his famous journey to becoming the world's youngest billionaire.
So what does it take to become rich in about 4 years or less? College? A degree? Nah, to get that rich that quick takes genius! From the very first scene, Zuckerberg (or the actor) proved that he was a super genius. His plan to unveil facebook to the world happened the way it should have happened and all because he did it the right way with the right smarts. It was amazing to see jesse eisenberg act out the businessman-genius and the computer-coding geek, come together in one and astonish the audience and actually made them think.
It was an entertaining movie that made me think alot about how/what it takes to build an idea and make it a fortune. How it only takes that one idea, and make it good enough for everyone to follow you. That is what i was thinking about the entire time while i was watching that movie. Even after the movie, I caught myself peeping at my phone for facebook notifications. and thought to myself, I am one of those followers...he got me too.
I found myself 'youtubing' videos of Zuckerberg during computer shows such as TechwebTV and businessinsider just to listen a little bit more on the Zuckerberg story. I was trying to imagine exactly what kinda tool facebook is...an addressbook? a spy tool? a background checking device? and how could zuckerberg be so smart as to make it stick in the market with unless growth in front of it? Personally, I kept thinking to myself, "because its free...and has all of that" but that's just me.
What do I think of facebook? I think its dangerous. I realize that it is a tool of background checks, auditing, and profiling...but why is it so damned addictive? it destroys personal interactions and lays out a cyberworld where people can actually 'follow' you. Plus, how can you have you life run through a computer? Can can you get out to see the world when your stuck worry about whether or not your girlfriend is confirming you relationship status...yet here I am, with facebook open on another tab...I am guilty...
Good movie...i'd suggest it.
So what does it take to become rich in about 4 years or less? College? A degree? Nah, to get that rich that quick takes genius! From the very first scene, Zuckerberg (or the actor) proved that he was a super genius. His plan to unveil facebook to the world happened the way it should have happened and all because he did it the right way with the right smarts. It was amazing to see jesse eisenberg act out the businessman-genius and the computer-coding geek, come together in one and astonish the audience and actually made them think.
It was an entertaining movie that made me think alot about how/what it takes to build an idea and make it a fortune. How it only takes that one idea, and make it good enough for everyone to follow you. That is what i was thinking about the entire time while i was watching that movie. Even after the movie, I caught myself peeping at my phone for facebook notifications. and thought to myself, I am one of those followers...he got me too.
I found myself 'youtubing' videos of Zuckerberg during computer shows such as TechwebTV and businessinsider just to listen a little bit more on the Zuckerberg story. I was trying to imagine exactly what kinda tool facebook is...an addressbook? a spy tool? a background checking device? and how could zuckerberg be so smart as to make it stick in the market with unless growth in front of it? Personally, I kept thinking to myself, "because its free...and has all of that" but that's just me.
What do I think of facebook? I think its dangerous. I realize that it is a tool of background checks, auditing, and profiling...but why is it so damned addictive? it destroys personal interactions and lays out a cyberworld where people can actually 'follow' you. Plus, how can you have you life run through a computer? Can can you get out to see the world when your stuck worry about whether or not your girlfriend is confirming you relationship status...yet here I am, with facebook open on another tab...I am guilty...
Good movie...i'd suggest it.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Why the internet is amazing
The world wide web has become to greatest thing invented in human history. With it, information is available literally at your fingertips, the world of communication has expanded to unprecedented levels with phone calls now available for FREE, relationships and social networking now heavily rely on the power of the internet as well. So ask yourself, can you really live without the internet without being considered outdated, primal, or stone-aged? Honestly, the answer is no. Simply, if you are not using the internet, you are clearly an outcast of society.
Specifically, why is the web so amazing? Well, the resources would be its most notable attributes. One can skip the process of searching for the girl of their dreams by using Match.com. They would simply put in their 'likes', 'dislikes', physical characteristics, etc...and find someone looking for those qualities or something close.
I remember being around 8 years old, and going on road trips with my family to places we've never been before. Inevitably we would get lost, and my dad would pull out a big book with hundreds of maps of different areas of the country. we would have to find where we were, where we want to go, and route a set of intricate directions to get from point a to point b. Now, we have maps.Google.com where one can simply type in the address of their destination and in less than a second, will have their trip planned out with alternative routes pending on toll roads, traffic hours, local, or highway.
Who remembers those terrible research papers back in middle school where one would have to tediously cite their sources in a certain format relative to the type of source. You know what I mean, newspapers, internet articles, scholarly journals, etc...Well, now they have something called noodletools.com where you can type in the exact source you had, and the site will format it, MLA, APA, etc to what you want it to be. No more..this in "", or italicize that...the site does everything for you!
Of course I have to mention the online shopping sites. notably, Amazon.com and Ebay.com. these two sites have revolutionized the world of shopping. A virtual super store with clothing, sporting goods, food, computer parts...everything you can possible imagine, is on the market in amazon or ebay.
I'd like to mention a not so popular site called wolframalpha.com this website is the first computational knowledge engine. what does this mean? If you type in any computational equation (e.g. derivative of log (x), demographics of..., or you can even do as far as adding colors!) yes, this is the first website I have come across that can compute almost anything! I feel that this is a breakthrough in search engines and we will be seeing more of things like this in the future. Wolfram is indeed impressive. So if you are bored or have some calculus webwork to do, just give it a try.
Specifically, why is the web so amazing? Well, the resources would be its most notable attributes. One can skip the process of searching for the girl of their dreams by using Match.com. They would simply put in their 'likes', 'dislikes', physical characteristics, etc...and find someone looking for those qualities or something close.
I remember being around 8 years old, and going on road trips with my family to places we've never been before. Inevitably we would get lost, and my dad would pull out a big book with hundreds of maps of different areas of the country. we would have to find where we were, where we want to go, and route a set of intricate directions to get from point a to point b. Now, we have maps.Google.com where one can simply type in the address of their destination and in less than a second, will have their trip planned out with alternative routes pending on toll roads, traffic hours, local, or highway.
Who remembers those terrible research papers back in middle school where one would have to tediously cite their sources in a certain format relative to the type of source. You know what I mean, newspapers, internet articles, scholarly journals, etc...Well, now they have something called noodletools.com where you can type in the exact source you had, and the site will format it, MLA, APA, etc to what you want it to be. No more..this in "", or italicize that...the site does everything for you!
Of course I have to mention the online shopping sites. notably, Amazon.com and Ebay.com. these two sites have revolutionized the world of shopping. A virtual super store with clothing, sporting goods, food, computer parts...everything you can possible imagine, is on the market in amazon or ebay.
I'd like to mention a not so popular site called wolframalpha.com this website is the first computational knowledge engine. what does this mean? If you type in any computational equation (e.g. derivative of log (x), demographics of..., or you can even do as far as adding colors!) yes, this is the first website I have come across that can compute almost anything! I feel that this is a breakthrough in search engines and we will be seeing more of things like this in the future. Wolfram is indeed impressive. So if you are bored or have some calculus webwork to do, just give it a try.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)