There are lots of destructive forces threatening to turn the information super-highway into a mall parking lot and it is the intention of this web site to help in the effort to neutralize those forces. By providing the concerned netcitizen the opportunity to define and discuss what is happenings to the internet -- perhaps we can devised defensive strategies that will give us the power to prevent inevitable change from robbing the internet of it's value.
Other Subjects That's entertainment or When money talks brain cells walk
There ott to be a law or
Animate this! or
The evil players or
Unfinished essays
Links to other web defense sites |
Dmoz, Go, and Hotrate the big three in imbecility. My recent encounters with these indexing "communities" ( what ?) Has me wishing computers never became user friendly and fearing that "stupid people" and unprincipled capitalist will do to the internet what they have done to television. Anything, Regarding Anything (gets the most hits)
dmoz- function and policy
From The Beginning - My first contact with the alien life. What Should Be - What Hotrate asked for but didn't really want. (Includes my description of a better way.) The Dumbest Of The Dumb-oz - My 24 hours with the little people |
The fact that the “O”minous “D”irectory “P”roject is a closed spam-rectory maintained to serve the narrow interests of its insiders and not the public interest is becoming more and more apparent. A year ago no ODP defender would admit that a site submission might languish for a year or two before review. Today such admissions have become rather routine. What hasn’t changed is the absence of any reasonable justification to refute the reasonable conclusion that the “project” is in practical fact closed. |
I am not suggesting that indexing companies should not be allowed to edit or tailor their index to suit the preferences of an interested group. What I am suggesting is that we all demand that laws against false advertising should force indexers to clearly disclose what the tailors cut off, tuck under, and do not give the consumer. If a company implies that it is offering a web search, than it should provide just that. But, if whole parts of the web are going to be excluded and other parts segregated to the bottom of the list returned, then the provider has an obligation to let the customer know what they're not getting. In the present environment, the consumer cannot make a reasoned choice between search engines (and menus) because they are given no facts. In the future, the consumer must be allowed to know (without having to do extensive research) who owns the available search engines and which ones are using essentially the same data base. Likewise, they must be clearly informed when an index or menu has been censored, or worse, spiked with "affiliate" sites. Whether the Internet becomes a paradise for all or a junkyard for most (like television) will be decided by what we allow search engines to become. The ideal is a lush, easy to navigate web for all, but that is not going to be achievable without the application of some logical design. Instead of being part of the cause, search engines should be made to obey, and encourage compliance with, certain consumer-friendly rules-of-the-road that will make any trip across the Internet the joyride it should be.
|