assessing WWW quality
Posted in the Science / Technology Forum
#1 Jan 5, 2013
The World Wide Web (abbreviating WWW) is a dazzling gem of the Information Age, since it provides unlimited universal access to more or less peer-edited useful information and editorials.
Because the World Wide Web is not well-regulated or formally monitored, many critics cite its lack of professional reliability and data verifiability (i.e., prevalence of spam).
Given this lack of quality control on the World Wide Web, how should society objectively measure its information accuracy? Well, since the World Wide Web is a peer-edited medium, peer-edited entertainment websites such as celebrity fan blog discussion boards more or less capture the essence of the magic of the World Wide Web.
In other words, while information-rich websites such as Carfax.com , Wikipedia, eBay, and Amazon.com are satisfactorily reliable, useful, and engaging, it is in fact websites such as TIGBlogs, eBlogger, Twitter, Facebook, and WireClub Chat that capture the populist magic of the World Wide Web.
Do these technology considerations reflect the user-friendly value of peer-based franchises such as Planet Hollywood and populist Hollywood (USA) movies such as "The Social Network" (2010)?
Are they printing movie posters on hemp/recycled paper yet?
Add your comments below
|"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12)||3 hr||Dogen||70,561|
|Is Time An Illusion? (May '10)||8 hr||0smius||14,163|
|The AI fight is escalating: This is the IT gian...||12 hr||Julzee111||1|
|If FBI wants to talk to Jared Kushner about Rus...||21 hr||spud||3|
|Access: Invalid database object||22 hr||RMcKee||2|
|60W Digiflavor WildFire TC Kit, Compact size, U...||Sat||luckyluckyluke||1|
|DVDFab Passkey 188.8.131.52 Updated!||May 26||dvdlover||1|
Find what you want!
Search Science / Technology Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC