Not so fast: 'stoopid' web readers?

Somewhere a group of cognitive scientists and researchers are quietly patting their backs after presenting evidence that the Internet is changing the way we read and, in turn, on a genetic "gushy brain connectors" level. If change is the enemy of typical, and this is not about the Obama Presidential campaign (it was not), then this headline lured me in immediately:

"Is Google Making Us Stupid?"

However, as much as I wanted to click on the link to read the article, I did not. At the time I wasn't in the mood to endure someone -- anyone -- droll on about how the Internet was actually killing us on a genetic level and how we'd all better watch out.

The second time I saw this headline, it was in the middle of a magazine rack at my local Barnes & Noble. There was one noticeable difference that really made me stop. First of all the article was written in the Atlantic, I hadn't stopped to filter that on my previous encounter. In terms of attention span, the magazine's flag paled in comparison to the article's headline, which was designed as graphic art similar to the familiar Google logo and featured a misspelled word (Stoopid).

Witty? Yes...but I would have never gotten this effect at all had I veered down another isle, leaving the Web version to rot in my mind as yet another sensational claim for the sake of making one. The reason the Atlantic probably chose not to follow through with the misspelling and/or graphic could have been because it wouldn't search well. Someone was likely practicing SEO (Search Engine Optimization).

The headline, important in the viewing world to catch the attention by way of vision -- Via Internet, completely unconcerned with visuals. They also went through and provided links to any blog or Web content that was mentioned in the story. (It was done sparingly). The article was quite long so anyone intending to read it probably didn't feel compelled to navigate away for any reason.

With the understanding that I enjoyed the article in its entirety, there was one part I took issue with.

"When the Net absorbs a medium, that medium is re-created in the Net’s image. It injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it has absorbed. A new e-mail message, for instance, may announce its arrival as we’re glancing over the latest headlines at a newspaper’s site. The result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration."

Perhaps this is the case, but the author presumes that this process is not good, and that somehow we cannot possibly glean the richness of the information if it isn't sitting right in front of our faces -- distraction free. He cites the sporadic nature of Internet readers to scan articles and then move on to another page. He mentions that articles are shorter, and less extensive... Well, this may be the case but those short articles are the meat of the story if done correctly. If the headline was created for use on the Internet, then so should the entire entry. Adding links to possibly unfamiliar jargon, pictures, breaking up text with subheads, adding the "strong" and "em" tags to catch scanning eyeballs - making them anchor to the screen for just a moment longer...etc. etc. etc.

This takes time. If the article is *ahem* optimized, then I don't see how they can imply that reading on the net is less informative.

-TechGOnzo

PORN Effect

What's the first thing you do with a brand spankin` new $100 Eco-friendly laptop?

Answer: Start looking at porn during class. At least that's what children in Nigeria are doing with the new technology, according to Reuters.

The Reuters report indicated that corespondents from the the News Agency of Nigerian "had seen pornographic images stored on several of the children's laptops." (Read the full article here.)

The news is sure to outrage the people who donated these cheap laptops, which happen to be folks in the conservative Christian majority country of America. But, to people such as myself who grew up on the Internet it doesn't seem all that far fetched. Allow me to bridge the generational divide...

The sprawl of technological advancements was driven by the desire to look at pornography from the privacy of your home at any time of the day. A computer with an Internet connection provides this with just a few clicks. Yet, most importantly it's all discreetly disguised as a calculator, a telephony service, a post office, a word processor and a database for everything.

It wasn't the only reason to own a computer but it was definitely a selling point. Eventually people realized this technology could improve all aspects of their life and not just the portion that scolds you for trying to look at naked people.

But I cannot take credit for this theory as it belongs to Esquire Contributing Editor Chuck Klosterman, who wrote extensively about this subject in an essay titled "Porn" from the book Sex , Drugs, and Coco Puffs. It actually makes sense that sex would ultimately drive human advancement. When we were all mindless cave people, sex was really the only recreational action not necessary for survival of the individual.

It's unfair for NAN to assume "efforts to promote learning with laptops in a primary school in Abuja have gone awry," --and/or not working. Eventually these children will become inspired to learn about something and when that happens those cheap laptops will serve their purpose.

A remedy to the "problem" could happen in the form of content filters, so students will focus on learning enthralling textbook material. Yet, I have a feeling this will fail and instead motivate the young minds to learn how the computer (and its various processes) works so they can begin watching porn again, which might not be so bad after all.

I mean, learning is learning.

Don't get comfortable...yet.

Most people get comfortable using something they started with. The person who cuts your hair, your mechanic and that first girlfriend who gained 80 lbs since you first met-- these are all examples of why people will continue on with something comfortable even though better options exist. The same is true for computer users.

As a Mac geek trying to explain why Windows is clunky and horrible in comparison, I tend to realize this about people quite often. So if you've been waiting for an excuse to explore other options, consider this post as a guiding force during your journey. Here are three computing changes that will make life easier...

E-mail - Google Gmail.
Replaces: campus mail, AOL mail, etc.
If your using AOL (like my parents still do), you're probably still getting hassled by large amounts of spam messages and congruently suffering from the endless reply (re:re:re:re:). It's time to make a change. I suggest Google's gmail because no one does it better. But if you must have reasoning behind your change then understand that both of the aforementioned problems will be solved. If you are the type that tends to reply to emails so often that you might as well call it a conversation...well Google beat you to the punch. It treats each email as if it were a specific conversation. So when you hit reply the tenth time, it'll appear as one group of messages rather than 15 with text copy added to it for miles. It makes navigation much easier. But you can also easily add contacts, create labels for emails and archive. Why is archiving important? Say you don't need an email at the moment but would like to keep it off to the side, rather than deleting. Archive button. Want to come back to it later? No problem, just search for it. Gmail is amazing, now moving on...

Web Browser - Firefox
Replaces: Internet Explorer
Do you get curious as to what the hell that orange and blue icon does on your coworkers desktop. You know, the one next to the blue "e" Icon? G'head, click it. It's every bit as good as the ol' reliable a.k.a. Internet Explorer. Firefox will make your computer run web pages faster, but that's actually not the best thing does. Since its an open source program, it means you can customize it to your liking. Thousands of geek from all over the world decided to write code, altering the Web browser because it makes their lives easier. And since they're usually pretty nice guys and gals, they share it will the public. One particular perk is never seeing ads when visiting Web sites. It does this through an extension (add-on) called adblock plus. Firefox can also clear my history every time I log out of my computer, which prevents spyware from combing through my personal information and protects against identity theft. Once you figure out how to use the add-ons, you'll be addicted in no time....Oh and one more notable feature: there's also tabbed browsing, which I hear ol' reliable has now too. Check it out, it's so much more than I can even bother to type.

Pictures - Flickr
Replaces: That huge pile of CDs you burned to save pictures digitally.
Flickr is a site that allows you to load an unlimited amount of pictures to their site free of charge. You can also set the file type, picture size, and create albums for groups of shots. Its free and easy to navigate through. Plus, you can share all your pictures with the rest of the world if you want. It's pretty handy. However, one annoying thing is that you must now sign up for a Yahoo ID because they just got bought out by the corporate giant. But it is still a worthy web application.

Internet TV: First Impressions

I am still waiting for an update from Joost that will add support for my Power PC Mac Powerbook. But since I still have a PC running Windows XP, I couldn't wait to test it out.

**Since this is just a beta version, I won't complain about the bugginess or the A/V not being in sync.

Interface
Joost's 0.9.2 beta interface is sleek. There are not too many buttons and it actually opens up to consume most of your television. The point the Joost team is trying to achieve is that this is TV on steroids and not just a window next to your Instant Messenger List and Web Browser. I get that because of the article I read in Wired Magazine.

Better than TV?
There are two notable differences from a regular T.V. that are suppose to create that "TV done right" mood. I'll start with the first and most obvious feature, which is the ability to customize your channel list.

This is something I can reasonably do with a newer set, but it wouldn't have a channel guide. [Comcast has a channel guide but no feature to let you edit channel lists.] Overall I wasn't really impressed with the functionality of moving from channel to channel. If I was searching for a new show I may want to watch instead of the current program, the show list completely engulfs the screen. It was a tad overwhelming and I found myself wishing I could get the same feature in a small column off to the side.

Features are mostly annoying...
The real sell of Joost is being able to watch the programing at your own pace without ever worrying that your DVR will soon be full and automatically play. That is something unmatched by competitors. But the clunky menu of shows kills it for me. I'd rather have it in a widget form..which brings me to the second prominent feature: Widgets.

I like the concept of Widgets, always have and always will, but I have a 17 inch monitor on the PC and only so much resolution before everything starts slowing down to a crawl. Widgets for most computer screens simply take up too much screen real estate to be useful. There's a chat function, a message notification and even an option to rate the show your watching. None of these need to be as large as they are for the small screen I have.

Pending your watching this stuff on a much larger, high quality monitor, I'd say this could be corrected. A simpler solution would be to re size and retool those cumbersome Widgets.

Ehh...
My initial reaction remains that its TV that I can control better on my computer, and as soon as I got frustrated at the buggy A/V, I switched to NBC so I could catch up on Heroes. The NBC.com player may be basic, but it gives me full screen and just one ad per section.

I'm interested to see how I'll react to Joost on a laptop though.

Joost TV: Day Zero...

Well, The folks over at Joost started passing out more beta invitations, including one to me. I'm not really sure how many they sent, but I told them I'd love to blog about testing it out since I was a journalist with an affinity for technology.

Joost, for all of you who don't know, is an Internet T.V. program that offers high quality streaming television for free. The catch is that commercials are embedded into the shows. These are more customizable to each user (so I'd get lots of computer commercials instead of 'Polly Pocket' toys). The trade off is that you can choose shows at your convenience instead of waiting to see stuff you like on a programming schedule.

It seems very cool and I'll admit I got excited after seeing the channel list (over a hundred to choose from). Yet, it seems like I'll have to wait a bit longer. The Mac version of the software isn't supported by PowerPC's yet. And since an Intel machine is a bit out of my price range at the moment I'll be waiting until they add support.

I've e-mailed the staff about the matter, but until then I'll be sticking with the faithful old school set.