stwilson

Web 2.0 technologies have revolutionized the Internet communication process, but it still seems that few people can definitively explain what that means. Oriley Media Group identified that Web 2.0 technologies shall be the foundation for the era of web development, but how do we know when that prediction has come to fruition?

Put simply, Web 2.0 is the characteristic of a web-page, available to the mass population, which can be manipulated by members of that entire population. Forums and encyclopedias of communal knowledge are two embodiments of this design technique. The seamless ability for users to receive information from an Internet source with the ability to directly provide feedback to that source – that is Web 2.0 technology.

Presentations by the students in Ball State University’s ICS 602 – Human Communications – class expand on the concept and credibility of Web 2.0 propaganda. These reflections highlight that users of Web 2.0 aggregated data should always remain skeptical and search for verification of ideas – as any scientist would.
Answering the question “how do we know when web design has fully adopted Web 2.0,” one’s first observation of whether a site allows user authoring may provide the answer. One must be certain to note, however, that if and when all web sources move to this style; the burden to prove credibility migrates largely to the user. Whereas many expert sources today establish credibility in their own web pages, many Web 2.0 contributors speak solely from experience and opinion – not taking additional time to cite their knowledge. Any undocumented Web 2.0 assertion should be extensively verified before it is accepted as doctrine.

With many of today’s architectures, scholars may seek information from expert sources or accountable reporting agencies. If all information is generated by users “in the wild,” it will be much more difficult to trust that facts have been thoroughly tested and credibility guaranteed.

Posted by Shaun T Wilson at 02:05 PM | Permalink

The empowerment of people during the mid 1300’s and beyond is widely known as the European Renaissance. Modern scholars may use this period of enlightenment to understand what factors must be present in society to drive change. Demonstrably, causes and leaders of popular free thought ideals during the time period were largely subordinates to public figures. Artists, assistants, and servants to nobility reached a point in their lives where they realized that they were surrounded by a wealth of knowledge, but had no real means of expressing their opinions on matters. Even in the rare even that their opinion was voiced, nobility and other “reputable figures” of the time would disregard thoughts from outside their own social circles.

Tired of being ignored, the common people of the working class realized that they had the ability to drive the values of their society. By diverting money and spending to creativity and works that they believed were valuable (such as education), common people began controlling the priorities of their own culture.

As a modern people, we can look to the drivers of the European Renaissance to understand the control that we possess in our own lives. Regardless of how great a task might be, renaissance (or change) in society is not unachievable. Learning from those who lived during the European Renaissance, modern people can understand how they might use their influence and resources to rally like-minded people and always strive to better their own circumstances.

Posted by Shaun T Wilson at 03:00 PM | Permalink

Plagiarism is an ever growing problem within both the scholarly and academic communities. This problem has become so great that entire organizations are dedicated to combating the undocumented usage of other researchers’ ideas. As a scientist whose objective is the pursuit and application of knowledge, it is invaluable to one’s own reputation that they be credited for accomplishments.

Scientists work diligently towards ensuring that their research is associated with like minded, already well respected, members of their own field. One notable characteristic of a scientist is acknowledged as “the types of questions that they ask and the way that they are phrased” (http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/gen01/gen01233.htm). Academic institutions have professed for many years that scientific credibility cannot be understated in one’s own career.

For these reasons, it is paramount that developing scientists document and brand any original knowledge, which they uncover. It is equally important that their predecessors be acknowledged for any thought or inspiring words that they provide to the growing scientist. Shared credibility not both encourages partnerships in the community and demonstrates the worth of all individuals. If work is plagiarized during any research endeavor, a previous scientist’s work is immediately disrespected simply because his dedication to the pursuit of knowledge is in vein.

Posted by Shaun T Wilson at 02:29 PM | Permalink