[Sigia-l] Google Needs People

[Mike.Steckel at SEMATECH.Org]

Alternately, I suppose, Google may have decided that harming humans turned out
to be a necessary part of the algorithm.

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Morville [mailto:morville at semanticstudios.com]
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 11:27 AM
To: 'Tim Salam'; sigia-l at mail.asis.org
Subject: RE: [Sigia-l] Google Needs People


Maybe I was just being a cranky information architect when I wrote the
article ;-)  Seriously, it seems a shame to use the old 'no humans'
sales pitch when the beauty and usefulness of Google comes from the very
fact that it uses the links that humans create.

Interestingly, soon after launching, GoogleNews did remove the 2nd line:

	"No humans were harmed or even used in the creation of this
page."

Perhaps in response to articles written by cranky animal rights
activists...


Peter Morville
President, Semantic Studios
www.semanticstudios.com



-----Original Message-----
From: sigia-l-admin at asis.org [mailto:sigia-l-admin at asis.org] On Behalf
Of Tim Salam
Sent: Monday, October 14, 2002 11:08 AM
To: sigia-l at mail.asis.org
Subject: RE: [Sigia-l] Google Needs People


I may be missing something, but I don't seem what's cause for any alarm.
I also don't see the "lies" Google has furnished the community.  I
missed the discussion on this list about it (saw it pass by), and still
don't have the time to revisit it, but here's my thinking...

How can "a news service compiled solely by computer algorithms without
human intervention" be seen as misleading?  It's quite clear that a
computer algorithm is compiling news items, without human intervention.
I'm surprise this was misunderstood.

Peter, you also say, "We now need to deal with bosses, clients, and
colleagues who surmise that since Google can automagically build a
newspaper, entire Web sites and corporate portals will be next."  In
case nobody noticed, so long as there is technology there will be a) a
need to educate and b) those who just can't match it up with realistic
expectations. This is so inescapable, it's no longer worth noting.

I think the article went a little too far, that's all.  Google never
claimed or even implied that humans had nothing to do with the actual
creation of the news.  The keywords used were "generate" and "compiled";
the former can be tenuously construed as meaning "created" but only if
taken out of the context of this matter, and the latter has nothing to
do with creation whatsoever.

Peter, you and Lou's first book are forever to be revered by me as what
catapulted me into this entire industry (see:
http://www.oreilly.com/cgi-bin/reviews?bookident=infotecture for my
fledgling March 2, 2000 post), so don't get me wrong when I say: "What's
up with that article, Peter?" :)

In short: Peter, I think you read between the lines when there wasn't
anything there.


Tim Salam
Vice President
Essemble IT Solutions
http://www.essemble.com
+1 602-246-0499 voice
+1 480-332-5521 cell
+1 602-795-8622 fax

------------
When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible. *Plain text,
please; NO Attachments

ASIST Annual Meeting: http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM02/index.html

ASIST SIG IA website: http://www.asis.org/SIG/SIGIA/index.html
________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l

------------
When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
*Plain text, please; NO Attachments

ASIST Annual Meeting:
http://www.asis.org/Conferences/AM02/index.html

ASIST SIG IA website: http://www.asis.org/SIG/SIGIA/index.html
________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l at asis.org
Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l