User talk:Glogger
hmm, IWIS 2004 looks like it was interesting. are any notes/recordings from it available? +sj+ 21:26, 2004 Apr 24 (UTC) [who desperately needs more permanent tools to wear]
There's another sousveillance workshop at ACMMM 2004; the published version of my opening keynote address will be online soon hopefully (acm digital library; hopefully also in some more free format as well). Also you might find my book, http://wearcam.org/books.htm of interest, as well as the eyetap website.Glogger 15:04, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Hello, and Welcome to Wikipedia! You seem to be getting along fine already, but since no-one else has, I thought I'd just drop you a quick note, and point you to some information you might find helpful:
Thanks for the information. There's alot of good information there about writing Wikipedia articles, but I also find it's a bit like learning how to swim --- you can't learn how to swim without getting wet, so I'm actually learning alot about writing articles by actually writing articles.
I'd also really appreciate it if some of you who are more experienced could point out where I've gone wrong, or could point out specific areas where I could write better, etc.. The manual of style, etc., is very informative, but also I hope that I can internalize these ideas through actual writing of articles, and through constructive criticism and useful feedback from that writing.
Alot of times I write an article and it later just says "this article needs to be wikified" but there's not a specific diagnostic. I wonder if it's possible to get some specific error messages that point to what makes it lack being wiki.Glogger 15:04, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- You might find these these to be quite good as first ports of call: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style - which includes advice on when to use internal and external links.
- You should read our Manual of Style - which includes advice on when to use internal and external links - and Policies and guidelines at some point too, particularly the important but fine line that is "NPOV".
- If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
- You can sign your name (on discussion pages) using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
- If you have any more general questions, you might want to ask at the Help desk, or start a discussion on the Village pump
In short, I hope you'll like the site enough to stay and contribute plenty in the future. - IMSoP 12:08, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Good evening. I wanted to follow up on your comment on the inclusion of newcomers and anonymous contributors to policy debates (such as VfD).
- You said that you do not log in more often because you are using a PocketPC. I almost never have to do anything to log in to Wikipedia. I check the box to "remember me across sessions". Does a PocketPC not support the cookies necessary to make that work? I'm not familiar with PocketPCs but that limitation surprises me.
Alot of this has to do with short link-times, and short attention spans, e.g. erratic wireless and other things going on. Thus the best way I find to make use of short 1 or 2 minute attention spans (while walking down a city block before I get to the next street to cross, for example, that would require attention to avoid being run over by a truck), is to not login, e.g. just to make a short contribution, and keep going. Suppose I come across a transformer on a pole, and then I say to myself, "that would make a great Wikipedia entry", so I shoot, send, write, annotate, and then my browser crashes, or then I have to stop because something in the environment commands my attention.
My browser crashes alot because it's not a stable computing platform at this time, so the mean-time-between-crashes is short, thus logging in represents maybe 10% to 20% of the uptime.Glogger 15:04, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Most of Wikipedia is based on the assumption that reader/editors are acting in good faith and that "credit" for contributions is unnecessary. As we discussed before, the one exception is during participation in policy debates. A few early (and very hostile) experiences with ballot-stuffing led the community to decide to reduce the value of anonymous votes. Subsequent misuse (ballot-stuffing through sockpuppets) has led the community to adopt a second filter that votes from brand-new contributors are suspect. They are granted less weight than the votes of long-time contributors. Reading your comments, I believe you to be a balanced and rational contributor - exactly the kind of person that we need contributing to these debates. I ask you to continue to contribute (preferably logged on if you can find a way to do that more easily). Since you seem to know him, can you please ask User:jasonnolan to do the same?
- You also expressed concern about the use of Wikipedia as a "definitive source". At times, I share your concern, though for different reasons.
- I am not particularly worried that a referenced article will be deleted. Chaotic as it appears, I've watched the deletion process for some time now and it is remarkably adept at sorting the good articles from the true junk. Verifiable encyclopedic content is almost never lost. There are two factors that help us reach those conclusions: First, the decision to delete an article is considered an extreme action. A simple majority is insufficient. Second, a surprising number of people invest significant time investigating and thinking about recommendations before voting. If an article can possibly be saved, people do it. For all the emotional rhetoric on the Vfd page, in my opinion, the decisions are based on logic and evidence.
- I have greater concerns about using Wikipedia as a "definitive source" when the content is functionally unverifiable. Some examples:
- Someone recently posted an article containing nothing but the first 10,000 digits of Pi. In the third line of digits, someone else changed a 3 to a 4. Was that a real correction or was it random vandalism? There is no way for an average user to know and very low probability that an informed user will come back often enough to track and revert the vandalism. I believe we are better off without those kinds of articles.
- Someone submitted an article on a housing project in India (if memory serves) with 88 inhabitants. Can the article be functionally verified? Assuming 50% of the world is web-enabled and that 2% of those participate in Wikipedia (both outrageously high estimates), that means that you may have only one contributor/editor who knows the "truth" about this housing project. At least one person on the VfD thread argued quite persuasively that no article should be trusted until it has some critical mass of author/editors - probably 5-6 volunteers making more than just copyedits. Without that level of review, the content can not be considered reliable. (By the way, the decision on this one was to keep.)
- In contrast, the article about sousveillance has been (or at least, can be)edited and reviewed robustly. It has a critical mass of people who understand the term and can be trusted to keep track of the article. Changes that would fundamentally change the meaning of the article are easy to see and vandalism relatively easy to correct.
If you are still concerned about the stability of articles and of the Wikipedia, you might want to look at Wikipedia:replies (which used to be called "What our critics say about us"). It was my first introduction to the social conventions that make Wikipedia work. In fact, I found Wikipedia in the first place because that page was linked in Carl Shirkey's landmark article on social software. I hope that some of these thoughts can satisfy your concerns. Take care. Rossami 23:28, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)
It's great to see peer review in action, and that our articles that are referenced in other published literature have survived the VfD. This goes a long way to building my confidence in Wikipedia as the standard reference for my students, etc..Glogger 15:04, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Eyetap question
"Picture of C. Aimone with an injection moulded eyetap " Is the Eyetap actually stink IN TO the eye? or the wearer can take easily it off at anytime?
That design has a 45deg diverter; you can see more pictures in http://wearcam.org/pictures.htm and also some of them are easily removed and others are attached permanently. The black injection molded one is meant for easy removal, suitable, for example, for unscheduled visits to urban beaches. The permanent type (metal frames version, for example) is not suitable for such use, and requires advance notice of going for a swim or otherwise remove it. However, the longterm adaptation question remains, e.g. if you adapt to good eyesight, it's hard to go back, and depending on correction, e.g. if mapping around blind spot, scotoma, or the like, reverse adaptation conditions may contraindict removal without gradual reversal of the "prescription". In this case, unscheduled swims are not possible because of the need for gradualization of the reversal of the "prescription".
If you really want to learn about electric eyeglasses, you may want to read the textbook on the topic, Intelligent Image Processing published by John Wiley and Sons.
Image:Sur-veillance-trafficcam-glog.jpg
I love your picure Image:Sur-veillance-trafficcam-glog.jpg. It captures the emotional element well, and it's pretty to boot (with the sunset). Thanks for uploading it. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 22:26, Oct 2, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for the encouragement. I've taken many more such pictures and am continuing to look for images that capture the essence of (and sustain the epistimology for) everyday objects in the world around us. As a professor, part of my passion is coming up with new ways of teaching the concepts of the everyday world to my students, so I constantly capture lights, cameras, pole transformers, and other everyday things so we can attempt to understand how they work, and how they affect our society.Glogger 15:20, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Ear fear
I questioned the page you created, Ear fear. Please respond on it's Talk page. Thanks! JesseW 01:00, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Thanks for raising the question... I responded on the talk page. I welcome suggestions, thoughts, ideas, etc., anyone may have on how to rework this article, and also maybe it needs a more scholarly name, or a more descriptive name...
Beachwear
Some people have expressed concern about my Beachwear article; I would welcome comments on the article, and on how it could be improved. Perhaps some of the history of beachwear, as it came about with the invention of the railway, which made it possible for large numbers of people to vacation in coastal regions, etc..
cuircuit breaker
Image:Breaker3phase2a_proc.jpg what country is this from (i suspect its american but im not sure)?
I took the picture in Canada, in Toronto, on the table in my Dundas Street studio. The background is a table made of solar cells. I'm not sure what country the breaker itself is from, because it's from surplus equipment, of which origin I am uncertain. I do however see this kind of breaker in alot of equipment, such as, for example, the power distribution units of PDP 11 computers, made by Digital Equipment Corporation. These power distribution units can be wired single phase or three phase, and when wired single phase, they often still have the 3 pole braker but use the outer two breakers for each of the +- 120v "hots" and the middle one for the neutral, even though the neutral would not normally need to have a breaker in it.
For many minicomputers, and similar rack mount equipment, you can often find some kinf of rackmount power distribution unit that has breakers built into it, at a lesser amperage like 2, 3, 5, or 10 amps, so that it will "pop" before the main breaker does, and thus better protect the equipment it's hooked up to.
Apple image
I'm a little puzzled by Image:Cyborglog-of-eating-old-apple-d360.jpg. Sure looks like a plum to me, no matter how hard I look at it. You're not engaging in some friendly leg-pulling, are you? --jpgordon{gab} 23:58, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The fruits that grow on the tree have a core that has many seeds. A plum has only one big seed, usually. Maybe it's a cross breed between apple and plum? Some friends of ours identified it as "old apple" (some old kind of apple), but I'd welcome any thoughts you might have on it. I also have some pictures of seeds from it. It's among other apple trees at my parents' cottage, and they estimate it might be around 80 years old or so, and seems to be from a group of apple trees planted there. It tastes like apple; it tastes quite good actually. They're about the size of a plum (i.e. very small apples). Glogger 01:31, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Might be its own thing! The fun thing about fruit (apples, citrus, plums) is that when they grow from seed, they pretty much decide on their own what they want to be, regardless of what its parents were. Plant a lemon seed, you might or might not get a lemon. --jpgordon{gab} 02:44, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)