Comments on: Information fragmentation in the world of Web 2.0 http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/ Manu Kumar | California | U.S.A Thu, 28 Jan 2010 05:58:10 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: sneaker http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2732 sneaker Thu, 19 Feb 2009 07:36:46 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2732 @Vyom You are absolutely right that information overload is a huge problem (though I would argue that it is an orthogonal problem to what I discussed above as 'information fragmentation'). I also have way too many feeds that I'm trying to keep up with on a daily basis (on top of email, twitter, facebook, linkedin etc) and the volume is past the breaking point. I'm already sacrificing sleep/weekends in order to keep up and I to wonder to what purpose. Yes, the information does make me better informed, smarter and more aware, but the signal to noise ratio is not good enough. The truly useful gems are far and few and there is too much stuff to sift through to find it. The people who are in the "we will built yet another technology to solve this problem" camp will argue that it calls for better filtering, recommendations, rankings, etc etc. However, even though I love technological solutions to problems, I have yet to find a good solution for this. I am fast approaching the point of believing that the problem isn't the technology or too much information. The problem is us and our unsatiable desire for more information. Google Reader was a great boon for me and helped save me tons of time when I moved to it and didn't have to visit sites and could go through the feeds much faster. But then where do I end up today -- with so many feeds that I can't even keep up with those! There is a great graph that shows technical progress in the form of the Moore's law curve but then overlays on the same graph the amount of human attention/time/bandwidth. Unlike the Moore's law curve which is exponential (and I would argue the information overload curve is also exponential with the increase in the number of publishers), but the human attention curve is a flat line. One can argue whether it should be sloped one way or the other, but the point is that the two are fundamentally incompatible! @Vyom You are absolutely right that information overload is a huge problem (though I would argue that it is an orthogonal problem to what I discussed above as ‘information fragmentation’). I also have way too many feeds that I’m trying to keep up with on a daily basis (on top of email, twitter, facebook, linkedin etc) and the volume is past the breaking point. I’m already sacrificing sleep/weekends in order to keep up and I to wonder to what purpose. Yes, the information does make me better informed, smarter and more aware, but the signal to noise ratio is not good enough. The truly useful gems are far and few and there is too much stuff to sift through to find it. The people who are in the “we will built yet another technology to solve this problem” camp will argue that it calls for better filtering, recommendations, rankings, etc etc. However, even though I love technological solutions to problems, I have yet to find a good solution for this.

I am fast approaching the point of believing that the problem isn’t the technology or too much information. The problem is us and our unsatiable desire for more information. Google Reader was a great boon for me and helped save me tons of time when I moved to it and didn’t have to visit sites and could go through the feeds much faster. But then where do I end up today — with so many feeds that I can’t even keep up with those!

There is a great graph that shows technical progress in the form of the Moore’s law curve but then overlays on the same graph the amount of human attention/time/bandwidth. Unlike the Moore’s law curve which is exponential (and I would argue the information overload curve is also exponential with the increase in the number of publishers), but the human attention curve is a flat line. One can argue whether it should be sloped one way or the other, but the point is that the two are fundamentally incompatible!

]]> By: Vyom http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2731 Vyom Thu, 19 Feb 2009 05:47:40 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2731 Manu, I think you have missed out social bookmarking. The problem is not only at information fragmentation but also information overload. I have more than 500-1000 feeds a day on my Google reader. How do I read all of it and then make use of it ? Most of the articles are much more interesting that the traditional media but even then the question persists "Is this information useful" ? Am I moving from being a Technology junkie to an Information junkie ? Manu, I think you have missed out social bookmarking.

The problem is not only at information fragmentation but also information overload. I have more than 500-1000 feeds a day on my Google reader. How do I read all of it and then make use of it ?

Most of the articles are much more interesting that the traditional media but even then the question persists “Is this information useful” ? Am I moving from being a Technology junkie to an Information junkie ?

]]> By: sneaker http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2722 sneaker Wed, 18 Feb 2009 06:56:54 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2722 @SkippyFlipjack: Well, I don't think you would call Google Maps (as it exists today) Web 1.x. Nor for that matter Google Earth, Google Book Search, Google Scholar, Google Code, or searching news paper archives etc. etc. When I talk about "human knowledge" and "Google" I talk about it in the broader sense of it than just web search. I remember Lycos from when it was still running in the Spider Closet in Cyert Hall at CMU and yes, it was a search engine in the dark ages of the Web 1.0 days as you put it, but the quantity and the variety of information it and other search engines of the time indexed was a small subset of what exists today. Besides, I'm not really trying to debate what's Web 1.0 and what's Web 2.0 -- that wasn't the point of the post :) @SkippyFlipjack: Well, I don’t think you would call Google Maps (as it exists today) Web 1.x. Nor for that matter Google Earth, Google Book Search, Google Scholar, Google Code, or searching news paper archives etc. etc. When I talk about “human knowledge” and “Google” I talk about it in the broader sense of it than just web search. I remember Lycos from when it was still running in the Spider Closet in Cyert Hall at CMU and yes, it was a search engine in the dark ages of the Web 1.0 days as you put it, but the quantity and the variety of information it and other search engines of the time indexed was a small subset of what exists today. Besides, I’m not really trying to debate what’s Web 1.0 and what’s Web 2.0 — that wasn’t the point of the post :)

]]> By: SkippyFlipjack http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2716 SkippyFlipjack Tue, 17 Feb 2009 20:39:51 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2716 "All hyperbole aside, Web 2.0 has been a wonderful thing. Today, we can search human knowledge using Google..." In the dark ages of Web 1.x, we were able to search human knowledge with Altavista, Lycos etc. The search engine is one of Google's few lines of business that's *not* Web 2.0, don't you think? “All hyperbole aside, Web 2.0 has been a wonderful thing. Today, we can search human knowledge using Google…”

In the dark ages of Web 1.x, we were able to search human knowledge with Altavista, Lycos etc. The search engine is one of Google’s few lines of business that’s *not* Web 2.0, don’t you think?

]]> By: Taylor Davidson http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2709 Taylor Davidson Mon, 16 Feb 2009 19:17:07 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2709 Daniel: Import comments? Not quite sure what you mean, probably just me being dense :) What about this: http://www.backtype.com/home/widgets Daniel: Import comments? Not quite sure what you mean, probably just me being dense :)

What about this: http://www.backtype.com/home/widgets

]]> By: Daniel Tunkelang http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2708 Daniel Tunkelang Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:44:50 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2708 It seems to me that it should be easy to asymmetrically merge a comment stream via its RSS feed. Do it both ways, and you get a symmetric merge. Why can't that be a general solution to the problem? Doesn't everyone export RSS feeds for their comment streams? I just don't know of any comment feature that lets you import them. If there is one, I'd love to try it on my own blog. It seems to me that it should be easy to asymmetrically merge a comment stream via its RSS feed. Do it both ways, and you get a symmetric merge. Why can’t that be a general solution to the problem? Doesn’t everyone export RSS feeds for their comment streams? I just don’t know of any comment feature that lets you import them. If there is one, I’d love to try it on my own blog.

]]> By: Taylor Davidson http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2706 Taylor Davidson Mon, 16 Feb 2009 06:21:33 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2706 Anyone reading this and understanding what all the tools are definitely not "normal" :) @Daniel I find the same problem. I like using Backtype subscriptions to track comments on posts (not just direct replies but the "rest of the conversation"), allows you to receive the rest of the comments by email, feed or aggregated on your own Backtype subscriptions page on the site. It's technically possible to use Disqus to create a single comment stream across multiple posts, but what's really needed is a way to combine it across all platforms. I wonder if that will ever happen :) Anyone reading this and understanding what all the tools are definitely not “normal” :)

@Daniel I find the same problem. I like using Backtype subscriptions to track comments on posts (not just direct replies but the “rest of the conversation”), allows you to receive the rest of the comments by email, feed or aggregated on your own Backtype subscriptions page on the site.

It’s technically possible to use Disqus to create a single comment stream across multiple posts, but what’s really needed is a way to combine it across all platforms. I wonder if that will ever happen :)

]]> By: Daniel Tunkelang http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2705 Daniel Tunkelang Mon, 16 Feb 2009 05:45:42 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2705 What I find more problematic is tracking conversations across different blogs. I wish that replies to all of my comments fed into a single RSS feed, ideally integrated into the same client I use for other conversations, like via Twitter. But that's a more fundamental problem with the way comment threads work on blogs. We aren't even able to do the simple stuff, like merging comment threads for related posts. What I find more problematic is tracking conversations across different blogs. I wish that replies to all of my comments fed into a single RSS feed, ideally integrated into the same client I use for other conversations, like via Twitter. But that’s a more fundamental problem with the way comment threads work on blogs. We aren’t even able to do the simple stuff, like merging comment threads for related posts.

]]> By: sneaker http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2704 sneaker Mon, 16 Feb 2009 04:52:37 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2704 @Daniel Tunkelang: Doing all of that already (though with different tool choices) :-) My point is more about fragmentation of the conversation and also about how difficult all this is for normal users to figure out. You and I don't qualify as "normal" :-p @Daniel Tunkelang: Doing all of that already (though with different tool choices) :-) My point is more about fragmentation of the conversation and also about how difficult all this is for normal users to figure out. You and I don’t qualify as “normal” :-p

]]> By: Daniel Tunkelang http://www.sneaker.org/2009/02/information-fragmentation-in-the-world-of-web-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2703 Daniel Tunkelang Mon, 16 Feb 2009 04:35:52 +0000 http://www.sneaker.org/?p=526#comment-2703 Why not maintain your long-term professional network on LinkedIn, store your photos on Flickr, use Digsby to chat with everyone (using one or both Twitter accounts--if you need both, then you actually *want* to fragment personal vs. professional), write your one or two blogs (same as above), and read everything using Google Reader. Drop everything else. Is that so fragmented? Why not maintain your long-term professional network on LinkedIn, store your photos on Flickr, use Digsby to chat with everyone (using one or both Twitter accounts–if you need both, then you actually *want* to fragment personal vs. professional), write your one or two blogs (same as above), and read everything using Google Reader. Drop everything else. Is that so fragmented?

]]>