1. What am I looking for?

2. What tools are available?

3. How can I search this tool like an expert?

internet of things.  what is it? I typed in a Google search “Internet of Things” to look what returns to the query: Wiki was at the top of the list defining the phrase “Internet of Things” – a network of objects that are related in one way or another.  Physical objects with URL.

OK, where do I go from here?  further I read wiki to find out what does that really mean?  so as I understand it, the internet of things is where everything is tagged with RFIDs (radio tags) that transmit particular information about that object within a small radius area.  The tag is electronically scanned and the item (or even person) is located/defined/inventoried, etc.

Vocabulary – defining a term

What does the term mean – looking for the database of articles and find synonyms.

Think about search strategies, when searching for things, it is the key to make your search beyond what is described as easy to find.

Reading Response to: “Search is too important to leave to one company – even Google”

Search engines becoming very important in our lives, our news, our education, and even politics are dependent upon the searchability of the subject we search for.  As Dewey’s, rigid structure of categories has its flaws because once the ingredients are mixed, you can’t go back and undo what you already mixed in to the bowl.  In a digital world we don’t need categories, all the things could be just piled up in one folder.  It is kind of like digital communism, every file is equal and has no hierarchical importance to any other file on the internet.  Except when we are talking about one company owning all the accumulated information, how powerful does it become…  The idea that Google saves every single piece of information I ever entered into their search engine, makes me think “what if I am being watched by the big brother?”

The fact that what we can and can not see when we search for answers demands transparency.  But Google is not dependent upon advertising for having its searchability, so the question then takes different turn… do we risk exposing a great algorithm of let’s say Google search engine by making it public transparent and then get slammed with advertising capitalism invading our very “private” relationship with the search box…

Reading Response to: “Smart Leaves”

This chapter begins from the history of the UPC.  The need to organize the products under one system, one bar code shows how we as humans operate in this world.  This chapter nicely touches up on the organization by comparing the two orders with one another, exposing the nature of the rigid vs. faceted structure.  In the second order (rigid structure) the manufacturers “declare” what gets tracked with the bar code, where as in the third order – or the digital order – the user defines those IDs that define what the “smart leaf” is.

The UPC code developed in the post-war era and implemented in the 1980s today has outgrown itself.  In the world of such complexity as ours is very diverse, we need a multifaceted structure that has both rigidity for its skeleton and flexibility to define product under multiple IDs.  in reality we have a manufacturers on one side, stores in the middle, and buyers on the other side.  In 1998 a new code was developed.

The new UNSPSC provided a more detailed system of numbers defining everything under a “giant 5-branch tree” structure classifying everything from “cats” to “voting rights.”  The two systems are integrated but can’t completely merge together because UPCs are used for products and UNSPSC used for raw materials.

Now with RFID tags, the items can have a much larger description and be better tracked, however, when we have bar codes on cereal boxes and RFIDs on pieces of clothing, it is not easy to “pin down” the intellectual content.  This is when the rigidity comes in handy.

BBC’s archive holds millions of items.  Every one of these items is accurately labeled by fields such as title, subject, and date of air.  With this the first initiative to make the leaves smart was to add more standardized metadata, so the episodes of a series, for example, would be recognizable by a computing system.  A formula to the tagging has to be at place that would define a wide array of items from the series to a single frame.  So producers can find a particular shot and a viewer can find a particular episode or the entire series.

Unlike BBC’s collection, the uBio (Universal Biological Indexer and Organizer) is a taxonomy of the 21st century.  It is “entirely a third-order idea.”  The scientific names of certain fish often have several descriptions.   So, instead of using one name, David Remsen uses all names and instead of using one taxonomy, he compiles them all.

The two-proned strategy the author talks about here is the Include and postpone, where eBio includes every possible name, on the other hand it postpones when it comes to the classification, due to each scientist may have a different opinion, its like a multiple scientific pools contribute to one tree.  But is too many solutions makes it worse? How do we decide what is what and how it has to be organized.  There is too many of us and we are organizing too many things in too many ways.

What matters? What is essential?  Essentialism is what seems to be adding the “R” to the rigidity also makes the world more manageable, but it misses the miscellany of the digital world, the dark matter, the viscosity, that keeps the users together and develop the defining the very essence of the market itself.  Users are clustered into groups in searching for answers.

Defining a leaf is talking about how information is generated by a query.  We collect a huge pile of leaves together in order to organize a tree when someone needs that tree to answer a query.

Until this chapter, I kept a hope for this class to answer me a question if we can come up with a ones single structure, an organization, a deep hierarchical order or a database (a drawer) to help us swim in the informational ocean.  But, that has melted like a first snow with reading this chapter.  As I understand, Ted Nelson’s logic, is there is no one subject, everything is interwingled together, in a third order of order everything becomes a one giant pool of knowledge created by interwingularity.