Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.011603883 = product of:
  0.023207765 = sum of:
    0.023207765 = product of:
      0.034811646 = sum of:
        0.01347911 = weight(_text_:r in 2392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01347911 = score(doc=2392,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14741929 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044534072 = queryNorm
            0.09143383 = fieldWeight in 2392, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2392)
        0.021332536 = weight(_text_:22 in 2392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021332536 = score(doc=2392,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15595074 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044534072 = queryNorm
            0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 2392, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2392)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)

DDC

323.44/5 22 (GBV;LoC)

Footnote

Part III, "Privacy and Information Control," has four articles and three discussion cases beginning with an 1890 article from the Harvard Law Review, "The Right to Privacy," written by Samuel A Warren and Louis D. Brandeis. Moore then includes an article debating whether people own their genes, an article on caller I.D., and an article on computer surveillance. While all four articles pose some very interesting questions, Margaret Everett's article "The Social Life of Genes: Privacy, Property, and the New Genetics" is incredible. She does a great job of demonstrating how advances in genetics have led to increased concerns over ownership and privacy of genetic codes. For instance, if someone's genetic code predisposes them to a deadly disease, should insurance companies have access to that information? Part IV, "Freedom of Speech and Information Control," has three articles and two discussion cases that examine speech and photography issues. Moore begins this section with Kent Greenawalt's "Rationales for Freedom of Speech," which looks at a number of arguments favoring free speech. Then the notion of free speech is carried over into the digital world in "Digital Speech and Democratic Culture: A Theory of Freedom of Expression for the Information Society" by Jack M. Balkin. At 59 pages, this is the work's longest article and demonstrates how complex the digital environment has made freedom of speech issues. Finally, Part V, "Governmental and Societal Control of Information," contains three articles and three discussion cases which provide an excellent view into the conflict between security and privacy. For instance, the first article, "Carnivore, the FBI's E-mail Surveillance System: Devouring Criminals, Not Privacy" by Griffin S. Durham, examines the FBI's e-mail surveillance program called Carnivore. Durham does an excellent job of demonstrating that Carnivore is a necessary and legitimate system used in limited circumstances and with a court order. Librarians will find the final article in the book, National Security at What Price? A Look into Civil Liberty Concerns in the Information Age under the USA Patriot Act by Jacob R. Lilly, of particular interest. In this article, Lilly uses historical examples of events that sacrificed civil liberties for national security such as the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II and the McCarthyism of the Cold War era to examine the PATRIOT Act.

0.0071108453 = product of:
  0.014221691 = sum of:
    0.014221691 = product of:
      0.04266507 = sum of:
        0.04266507 = weight(_text_:22 in 145) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04266507 = score(doc=145,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15595074 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044534072 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 145, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=145)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

20.12.2006 18:22:32

Isbn

3-936931-22-4

0.004747989 = product of:
  0.009495978 = sum of:
    0.009495978 = product of:
      0.028487934 = sum of:
        0.028487934 = weight(_text_:y in 797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028487934 = score(doc=797,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21431579 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044534072 = queryNorm
            0.13292503 = fieldWeight in 797, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8124003 = idf(docFreq=976, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=797)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Andrew Keen is ein englisch-amerikanischer Schriftsteller, Absolvent der Universitäten von London, Berkeley y Sarajevo, Professor an den Universitäten von Tufts, Northeastern und Massachusetts und Gründer des Online-Unternehmens Audiocafe, wer gegenwärtig über die Massenmedien schreibt. Dieses Buch, veröffentlicht in USA in Juni 2007, kursierte schon zwischen den Teilnehmern der Konferenz des TED (Technology Entertainment Design) in Monterrey und es ist eine unerbittliche Kritik des Web 2.0. Ein Artikel in der Weekly Standard ging voraus.. Das Web 2.0 ist nicht so sehr eine Aktualisierung des Internets aus technischer Sicht sondern ein Kolloquialismus, das von O'Reilly Media, ein Internet Kommunikationsunternehmen, während eines der unternehmensinternen Konferenzzyklen geschaffen wurde. Es bezieht sich vor allem auf die Art, in der das Internet benutzt wird. Web 2.0 bezieht sich darüber hinaus auf die Methoden, die die Zusammenarbeit zwischen den Benutzern nachdrücklich betonen und den Besucher oder Kunden einer Seite in Mitverfasser/Co-autor transformieren. Beispiele von Web 2.0 können sein: die Rezensionen in Amazon, die online-offene Enzyklopädie Wikipedia, blogs mit Beteiligung der Leser, Verlage wie blurb.com, welche für jeden Autor die Veröffentlichung seines Buches ermöglichen, u.a. Das Web 2.0 erlaubt einerseits eine größere Interaktivität zwischen Schöpfern und Konsumenten der Kultur- Online, anderseits hat die intellektuelle Piraterie stimuliert. Für den Autor ist es klar, dass genauso wichtig die Mitbestimmung für die politischen Demokratie ist, ist in der Welt der Wissenschaft das, was die Verfechter des Web 2.0 "Diktatur der Experten" nennen. Hundert Wikipedia Mitarbeiter werden nie einen authentischen Techniker, Wissenschaftler oder Historiker ersetzen können. Die Amateurs Blogs können sogar die Texte von Journalisten ersetzen, fehlt es ihnen jedoch die Seriosität dieser. An der einen Seite, stehen die Journalisten, die reisen, befragen, untersuchen, erforschen. An der anderen stehen viel zu oft Leute, die nicht verifizierte Information aus sekundären Quellen entnehmen und veröffentlichen. Es ist nicht nur, dass sie an Seriosität mangeln, sondern auch an Verantwortung. Die anonyme Information kann auch falsch oder fehlerhaft sein, aber ist vor allem verantwortungslose Information, für die, die Verfasser selten zur Verantwortung gezogen werden, egal wie schädlich ihre Ergebnisse sind. Anders geschieht es mit der gedruckten Presse, weil sie rundweg reguliert ist.

0.0035944297 = product of:
  0.0071888594 = sum of:
    0.0071888594 = product of:
      0.021566577 = sum of:
        0.021566577 = weight(_text_:r in 61) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021566577 = score(doc=61,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14741929 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044534072 = queryNorm
            0.14629413 = fieldWeight in 61, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.3102584 = idf(docFreq=4387, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=61)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Editor

Subramanian, R. u. E. Katz

0.003016876 = product of:
  0.006033752 = sum of:
    0.006033752 = product of:
      0.018101256 = sum of:
        0.018101256 = weight(_text_:22 in 3037) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018101256 = score(doc=3037,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15595074 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.044534072 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3037, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3037)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 7.2009 13:43:50