資訊爆炸的時代，我們該如何面對？龐大的資料是幫助我們更瞭解事實？還是離真相越
來越遠？web 2.0是不可擋的趨勢，未來資訊的傳遞只會越來越快，我們必須加強短時間內判
斷資訊是否正確的能力。
聯合報一篇摘錄Andrew Keen新書《The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet Is Killing
Our Culture》的報導，揭露網際網路正在蠶食文化的殘酷事實。
| Web 2.0狂熱 鯨吞蠶食文化 | |||||
 |
|||||
| 【聯合報╱李維國╱台北報導】
Web 2.0打造網際網路新操作模式，強調使用者可以自產自製內容，四面八方的資訊、觀點和意見自由上傳下載，而且完全免費。眾聲喧嘩的榮景中，矽谷企業家安德魯‧基恩（Andrew Keen）冷眼看待，新書《門外漢的偽宗教》（The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet Is Killing Our Culture）揭露網際網路正鯨吞蠶食文化生機的殘酷現實。
基恩1996年創建Audiocafe.com，是電子音樂網站先驅，錢沒賺到就關門大吉。許多投資者因此視網路如瘟疫，但基恩像打不死的蟑螂，2000年另起爐灶，四年後又以失敗收場。2004那年，正是「網路的閃耀新版本」Web 2.0成為當紅話題。
基恩2006年在《標準周刊》（The Weekly Standard）發表專文，引爆爭議，因而動念寫成新書。他對數位菁英壓倒文化守門員，「群眾智慧」凌駕專業觀點深表痛心，「專業評論家、記者、編輯、音樂人、電影工作者和其他領域專家，這些文化守門員一一被取代」，結果是：真相／意見、專業觀點／業餘看法的界線模糊難辨。
這些「門外漢」借力科技，透過部落格、YouTube上傳視訊或編輯維基百科（Wikipedia）抒發議論，形成百花齊放新生態，主流媒體風光不再，廣告預算由平面媒體及電視急速流向網路。新創的虛擬世界中，「音樂出自業餘的車庫樂團，電影及電視以YouTube網站為平台，新聞是連續劇般的名人八卦，全淪為廣告的陪襯花邊」。
網路上難見「客觀」，部落格版主依個人喜好，精心挑選資訊演繹推論，再包裝為事實；更多Web 2.0用戶利用網路「確認自己的偏見，超連結到其他同聲一氣的人」。在網路想認真辯論重要政治、社會論題是癡人說夢：政治候選人的負面消息難保不是對手的傑作，誇大的文宣被當成事實像傳染病隨網路流竄。「Web 2.0革命真正帶來的是對我們周遭世界浮面的看法，而非深入分析；是井蛙之見而非深思熟慮的判斷。」
由於Web 2.0仰賴「高貴的門外漢」而非專家，許多搜尋引擎和網站只衝點閱率不管可信度，加上虛擬世界多屬匿名，無從確認身分與目的，錯誤資訊和謠言輕易在網路散播。維基百科點閱率高於大英百科，特殊的互動設計讓錯誤、未經查證，甚至明目張膽騙人的資訊橫行無阻。今年二月就爆出編輯維基上萬則資料，且未得授權可仲裁內容爭議的Essjay，根本只是讀社區大學的二十四歲學生，不是資料所載的神學教授。
「歷史證明群眾通常是愚昧的」，否則不會接受「奴隸制、殺嬰、小布希的伊拉克戰爭」等決定，也不會出現1990年代高科技泡沫和十七世紀橫掃荷蘭的「鬱金香熱」，「無知加自大加不良品味再加暴民統治」，後果難以想像。基恩指出，Web 2.0用戶最愛的資訊重組、剪貼工程可能侵犯著作權，盜版音樂及單曲下載直接衝擊唱片銷售和音樂產業。
根據Technorati搜尋引擎今年四月估計，網路現有七千萬個部落格，每天以新增十二萬個速度擴充。全球最大交友網站MySpace有超過一億八千萬筆個人資料，許多是刻意欺騙，「或許世人不瞭解，免費的東西其實會讓我們付出相當代價。」
【2007/07/29 聯合報】 |
|||||
By Kim Hart
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 30, 2007; A01
The Federal Communications Commission will set the rules tomorrow governing the auction of $15 billion of public airwaves, a decision with stakes so high that the major U.S. cellular carriers and Google have spent millions of dollars on a lobbying campaign in an attempt to influence the outcome. The decision could dramatically alter the nation's cellphone industry.
Google, the giant Internet search company, wants to extend its popular tools, which include e-mail and video, to the rapidly expanding mobile phone market. To do so, it may spend billions to build a new, open network it says will loosen the grip telecom operators have over how consumers use their cellphones.
Currently, the major U.S. wireless carriers, including AT&T and Verizon Wireless, largely decide which Web sites, music-download services and search engines their customers can access on their cellphones. This is accomplished by wireless companies determining which cellphones will receive their services: AT&T, for example, is the only carrier available to users of Apple's iPhone.
Google wants to end that restriction and has urged the FCC to require the winner of the auction to build a network that will be open to all cellphones and services, so any consumer can have access to Google's array of offerings.
AT&T and Verizon Wireless have been eyeing these airwaves for almost a decade, waiting for them to be abandoned by television broadcasters moving to digital programming. The airwaves, which are ideal for carrying wireless signals, are particularly valuable because they will be the last up for auction for decades. The auction is to take place in January.
They are crucial to wireless carriers looking for more ways to put ever-more-elaborate video, music and Web-surfing tools in consumers' hands, especially as cellphones continue to replace telephone landlines and offer services heretofore available only on a computer. But the auction is also testing the political might of Google, which has to this point been somewhat of an outsider in Washington.
Google, in its first serious foray into the Washington regulatory scene and, potentially, the wireless industry, has offered to spend at least $4.6 billion for the airwaves it would use to build the network it envisions if the FCC's rules work in its favor. The move reflects Google's growing ambitions to reach consumers in new ways while exerting its influence on policy it sees as critical to its future. But the company's efforts to recast the wireless landscape have met fierce opposition from AT&T and Verizon, which worry Google's open network would undermine their businesses.
Google's 12-person Washington team, based in temporary quarters on Pennsylvania Avenue, has aggressively confronted the legions of lobbyists behind the two telecom behemoths. Its goal of creating an open-access network, first thought of as a long-shot proposal, has gained substantial political traction among FCC commissioners and Democratic lawmakers, who see the auction as the last opportunity to create a new competitor in the wireless industry.
"Google sees network owners as potentially coming between it and its customers, so they realized how critical Washington was to their long-term game plan," said Paul Gallant, a telecom policy analyst with Stanford Group Co. "Google is still nowhere near the Bells and cable [television] when it comes to lobbying, but it does have a real cachet that can make up some of the gap."
Google has not always been taken seriously in Washington. When co-founder Sergey Brin visited Capitol Hill two years ago, he had trouble persuading members of Congress to meet with him. The company didn't bother to open an office in the District until 2005, when it hired Alan B. Davidson, formerly of the Center for Democracy and Technology, to tackle Internet policy issues. A year later, Google hired Robert Boorstin, who held several positions in the Clinton administration.
When the debate over the ability of Internet service providers to favor certain Web content for a fee, a concept known as network neutrality, heated up last summer, Google was late to the scene. It initially depended on public interest groups to lobby on its behalf.
Since then, Google has expanded its Washington presence. Besides increasing its effort to sell its services to government agencies, Google has taken what it calls a "Googley" approach to politics by seeking the business of political campaign managers and starting a public policy blog. Last week, the online video site YouTube, which is owned by Google, sponsored a debate between the Democratic presidential candidates.
The company recently hired Johanna Shelton, formerly on the staff of Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), an influential member of the House telecommunications subcommittee. Google also frequently invites prominent politicians to tour its Mountain View, Calif., headquarters. But its 2006 congressional lobbying budget of about $770,000, according to public disclosures, is dwarfed by the $21 million spent by AT&T and $14.4 million spent by Verizon the same year.
Unlike many campaigns that use well-connected lobbyists to persuade members of Congress, Google and its opponents have fought this battle on paper, using their lawyers to make their arguments in filings to the FCC.
Google's clout in the airwaves auction has grown slowly, marked by small victories along the way. In February, it hired Richard S. Whitt, once a lawyer for the now-defunct telephone company MCI, to lead its telecom policy agenda. And Google also harnessed the power of politically savvy public interest groups, consumer advocates and like-minded companies such as eBay and Yahoo to push its idea for an open network.
In late April, FCC Chairman Kevin J. Martin endorsed the general idea. A week later, during a tour of the Googleplex in Silicon Valley, he asked Brin and the other Google co-founder, Larry Page, and chief executive Eric Schmidt to suggest rules for the auction that would increase the chances that a new wireless competitor would emerge.
"I think that was a little victory for us that showed the chairman was willing to meet us in the middle," said Whitt, who has led Google's lobbying operation.
Over the next two months, Google outlined its requirements for the auction with the FCC. Its "alternate access team," run by three wireless engineers, Chris Sacca, Larry Alder and Minnie Ingersoll, swooped into Washington for a series of visits with FCC commissioners. Google has also hired game theorists to strategize for the auction.
In the meetings with the commissioners, Google's team urged them to require the highest bidder in the auction to build a network that would be open not only to devices but also to software and third-party companies. Those conditions would make the airwaves more accessible and, hence, more valuable to Google, but would conceivably damage the business of the wireless companies by no longer allowing them to differentiate their offerings from one another.
Like the culture at many Silicon Valley technology companies, Google's clashed with Washington's. Some FCC staff members said the company's tech gurus came across as arrogant in meetings with commissioners.
"They're used to getting what they want rather than having to make a case for what they want," said one staff member who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Martin subsequently said he favored requiring the auction winner to use a chunk of the airwaves to build a network open to all mobile devices but stopping short of meeting Google's other demands.
AT&T and Verizon initially blanched at Martin's proposal, arguing it would tip the competitive scales in Google's favor. But in a series of hearings on Capitol Hill, several lawmakers voiced support for using these airwaves to give consumers more choices. Many cited complaints about the fact that Apple's iPhone, recently introduced to great fanfare, can be used only on AT&T's network.
Others said they were concerned that regulating the airwaves would diminish the estimated $15 billion in revenue raised by the auction. AT&T questioned Google's intentions, telling the company to "put up or shut up" in filings with the FCC. To "put our money where our principals are," Whitt said, Google then committed to spending at least $4.6 billion to bid on the airwaves if its conditions were met. AT&T responded by shifting its position to support Martin's open-access proposal.
Martin's plan for an open-access network "would enable the introduction of an alternate wireless business model without requiring changes in the business models of AT&T and others in what is a highly competitive wireless industry," said Jim Cicconi, AT&T's senior vice president of external and legislative affairs, in a recent filing with the FCC.
"It was very surprising that they backed down. . . . Google was getting traction, and I think the major players wanted to be on the winning side of this battle," said Doug Bonner, who heads the communications practice at the law firm Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal. "Google's definitely putting their currency to work."
這兩位名人堂選手，有一個共同點－生涯都待在同一支球隊，皆於2001年退役。A-Rod的偶像－Ripken在金鶯隊效力21年，初期都是擔任游擊手，1997轉任三壘手，1983跟1991年美聯MVP，最著名的成就是連續出場2,632場比賽，打破Lou Gehrig的鐵人紀錄。
"Whether you like it or not, as big leaguers, we are role models," Ripken said, then pausing as a loud ovation arose on the hilly fields. "The only question is, will it be positive or will it be negative? Should we put players up on a pedestal and make them take responsibility? No. But we should encourage them to use their influence positively, to help build up and develop the young people who follow the game.
不管你喜歡與否，身為大聯盟球員就該做出榜樣，...唯一的問題是，你會是個好榜樣還是壞榜樣？～Ripken今天如是說。
另一位教士先生、打擊教科書Tony Gwynn，八屆的國聯打擊王！生涯打擊率高達.388，3141支安打，也拿過五屆金手套獎。
"My father said, 'If you work hard, good things will happen,'" Gwynn said.
"Boy, oh boy, he was absolutely right. I worked hard in this game, because I had to. I wasn't talented enough to get by just on ability. I really had to work at it. I had to do the video stuff, go about my business and do things the way I did. We make a big deal about work ethic ... about trying to make good decisions and doing things right, and you know what, that's what we're supposed to do.
只要努力，好事就會降臨～Gwynn今日一直強調此一價值
能入選名人堂的選手，除了締造的紀錄之外，最重要的是他們的品德，能否成為Role Model!下面這一段影片是2001年，Ripken以3B的身份入選明星賽，總教練Torre在賽前練習時要A-Rod跟Ripken換位置，讓他回到熟悉的SS，兩個打數一支安打，是一支全壘打，並當選當年All Star Game的MVP！
創意行銷手法，最容易犯得錯誤就是「移植」，把在一個國家或區域成功的經驗，複製
在另一個地方。行銷學會說沒做好環境分析，制度經濟學會說忽略的每個地區人民的
「Shared Mental Model」，講簡單一點就是文化價值判斷。
IKEA在挪威這樣搞，在台灣行得通嗎？
IKEA白天賣家具 晚上變免費旅館
記者:張喬青 外電 報導
|
逛家具買床的時候，如果能試睡一晚，該有多好？真的就有這麼好康的事，挪威的IKEA家具店，想出了一個新點子，白天繼續賣家具，晚上這裡變身免費旅館，邀請大家免費來試住。甚至還提供早餐服務，許多人試睡一晚，覺得很滿意，隔天就買回家，IKEA發現，他們的業績因此變好了。 IKEA除了是家具店，現在還變成了旅館，挪威首都奧斯陸附近的這一間IKEA，推出IKEA旅社服務，歡迎大家到這邊過夜。 這一家人，擠在同一張床上，享受溫馨的家庭時光，這一位女性，一個人來，點盞燈，躺在床上看雜誌，這一家四口，在床上擺張小桌子，吃起宵夜。消費者凡嘉 ：「今天晚上我們要玩的盡興。」 裡面一共有30張床可以選擇，幸運的人，還可以挑到主題式的房間，這對夫妻，就待在用蕾絲布簾圍起來的小空間，頭頂上還有水晶弔燈，非常浪漫。 有的人為了好玩過來住住看，但是大部分的人，都有實際目的。消費者希聚 ：「她想要一張沙發床，她可以試躺一整個晚上。」 睡覺前，還有大姐姐說床邊故事給小朋友聽，賣場裡面，各式各樣的玩偶陪伴下，小朋友就像在童話故事裡面過夜，滿足了童心。 早上起床後，工作人員還會用現場器材，準備早餐給大家吃，許多人試睡、試用了一整晚，很滿意！把東西直接買回家，雖然住在IKEA旅社不用錢，但是銷售業績，卻是嚇嚇叫。
|
從高中畢業的新竹二日遊、大一的墾丁之旅、大二的綠島（我缺席）、大三台中行、大四暑假的澎湖，到今年的大板根，都是屬於我們幾個高中社團好朋友的回憶，相信以後大家會越來越忙，時間也越來越難湊，我們的旅行只會越來越難安排，不過我們每年都這樣講，不過最終還是可以找到空檔。話說如果每一次旅行都當作最後一趟，應該會更在乎大家在一起的時光！
不得不說，如果不是因為阿牛有關係，以我們的經濟能力根本不可能去大板根，與其他溫泉飯店相比，價位還是偏高，也只提供一張溫泉券，小氣了點。但就算如此，人還是很多，不管是來登山還是來住宿！
十人份兩千二的烤肉食材與用具，讓我們吃得相當飽，雖然「火牛」生火生很久，但是火一旺起來，我們根本來不及吃，360烤的香腸到未到我們都叫他不要念材料，馬上拿一個碗公去夜市！烤雞跟旗魚超好吃，搭配邊媽媽提供的冰滴咖啡跟冷泡茶，我第一次覺得烤肉吃起來不會很噁心。恰好旁邊還有要辦營隊的小朋友（會不會太奢侈）在練舞，放得音樂都很好聽，讓我們在等待的後不會太無聊！
回房間休息一下，一夥人就去泡湯嘍，他的溫泉屬於無色無味頂級的碳酸氫鈉鹽泉 ，俗稱美人湯，可惜二樓的溫泉區十點就關了，所以我們沒有辦法享受到各式各樣的小湯屋只能在一樓SPA、他們幾個人去挑戰冷泉，坦白說，我還沒專業到分辨哪一種溫泉比較好，反正就是裝享受阿，平常也沒多累，所以也不知道有沒有疏壓的效果，反正晚上我們要有體力大吵大鬧！
我們一夥人出去絕對不會無聊，麻將、撲克牌是必備的玩具，我一整個就是不順，玩大老二的時後我從來沒有洗過牌（因為沒有贏過），一下就輸了一百，阿牛看我太慘，提議換玩拱豬，不過這次不賭錢，但要付出勞力的代價。負分十分要做一次扶地挺身，兩輪下來每一個人都是負分，我總共做了八十幾下扶地挺身，我承認我太久沒做，昨天晚上開始全身酸痛，現在手舉不太起來...
我們玩太HIGH了，櫃臺還打電話叫我們小聲一點！我們是年輕人！明天一早還要去登山，大家大概三點鐘去睡，不過六點半就起床吃早餐準備挑戰森淋浴啦！不過有人打呼太大聲，大家都沒睡好...
大板根最著名的就是他的雨林生態嘍，才剛開始爬我們就累了，但擔心怕被後面的老阿婆追上，還是撐到了命運的交叉點：我們到底要走哪一條路？一環只要30分鐘、三環卻要120分鐘，施凱升不甘心一直被大家嗆是爽兵，帶頭走三環！三環的登山步道是沒有階梯的，完全走在原始的森林，能走得空間很小，所以他旁邊有一根繩子給你拉著，以防危險！
不知道三環一圈需要120分鐘是怎麼計算的？應該是以老人的速率而非精實國軍的步伐，最辛苦的應該就是360啦，韌帶受傷還跟我們一起走，希望沒有舊傷復發。沒想到我們三十分鐘就走完了，真的是森淋浴，用自己的汗洗了一次澡！不過真的很舒服，茂盛的雨林足以蔽日，吹起風來真是一種享受！最後我們就循著一環（有鋪階梯）走回房間看洋基的比賽。
十一點退房到土城吃旬堂推薦的川菜館，兩點多就回到台北，在這不到二十四小時的相處，卻覺得過了很久，發生很多有趣的事情，不過忽冷忽熱的結果讓我有感冒的跡象。尤其從三峽到土城這一段路我幫阿牛開車，車子的冷氣時好時壞，我一下滿身是汗，一下又直接吹著冷氣，到目前為止也一直昏昏沈沈的，明天可能不能搬重物。
不過這一切都很值得，當我們在人生道路各自前進時，互相陪伴鼓勵會讓我們更有勇氣！祝短期之內要面臨當兵、考試的我們，一切順利了！
