My new Discover column, "Watching The Watchers," is online. This one's about the fascinating Government Information Awareness site that tracks and filters a vast web of data about government officials. (It's explicitly designed as a mirror image version of Poindexter's Total Information Awareness.) Here's a taste:
"Every piece of information is annotated with information about who entered it," [site creator Ryan] McKinley explains. "Everything can be ranked for veracity and interest. The hope is with that you can come up with pretty simple rules to keep out the things that would make this kind of database unusable. I honestly believe that there's enough genuine interest out there for people to put time into this, and so the amount of garbage that goes in will be pretty small." If the approach works, the garbage will be quickly spotted and demoted by the users of the site, while quality information will rise to the surface. High-rated contributors might rise up as well.
The self-policing of the site makes for an arresting sociological experiment. Most of the time, the trust ratings of eBay manage to block an individual's financial incentive to misrepresent information online. Will a similar approach work when the incentive is ideological instead of financial? Systems that self-regulate by following predictable rules can be gamed, of course. A group of users could agree to rate their own contributions highly and downgrade everyone else's. If they reached a critical mass, they could significantly alter the perspective of the database. It would take a lot of work –– and a lot spare time –– but ordinary people have done a lot of extraordinary things on the Web in their spare time.
Check out "The Soft Cage"
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0918/p20s02-bogn.html
Might spark an idea or two...
Posted by: Zack Lynch | September 18, 2003 at 02:47 AM
Sounds similar to a Slashdot-style moderation methodology.
Of course, then who will watch those who watch the watchers? :)
Posted by: Book Review | September 30, 2003 at 03:46 AM