Rating Systems

We recently were discussing rating systems in class, and attempted to determine how useful these rating systems are as informational tools for consumers. Examples of these rating systems include Amazon, Yelp, Trip Advisor, and many others. These rating systems can be very effective if they have enough reviews to analyze the product with. However, there are some flaws that lie in these systems which stem from anyone, including the owner of the product/service, being able to make reviews, as well as people purposefully trying to mess with the data.

I was recently in the market for headphones, and these rating systems were the most useful tool imaginable when deciding on what I wanted to purchase. Amazon had over 50 to 100 reviews of every headphone I was researching, so I was assured that I could take useful advice from them. Two headphones that had similar 4 star ratings were the Beats by Dre Tour Earbuds and the Etymotic HF5s. Both of the headphones had overwhelmingly positive reviews saying that the sound was amazing and they noise canceling made it seem like you’re in your own world. Therefore, I knew that the worst reviews would tell me the most useful information. Comparing the bad reviews, both of these headphones, as well as other ones that I also researched, had mostly complaints about them not lasting long, breaking easily, and sound not coming out of one ear. Therefore, I determined that these kind of issues arise with all headphones, and most likely because people do not take good care of their headphones. Other bad reviews about the Beats by Dre headphones said that the bass was too heavy that they overpowered other instruments, whereas the Etymotics didn’t have any complaints outside of them breaking easily. I ended up buying the Etymotics because of this, and they are the best headphones I have ever had, thanks to the rating system.

On the other hand, rating systems can be flawed easily. For example, an HDMI cable was recently released on the Best Buy website which costs $1600. Immediately, internet forum users were alerted to this ridiculous product and overtook the review board. All giving 5 star reviews, the comments were sarcastic with remarks such as, “Wow this cable is the best investment that I have ever made. It is the highest quality HDMI cable out there. It is so good that I hope that one day I can afford a TV to hook it up to.” Best Buy noticed all of these joke reviews, and deleted them shortly after. However, this left only reviews that didn’t seem to be sarcastic. Now the product has many high reviews when obviously no one should be buying a $1600 HDMI cable. This is an instance when the review system is flawed easily. When people use these rating systems, they have the potential to be the most useful tool when deciding what to purchase, but the whole situation (how many reviews, what the reviews say, and the product in general) must be analyzed together in order to not be fooled by possible flaws.

The Importance of Town Hall Meetings

Professor Lazer’s study on online town hall meetings brought forth some very important facts. There is a huge disconnect between politicians and the general public. Most Americans don’t understand the issues or why politicians take certain actions regarding different policies. The task of reading, understanding, and fact checking different topics can prove to be difficult and time consuming. Therefore, many people give up on the effort and blindly form their opinions based on their feelings, which may not be backed by reality. One major consequence of this is that people strongly dislike and distrust those who disagree with them. According to Professor Lazer’s study, town hall meetings can increase approval of the member and his/her position, increase engagement in politics, and increase the probability of voting for that member. All of these points are very important for a working democracy.

I was recently watching an episode of Top Gear, and it proved Lazer’s points perfectly. Top Gear is a British/American car show on BBC America, and is riddled with jokes and silliness. Each episode has a guest whom they interview for 10-15 minutes. However, a recent episode had Lord John Prescott on the show, who is a former Deputy Prime Minister and First Secretary of the State of the United Kingdom. When he was first introduced, he was booed by at least half of the audience. Throughout the interview, the host was surprisingly grilling him really hard on issues, despite it being a car show. It was amazing how he answered every question with a very understandable answer, which made his decisions very clear. After the show, everyone clapped for him, there was no more booing, and I’m sure everyone in the audience had an “Aha!” moment as to why he made enacted some of the policies that he did. It is amazing how one small interview with a policy-maker can change ones entire views on that person. If we can get more people to be part of these town hall meetings, which is helped greatly by online meetings, then perhaps we can have a more successful democracy.

Open Sourcing and the Freedom of Information

For people that haven't heard of Linux and Unix based operating systems, Wikipedia was a huge eye-opener for people that were unaware of open-source content. Wikipedia was founded under the principle that information should be free, reliable, and easily available to everyone. In Unix operating systems, the core distribution can be easily modified by programmers and redistributed freely. In Wikipedia, anyone who wishes to can add, delete, or modify articles, however many articles are moderated by volunteers, who are responsible for reversing any spam changes or changes that may lead to false information. Academia has constantly berated Wikipedia for being unreliable, but as the number of moderators increases, the quality and reliability of articles increase. As more people begin to trust Wikipedia's accuracy, maybe Academia will begin to trust open-source content such as Wikipedia articles .

One of the most prominent open vs. closed source battles occurring today is the Apple vs. Android argument. Apple chooses to lock down their iOS platform so nothing that Apple directly approves of can be released into the App Store. Android, however, is based on the open-source Linux kernel, so, for the most part, everyone is free to modify their Android devices as they please. Google often encourages third party developers to modify Android devices, who then write custom firmware distributions, known as ROMs, for Android users to install once they gain superuser privileges by rooting. However, within the Android platform, some device manufacturers disagree that users should be able to run custom ROMS, notably Motorola, and they have thus encrypted their phones. After a large and constant outcry from Motorola Android users, Motorola finally reversed their policy on custom firmware. Open source content, when used appropriately, can be hugely beneficial, as the content is often free and users tend to appreciate the freedom given to them.

Extremism in the U.S.

Sunstein’s Going to Extremes was a very interesting book that discussed how like-minded people act in groups. Given the current political climate, it was extremely relevant to what is happening in this country right now. I am a liberal, so my view may be a little biased, but in my opinion, two groups were formed directly from this phenomenon. One is the Tea Partiers, and one is the Westboro Baptist Church. The extremism from the Tea Party is a huge issue because as they converse with “regular” Republicans, they effectively push the views of the Republicans even further right. The implications of this shift were highlighted in a study done by John Avlon of Newsweek magazine. According to the study, 67% of Republicans (40% of America) believe that Obama is a socialist, 45% (25% overall) believe Obama was not born in the U.S., 57% (32% overall) believe he is a Muslim, 24% (14% overall) say that he “may be the Antichrist,” and 38% (20% overall) says “Obama is doing many of the things that Hitler did.” These claims are ridiculous, and take away from the real issues of the country. I think the most ridiculous ones are the ones relating him to the Antichrist and Hitler. One thing that Hitler was known for was his use of propaganda. He knew that if you read something over and over enough times, eventually you will take it as a truth. I can’t think of anything Obama has done that makes him anything like Hitler, but largely extreme Republicans such as Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh use this type of propaganda to sway the minds of voters. Republicans control 80% of talk radio, and by people listening to all of these ridiculous claims on a regular basis, many are taking them all as fact without looking further into them at all. If this trend of blindly accepting wild claims continues, it good have terrible repercussions for our country.

Rating Systems

In class last week we were asked to bring in one form of rating website, or wikipedia-esque website. The different examples of rating systems brought in were yelp, tripadviser, Hostels, and Netflix just to name a few. These rating systems brought up an interesting conversation centered around who posts reviews on them. It became clear that most people only post a rating review when they are extremely pleased or displeased with some service or place. This leaves the average or mediocre ratings and experiences out. Some students said that they look at the worst and the best ratings to compare what a business might thrive in versus what they lack. Another opinion is that the best rating system is a 1-5 rating or giving it a certain number of stars. This is so that all of the reviews and ratings and be summed up in one overall average that is easy to interpret.

The other issue when it comes to rating systems and websites is finding a real rating. One cannot discount the fact that anyone can post on most of these with very little regulation, if any. An owner of a restaurant could simply go on and post wonderful reviews about themselves, and no one would know. In addition, the opposite scenario could be true. A competitor could easily go on the website and post something negative about their competition. On Amazon, when reviews are done of the books it could quite possibly be the author's friends and collaborators who are the ones posting reviews, which while maybe not intentional could give a bias review. Also frequent reviewers who post long positive reviews with frequency can be sent free early copies of books, or other things giving them incentive to post a positive review. A young artist, Sam Adams, is said to have bought his own music on itunes thousands of times so that his song could be ranked in the top charts. These examples are just a few ways that these systems can be manipulated.

Professor Lazer brought up the way his profession reviews papers. Two people within the profession are carefully chosen to comment and review a paper with end remarks such as revise and edit, or rewrite and revise, etc. The author does not know who the two people are, therefore no one will feel compelled to slant their reviews one way or another to please a collaborator. I think this is one of the few systems that seems like it would be an effective rating and review of someone's work.

The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted, But It Can Help

In his article, “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted,” Malcom Gladwell makes some pretty good points about why the internet and social media do not completely change the game when it comes to activism. One can probably see the issues with a digitally generated protest or sit-in even without Gladwell’s paper.

The reason protests like those that took place in Egypt are so successful is because it is so clear whn a large group of people support it. That is because you can see it. You can see the number of people in the streets and the enthusiasm they show for their cause. By contrast it still seems like any online activism or petition signing doesn’t carry much weight. You may have 1000 people ‘attending’ your event on Facebook, but until they actually show up in person they are uselesss.
The idea of being willing to sacrafice something is what gives these activists and their actions so much power. When you see them take to the streets you know they are willing to put a face to their cause and in some cases suffer some kind of harm whether physical abuse or social stigmatizing. However, simply retweeting a message does not have the same effect.
While a physical presence will always outweigh a digital one when it comes to matters like this, we cannot underestimate the importance of social media tools like Twitter and Facebook. You may need to physically show up to a protest to create change, but that protest can be started online. There are a lot of people out there that are waiting for their “tipping point” when it comes to protests, they want to see others joining in before they do. By starting online, these people can see the growth and strength of the movement before stepping foot outside. From there they must actually take some action to be recognized by the authority they’re trying to reach.
So the internet and social media may help organize activism like that which we saw in the Middle East early this year, but when it comes down to it, a physical presence is needed. Protests can’t take place entirely online with any hope of being effective, but they can start online and the internet can be used to get them started. It’s just the peoples’ job after that to actually show up.

Swarm Theory in Practice

Growing up, I loved playing Towers of Hanoi. I had the game loaded on my TI-83+ in High School and would play it almost every day in my science and math classes, which I excelled in anyway. Once I figured out the puzzle's pattern, I quickly learned and memorized the optimal routes. I then quickly transitioned to blindfolded speed runs! Once you learn the pattern, it is easy to apply it to higher towers, even without looking.

Reading earlier about how a swarm of ants could learn the same pattern and end up only using the optimal path to reach their food source amazed me. Initially, I thought that ants weren't too intelligent, but when a swarm of ants travels through a maze, they somehow relay information to the swarm that a certain path isn't optimal. Bees use the same problem solving approach when searching for food, or solving mathematical equations. When searching for food, swarms of bees actively search for the closest food source and avoid those that are farther away.

These readings partially inspired me to write my third essay on the news aggregator Reddit. Community members actively seek out and upvote the best new posts to be put on the front page, and they downvote those that they dislike or disagree with. This mindset, known as the "hivemind mentality," can be problematic with links in the Politics section of the site, as it has some fairly heavy bias, but the hivemind often works well to promote higher quality links to the site.