I think I’m getting addicted to blogging
7 September 2007 1 Comment
I spent some of last night and today looking at technorati http://technorati.com and other sites that kind of rate and validate blog content (I’m sure it does much more than that but that’s what I see it doing). I signed up and got my blog registered to me and I browsed other peoples blogs and am adding them to my favourites. My main problem at the moment is that at work I have three different mechanisms for RSS feeds (Google Desktop, RSS Reader and I’ve just installed Office 2007, there are also the browser widgets and toolbars). I’m getting nearly overwhelmed by information right now since I’ve been adding stuff left, right and centre to my feeds and favourites on various tools and websites.
I’m wondering how other people manage to apply filters to get appropriate stuff out. I can of course choose to ignore postings goings into all these other blogs that I’ve subscribed to but actually most of them are useful in some sense. Is the filtering process a human one bourn from experience of what to look out for? (in which case should I be working on making the first ten words of each post eye catching!) or are there automated methods used by people? – Is this something that should be explored further with web 2.0 to avoid information overload? – Also can rating mechanisms (such as technorati) be used to provide a guide to the authenticity of at least the authority of the information from particular sources?
As you can see I’m very green in this area but I think that there’s a gap in the market here for something that works with other Web 2.0 tools and provides (a) A filter which is adaptable depending on what I’m doing so if I’m at work I get more work related blog stuff and if I’m at home I get more leisure related stuff etc. (b) A method of enhancing what I need to know by doing something clever with the way I might search or browse for information.
So to explain (b) I was thinking like with an Encyclopaedia you find out what you want and can then follow it up with more stuff using intelligent behind the scenes aggregation (with an Encyclopaedia I tend to look at the topic and see references to other things that some brainy person has referenced and are actually more what I wanted to know about). For example I looked up paganism because of a programme on the TV and I discovered that actually despite the programme incorrectly calling it a pagan ritual the programme was more about Wicca. I could do that online with a search but a lot of the information is rubbish, shops selling stuff etc., things about witches and rubbish that is not a simple statement of the facts (try it yourself).
By the way I’m not obsessed by paganism or wicca, the programme was Silent Witness I think (BBC) and it was a pretty duff episode which is why I had my nose in a book in the first place.