Google obviously wants to have all the answers to all possible absurd questions. The danger with this goal is that they positioned the persons that represents part of the diversity of the world as not worthy of being treated with respect.

Más de acuerdo no se puede estar. Concuerdo con ese pensamiento, no lo entenderemos a la perfección, cada vez más sigue siendo un misterio y a la vez un abismo del que todos quedaremos atrapados, consumidos.

Ahí vamos, a ser unas compañías mecanizadas están programadas para producir información de acuerdo a los intereses de la mayoría de los buscadores. Google contiene millones de archivos que contienen información a donde la compañía recurre para brindar resultados y esto es casi una manera de justificar a estas redes.

Esto realmente asusta, cuando google te da opciones irrelevantes y es por lo que la mayoría de las personas buscan. Aquellas personas que solo buscan información por internet como fuente primaria y no profundizan en la búsqueda de libros para cerciorar sus respuestas.

Al comienzo el concepto que tenia Hitler no era malo porque lo que el quería era levantar a una Alemania que estaba completamente hecha pedazos por la derrota que tuviera en la primera guerra mundial, luego es que comienza a tener las ideas completamente locas. Pero esto puede traer un poco de problemas porque esta información lo que nos esta dejando ver es que este tipo de conducta la quieren ver como algo bien y considero que no lo esta

As a student of Communication and Public Relations l consider myself a "neutral" person. I don't think it is Google fault or any search engine about what people decide to educate and informed themselves. Whether it is for good intentions or bad intentions to use that knowledge. Good and bad intentions are a human nature that will never go away as it is a part of us. The way you use it will define and shape the people who you tell them to.

It is very interesting how this article talks about how Google's search engine is a reflection of our society. The suggestions it gives throughout our search are suggestions that people are also asking themselves and rather the top 4 be harsh and bad. We have to remind ourselves that people are the ones searching for these answers, it is as stated a "information war". You might not agree to it or the top pages listed for those answers but it is the reality we have. In this case people really want to learn if Jews, men, women and Muslims are bad. I bet there is people who think Hitler wasn't the "bad or evil" person from WW2.

This article comes to show you that technology has its positive and negative sides. Throughout believes given to us by our nuclear family some people truly believe this to be true and decide to google this to confirm and educate themselves on "why". Reasons to know why "jews are evil"and let me tell you this, "evil" can manifest itself in different ways, races, gender and it has many faces.

Si nos ponemos a pensar, estamos viendo como nosotros mismo estamos nutriendo este problema, se ha visto desde siempre y como dice en el articulo no tenmos form de pararlo. La curiosidad juega un papel muy importante en esta situción. Lo digo porque por curiosidad fue que la gente sigue entrando a los diferentes links para ver si hay más información de esa noticia, quieren llegar a una conclusión, quieren saber si es verdad o no.

Todos sabemos eso. El problema es el tipo de información que esta buscando el usuario. Asi mismo esta pasando con wikipedia, uno puede entrar a una pagina de wikipedia y puede editar la información que esta ahi dentro, sin que te pida algun tipo de "log in" o llenar alguna información para que te autorize a editar lo que ya esta escrito.

Esto es otro problema grande que está ocurriendo. A uno le sale en el feed de facebook cualquier noticia como por ejemplo: "Obama muere a sus 57 años" y hay gente que se lo cree y cuando entran la pagina o es un virus o es una promoción.

me pasa mucho esto cuando estoy con mis amigos y familia y en realidad es triste ya no parecemos humanos, ahora parecemos extraterrestes que sin el telefono no funcionamos.

Esto es una de las preguntas que hace a diario cuando vemos a otras personas envueltas con la tecnología... pero, nos hacemos esa misma pregunta nosotros?

Si parecemos subhumanos, porque nos desconectamos de cualquier interacción presencial por estar viviendo en el telefono, computadoras y tablets. Somos unas victimas adictivas a todo lo digital que hemos perdido el sentido y el toque humano de tener una buena conversación, una cena y una salida sin utilizar y desconectarnos de lo digital.

deben de prevenir mas los celulares porque ya descrubimos un metodo de estar en el celular en clase y si nos vuelve una costumbre

Estoy totalmente de acuerdo con esta oración en particular. A través de los años hemos visto como el ser humano sigue dependiendo de estos aparatos electrónicos.

Esto es muy triste y lamentable, se van perdiendo el desarrollo y progreso de sus hijos por estar pendientes a los celulares. Esta bien utilizar tecnología pero en su momento. Hay millones de experiencias para compartir con los hijos que no van a poder regresar una vez sean adultos.

This article, and sentence, reminds me of the discussion we are having this semester, in my class #inf115, with @avunque. We are discussing two other articles. One is by Sherry Turkle called "Stop Googling. Let's Talk". http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/27/opinion/sunday/stop-googling-lets-talk.html?_r=1

The other one is by Nathan Jurgenson (@nathanjurgenson) called "Fear of Screens".http://thenewinquiry.com/essays/fear-of-screens/

This year the topic for our class is Reclaiming the Web, which comes together with Sherry Turkle’s new book called Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age.

You can read the blog post by @avunque

http://blogs.netedu.info/2016/02/21/whats-in-conversation/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SkateOfTheWeb+%28Skate+of+the+web%29

A veces con la vida ocupada que tenemos, sin darnos cuenta cometemos esto. A menudo me pasa con mi familia, mientras me estan hablando.

For me this article was amazing, I think Jurgenson wants to remind us that even though we do have technology at the touch of our fingertips not everything is technological. This article wants us to embrace and be grateful for all the information that we have and the way we have it. It's not bad to use technology as part of your daily life, for me it doesn't define the way you communicate with others and engage in conversations.

Aprendemos a ser empaticos con los demas.

La felicidad la encontramos en nosotros mismo cuando dejamos de buscarla en los demas. Naturalmente el ser humano siempre depende de otro ser, pero hay que aprender a saber estar solo, a ser independiente.

Tipo de conversaciones que nos ayudan ser nosotros mismos. La confianza en uno mismo es solo el comienzo de una buena conversacion.

Deberia ser asi, siempre que voy a comer en algun lugar todos estan pegados al telefono.

It is kinda worrying that kids are getting more used to their phones and less to human interaction to the point that most of them become angry of they don't have their tech stuff

I agree, but also think that even though this might be true, there are a lot of people that are trying to break that habit

I completely agree with this statement, we see how disconnected we become of each other and how much we depend on mobile devices

Turkle and Jurgenson are both trying to make a warning on how we should remind ourselves, to balance these worlds, by not getting lost in the "blurred lines". We should be grateful for this information, because they are speaking up, on everyone's behalf. Find yourself in all this information, and analyze were your should correct yourself or better yourself.

This example can apply to writers, from years ago, who probably too, passed a lot of time just writing, and probably were asked to be more social. So this concept has always existed, this is just another era.

But this really refers to the development of each person.

We have to remind ourselves, that this "monster" as some refer to it, is a vehicle of communication.

But we are not less of a person. Always remember that.

This is true. But people sometimes really, don't feel the need to be present at the exact moment where they are, and feel the need to escape.

Are we sure the technology that mediates conversations actually impedes it or at least diminishes them? After all, tech has always mediated conversation (ie. telephone, pencils, language...).

For example, when the telephone was introduced, some people actually feared it would take intimacy out of the conversation. Did it happen?

Cannot it be simply that the very idea of conversation changes with time and the technologies which mediate it?

What is this evidence?

Who implicates technology? Is this in the research, is this an assertion? Like the statement about people killing each other, not guns, who is really responsible?

This refers to rather small bits of information ("What's the pythagorean theory?" "Where is Bora Bora?" "How do I make mashed potatoes"

What is missing here are the things we add to the web to enhance our own later discovery, our streams of bookmarks, a history of photos in flickr/instagram can helps us remember where were on a past date, blogs that record our process through a project. I have relied on Tripit.com (travel reservations and such) to figure out what conferences I went to in the past.

I like to speculate an alternative present/future where if there was a different boss, maybe more of an accountant who wrote "Vague and not essential to out mission. Get back to that database project Berners-Lee!"

Would the web have been invented? By whom? What would it look like?