Speaking of crap detection, I also don't see an obvious author on this article. I feel prompted to further research this web page.

Rheingold would agree that this is nothing new. The web makes information all the more accessible, and of course, it can be used to create hoaxes, fraudulent claims, and even manipulate or threaten people. Crap detection is extremely important in being able to discern the good and bad parts of the internet in order to protect yourself.

So, the AI system is not as efficient as it is presented to be because it only has 91% accuracy when it has a 50% chance of getting the answer of who is more likely to be gay correct. But, in a realistic situation where sexuality is more fluid, and a smaller fraction of the population is known to be LGBTQ, it would be harder to pinpoint who is actually gay or straight. I also believe that this research is slightly bias to the social expectation of what gay and straight appears to be.

What does this statement exactly mean? Does it mean that one can easily assume the sexuality of a person on a dating site by the way he or she present themselves?

My understanding from reading the text is that these techniques rely more on social engineering than genetic makeup. For example, I presume it means that women who appear to have more male hormones are more likely to be attracted to women.

What I get from this is that the level of testosterone and estrogen (hormones) plays a role in determining the sexuality of a person, but I disagree slightly because any sexuality is not attached to any particular sex.

This process of logistic regression is just advanced research like crap detection.The software studies which face structures are correlated to which sexualities and then makes guesses on entirely new data based on the correlations it studied and concluded from that. The sfotware determines what sexuality is more likely just as researchers do with their sources.

I think Rheingold might have disagreed with this statement. Its possible that if people were as exposed to the information (on faces) that artificial intelligence harbored, people could also be better at determining signs about a person just from their face. After all, research is all about analyzing multiple pieces of information, and being exposed to a plethora of information is definitely an advantage in that.

I highlighted this to point out that grammar is a part of crap detection because proof reading and peer review is one of the most significant parts of publishing a scholarly article. I don't think this sentence is grammatically correct because semicolons are usually used to separate two independent clauses.

I feel like this is the foundation of crap detection. When researching and analyzing a claim, one can only make "precise guesses" about the information based on information of other sources about the claim and about another source. Like I mentioned before and like Rheingold said, determining the credibility of a source isn't black or white but rather a measure of the degree to the researcher believes its accurate. Like the google system, people can also make infers about a claim or source based on patterns in other sources.

Even though this quote is describing the process of artificial intelligence, I think it indirectly describes the process that researchers should perform while filtering through online sources which Rheingold discussed and called crap detection. Although we may be no where near the capability of artificial intelligence, spotting patterns matters immensely when determining which sources are more or less reliable. When patterns are spotted, researchers can also use a technique called triangulating which helps support the credibility of sources and their claims.

I will make 10 annotations on this article in connection with Rheingold's Crap Detection Chapter 2

Once you are skeptical, have knowledge that the internet's information is practically limitless, use triangulation, you are most likely to find the best information available. To be apart of digital culture, you must use these tools at your expense to get the most credible information on the web.

Infotention, as rheingold describes, is a wealth of information that means the death of the credibility of the information. The more information available, the higher chance that a good majority of the information is not credible.

Rheindgold shows the scope of his research, and how if used effectively, it could change the way news is received and operates. Using the tactics discussed and being skeptical will lead to the shaping of more credible news for everyone.

In this statement, Rheingold highlights the benefits you get from being skeptical. By triangulating reliable sources, he recieved his credible information via twitter hours before it would have been reported by a credible news source.

Triangulating sources, such as journalists do, is a good way to ensure that the information you are getting is as credible as possible. Triangulating information would 100 percent of the time lead you to not believe what terrorist recruiters are saying, according to the supplemental text.

Another quote that highlights Rheingolds emphasis on being skeptical. The more skeptical you are, the better your information is going to be. Using the interface as a clue but still being skeptical of the information increases your chances of getting the most credible information available to you.

Rheingold states that simply being skeptical is a big first step in getting good information. Searching more than once and knowing that the information you find may not be the most credible is the best way to troubleshoot finding good information.

Rheingold touches on a large part of his argument here, saying "think skeptically, look for an author, and then see what others say about the author." His idea of thinking skeptically encompasses how he looks at the internet, as a place to look for information but never fully believe it without doing your research.

Rheingold, aware of the overwhelming flood of information that is the internet, states that it is the responsibility of the reader now to be aware of the validity of the information they find on the internet. This relates to my secondary text as well as social media plays a large role in recruitment, while if you take a second and look at the information recruiters could send you you would understand how wrong your actions to sign up are.

Rheingold states that you shouldnt believe everything you read online, although you should take the time to crap test it as some things you read online could be true. This relates to my supplementary reading, how terrorists recruit online (and how to stop it) as a little bit of crap detection in the information provided would help analyze what the terrorists are doing and ways to stop it.

"Clearly, the raw volume and velocity of information as well as opportunity for distraction now is unprecedented. But I find the info-overload fears of the past to be instructive in the way they eerily reflect today's moral panics about the putative stupefying effects of the Web, and in the hopeful clue that history conveys-people responded to overload in the past by developing mind tools to elevate the information-handling capacities of literate people."

Very similar to Chris's words in his blog, Digital Redlining, Access, and Privacy This is something can be truly related in the response due to effects that surfing the web can have on you, your ideologies and the topics that you may want to research upon using the internet.

"Some people are exploring the use of social media for crap detection about journalism. FairSpin.org's community votes on stories in order for its aggregate judgments to identify opinion disguised as fact, and reflect the degree of political bias detected in stories from both the Left and Right."

In a political sense, many of the sources from organizational websites can result in bias writing towards a certain ideology. This isn't terrible but it can also leave specific facts from one side due to a organization using favoritism in an argument. Which can also be checked for crap detection just because someone is trying to make their group look better than another.

"If you are going to grant credibility to people whose expertise is based on being a professor of something, make sure that assertion is accurate. Don't stop at simply verifying that the claim to be a professor is valid if you are looking for scientific credibility."

Credibility is something that everyone needs to be checked for even if you are a professor. Rheingold slides in that just because someone is a teacher, doctor, professor or something doesn't mean that they're valid 100% of the time about everything.

"Search engines are such powerful magic that we've forgotten how magical they really are. While people stand in line for hours to pay for the privilege of walking around a fake village full of actors posing as magicians in the Wizarding World of Harry Potter theme park, millions of people use computer and telephone keyboards to utter magical spells-with various degrees of proficiency and success-every day.

The way gathering information back then was reliable mainly because of the fact that you had to read to gather information. Also this was better mainly because of the fact that you had to realize that many books were read over before they were published.

"I'll soon drill down on that "collective intelligence" aspect of credibility testing. The social aspects of critical evaluation can be powerfully useful, but they also can be misleading. Skill at evaluating the quality of collective intelligence is essential to knowing how to take advan- tage of it."

This results in being able to work with peers and other scholars in order to put heads together to find and gather valuable information on a topic. However Rheingold proves this route to be inclusive as to still being able to crap detect by realizing that these sources from your peers may be misleading

"Most people ask themselves whether a detective-like inquiry to verify the answer to a Web search is worth the time. According to researchers Soo Young Rieh and Brian Hilligoss, interviews with twenty-four college stu- dents revealed that they would be willing to compromise certainty about credibility for speed and convenience."

While rheingold provides numbers to his argument of determining how many students ever wonder what sources they are using, there are many students who actually take the route of using sites like google scholar to find their sources which is most cases is better than using a normal cite.

"A study in 2010 by Eszter Hargittai, Lindsay Fullerton, Ericka Menchen-Tre- vino, and Kristin Yates Thomas, found that students use search engines as a parameter of trustworthiness. As long as a site is toward the top of a search engine's listings, many of this study's subjects considered it credible."

Rheingold is backing up his argument with supporting sources from studies in the past. This is very believable even today as students just believe that since a source is at the top of the page when they use the search engine, they deem credible because they believe if it wasn't there would be someone to take it down.

"Treat a site's design not as validation of credibility but instead as one possible clue (along with grammatical errors, suspicious sources or lack thereof, and other people's negative opinions of the site) that could convince you to lower your evaluation of the site's credibility."

The ability to Crap detect and being able to read between the lines is something should be able to do. Rheingold argues that you should not just use website aesthetics as way to find credibility. nevertheless he says it can help as way to see if the article has grammatical errors, suspicious or lack of sources to help you determine where the site stands.

"To show her what I meant, I typed in the name of the civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. I knew that near the top of the first page of results from most search engines is a link to a site titled "Martin Luther King Jr.: A True Historical Examination."1 It doesn't take long to see that this "true historical examination" presents King as a disreputable character."

More strong evidence as to support Rheingold's argument. If you were to look this up, it is in face very true that you will find a website that actually talks down on Martin Luther King. This is what Rheingold supports as a crap source to prove that the internet can be a mysterious place.

"The first time I saw my daughter use a search engine to research home-work, I explained that in the olden days, you gathered information by going to the library for a book or magazine article. You might disagree with a library book, but you could be somewhat confident that someone checked the author's claims about facts before the book was published."

This is the main argument that Rheingold is trying to make. He explains that reading a book to gather information is more fruitful than gathering it from the internet (also relate-able to Chris's writing due to digital redlining). This is true because of the simple fact that if you click and link and use that information from said website, there is a possibility that you are using a "crap" source. This source is something that can be downplayed as something that may seem true but to find credibility within you must at least look at the author, the one whole typed it.

Aural focuses on sound. I did not know silence was in this category. I find that interesting. I can explain how in the video there was silence as one example of aural.

The most important thing I got from this is linguistic mainly focuses on word choice. I can remember that by thinking of the word language. I got an idea how I can incorporate this into the response.

Multimodal is described here well. Can I elaborate more? Will this go into depth. I feel that with more examples, my point can be thoroughly explained.

I appreciate when authors use multimodal text because it keeps me interested.

Before this class, I didn't take advantage of using Multimodal when completing online assignments.

Initially I thought the word "text" just meant a group of words to form either a sentence, paragraph or essay.

Gestural mode is exactly what it sounds like. When giving a speech this is an important feature. I could give an example of how when I was giving a speech, my facial expressions and hand gestures and body language came into play.

Website page could be an example of how visual elements enhance the website as a whole and catches the attention of others.

Visual is pretty much what the name says. It is what you see. I love the quote a picture is worth 1000 words because including pictures into work helps 10 times better than just trying to describe it.

The different modes are listed. How can I incorporate the modes into my response and explain further? Aural is the one I always seem to struggle with remembering.

There are many ways that modes work. I can explain and include examples in my response.

The video is funny with the words at the bottom. The video depicted uses the modes of communication. Visual of course is one, gestural is one and sound is one of course.

The video is funny with the words at the bottom. The video depicted uses the modes of communication. Visual of course is one, gestural is one and sound is one of course.

The way the website is organized it allows for the reader to veer off and see other related topics. That is where Spacial mode comes into play.

The way the website is organized it allows for the reader to veer off and see other related topics. That is where Spacial mode comes into play.

Sign language would be a gestural form of communication. I think this is interesting.

Sign language would be a gestural form of communication. I think this is interesting.

Ironically they added 3 articles that corresponds to the article I'm reading an annotating.

As I stated in a previous annotation, this is true. Although, I don't search inappropriate content, those who do may receive ads of that content in a setting with many others which would be taboo.

Rheingold stated that each engines such as Google, Yahoo and Bing use data from our social media accounts in order to put sponsored ads such as links in videos on the website we are viewing. I believe Rheingold and Dr Kosinski because I'm no stranger to social media and I have seen for myself that after I search something I start seeing ads for that product or content.

Rheingold believes that the best crap detection is when you make 3 different advanced searches to check if the information you're receiving is valid. The researchers have done this with this study, per the author of this article.

This seems reliable, as they did tell the likelihood of the AI being able to detect the sexual preference of someone outside of the study group they chose.

When a reader read this article, they should also do an advanced search on the researchers of this study. This will give much needed understanding why they may have chose this study rather than another, and if their statistics are reliable to use. Rheingold believes this is the best way to find out the intentions of the author.

In order to know if this is true or not, the people doing the research have to be bias when choosing their study group and have prior knowledge of their sexual preference in order to determine whether this machine can actually point out the sexual orientation. The researchers can't be helpful to the machine by giving it hints, that would defeat the purpose.

Rheingold stated that all information isn't valuable information. Although, Michal and Yilun made suggestions on this machine's ability, we have to dig deeper to know if they're inferring this using bias assumptions.

This can be considered Crap depending on what the machine is said to conclude about a person or group of people.

Without even noticing what the actual use of the cameras are used for on the streets, we now learn that they are used for much more than catching crimes and traffic violators. Rheingold said, "machines publish information so rapidly".

Without even noticing what the actual use of the cameras are used for on the streets, we now learn that they are used for much more than catching crimes and traffic violators. Rheingold said, "machines publish information so rapidly".

This stood out to me because I'm one of those writers. I will know exactly what I mean yet still manage to write vague essays.

As I read through this paragraph I notice that he feels that writing with physical objects helps get your point across in a vivid way compared to being obscure. It takes extra teaching from the teacher and that's why it is over looked. Some teachers rather teach the basics or expect you to know it before registering for that class. What they should know is we are still learning and this is why we're in school... to learn more.

Sadly, I sometimes still lack this skill. Usually when I'm not familiar with the topic I search it to familiarize myself but it still gets worded on the paper weirdly showing that I'm unaware of the object I'm talking about.

This is how a school should operate, fix the problem before it gets out of hand. Once, they noticed the issue they began tackling it. If every school worked this way, maybe students wouldn't come into college discourage in the fact that they have poor writing skills.

Oftentimes, students arrive into a classroom nervous because they aren't good writers and this is true for many. Students in recent years aren't taught to excel college but only to pass high school. This doesn't mean all students but the majority.

As stated in my secondary reading, describing the object in a concrete way instead of using abstract ideas can enhance your paper

In The Secret to Good Writing, many teachers believe that the ideas are what matter. This caused many of the students to easily get off topic, while Tyre believes that writing about physical objects helps them stay on topic.

Your imagination is critical when performing a task as you may come to a halt with writer's block if you are only thinking abstractly.

When describing an object we have to concisely give our readers or listeners a vivid description of what the object is. Being sure to keep the reader engaged by not floating away from the topic at hand.

When describing an object the better your vocabulary is the more precise you can be when detailing it, we all can look at something and have thoughts on it but how well we can interpret those thoughts matter more. I myself am working on bettering my vocabulary to be able to describe material more concrete.

As in The Secret to Good Writing the difference between writers is those who focus on the object rather than ideas. When you focus on ideas you may end up on a different topic which displays lack of control. While focusing on the object shows communication power.

An object can be viewed in different context depending on a person. As two people from different cultures may view marriage differently. One culture may continue to accept you if you express your concerns with your marriage and believe divorce is the right decision. While another culture may shun you due to your belief.

I agree completely with this statement, as we completed our class activity with our peer we found out the meanings of our objects were different than what we concluded on at first sight.

To lucidly be able to describe an object we have to firstly have an interest in it, as this is the only way we can be drawn into analyzing it.

An artifact can be visualized differently depending on a person and the society they are in or either from. In material culture we oftentimes see items that have a unique meaning for certain that culture. This put me in the mind of my peer as she brought a flag from her country of origin and even though her parents left because of the communistic government, she keeps the entity because it signifies their strengthen as a family, while still embracing her culture.

As I am a student when reading this essay with hopes of one day becoming a scholar at being able to articulate my descriptions of items. As for now this essay gives me insight on the thought process needed to achieve this ability.

A scholar can find importance in all items no matter how insignificant it may seem to a student.

When reading this essay I have to begin with an open mind as some of the text can be interpreted in many ways than one, I should read it and understand in my best ability of how the author would want me to. In my secondary reading "The Secret to Good Writing: It's About Objects, Not Ideas" the author discussed that thinking about things in an abstract way can get you off topic.

This is a notable attribute that I didn't think of before. While studying material culture, I could consider the change in value that an object has over time and why it has occurred. More often since the world continues to progress and advance, many thing things become inept, like mp3 players and flip phones.

Throughout reading both Haltman and Woodward, I noticed the similarities between an ethnography and the study of material culture.However, I believe there are weaknesses in the idea that existing people or active people need to be present in order to make an ethnography. They are similar in observing, describing, and analyzing something (an object or space) to deduce something about a culture.

I can presume that much of the way historical artifacts are studied are a part of the study of material culture. Many ideas about a pre-existing culture can be uncovered or inferred by investigating artifacts which are material culture. When the author, Sophie Woodward, uses the word "agency," I think she means the conscious actions and thought processes that the creators had while making the material. That's definitely important in defining cultural differences, and because of cultural differences, objects do impact societies completely differently, large and small.

This is entirely what material culture is about. Materials are not just meaningless objects. In a sense, they are alive. They hold historical significance that carries truths about a a people or place that we otherwise would not be able to understand without that material object. Knowing more about the physical aspect of a material object can open up our understanding to underlying layers that we could not see on the tangible surface.

Material culture is definitely a fusion of natural science and social science. It's an analysis of how these two sciences interact and make sense together. "Why this material?" can answer questions both about the physical (practical) and social side of a culture.

I feel like this breaks down the process of analysis perfectly. It shows the relationship that observations have with conclusions. These are questions and answers that we should be asking and looking for to simplify our understanding of our subject.

It's an interesting view that we can't necessarily analyze something we haven't "written." I think the author really means "think about deeply" when he says, "writing." Writing is kind of a deeper form of thought or speech because it takes more time and energy to form thoughts into words that make sense. It could have to do with how busy and abstract our minds are. It reminds me of how my last English teacher explained that witness accounts in court are many times blurred because our memory isn't as great as we think it is. If I am not thinking about something purposely, cautiously, or consciously, I probably haven't thought about it enough to be able to analyze it. Writing puts that all into perspective.

I see many connections to outside knowledge in this reading. In critical thinking, the instructor taught the class to always give more information about an argument than less. It was our job as critical thinkers to translate "emotionally-charged" language into unbiased language in order to solve arguments logically. Both of these combinations allowed us to depict a logical argument which is similar here with descriptions depicting non-emotionally-charged language.

Description is an unbiased form of explanation using the five senses. Interpretation is the impression something (concept, action, etc.) has on an individual (basically an opinion because interpretation is subjective). If someone tells you their impression of something without explaining what that something is without including their opinion, your interpretation of that thing is at the mercy of their impression. However, if only the description was presented to you, you would be at a better advantage to create your own interpretation without the corruption of someone else's. I think that is what Haltman is explaining when he says, "description...has opened itself up to an interpretation."

Haltman is discussing the importance of concise language here. Concise language is vital to description because it is a large part of the process of translating an image into words in order to interpret it as accurately as possible. In most English classes, we're taught to avoid using "to be" verbs such as the ones stated because they do, in fact, cause obscurity and result with less dimension. For example, instead of saying "he went to the store," someone could say, "he raced to the store." The latter description creates a clearer vision in one's mind to understand more precisely what is being described.

Cultural relativism exists in all aspects of life. As learned in Ethics, cultural relativism is about the differences in values, practices, etc. among cultures, and I feel that is a large part of my understanding in this text. In this case, though, material objects are being discussed, and this statement explains that these objects which seem to have one or a simple purpose are all relative to culture and determine significant differences in every culture's structure whether it be social, political, or economic.

The idea of "choose an object to consider" is directly related with the main thesis in The Secret to Good Writing. Object signify more than just ideas; objects are were the basis of writing is born. I want to remember this as I start researching the NAMES project. We can start with a block of quit and find many ideas and substance that derive from it.

"Material culture takes place in a world of words." I neglected to understand why material culture is vital. However, I now see that material culture is almost a time line. In class, we talked about the type writer. Not only does material culture derive from objects it is a time line and can help one indicate the time period in which some lived which can in my eyes furthermore help one understand a main theme; setting.

This hits the target of how I want to go into researching the NAMES project. The idea that ideas evolve from object is new to me but also sound. If I am able to start with one simple object and let that one object evolve into many other tangible ideas it would be worth while. Examples are vital and too often we forget to provide simple evidence to our ideas and arguments. In short, the article is all about using objects and using them as solid concrete evidence. The author argues that we students overanalyze essay prompts which results in us students forgetting the simplicity of writing. Using simple, clean, and contextual evidence is not a tough skill, in fact it is simple. However, in a world of word count, competition, and grades it a times feels like simple is not good enough.

Take time. While one piece of fabric does not seem like a daunting object to research, one piece of fabric contains a story, a person, a life, a memory, and imagery that all deserve to be studied and illustrated equally.

I think the question "How does the object make one feel " is important to my research. Objects convey ideas but they generate emotion as well. Touching back on the Secret to Good Writing, I find that Haltman ties into it because objects play such a big role in both readings. Objects remind us of how to provide evidence. Providing evidence is going to help me not only be clear in my research but also do as Haltman says; and use my evidence to convey emotion and in my case use the quilt as a purpose.

The Prownian Analysis ties directly into the Secret to Good Writing. Prownian analysis serve as a "means to a end" and shape the way students are able to find structure in writing. When I read about structure in my other reading it was all about how we forget the simplicity in writing. The Prownian Analysis guilds us back to where we need to be. I will use the Prownian Analysis to use objets to describe emotion which will tie into "interpretive analysis".

The final step of "interpretive analysis" is critical to my NAMES research. Not only does it tie into the theme of objects but I would link the idea of final analysis to my other reading in the sense that the road map in which to Prownian Analysis lays out takes us to this final point. I will need to remember Prownian Analysis as almost a road map. In order to write to my fullest potential I must use the steps of "description, deduction, speculation, research" which will help me write a full analysis which will make my research clean and concise.

I talk so much about a road map but I think that is what both of my readings aim to aid students in. The Secrete to Good Writing asks the question "how can we make students better writers?" and the Haltman artcile responses with an outstanding answer. While my supplimental reading does give us an answer of how to come up with ideas, I see the Haltman article as a way to insure the ideas are formatted well. Haltman and The Secrete to Good Writing remind me that I need to convey emotions and ideas. In short, the quilt itself has all the answers I need to make a good NAMES project.

I talk so much about a road map but I think that is what both of my readings aim to aid students in. The Secrete to Good Writing asks the question "how can we make students better writers?" and the Haltman article responses with an outstanding answer. While my supplimental reading does give us an answer of how to come up with ideas, I see the Haltman article as a way to insure the ideas are formatted well. Haltman and The Secrete to Good Writing remind me that I need to convey emotions and ideas. In short, the quilt itself has all the answers I need to make a good NAMES project.

Yes, the quilt has original meaning and clear intentions. However, it is vital to remember the key factors of "unconscious" and "conscious" evidence. I will find my own meaning and interpretation in my quilt block. Look for the original intent and then form my own questions with the hopes of formulating and discovering more.

She does take it to another level and her projects are extraordinary on a larger scale.

While this comes from the interviewer, it pulls in what we were talking about in class with Grosse's paintings seeming to immerse viewers into the world of the painting. Which traditional paintings could only accomplish on a 2D/imaginative level.