成人小说亚洲一区二区三区,亚洲国产精品一区二区三区,国产精品成人精品久久久,久久综合一区二区三区,精品无码av一区二区,国产一级a毛一级a看免费视频,欧洲uv免费在线区一二区,亚洲国产欧美中日韩成人综合视频,国产熟女一区二区三区五月婷小说,亚洲一区波多野结衣在线

立即打開
新聞篩選:社交媒體殺手級應(yīng)用終浮出水面

新聞篩選:社交媒體殺手級應(yīng)用終浮出水面

JP Mangalindan 2011-04-28
將數(shù)據(jù)輸入到社交圖中的做法已有多年。個性化新聞篩選作為最新的新聞輸出應(yīng)用,它的問世盡管令人欣喜,但未免有些姍姍來遲。

????即使最漫不經(jīng)心的社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)用戶也會承認(rèn),F(xiàn)acebook或者Twitter的應(yīng)用體驗,簡直如一泄千里的洪流,勢不可擋:親朋好友的狀態(tài)更新流和共享內(nèi)容流以無情的速度大量涌入,那陣勢可絕非涓涓細(xì)流,卻一如奔騰不息的洪流,大有泛濫之勢,無論是男人、女人還是Web爬蟲,都難以招架。

????當(dāng)然,人們形成這樣的認(rèn)識,也自有其原因:Facebook用戶每個月要共享300多億條信息,Twitter用戶每周也要輸出10億條推。雖然如此海量的數(shù)字信息源源不斷地產(chǎn)生,匯聚成龐大的信息流,但鮮有卓越的解決方案能對之進(jìn)行過濾、理解以及消費。

????最近,形勢開始有所轉(zhuǎn)變。早在1995年,尼古拉斯?尼葛洛龐帝就預(yù)測到互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的現(xiàn)狀。他提出了“個性化媒體”(Daily Me,又稱每日的我)的概念,該服務(wù)能提供定制化的新聞體驗。但是,直到過去的1年半時間里,體現(xiàn)這一理念的主流產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)才真正開始出現(xiàn)。由于社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)迅速成為人們?nèi)粘I钪斜夭豢缮俚慕M成部分,同時人們開始使用平板電腦處理越來越多的內(nèi)容,一系列社交媒體開始體現(xiàn)出個性化媒體的思想,它們力求不斷優(yōu)化內(nèi)容篩選服務(wù),并因此展開了激烈的角逐。這些公司包括:Flipboard、Zite以及News.me。這或許是迄今為止業(yè)界對尼葛洛龐帝的最為直接的表達(dá)敬意吧。

????這些服務(wù)的工作原理有所不同。這一點在《財富》(Fortune)于去年舉辦的頭腦風(fēng)暴技術(shù)大會(Brainstorm Tech conference)上得到了集中體現(xiàn):Flipboard收集社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)和互聯(lián)網(wǎng)內(nèi)容,再以類似雜志的形式呈現(xiàn)給用戶;Zite則根據(jù)用戶的使用行為/習(xí)慣提供個性化的用戶體驗。News.me不僅借助適應(yīng)性技術(shù),提供令人賞心悅目的設(shè)計;而且,與前兩者不同的是,它還采取按周或月付費訂閱的形式。不管怎么說,這三者都以這樣或那樣的方式,將用戶的各種社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)圖集成到一起。而且,每家公司對于自己的思路都有一套合理的解釋。

????“我們面臨的一個最大挑戰(zhàn)在于:如何簡化發(fā)現(xiàn)、消費、消化內(nèi)容的過程,使之更易于操作。” Flipboard首席執(zhí)行官邁克?麥克庫伊表示?!拔艺J(rèn)為,在實現(xiàn)尼古拉斯?尼葛洛龐帝的原始設(shè)想方面,社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)稱得上迄今最偉大的探索,它們是用戶的個性化探索和發(fā)現(xiàn)工具。”

????這點同樣也是專注于Twitter的初創(chuàng)公司Sulia的核心理念。該公司由喬納森?格里克創(chuàng)建,是得到Twitter支持的屈指可數(shù)的第三方服務(wù)之一。其任務(wù)是:對推和Twitter列表進(jìn)行過濾,并能針對任一話題,確定哪些人加入的Twitter列表最多并且發(fā)推最多。這些發(fā)推者則依序成為五花八門的各類頻道的“頂級專家”來源。這些頻道包括:Sulia的各類頻道,從政治與理想(Politics & Causes)到藝術(shù)與娛樂(Arts & Entertainment)等各類主題無所不包;以及其他可通過Sulia或者Flipboard等應(yīng)用程序正常收看的頻道。

????無論麥克庫伊還是格里克都坦承,盡管Sulia等服務(wù)有助于對海量信息和內(nèi)容進(jìn)行過濾,但它們也不過是萬里長征剛剛走完了第一步而已。面對這一艱巨挑戰(zhàn),根本不存在清晰見底的答案,或者至少目前他們還無法提供這樣的答案。但是,他們的目標(biāo)再顯而易見不過:增強(qiáng)技術(shù)的智能化。

????格里克曾在《紐約時報》電子媒體公司(The New York Times Electronic Media Company)擔(dān)任產(chǎn)品開發(fā)與技術(shù)部門的負(fù)責(zé)人。他表示:“我們不妨將這些信息碎片看作組成棉被的棉絮,我們所做的就是將這些碎片縫接成一張密密實實的‘大棉被’,我們可以干得更出色?!?/p>

????Zite已經(jīng)開始進(jìn)行這方面的嘗試了。他們根據(jù)點擊量、用戶在某篇新聞報道上逗留的時間長短以及語義(比如“左翼”還是“右翼”網(wǎng)絡(luò)日志作者)等若干因素,不斷將相關(guān)內(nèi)容輸送給讀者。從當(dāng)前的技術(shù)水平看,這些服務(wù)盡管前景不可估量,但也并非完美無缺。比如,它們可以依據(jù)與讀者在Facebook或者Twitter上進(jìn)行互動的人群(同事、導(dǎo)師、密友以及家人)等深層視角,對內(nèi)容進(jìn)行篩選和組織,并且做到這一切均在后臺實現(xiàn),讀者無需像傳統(tǒng)做法一樣,得對新聞報道進(jìn)行投票表決才行。

????相反,麥克庫伊認(rèn)為,出色的內(nèi)容篩選服務(wù),應(yīng)該無需用戶輸入過多的信息。無論應(yīng)用的系統(tǒng)是計算機(jī)、平板電腦還是智能手機(jī),總會有一部分用戶希望自己有權(quán)使用所有按鈕,盡可能地發(fā)掘和應(yīng)用產(chǎn)品與服務(wù)的各種功能。但是,大多數(shù)或者主流用戶基本上還是希望將所有那些操作都放在后臺實現(xiàn)。

????就這點而言,開發(fā)人員和內(nèi)容篩選人員應(yīng)該把握好尺度,既能合理地滿足用戶需求,又不能聰明過頭。如果做得過度,便會物極必反,經(jīng)過一道道精挑細(xì)選的內(nèi)容,實際上起到的恰是反面作用。如果內(nèi)容篩選服務(wù)對我們的社交圖挖掘過深,它們最終提供的信息很可能范圍既過于狹窄,內(nèi)容也過于類同。那樣的話,我們每天打開報紙瀏覽新聞,突然發(fā)現(xiàn)奇聞趣事時的那份樂趣和驚喜,也就蕩然無存了。此點至關(guān)重要,管窺一下StumbleUpon每月提供的10億個“意外發(fā)現(xiàn)”,便可見一斑。但這也并非說,為讀者提供意外發(fā)現(xiàn)的閱讀樂趣,只是傳統(tǒng)媒體的專利。如果內(nèi)容的個性化程度過高,比如說,用戶只能收閱有左翼或者右翼傾向的內(nèi)容,結(jié)果只能是進(jìn)一步強(qiáng)化其原有世界觀,那也并非什么好事。如果用戶根本無從知道相反觀點,也就不存在辯論的空間和可能了。

????換言之,雖然社交篩選新聞應(yīng)用程序可能極為有用,但是就其效用而言,也應(yīng)該有個分界線,如果服務(wù)得過了頭,新聞聚合服務(wù)所扮演的就不再是智能過濾器,而僅僅是一面鏡子了。

????譯者:大海

????Even the most casual social network user will admit that the Facebook or Twitter experience can be overwhelming -- that merciless stream of status updates and shared content, which sometimes feels less like a stream and more like a deluge, waits for no man, woman, or Web crawler.

????Of course, there's good reason to feel that way: Facebookers share 30-billion plus pieces of information each month, and Twitter users output 1 billion tweets weekly. There's a tremendous amount of digital information floating around and few great solutions for filtering it, making sense of it, and consuming it.

????That's changing. Nicholas Negroponte foreshadowed the current state of things back in 1995 with the "Daily Me," a customized news experience, but it's only been over the last 18 months that his idea has manifested itself via mainstream products and services. As social networks quickly become entrenched in our everyday lives and content becomes increasingly consumed on tablets, we're seeing the Daily Me embodied among competitors in a race towards better content curation: Flipboard, Zite, and News.me, maybe the most obvious homage to Negroponte yet.

????They all work differently. Unveiled at Fortune's Brainstorm Tech conference last year, Flipboard pulls social network and web content and presents it in magazine-like form; Zite tries to personalize the user experience based on behavior. And News.me meshes attractive design with adaptive technology, and differentiates itself with a paid subscription weekly or monthly model. All of them integrate your social network graphs in some way, and there's a reason for that.

????"One of the biggest challenges is how do you make that content more easily discoverable, easily consumable, easily digestible," says Flipboard CEO Mike McCue. "I think social networks are the biggest heuristic we've ever had to achieving the original vision of Nicholas Negroponte's idea -- they act as your personalization heuristics."

????That same concept is at the core of the Twitter-focused start-up Sulia. Founded by Jonathan Glick, it's one of the few Twitter-endorsed third-party services. Its mission: filter tweets and Twitter lists to figure out who the most frequently listed and prolific tweeters are on any given topic. Those tweeters in turn become the sources of "Top experts" of different broad channels on Sulia, from Politics & Causes to Arts & Entertainment, and those channels are viewable on Sulia.com proper or via apps like Flipboard.

????Though services like Sulia help filter through all the riff-raff, there's a long way to go, something McCue and Glick readily admit. It's a challenge with no clear discernible answer, or at least one they're ready to reveal yet, other than the obvious: make the technology smarter.

????"Think of these pieces of information like individual pieces of a quilt," says Glick, who once served as Head of Product Development and Technology for The New York Times Electronic Media Company. "We can do a better job of patching those pieces together into one cohesive, larger work."

????Zite already tries to do that, based on factors like click-throughs, how long users linger on stories, and even semantics -- "left-wing" blogger? "Right wing?" -- to increasingly "surface" relevant content to readers. The current level of technology remains promising but flawed. Content could be curated depending on deeper aspects like who you interact with the most on Facebook or Twitter -- colleagues, mentors, close friends and family -- and all without readers having to perform banal tasks like voting stories up or down.

????Instead, McCue argues that better content curation should come without what he views as superfluous user input. Whether it's a computer, a tablet or a smartphone, there will always be a user contingent that wants access to all the knobs and buttons to tweak the product and service as much as they like. Yet, the majority or mainstream will arguably want all that stuff tucked away behind-the-scenes.

????Developers and curators will and should get smart on this front, but not too smart. Cross the line, and heavily curated content actually becomes negative. As services dig deeper into our social graph, they run the risk of eventually presenting a narrow, homogeneous mix of information that lacks the serendipity that comes from discovering the news for ourselves, as we might when we open the day's newspaper. That's an important element -- not to say it's only the province of old-media to be serendipitous -- if StumbleUpon's 1 billion monthly "stumbles" are any indication. If content becomes so personalized that, say, users only see left-wing- or right-wing-leaning content that reinforces their world-views, that's no good either. There's no room for debate if users simply don't know what the other side is saying.

????In other words, there may be a lot of utility in socially curated news apps, but there could also be a point where rather than act as a very smart filter, news aggregators become nothing more than a simple, dumb mirror.

掃描二維碼下載財富APP
欧美日韩无码国产乱人伦偷精品视频| 日韩精品一区二区三区九九| 一级毛片免费高清视频中文字幕精品久久天堂一区| 国产成人精品自产拍在线观看| 成人国产亚洲精品A区天堂| 色偷偷人人澡人人爽人人模| 一区二区免费国产在线观看| 无码国产精品视频一区二区,| 美女视频一区二区三区在线教室内污辱女教师在线播放| 久久综合九色综合欧美就去吻中文字幕最新在线| 日韩精品无码专区视频网站 | 起视碰看97视频在线| 特级毛片AAAAAA高潮流水| 精品熟妇视频一区二区三区| (愛妃精選)午夜福利理论片高清在线观看| 国产无遮挡又爽又黄大胸免费| 超国产人碰人摸人爱视频| 精品特级一级毛片免费观看| 国产成人精品高清在线观看99| 无码AV免费毛片一区二区| 亚洲人成网站18禁止午字幕| 精品久久久久久无码中文字幕一区| 东京无码熟妇人妻AV在线网址| 精品香蕉久久久午夜福利| 国产真实乱在线更新| 中文字幕被公侵犯的漂亮人妻| AV无码专区一线二线| 国产精品天天看特色大片| 欧美午夜理伦三级在线观看| 欧美一级α片中文字幕| 国产婷婷一区二区三区| 999国产一区在线观看是全球优质网站| 色久桃花影院在线观看| 亚洲无线观看国产高清| 久久综合亚洲鲁鲁五月天| 国产精品天干天干在线观看| 国产女人乱人伦精品一区二区| 亚洲午夜高清国产拍| 国产91精品对白在线播放| 卡通动漫午夜一级毛片| 国产午夜精品二区三区|