Greg Conti -- a West Point instructor in computer science and information war -- has taken a long, hard look at the amount of information Internet users explicitly and implicitly disclose to Google and the results, collected in his book Googling Security: How Much Does Google Know About You? are sobering. Conti enumerates all of Google's (often fantastic) services, describes how compelling they are, and then notes what information you disclose when you use them -- even when you only use them inadvertently (say, when you send email to someone with a Gmail account, or when you load a bookmarked Gmap that's been sent to a group of logged-in Google users, thus tying yourself to those users as part of the same group). In slow, methodical steps, Conti builds his case: our complacency, Google's capacity for building compelling services, and the inadequacy of our browsers and other tools in alerting us to potential information disclosure have created a situation where Google ends up in possession of an alarming amount of information about us, our beliefs, our movements, our finances, our health, our employment and our social circles. Conti's explanations are extremely accessible, even when discussing difficult and counter-intuitive subjects like cross-site scripting and cookies. Likewise accessible are his concrete recommendations for staunching the flow of personal information from your computer into Google's records. Finally, Conti does a great job of explaining why people who "have nothing to hide" might still want to keep their information to themselves (the approximate dimensions and characteristics of the body under your clothes aren't a secret -- but you still don't walk around naked in public and you'd resent it if someone forced you to. Private and secret aren't the same thing). I've given the subject of privacy and Internet use a lot of thought, but even so, Conti's book opened my eyes to potential risks I'd never considered. I'd recommend this to anyone who's worried about what's happening to our ability to control the aggregation of our personal data. Googling Security: How Much Does Google Know About You?, Slashdot review...br style="clear: both;"/ a href="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?s=391de14bf062d26cf66349f820391375p=1"img alt="" style="border: 0;" border="0" src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?s=391de14bf062d26cf66349f820391375p=1"//a img src="http://www.pheedo.com/feeds/tracker.php?i=391de14bf062d26cf66349f820391375" style="display: none;" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/

Two interesting developments today at the New York Times online:

The first, and most noteworthy, is the paper’s welcome discovery that aggregation of and links to things it didn’t produce in-house improve the audience experience. As the graphic shows, the green-highlighted items below the story summaries are links to coverage in other media — including bloggers and direct competitors. The technology behind this feature comes from Blogrunner, a news aggregator the Times acquired a while back.
No, this is not a new idea. In fact, it’s as old as the Web, and the Times’ own Frank Rich has been doing it liberally for some time in his Sunday column. But to see the Times do it in this way — on the home page (and section homes) is a step forward. It moves the paper much more into the linked world we all now inhabit.

The other interesting item in the online edition is an exchange between U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, a New York Democrat who was the subject of a tough investigative piece recently. Rangel replied, and the Times responded right next to his long letter on this page.

The numbers — footnotes, essentially — in the Rangel letter correspond to the newspaper’s responses to his points. Oddly there are no hyperlinks, but that’s a relatively small quibble.

There are even better ways to display these kinds of exchanges. But it’s great to see the paper experimenting with this kind of conversational journalism. I hope these will become more common.

(Disclosure: I’m own a small amount of New York Times Co. stock, which is worth a lot less than I paid for it…)

Well, well, well — maybe there’s a place for human beings in the new media landscape after all. Who would have guessed? The revelation comes courtesy of Gabe Rivera, the creator and programming genius behind a series of news aggregation sites including Memeorandum, Ballbug and Techmeme. He has just admitted that the algorithms he uses to find the latest hot news haven’t been working all that well, and that as a result, he has added the services of a (gasp!) human being to the mix to try and improve things. That would be Megan McCarthy, a former writer for Wired.com and the gossip site Valleywag.

Rivera posted a job ad on Craigslist recently, looking for what he variously described as a “news technician,” “news analyst” or “configuring editor.” As the young Techmeme founder noted in the ad, the type of job he had in mind — the one Megan McCarthy has apparently been hired to do — had never really existed before, but “will become increasingly important in the years ahead.” Anyone who has tried to follow the news coming from hundreds or even thousands of different sources, using a combination of overstuffed RSS readers and other tools, knows that Rivera is right — there is a fire hose of data gushing 24 hours a day, and filtering through it all is becoming harder and harder.

Not that long ago, it was assumed by many that algorithms would be the answer. Aggregators like Yahoo News and Google News, along with more specialized (and in some cases short-lived) RSS “meme trackers” such as Techmeme and Tailrank, were seen as the killer app for information overload — automated news readers that would be able to sort through the headlines and figure out what was important. And some of them, including Memeorandum and Techmeme, manage to do that pretty well. But they are still missing, as Rivera describes in his frank and honest assessment of the flaws in his methods, an important ingredient: the ability to tell when a story or headline just doesn’t belong.

The hiring of a human being to tweak the selection of headlines at Techmeme and possibly some of Rivera’s other sites is just another sign that algorithms aren’t the final solution to the information overload problem, and that it’s going to take software and human beings working together to make sense of the information coming out of the fire hose. Even Google, the king of the algorithm — a company whose automated PageRank methods have helped to create more than $100 billion worth of stock market value in just a few years — has started allowing people to influence its search results directly, through its recently-launched Search Wiki features. Although the choices people make only directly affect the results they see, the search giant has suggested that in the future those choices could affect a site’s overall PageRank.

Looks like there might still be a few jobs left for us human beings after the robots take over.

Concentric Hosted IT Solutions and Web Hosting
Click here to save cost on your IT demands

pThe home pages at a href="http://nytimes.com/" title="NYTimes.com"NYTimes.com/a and a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/us" title="WSJ.com"WSJ.com/a have a few new elements today. At NYTimes.com, the site is finally opening its Times Extra feature in beta. The feature includes links to other news sites and blogs alongside the newspaper site's own content.nbsp; NYTimes.com readers can choose to view the "regular" unaggregated page by hitting the "Switch Back" button if they don't want to mix outside content. The paper lined up Shell as the feature's launch sponsor. /p p What the NYT is doing with Times Extra is simply expanding the newspaper site's existing aggregation feature which is handled by a href="http://www.blogrunner.com/" title="Blogrunner"Blogrunner/a, out of its pen within the site's Technology section. Nevertheless, it's a big step for the NYT and represents the evolution of its approach to content. Similar ideas are catching on lately at other papers in the face of staffing reductions and other cuts, as evidenced with this week's a href="http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-after-layoffs-newspapers-embrace-content-sharing" title="agreement"agreement/a between McClatchy (a href="http://finance.paidcontent.org/paidcontent?Page=QUOTETicker=MNI" class="ticker" title="MNI"NYSE: MNI/a) Company newspapers and the iChristian Science Monitor/i to share foreign news reports.a href="http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=105317p=irol-pressArticleID=1232547highlight=" title="Release"Release/a /p p -- bAds make the front page at WSJ/b: Meanwhile, beginning today, the iWSJ/iprint version will offer "cover wraps" to advertisers. While tabloids like the iNY Post/i and iNY Daily News/i has sold these kinds of print ad overlays, this is the first time the WSJ has given its front page over to advertisers, a href="http://adage.com/mediaworks/article?article_id=133002" title="AdAge points out"AdAge points out/a. The inaugural advertiser is Dell Computers, whose promotion covers one-third of the front page and the paper's entire back. Michael Rooney, chief revenue officer at WSJ parent Dow Jones (a href="http://finance.paidcontent.org/paidcontent?Page=QUOTETicker=NWS" class="ticker" title="NWS"NYSE: NWS/a), tried to suggest that the policy change wasn't just reflective of the new ethos since Rupert Murdoch took over this past year, comparing the introduction of cover wraps to the creation of new editions like the Weekend Journal and sections like Personal Journal. /p pstrongRelated/strong/p ul class="related" lia href="http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-wsj-targets-nyts-luxury-advertisers" title="WSJ Targets NYT's Luxury Advertisers; NYTCo Stock Hits New Low On Ad Worries"WSJ Targets NYT's Luxury Advertisers; NYTCo Stock Hits New Low On Ad Worries/a/li lia href="http://www.paidcontent.org/entry/419-moving-towards-each-others-more-on-nyt-vs-wsj" title="Moving Towards Each Other: More on NYT vs WSJ"Moving Towards Each Other: More on NYT vs WSJ/a/li /ul p!-- iMark Logic Digital Publishing Summit, Thursday November 6, Westin Times Square. Insight and perspective from Outsell, Gilbane, Simon Schuster, BusinessWeek.com, more. Evening cocktail reception. Cost is complimentary. a href="http://content.adbureau.net/accipiter/adclick/CID=000010cb0000000000000000/SITE=PC_US/AAMSZ=PREMB_NEWS/relocate=http://marklogicdps.eventbrite.com/"Register now!/a/i --/p pa href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/pcorg?a=OhmW9I"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~a/pcorg?i=OhmW9I" border="0"/img/a/pdiv class="feedflare" a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?a=ZORRO"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?i=ZORRO" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?a=Z2ALO"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?i=Z2ALO" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?a=Ni5zo"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?i=Ni5zo" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?a=UWLvO"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?i=UWLvO" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?a=uBgfO"img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/pcorg?i=uBgfO" border="0"/img/a /divimg src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/pcorg/~4/474800984" height="1" width="1"/

The New York Times has launched its beta news aggregation feature Times Extra. As the screengrab below shows, it makes for a pretty busy page with scrollable links to external, relevant content below each main news item: The alternative version of the homepage features up to eight links from blogs and other news organisations#8217; sites beneath [...]img width='1' height='1' src='http://rss.feedsportal.com/c/367/f/5716/s/27f9534/mf.gif' border='0'/div class='mf-viral'table border='0'trtd valign='middle'a href="http://res.feedsportal.com/viral/sendemail2.html?title=New York Times debuts aggregation homepagelink=http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/12/04/new-york-times-debuts-aggregation-homepage/" target="_blank"img src="http://rss.feedsportal.com/images/emailthis2.gif" border="0" //a/tdtd valign='middle'a href="http://res.feedsportal.com/viral/bookmark.cfm?title=New York Times debuts aggregation homepagelink=http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/12/04/new-york-times-debuts-aggregation-homepage/" target="_blank"img src="http://rss.feedsportal.com/images/bookmark.gif" border="0" //a/td/tr/table/divbr/br/a href="http://da.feedsportal.com/r/25853576556/u/49/f/5716/c/367/s/41915700/a2.htm"img src="http://da.feedsportal.com/r/25853576556/u/49/f/5716/c/367/s/41915700/a2.img" border="0"//a

The New York Times launched a new version of their front page today, "Times Extra," that incorporates up to eight related or supporting blog posts and news articles from outside sources, including...

pimg src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/lifehacker/2008/12/timesextra.jpg" width="495" height="200" align="right"/The New York Times launched a new version of their front page today, "Times Extra," that incorporates up to eight related or supporting blog posts and news articles from outside sources, including news firms the Times could be seen as in direct competition with. The Grey Lady is only lightly treading in the content-aggregation/link-friendly waters, thoughmdash;you have to click the "Extra" button in the upper right to get the extra sources, and the cookie switches back to a standard view after 24 hours. Still, it's an intriguing step forward by an old media company looking to what's newmdash;new in the last decade, at least. div class="related"a href="http://nytimes.com"New York Times/a [a href="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/readwriteweb/~3/NvZ5YGhaybc/times_extra_the_new_york_times.php"ReadWriteWeb/a]/div /p br style="clear: both;"/ a href="http://www.pheedo.com/click.phdo?s=63a03b5aaecf218ffb20da579350d09ap=1"img alt="" style="border: 0;" border="0" src="http://www.pheedo.com/img.phdo?s=63a03b5aaecf218ffb20da579350d09ap=1"//a img src="http://www.pheedo.com/feeds/tracker.php?i=63a03b5aaecf218ffb20da579350d09a" style="display: none;" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/div class="feedflare" a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/lifehacker/full?a=jV1FjvwJ"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/lifehacker/full?d=120" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/lifehacker/full?a=E60a0q7T"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/lifehacker/full?d=41" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/lifehacker/full?a=r4bz5RXN"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/lifehacker/full?i=r4bz5RXN" border="0"/img/a a href="http://feeds.gawker.com/~f/lifehacker/full?a=Zth7fXCZ"img src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~f/lifehacker/full?i=Zth7fXCZ" border="0"/img/a /divimg src="http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/lifehacker/full/~4/89GXHvLVNYA" height="1" width="1"/

Any competent developer who tries to automate the selection of news headlines will inevitably discover that this approach always comes up a bit short. Automation does indeed bring a lot to the table -- humans can't possibly discover and organize news as fast as computers can. But too often the lack of real intelligence leads to really unintelligent results. Only an algorithm would feature news about Anna Nicole Smith's hospitalization after she's already been declared dead, as our automated celeb news site WeSmirch did last year:

Instantly obsolete news isn't the only hazard. A fundamental component to any news organization program is the determination of whether two stories are related. Deciding is often rather easy: if two stories hyperlink each other or both use the words Apple, Psystar, and DMCA repeatedly, they're probably related. Unfortunately, the clues are sometimes far too subtle for the most advanced algorithms to notice. This leads to bad "related" grouping, and even the failure to surface breaking news in the first place. Even giant, technically-accomplished corporations have had trouble breaking news using algorithms.

It's time for a more "edited" Techmeme

In 2005 it was clear to me that an ideal news aggregation site would need to combine automation with direct, hands on editing. In a rare departure from my usual reticence, I even stated in comments to a blog post "I'm planning extensions to my system to enable a hybrid man+memeorandum." This "planning" turned out to be rather long term, since we made no major headway on this idea until 2008.

Early on, when our system was less technically refined, the clearest path toward improvement involved simply iterating algorithmic development. Later, as the automation reached a certain degree of maturity, we recognized that direct editing could now improve news results by leaps and bounds. Though our roadmap contains a number of novel future algorithmic enhancements, introducing editing now appears to be a no-brainer.

So what exactly will change?

Humans have always edited Techmeme of course, just implicitly. For instance, when a blogger links to a story, the headline might move higher on Techmeme. What's different now is that an additional human editor will carry out changes explicitly to directly improve the mix of headlines on Techmeme. Though the implicit edits conveyed via algorithm outnumber the explicit edits perhaps by 1000 to 1 or more, the impact of the human editor is nonetheless pronounced. What will that effect be?

The news will just get faster and more interesting. Obsolete stories will be eliminated sooner while breaking stories will be expedited. Related grouping will improve. Most of this will happen only on Techmeme, though other sites (like memeorandum and WeSmirch) will increasingly benefit from the direct human touch as well.

Meet Techmeme's new scapegoat

Last month we hired Megan McCarthy to help with a variety of editorial tasks. Chief among them was taking up this new editing role. We haven't settled on a job title yet, but perhaps "news maestro" is a fitting moniker, given her new role in conducting the symphony of voices that flow through Techmeme each day. Her name may sound familiar to you: Megan has worked at institutions ranging from Wired.com to The Rose and Crown. She mentioned some other place too which I can't recall at the moment. Appropriately, Megan is quite familiar with the workings of tech news on the web.

Writers and publicists unhappy with the headlines on Techmeme are encouraged to transfer the bulk of their resentment to Megan. I'm pleased to report she's looking forward to this. Though Omer Horvitz and I will share some of these editorial tasks, Megan will focus on this much more than us.

Doesn't this make Techmeme even more unfair and biased?

If that question makes any sense to you, you're probably a frustrated blogger. Otherwise, feel free to skip to the next section! I'd like to note here that Techmeme isn't fair because life isn't fair, and Techmeme will always be biased because humans have built Techmeme. And because news judgement, by definition, is bias. For background, please see this post from last year in which I state "Techmeme is biased".

Ultimately, Techmeme will succeed based on whether it interests a significant readership. While fairness and balance probably affect this interest, I need to stress that bloggers will never agree on what's fair. Why not? To generalize and perhaps exaggerate somewhat, many bloggers feel that in the fairest scenario, Techmeme prominently features all of their posts. So it's hard to be fair.

Image by tartx There's something happening here

I should note that the experience of introducing direct editing has been a revelation even for us, despite the fact that we planned it. Interacting directly with an automated news engine makes it clear that the human+algorithm combo can curate news far more effectively that the individual human or algorithmic parts. It really feels like the age of the news cyborg has arrived. Our goal is apply this new capability to producing the clearest and most useful tech news overview available.

New contact info

We always want to know how we can do a better job, and are now better staffed for listening. Please send complaints or news suggestions to this new email address: editorial at site domain Though we'll realistically reply to almost nothing sent there, we'll read it all, and appreciate your thoughts!

img class=face src=http://planet.ubuntu.com/heads/jono.png alt= pWhen I was a kid, I owned a a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_GenesisSega Megadrive/a (Sega Genesis for my American friends). I spent hours on that thing. Sonic The Hedgehog. Streets Of Rage. Desert Strike. Toejam And Earl. I loved it./p pOne game that was released was a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmen_SandiegoWhere In The World Is Carmen Sandiego?/a Back then it was marketed as emedutainment/em: essentially a sneaky way for parents to infiltrate their kid#8217;s leisure time with learning under the premise of it being #8220;fun#8221;. Of course, kids are smarter than parents give them credit for. Kids were wise to this and often avoided games like that like the plague. The mind of a 12 year-old concluded that enough time is spent in front of teachers, workbooks and exams without it invading precious Sega time. I was one such kid. I emhated/em the idea of edutainment. I didnt want to learn with my Megadrive, I wanted to shoot things with very large, very loud, deeply pixelated guns./p pThings change when you grow up (yes, I have grown up, smart arses). I now love learning. I love reading. I spend hours drowning in Wikipedia and exploring our world, our history and our patchwork of cultures. I love learning about people#8217;s experiences, perspectives and attitudes. I no longer have the 12 year-old mentality that learning is for school time. Learning really is genuinely emfun/em./p pNaturally, there are some subjects I like to learn about in more detail. Community (zing!). Computers. Free Software. Free Culture. Music. There are however some subjects that I develop a curiosity about and feel an urge to investigate. These subjects are not part of my daily interests and hobbies, but are temporary avenues of curiosity./p pOne recent example for me is emHistorical Jesus/em. A few days ago I read everything Wikipedia had to offer about about the subject. This was triggered originally by a history TV show which in turn inspired me to buy a book about significant events in human history. In this book I read about Jesus#8217;s Crucifixion and decided to further refresh my knowledge of the subject by hitting up Wikipedia. In this example we see two distinctive concepts: emPassive Education/em and emContent Aggregation and Linking/em:/p ul liemPassive Education/em - in my example of Historical Jesus, my primary focus was gathering the facts and the story. I was happy for this subject#8217;s learning to be passive. I was happy to merely consume the content and not interact with it much more than selecting what to learn./li liemContent Aggregation and Linking/em - learning has links and connections. I first watched a show about history. This intrigued me to buy the book on historical events. A section in that book inspired me to access specific content on Wikipedia. The thread that connected these different resources together was the subject of Historical Jesus and I aggregated the different pieces of knowledge together in my brain. My current knowledge of Historical Jesus draws from these different resources./li /ul pWhen we learn about our primary interests, learning is different. Our desire is often for emActive Learning/em. We not only want to know the subject, but we want to immerse ourselves in the execution and debate of it too. Much of this is not only collating general knowledge, as I did with Historical Jesus, but learning about more localised information too. When I learn about music, I want to know about local bands. I want to know when my favourite bands are coming to my area. I want to hear about music groups, gigs, and conventions near to me. I want to know about special offers in local music stores. In a nutshell, I don#8217;t just want to consume, I want to emparticipate/em./p pIn recent years, computers and the Internet have made both Active and Passive Learning incredibly accessible. The web has bolstered passive learning resources, and active learning has been thrusted towards us with online communities, social networking, community groups and discussion boards. No matter what you want to know about, the Internet can help you in both Passive and Active ways/p pBut lets get back to emWhere In The World Is Carmen Sandiego?/em. Although I could not stand the concept of emedutainment/em at the time, what that game emdid/em do that intrigues me is that it delivered education to people automatically. The education was emassociative/em: topics and concepts were delivered to you as you played the game./p pI find this really interesting. I find the concept of linking and associating different types of education and resources fascinating. This also holds huge opportunity for the desktop./p pA great example is a href=http://banshee-project.org/Banshee/a. For those who have been living under a rock for the last three years, Banshee is a media player. I have it open all day, delivering a fresh dose of metal to me all day long. Banshee not only plays music, but it brings many diverse music related activities together under the same roof: digital music, Internet radio, CD playing and ripping, meta-data editing etc. The Banshee bods have done a great job./p pBut the most interesting feature to me is its a href=http://www.last.fm/Last.fm/a integration. When I listen to a song (such as Hammerfall right now). The artist and track is posted to a href=http://www.last.fm/user/jonobaconmy Last.fm account/a. This in itself is not all that exciting. But what Banshee does that emis/em exciting is look up the artist of my current playing song and use Last.fm to make recommendations. It delivers those recommendations to me inside the application. That is emwicked cool/em. Sure, I could go and look up these recommendations on the Last.fm website, but I am unlikely to do that. Banshee does the work for me. The result is that this simple feature has helped me discover literally hundreds of new bands. Banshee linked and aggregated the data, and this resulted in better learning for this important part of my interests./p pYesterday I installed the a href=http://getsongbird.com/new 1.0.0 release of Songbird/a. Songbird is an iTunes like Open Source media player that holds some stunning promise. They have used Mozilla technologies and GStreamer to build a cross-platform media player. I know some of the guys who work on Songbird and wanted to give it a try: I had last used an early snapshot. While I don#8217;t want to turn this into a review (if you folks want a review, let me know and I will write one up), it ships with some interesting features that build on some of the concepts seen in Banshee. Oh, and Amarok folks, I know your media player has probably been doing all of this for years, so hold fire. img src=http://www.jonobacon.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif alt=:) class=wp-smiley / /p pIn Songbird, for the artist of the song I am currently listening to, Songbird will go and look up data from a number of resources and bring it together. It grabs a summary blurb, discography, members, tags and links of the artist from Last.fm, a photo slideshow from Flickr, videos from YouTube, and News from Google News. Again, I could find this information separately without ever installing Songbird, but Songbird not only aggregated this content, but it linked it to an opportunity of curiosity (what I am listening to). I might never typically go and look for more details about emHammerfall/em, but when I am listening to it, it often triggers my interest. Songbird satisfies that curiosity before I even know I have it./p pAnother great feature of Songbird that builds on emactive learning/em is that it uses a href=http://www.songkick.com/Songkick/a to look up all of the artists in my playlist to see if there are concerts and shows in my area. With this feature I now have a list of all the up and coming shows for the artists I like (including all those obscure metal bands). This provides me with direct access to the local community and opportunities. That is one stunningly helpful and outrageously cool feature. My media player is stopping being a place to merely consume music, and instead becoming a place to aggregate everything these is about the music I listen to and the artists that make it./p pThis is an even more valuable proposition for a desktop. Just think of the range of types of media we consume and the applications that we use to consume them. Now mix this with the range of online sources of education and content. It could be really interesting to pull together these threads into one cohesive experience. I love that Totem in Ubuntu can stream BBC content to me, but I would love it to show me some information and products about that content too. I would love Evolution to provide me with an ability to easily look up terms, acronyms and products in my emails with a single click. When I look at photos in F-Spot I would love to see pricing for prints and frames to put my pictures in./p pIt would also be fascinating to identify the work-flow of education in a computer. From sourcing content in Wikipedia, how does it flow through text editors, communications tools, online services and publishing mediums? How can we identify these links in the chain and optimise them?/p pBig subject. I know. But huge potential./p