Another little grievance

Just a very short posting here; I sent the previous message from Outlook in an html format.

>> Make mental note to never do that again.

The amount of useless html contained within the message was larger than the message itself.

You'd think Outlook would be able to tidy the messages up before sending them ... ?

Gegroet. Paul.

PS: Plain text rules the roost !

Thought for the day on internet browsing

How much of the information you see on the internet do you actually want ?

Googling or Yahooing helps find the information, but even then the information is always packaged in a way you might not have chosen.

So, how about the idea of a web-browser which doesn't browse complete pages, but only the relevant information of one or more pages.

Imagine searching for, or browsing, the subject "car". In front of you, you see a "bubble" of information concerning the subject. Linked to the main bubble are other bubbles of information.

There would be bubbles of information of a higher hierarchical order ("vehicle", "transport", "logistics", ..) and bubbles of a lower order ("engine", "transmission", ..) and bubbles detailing the current level ("Ferrari", "Toyota", ..).


I see a (bit of a) parallel with what's happening to tv: with hard-disk recorders allowing you to record and watch, people are watching the programme (they want) and skipping the commercials (they don't want).

All that's needed is for information (content) to be accompanied by meta-data; information describing the information. Technologies for this are available and are used; xml is a mature and well known technology.

The interesting thing is, is that the (world wide) web is already moving this way. The "Semantic Web" as (a) term for the future of the web has long been coined.

Which leads me to think that somewhere out there, this idea has already been implemented. What's "Twine" for instance (I can't check it out here at work; the browser won't let me).

Can anybody tell me ?

PS: Regarding the parallel I draw to commercials, the commercials of the future will have to be (and already are) planted within the content ("product placement").

Gegroet. Paul.

Car navigation systems aren't for navigating, silly.

Nowadays, nearly all cars are equipped with (add-on) car navigation systems.

I am sure that (at least) 95% of the time these car navigation systems
are switched on they show the car occupants information which they
don't need. I.e. most of the time the car driver isn't lost or looking
for a location.

So why are they on ? Are they so hard to switch off ?

Maybe it's because they're a status symbol; look at me; I know where I am. Wow.

Or maybe ... the car navigation system has become a (very, very basic)
in-car entertainment system ?

Not contented with the sights of the world outside, nor with the radio
/ cd / ipod, the driver and passengers need something else to keep
them happy whilst in the car. God forbid, they have to talk to one
another.

So they look at a colourful, moving map, telling them exactly where
they are and what the surrounding streets, villages, cities, etc are
called. Now that's entertainment !

So .. maybe the Tom Tom's and Garmin's of this world should invest
less in the actual navigation and more in the entertainment side of
things.

Points of interest (the street you are now in has the highest number
of car-jackings in ...), useless statistics (you have been in this
street 322 times), ...

Of course it would have to be, primarily, a navigation system or it
would soon incurr the wrath of the law. But I'm sure navigation can be
brought to you in lots of interesting ways ...

Gegroet. Paul.

Rather happy as my tax return is in and the government owes me lots (I think).

Dogma's: part 1

Triggered by the study I'm doing at the moment ("Information Analysis"),
I noticed that I sometimes missed 'things' when I was analysing some of
the problems posed.

Annoyingly, I am sure that I wouldn't have missed these 'things' if I
hadn't been in the classroom; some were so blindingly obvious.

Why ?

Because I was trying to work from within the (new) Information Analysis
framework I am learning.

Now this might just be a problem only I have; I try to use only the
tools that I am learning (and try not to use the old tools I knew). Why
else would I be doing this study ?

Now I must admit, in hindsight, that this is a stupid approach; you
should always question the information you are presented with. In this
case; don't believe in the truth of the study; question it.

So what to do; learning throws up frameworks which limit thoughts.

This is of course part of the larger discussion about schools and
learning; we're all forced into a framework and consequently think from
within this framework. This stifles creativity; we have to make an
effort to think from outside-the-box.

So; should I teach my kids that 1 + 1 = 2 ? What would happen if they
could develop their own thoughts ?

But now it's weekend.

(And by the way; why is PI such a special number ? Or is it just that
the framework's wrong).

Gegroet. Paul.

Pancakes with Paul

Hola !

Poor old Sebastian's had a bad morning; falling out Sophy's bed; headfirst (how did he get in there ?). Later on, visiting some neighbours he smashed the other side of his forehead against a table edge. Result: 2 BIG bruises on either side of his forehead. He's not happy.

And now for something completely different.

(Gluten-free) Pancakes !

Here's "my" recipe:

• 500g gluten-free flour (I use Dove's farm plain white flour);
• a "bit" of salt;
• a squirt of olive oil;
• between 575 - 600ml milk;
• 4 eggs.

Mix all up to a homogenous milky liquid (some sites then advise to let it stand for 20 minutes for the starch to ...do something ..?). Pour out into a hot non-stick pan (with a minimal covering of oil). Enjoy (?).

Gegroet.   Paul.

A niche market for GMail; a child friendly version ?

Cycling to work on a rather dull looking morning, an old idea of mine
came to mind.

Why doesn't Google Gmail provide a GMail service, specifically for
primary school age children ?

I've given my three kids there own GMail accounts (although none of them
are literate enough yet to use them), but there's no way I can make
these accounts child safe:

- A higher SPAM filter setting;
- SPAM shouldn't be kept but trashed immediately;
- A guarantee that adverts are safe;
- The parent has the option to block (specific and additional) email
addresses.

>> I would imagine that a child GMail account would be a sub-account of
the parent account; allowing the parent access even when the little brat
discovers how to change the password.

Great eh ?

But then I started thinking that when for example Timothy becomes more
literate (and he's already quite internet-savvy), there's nothing to
stop him from just creating a new (standard) GMail account.

In that case I'd lose all control.

Which brings up the matter of how to make your child "modern-world-wise"
? (But that's a subject for a separate blog ...).

So is it a good idea or not ?

Gegroet. Paul.

Well, there isn't much happening with this blog ... but I thought I'd share this picture of our glorious trinity ...