Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

History Flow Shows How Wiki Articles Evolve

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the shows-border-wars-between-wiki-thugs dept.

IBM 117

teslatug writes "IBM has released a preliminary alpha version of its History Flow Visualization Application that shows how collaboratively created documents evolve. The tool is written in Java and it's available for download along with plugins for MoinMoin and MediaWiki. They have some interesting screenshots of the Wikipedia articles on abortion, Brazil, and love."

cancel ×

117 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (1, Troll)

Amsterdam Vallon (639622) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064009)

I'm a Wikipedia editor by night and we all simply use the History option (URL parameter is ?action=history, see this page [wikipedia.org] as an example) for viewing the history of the development of whatever article we're curious about. It gives the perfect overflow of a topic's evolution; after all, we designed Wikipedia code after much consideration for exactly what we wanted.

In Slashdot terms, I'd say we mod IBM project -1, Redundant ;-)

(NB: Please keep Terry and those who love her in your prayers)

WHAT THE FUCK LET HER DIE MAN (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064043)

You're linking to a troll propaganda piece and your signature indicates that you want Terri Schiavo to continue living.

I don't care for either of those things.

Ah well, nice comment tho.

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064054)

Who is Terry.

I will not pray because God has nothing to do with it. As if praying will make any difference, I suppose you believe in the easter bunny too.

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064064)

Hey BUDDY, keep the Terri crap OUT of SLASHDOT. It's propaganda, it's irrelevant, and it's pissing everyone off.

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064083)

I just moderated your post redundant.

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064210)

And posted to the same thread to gloat about it. :)

If you had done it from the same IP, your mod does not count now.

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (4, Insightful)

Stalyn (662) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064087)

poor Amsterdam Vallon... his posts are somewhat informative and interesting but are constantly being modded down because he asks people to think of Terri Schiavo when right now a lot of people can't stand her (well the media coverage).

btw Amsterdam if thats your real name are you of any relation to Archimedes Plutonium [wikipedia.org] ?

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065436)

Don't worry. I meta-moderate based on reason, not my feelings on a subject. Even if I disagree with the poster, I will hammer the down-modder.

Thank you for single handedly "fixing" mods... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12067234)

Thank you! I can now rest easy knowing you are ever vigilant to hammer those evil down-modders.

Give up your WMD (Weapons of Mod Downing) programs or MyLongNickName is going to bring freedom to your region!

Re:Thank you for single handedly "fixing" mods... (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 9 years ago | (#12067409)

I would mod you down, but I'm afraid I might come across it while meta-modding...

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (1)

Altima(BoB) (602987) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065986)

The fact that he linked to the history page of "Trolltalk" is another amusing little tidbit about his post. It's strange, he's a troll who actually contributes to the discussion at hand. I think he should be applauded :)

(And lastly, about the Schiavo case... I don't know how you guys put up with cable media coverage of anything. The only US media I get at the moment is webcasts of The Daily Show and that's enough to see how obcene their treatment of the story is...)

pseudo insights (2, Interesting)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 9 years ago | (#12066163)

It's strange, he's a troll who actually contributes to the discussion at hand.

It's not strange. He just includes seemingly insightfull elements to his trolls as a distraction. People might mod him up absent mindedly without realising that aside from the on-topic element, the post was a troll.
Wikipedia explains it [wikipedia.org] .
I'd like to see the graphic for the changes of THAT page. I bet it's the target of many a troll who'd rather keep their behaviour undocumented.

-1 offtopic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12067031)

"archimedes plutonium" :

any relation to "napoleon dynamite?"

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064101)

This is what I call american stupidity at its best. They need some thing all the time - After gay marrige, here you have one more. The most powerful nation in the world does have hollow foundations.

PS: I am american and not proud about it. Outsource me.

It's the Media (0, Offtopic)

nsaneinside (831846) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064325)

The truth of the matter is, people want drama in their lives, however lame it is. They expect the media to give it to them - and so they do.
Who do we blame? IMHO, it's the general population's fault for wanting the drama.

Re:It's the Media (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065406)

My Dog wants chocolate but i am not going to give it to him.

Fact is resposibility is in everyones hands. The Media content providers all the way down to the unwashed masses.

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (2, Insightful)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064125)

"I'm a Wikipedia editor by night..."

"Please keep Terry and those who love her in your prayers"

So much for non-POV.

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065498)

That got modded up as insightful? WTF? So, a person is a hypocrite for being a wikipedia editor and not having personal views that don't coincide with Guppy06 and the people that modded up his post?

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 9 years ago | (#12066622)

"So, a person is a hypocrite for being a wikipedia editor and not having personal views that don't coincide with Guppy06"

Screw that, he doesn't have poersonal views that coincide with the subject. If he feels so strongly that he needs to include a pseudo-sig (deliberately getting around sig filters) to voice views on a bitter, political, off-topic debate, I doubt his ability to contain himself while he does his "editing [wikipedia.org] ."

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064213)

Interesting. A mod bitchslap simply for mentioning She Who Shan't Be Named here in otherwise informative, non-troll posts?

Seems a tad vengeful, no?

instead of letting her die do the right thing.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064425)

... and inject the lethal drugs. Oh but in America you have to be on fucking death row.

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064634)

A list of dates (as per the link) is hardly equivalent to a visualization of the document history. Humans are visual. It is easier to reason about a sequence of data points plotted in a graph than it is to reason about a long list of numbers. Anybody that has had to understand extremely complex systems appreciates the power of visualization.

Re:MOD IBM -1 REDUNDANT ;-) (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12066923)

I had a Terry moment the other day. I was really thirsty and hungry. I said to myself: I'm glad I'm not a brain-dead woman living in a coma due to self-inflicted anorexia whose family wants to keep me around like a fucking sofa to look at, and some hillbilly politicans can tout around like a hooker.

Here's an Idea (5, Informative)

great throwdini (118430) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064017)

Instead of linking simply to the download page and the screenshots, give people a chance to RTFA and link to the History Flow Visualization Application [ibm.com] 's overview document.

Re:Here's an Idea (1)

ChairmanMeow (787164) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064073)

What? Slashdotters actually RTFA? Impossible!

Re:Here's an Idea (3, Informative)

Amgine0 (751874) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064077)

Might be nice to link to http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/IBM_releases_freeware_ for_visualizing_document_histories the wikinews article from the 26th...

Re:Here's an Idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064081)

+5 Informative troll. Good luck in achieving your goal.

Re:Here's an Idea (1)

krunk4ever (856261) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064822)

so has anyone been able to decipher what those graphs on the screenshots are saying? the magnify-glass feature on windows doesn't seem to help.

Re:Here's an Idea (1)

X1011 (819111) | more than 9 years ago | (#12066744)

Yea, a lot of help that was, look at the FAQ:

1. Where is the FAQ?

Currently, there is no FAQ for this technology. Please check the discussion forum for questions and answers.

Obligatory (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064018)

Any brazillians here ?

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064042)

Well I'm not A Brazilian, but "down there" I have a.. err..

never mind...

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064066)

I am not sure why this is offtopic. If slashdot asslicks google everyday by posting 2+ stories - then orkut is also from goole. I mod you up funny 5+

Slashdot sucks (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064161)

Sometimes I just want to blow this place up [netdisaster.com] .

I can now visualize (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064023)

the rapid spike in my documents before their deadline.

Huh? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064029)

The screen shots are so poor they look like some geological data.

Can any tell if there is going to be an earthquake soon?

Sure is. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064106)

Either California is going to slide into the Pacific next week, or a squirrel farted in Connecticut. I'm not sure yet.

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064633)

Revert war in 3 days, get your asbest underware ready!

Re:Huh? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065444)

they're read from left to right.

different colors represent different paragraphs.

not that bad, but not that innovative imho. shows which parts get changed most I suppose still, so shows which parts of the document you should treat as most controversial.

one just happened (1)

jahknow (827266) | more than 9 years ago | (#12067482)

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/eqinthenews/2005/usweax / [usgs.gov]

Magnitude 8.2 - NORTHERN SUMATRA, INDONESIA
2005 March 28 16:09:37 UTC
Preliminary Earthquake Report
U.S. Geological Survey, National Earthquake Information Center
World Data Center for Seismology, Denver

A great earthquake occurred at 16:09:37 (UTC) on Monday, March 28, 2005. The magnitude 8.2 event has been located in NORTHERN SUMATRA, INDONESIA. (This event has been reviewed by a seismologist.)

Interesting but useful? (3, Insightful)

thundercatslair (809424) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064030)

This program is interesting to look at for a little while, but can it do anything useful? I don't really see a need to see the history of a wiki visually.

Re:Interesting but useful? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064245)

This program is interesting to look at for a little while, but can it do anything useful? I don't really see a need to see the history of a wiki visually.

Well, since it has a number of plugins, I assume it can be used to visualize the history of a file of source code (or if it can't, that because of the plugins it will be easy to extend it to do that). This could be useful because just like "abortion" is a controversial word whose definition is hard to agree on and changes a lot, some source files are "controversial" in that they are hard to get right and wind up changing a lot. It seems like you could use this tool to look at each one of the files in a tree of source code and figure out which ones are the "hot" ones (i.e. ones that are always being modified). And, beyond that, you should be able to figure out which individual regions are the problem areas. When you detect something like this, it might give you an idea into what parts of the code have problems (are always having bug fixes or just don't meet future needs without constant changes), which could give you ideas about ways to change the design or take other steps to make development go more smoothly.

Re:Interesting but useful? (3, Informative)

shadowmatter (734276) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064382)

From the Overview page on alphaWorks:

The patterns revealed by History Flow Visualization show such information as spacing by date; occurrances of vandalism; authorship; growth; and persistence.

It seems like a good tool for inspecting the history of a document at-a-glance, but you're right -- for more details, there is no substitute for a commit log.

Could be useful, however, in environments such as CVS or Subversion across sets of files... Hmmm.

- shadowmatter

i may be blind... (1)

bird603568 (808629) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064032)

but i can see love. The link that says love i can't read the screenshot. Lit just looks like lines. Can we get the actual page?

Re:i may be blind... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065070)

no, Love is Blind, you insensitive clod!

Heavy Metal Umlat (5, Informative)

hatrisc (555862) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064046)

Heavy Metal Umlat [infoworld.com] is a very interesting look at the history of a Wiki page. Worth checking out.

Re:Heavy Metal Umlat (3, Interesting)

Raul654 (453029) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064165)

I had the great pleasure of showing that video to David Gerard, the principal author of Heavy Metal Umlaut. He was floored, and thought it was the greatest thing he ever saw :)

evil linkage (2, Insightful)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064226)

a very interesting look at the history of a Wiki page. Worth checking out.

A guy loads the Heavy Metal Umlat page v1.0 and steps through the hundreds of versions while talking in a nerdy voice and laughing about attempts at using unicode and LaTeX for rendering the band name Spinal Tap. He provides a near monotone commentary to what is very obviously changing in the page. "Oh, look at that, someone added something. Fascinating."

That was neither interesting, nor worth checking out, and I hold you personally responsible for the 5 minutes of my life I wasted on it.

Re:evil linkage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064341)

what a troll.

Re:evil linkage (1)

JRIsidore (524392) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064939)

Uh, that video has audio commentary? Glad I didn't turn my speakers on...

Re:evil linkage (2, Insightful)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065829)

A guy loads the Heavy Metal Umlat page v1.0 and steps through the hundreds of versions while talking in a nerdy voice [...] He provides a near monotone commentary

That's redundant. I wish I could edit that paragraph...

That was neither interesting, nor worth checking out, and I hold you personally responsible for the 5 minutes of my life I wasted on it.

I found that clip very interresting, but I now wasted about a minute of my time replying to a "waah-waah I didn't find this as interrestnig as you so you shouldn't have shared it" comment.
Give me back my minute.

Re:Heavy Metal Umlat (-1, Troll)

Kafir (215091) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064283)

Heavy Metal Umlat [infoworld.com] is a very interesting look at the history of a Wiki page. Worth checking out.

That's Heavy Metal Umlaut [infoworld.com] .
Misspelling the same (key) word twice in a twenty-word post makes my eyes hurt. It may also make the baby Jesus cry, FWIW.

Re:Heavy Metal Umlat (1, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064452)

Evil Flash! Hsssss

Re:Heavy Metal Umlat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065313)

You made a silly bash against a technology disliked by the Slashthink. And you got modded Troll? the mods need to get back on the crack...

Re:Heavy Metal Umlat (1)

moonbender (547943) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065417)

Probably because those low-filesize screengrab videos are one of the coolest uses Flash has.

Re:Heavy Metal Umlat (1)

loki1978 (532644) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065094)

This video is amazing. I like it very much

Re:Heavy Metal Umlat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12067487)

That was a really fascinating article, and I especially loved the commentary on h
I SUCK COCKS I SUCK COCKS I SUCK COCKS I SUCK COCKS
ow the images evolve...

As much (3, Insightful)

odano (735445) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064061)

As much as I love visualizing things that aren't visual, it just doesn't seem like this application changed the data into anything useful.

I have no idea what the evolution of those documents was before, and even after viewing the visualizations (and knowing what they mean), I still have no idea what it means about the document.

Re:As much (4, Insightful)

FarHat (96381) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064085)

Without the actual document, a graph such as this doesn't tell you anything. What it could tell you, along with the document that it is representing would be much of a document changes in any given time. Are there parts of the document that are essentially static. Parts that are static would be parts that there is little disagreement about. Parts that change a lot could be considered controversial. Heavy editing would indicate a lot of popular interest in the article, etc.

Information visualization is tough (5, Interesting)

shanen (462549) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064273)

You're addressing a difficult problem there. You have to decide which dimension you want to consider, and then you have to provide data that spans the dimension in a meaningful way. The samples given were apparently picked mostly for their heavy activity resulting in "pretty pictures", but that isn't a particularly relevant or significant dimension.

My own interest would be in visualizations that identify zealots of various stripes violating the basic neutral POV philosophy. Something that would show the behavioral similarities in their behavior. I must be too interested in deviant behavior? For example, there was some recent ruckus about the "online poker" entry, where some commercial zealot was trying to use Wikipedia as free advertising to flog his poker Web sites. Before that, I remember a similar incident involving a religious crazy who wanted to use Wikipedia to manufacture some credibility for his cult. I'm sure there must be some tranplanted Newsgroup Charlies wandering around Wikipedia, too. (Don't look at me--I'm just a harmless grammar Nazi.)

In practical terms, if you can identify patterns associated with such problematic behavior, it will make it much easier to create automated alarms to help people notice. However, I'm kind of skeptical about the idealistic approach of trusting people's common sense. I'm given to understand that the Simpsons is a popular program, but it is so profoundly anti-intellectual that I can't stand it at all. Then consider some of Dubya's knuckle-dragging supporters and their primitive belief systems...

Never underestimate the power of organized knuckle-dragging.

get over yourself (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064430)

seriously - and i clicked over to your homepage and read your writing - i must say it again:

get over yourself

The Simpsons (2, Informative)

jesterzog (189797) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064908)

I'm given to understand that the Simpsons is a popular program, but it is so profoundly anti-intellectual that I can't stand it at all.

I may have misunderstood you or what you mean by anti-intellectual, but personally I've found The Simpsons to be, by far, one of the most insightful shows on TV. Once you look past the humour and the sometimes really bad (occasionally pathetic) joke, especially in more recent episodes, it's a very good satirical commentary on society. It's also not afraid to make fun of itself, and it does so frequently.

If you have an opportunity, I highly recommend Planet Simpson [amazon.com] , by Chris Turner. He's a self-confessed Simpsons fan and goes off on tangents a little from time to time, but otherwise I found it to be a very good analysis of The Simpsons and the multitudes of hidden satire of today's society that makes it such a well thought out show.

Clearly the show's not for everyone. If you don't like it then good for you for not watching it. But anti-intellectual is something that The Simpsons definitely isn't, and I think it's short-sighted to call it such. It has stacks more depth and thought put into it than most other relatively shallow content on TV.

Re:Information visualization is tough (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065485)

My own interest would be in visualizations that identify zealots of various stripes violating the basic neutral POV philosophy.
...
Then consider some of Dubya's knuckle-dragging supporters and their primitive belief systems...

Yeah, you're the right person to complain about other people violating the basic neutral POV philosophy of wikipedia. Here's an article [wikipedia.org] that you might want to read up on.

Re:Information visualization is tough (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065878)

the Simpsons is a popular program, but it is so profoundly anti-intellectual that I can't stand it at all.

How so?
And have you considered the possibility that the irony passed you by? Because it is (was?) a show chuck full of it.

One of my faverite Simpsons moment was when the family goes to a self-help seminar, and as Homer turns off the car in the parking lot he says "Well, here we are at the self help seminar" (or some such), and a kid replies "What an odd thing to say..."
See, the sentence Homer said was a classic TV sentence where they recap the situation, what his child replied was a sentence pointing out that no one in real life talks like people do on tv.

Satirical, ironic, subtle. I can't see how that's anti-intellectual.

Re:Information visualization is tough (1)

jafac (1449) | more than 9 years ago | (#12067661)

...Before that, I remember a similar incident involving a religious crazy who wanted to use Wikipedia to manufacture some credibility for his cult...... ... talking about the GW Bush page?

Re:As much (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064305)

I'm almost tempted to download this thing just to see how it renders Wikipedia's Xenu article.

Re:As much (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065089)

I work in the same office as the people who built this. The history flow program shows you all the original copies of the article. You can drag your mouse around the diagram and read exactly the text that corresponds to the visuals. It's a very high-density display that really requires interactivity to be useful, which is why the screenshots can be hard to parse.

Re:As much (2, Informative)

Spoing (152917) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064854)

  1. I have no idea what the evolution of those documents was before, and even after viewing the visualizations (and knowing what they mean), I still have no idea what it means about the document.

Go here [ibm.com] and look at the text to the right. It looks like you can 'slice' the graph (the vertical line) and see the color coded text at each point along the graph.

A quick glance through sections would be an easy way to figure out the stability and quality of any one document and who is a good editor or writer.

They can see the past, but I can see the future! (2, Funny)

RileyLewis (826273) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064070)

IBM may be able to trace the past of Wiki with their computers, but I can track it's future with my Wiji!

Hmm (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064071)

Can we get a visualization for this wiki article [wikipedia.com] ?

Ah Yes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064072)

Now I know what love looks like! So when I meet my true love I will know the signs.

Thank you all, may love [ibm.com] be with you always.

svn blame (3, Informative)

TrdrJoe (856523) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064105)

Tools like "svn blame" or "cvs annotate" are much more useful; they tell you who added each line of text in your file, when they checked it in, etc.).

Still, these tools don't let you see the history of text that has been *deleted*. A visualization like "historyflow" could be useful there

Re:svn blame (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064432)

Tools like "svn blame" or "cvs annotate" are much more useful; they tell you who added each line of text in your file, when they checked it in, etc.).

In other news, scientific papers have this thing called an "abstract" so you can get a general idea of what's the paper is about without reading the whole thing.

I think you're getting confused on the difference between "more useful" and "more detailed".

Re:svn blame (2, Insightful)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065562)

you don't want to see who added each line if there's 5000 people involvelved in a flame war, you just want to see which part of the document is suspect to be part of that flaming.

Truth Washing (1)

cannuck (859025) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064113)

Wiki=Truth Washing

Sounds of the 80's (0, Offtopic)

RipTides9x (804495) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064138)

Google-Eyes, are watchin' YOU.
Their Adsense is watchin' your ev-very move..
Google-Eyes,(KA-CHOW)are watchin' YOU.
Their Adsense is watchin' your ev-very move..

Hey kids, that was Google-Eyes by the Police!
Next up is The Culture Club with "Wiki-Pedia"
right here on KNRD, sounds of the NET.


Wiki Wiki Wiki
Wiki-Pedia.
Info comes and goes..
It comes and goes..
Deleting others misinformation
and replacing it with my own..
Every day.. Night and dayyy.

Re:Sounds of the 80's (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064272)

Google-Eyes, are watchin' YOU.
Their Adsense is watchin' your ev-very move..
Google-Eyes,(KA-CHOW)are watchin' YOU.
Their Adsense is watchin' your ev-very move..

Hey kids, that was Google-Eyes by the Police!

Arrrrrrghghghghghgh!!! "Private Eyes" was NOT by The Police. It was by Hall and Oates (off their Private Eyes album from 1981), for crying out load.

I suggest you check out the music that actually is by The Police, though. It's pretty good stuff, all 5 albums of it. (Why do the great bands have to record only a few albums and then break up?)

Re:Sounds of the 80's (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065090)

FOR CRYING OUT LOAD? Why don't you take a big load of thick man juice out of my fucking ball bag all over your face?

What is wrong with a little prayer? (-1, Offtopic)

jefedesign (869140) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064172)

People need to chill out a little. It was a harmless statement. And even if it wasn't intended as nothing more then a statement, what is wrong with freedom of religion? We should all pray! Pray that idiots(not referring to anyone in particular), psychos, trolls, and the like suddenly burst into flames, or lose access to this forum. Stop the flaming.

Re:What is wrong with a little prayer? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064197)

Oh, he has the right to say it if he wants to, but it's still a dastardly thing to sneak it into a post that has otherwise nothing to do with Terry in a discussion about something other than Terry. That message will be broadcasted because the rest of his post was +5 insightful, despite the fact that his "Terry" line definitely was not.

Re:What is wrong with a little prayer? (1)

killawatt5k (846409) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064227)

actually the parent was modded 20% flamebait so that could be the cause of the said flames

Re:What is wrong with a little prayer? (-1, Offtopic)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064631)

Praying. The lazy alternative to taking action.

I think he's paying the priced for including adverts in his sig. Asking people to pray to santa or whoever is no better or worse than the 'get me a free iPod' sigs.

Wondering what "Moin-Moin" means? (3, Interesting)

Doomie (696580) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064180)

It's how people greet in Northern Germany (especially Bremen). I guess it comes from "Morgen" (morning), but people say "moin-moin" pretty much all the time.

Thank you for your attention :)

Re:Wondering what "Moin-Moin" means? (1)

Kristjan Kannike (857220) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064564)

And Wiki Wiki is a vicious character in one of the short stories of the protagonist in Martin Eden by Jack London. The story takes place in Tahiti, of course. :-)

The answer is: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064626)

Well... read the wikipedia entry on it here. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Wondering what "Moin-Moin" means? (1)

Quo_R (734198) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065062)

Moin just means good, as in good [morning/evening/afternoon]. Moin moin is often used to greet a larger group of people instead of a single person.

No MediaWiki plugin (2, Informative)

BReflection (736785) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064189)

There is no MediaWiki plugin available atm.

mirror? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064236)

anyone have a mirror of the download for those of us who don't want to sell our souls to Big Blue?

Visualisations as writing tools (5, Interesting)

jesterzog (189797) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064346)

These visualisations are quite neat. I've often wanted a word processor that would be able to do something like this. I tried writing on a private wiki at one point, but it still presents the changes between different versions very separate and discrete from each other, and from the editing, so it didn't work terribly well.

When I write things, the text often evolves a lot over several days. I usually blurt out everything I want to say at the beginning, and then go back and edit it over and over again until it's expressed how I want it. One problem, though, is that when I go away and come back again, it's not always obvious which parts are the most volatile, and might need the most attention. It often takes a while to get back into the right mode of figuring out where the complicated parts are, and editing the document.

Writing on paper is still very different from a word processor. It's very obvious where a lot has been crossed out and changed over and over again, and previous crossed-out versions, even if they're on paper that's been put aside, are often still visible and easily accessible during the rest of the process. In a word processor, though, nearly all of this contextual information is lost. At best it's possible to "track changes", and that particular tool is relatively simple and usually aimed at being able to see some one-off changes that someone else has made to your document.

Beyond just tracking changes, which is a very linear representation, I'd love to be able to have some kind of visual representation surrounding the text to indicate the stability of different sections of what I've been writing.

Some useful ideas might perhaps include different coloured backgrounds to represent the volatility of sections of text, blocks of text that get moved a lot, being able to quickly flip back to what a small section used to be (without necessarily committing to it), and so on. Perhaps even a draft mode that shoves text aside (maybe above or below), but still leaves it accessible while editing the replacement text.

As a writing tool, it'd be a very helpful extension to any of the open source word processors out there. I bet there's a great niche market in authoring tools that current word processors really don't cater to right now.

Troll metrics (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064461)

One step closer to objectively identifying who the wiki trolls are :-) What color of lines do they use for trolls? Toad green?

Re:Troll metrics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12067448)

No, something flourescent, like their hair.

Does it handle Wiki spam? (1)

dalleboy (539331) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064540)

If it doesn't the tool is useless, if it does the tool could be used as the perfect spam filter for email instead.

you Fail LIt (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12064799)

also dead, its Guys are usually STartling turn GAY NIGGERS FROM opinion i6n other is the worst off philosophies must market share. Red OS don't fear the conducted at MIT

It's based on diff format... (3, Insightful)

vhogemann (797994) | more than 9 years ago | (#12064866)

So it might be used to show progress over time on open-source projects. It would be usefull to show progress over a single project or how two projects merged, and to show wich contribuitions made it to final versions, or witch developer has more code on it.

It should be very interesting to see it applied to big projects, like the Linux kernel or the KDE project to see how it evolved from the number of contribuitions and devellopers, and to see how long each contribuition survived unnaltered on the source.

It could prove to be a very usefull tool indeed.

The author (4, Interesting)

rexguo (555504) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065192)

Martin Wattenberg, being the main author, also has a personal homepage that has very interesting visualisations in Java as well: Bewitched [bewitched.com]

informati7e Bitchbitch (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065251)

OUTER sPACE THE

At what point is bias removal done? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065414)

Oops, it's not there! And that is the biggest problem with Wikipedia. The morons that write for Wiki absolutely worship the Bush Crime Family. Until their messages of hate are removed, Wiki is not useful at all and not appropriate for children to access. I convinced our school district to block access to any domain name with the string "wiki" in it to help protect our children from Bush's message of hate.

Once again, slashdot's Bush-bias shows again. They once again are pushing his agenda.

Re:At what point is bias removal done? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12065734)

Right on! With the way most slashdot registered users worship Bush. They think that by supported him now, they'll be one of his chosen elite when he dismantles the government. Guess what, that ain't happening. He doesn't care about you. Unless you are a member of the elite, he hates you and wants to see you unemployeed, homeless, and dead from exposure or starvation. Never forget that.

Skinner

Ironic that this gets posted on Slashdot... (3, Insightful)

corporatemutantninja (533295) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065448)

...yet Slashdot passed on an opportunity to have something like this for themselves.

The IBM researcher who created this software, Martin Wattenberg [ibm.com] , also wrote some really cool tools for visualizing and navigating Slashdot threads. He said he would be happy to let Slashdot use them for free so I made an intro but the /. guys never followed up.

slashdot take advice from the outside? (1)

delmoi (26744) | more than 9 years ago | (#12065895)

Please, the amount of work it would take to implement his tools is far less important then the amount of benifit to the reader! The slashdot editors are our gods. BOW DOWN PLEBE!!!

Druthers (1)

JJ (29711) | more than 9 years ago | (#12067436)

I personally would rather see the degradation of information over time or generations of tellings. I'm presuming most people have done this in school, with one person getting the story from a written source and a sequence of people telling the story one to another and seeing how accurately the original story is retained. I had a sociology class were this was done in a myths and legends context.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?