[Geowanking] orkut data mining

[Anthony Townsend]

i also favor the second approach. however, i guess i just feel that so 
many of these experiments at mapping networks and activity are one-offs 
that fail to communicate anything of significance to non-technical 
audiences. the mapmakers get obsessed with data and methodology and 
usually drop the project at the point where cartography/graphic 
design/infoviz skills become the main thing needed to move the project 
forward. same thing could be said for many LBS, which start to break 
down about the point where the expertise of an architect or urban 
designer might be helpful in thinking about 
personalization/contextualization.

martin dodge's analyses of maps of cyberspace raise a lot of these 
issues. (http://www.cybergeography.org - see especially the "Map of the 
Month" article series. also his books with Rob Kitchin)

i guess my point in large is that whilst geowanking, we need to be 
conscious of all the many social/psychological factors that contribute 
to how people understand geographic spaces and representations of 
geographic space.

another point is that hardcore programmers and database gurus are 
specialists - they could benefit from bringing in people with 
complementary specializations to improve these experiements. understood 
though that there is little dialogue going on now to lead to these 
kinds of collaborations.

On Feb 25, 2004, at 12:00 PM, Rich Gibson wrote:

>> though it reminded me at first glance of some of the awful maps of the
>> Internet that came out of MIDs in the mid 1990s. all kinds of
>> overlapping symbols, etc etc
>
> There are two ways of looking at new things.  There is the 
> hypercritical
> 'look at all it isn't' and there is the positive 'look at what now is'
> approach.
>
> Personally I favor the second.  There is much more I could say on the
> subject, but I feel that there isn't much more I could say without
> violating my own rule.
>
> Regards,
> Rich
>