Slashdot Mirror
New Study on Americans' Expectations of the Net
radicalsubversiv writes "A new study from the Pew Internet & American Life Project reports on Americans' expectations about finding information on the Internet. The (unsurprising) results reveal that large portions of the public go to the net first for many kinds of information. '16 percent of the nonusers say they would turn to the Internet first the next time they need health care and government information.' AP story summarizing the results; and the actual report in PDF format."
In my surrounding, I noticed most people that are not used with using a PC and the interent expect alot from the net, but when they actually use it, they get somewhat demotivated. This biggest problem for non techies is actually finding what you are looking for.
Personally I think this is a matter of habit. if you use alot of searchengines to get to the stuff you want, then you get to know how they work and thus will be able to use them much better.
Linux hosting for $2.50/mo
She has heard of this thing called the internet, but she doesn't appreciate it.
:)
She asked me what I did for work, so I explained. "But you're not making anything, not doing anything", she said.
I'm working with information, I told her.
But that's not real, she said.
If people don't understand the value of information, well. Mind you, if there was a nuclear war, we'd all forget about computers pretty quickly and start trying to grow enough food to survive, find un-contaminated water, and somewhere to stay safe until the nuclear winter was over.
What's my point? I don't know. Maybe I've been insightful. Maybe not. I'll tell my Mum I talked about her on Slashdot though - that'll confuse her...
Get your own free personal location tracker
> Yes, there are a lot of bad things about the internet
The only bad thing I see about the Internet is spam. Aside from that, the rest is stuff we can live with even if we don't all necessarily like it... In fact, every other "bad" thing about the Internet which is usually cited is something that's easily dealt with on the client side through filters, firewalls, etc. Spam and the bandwidth it wastes is the only 100% bad thing I can think of about the net.
Chasing Amy
(We all chase Amy...)
"The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus
Of course this requires a little more work on my part, actually picking through information and choosing what is good and what is crap, rather than having it spoon fed.
I actually laugh at what the AP wire and most newspapers call news. I pay little attention unless there is a "comments" link I can sift underneath. I often test a website by checking for and if neccessary posting a contrary comment, just to see if it sticks around. If the comment is harshly negative to the majority of comments already posted, but is not deleted, that website has validity, and I will be more apt to trust it.
I was just going to moderate this as Offtopic, but I decided to comment instead. What does a "demo" have to do with what people expect to find on the Internet? Most people, even heavy Internet users, don't know what a "demo" is, so they are hardly going to expect to find one.
Also, it would have been a far better comment if the author had decided to include some detail about the link. A plain link just gives me the impression that the author is pasting links to this "demo" into as many places as possible. How is this any better than spam?
You can scare yourself shitless searching for health care information on the Internet. The Onion have run a few stories on this.
Apparently, it's also a pain in the ass for doctors, because patients walk into their surgery having diagnosed themselves on Google and demand a particular treatment.
No need to teach granny to suck eggs, but as someone said above; it's on the Internet - so it has to be true.
Health Care info on the Internet is mostly bad news, because it is almost impossible to distinguish sound peer reviewed medical services from Dr. Nick Riviera's "I'll do any operation $199.99".
If you feel ill or find a lump anywhere, go see a real doctor.
CNN? USA Today? the LA Times?
I must admit after spending 18 months in LA. I HAD to use news.bbc.co.uk for news, and cnet.com and epinions.com for reviews of products/prices.
The alternatives were horrendous, CNN was just so sensationalist that it made ITN look serious. Ditto the majority of news services. Anyway for sheer convenience and control of what I am reading, the Internet has an easy win.
As for shopping,shop staff were generally useless (except at Fry's, bless 'em), newspaper advertising never gave enough details. Magazines only reviewed new products, not the end of line stock that is so attractively priced in the stores.
Finally, erm, having no friends over there didn't help either.