Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the we-prefer-to-say-'borrow' dept.
XiceeX writes "Wired has up a story about HP, as part of a larger drive to figure out how ideas ideas 'infect' large groups of people, scientifically proving what most people already knew: bloggers steal their ideas from other bloggers."
Yes, horrible plagiarism!
by
musingmelpomene
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Idea theft?
You don't say!
I suppose we're going to start burning Shakespeare's works because they were blatantly stolen from other writers, right?
Idea modification and adaptation is not plagiarism - much of human progress in the arts has happened because of this phenomenon, and the internet neither started nor ended it.
That's not just blogs...
by
LostCluster
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
It's also how news spreads. Afterall, Slashdot is very rarely the first to report a story, it just links to somebody else who has posted information on a topic. From there, several other media outlets see the story on Slashdot and therefore report on it themselves.
Plagiarize,
Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes,
So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize -
Only be sure always to call it, pliz, 'research'.
The mainstream news media has been reduced to parroting press releases from any group whatsoever and calling it "reporting" for years now.
Just yesterday I heard a radio news story about how thousands of people are dying from something or other every year. When I looked into the data deeper, it was an estimate (read: ideologically motivated wild ass guess) by some political group, and had no actual science behind it whatsoever. But it was still just reported without any thought because the group issued a press release.
About how ideas 'infect' large groups of people, scientifically proving what most people already knew: bloggers steal their ideas from other bloggers. I will post them shortly.
Re:Few Original Ideas
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Funny
I do support plagiarism in one area: spelling. Please grab a dictionary and look up plagiarism. It's not spelled plagerism. Thanks.
Aggregators
by
truthsearch
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
One reason is that good bloggers who don't have many original thoughts are good aggregators. They may or may not state the ideas in a clearer fashion. But they know what people are interested in and bring it together. That's one reason/. is popular. It's a collection of information you'd have to go to hundreds of other places to find yourself.
Sounds more like transient social consciousness
by
MooseByte
·
· Score: 5, Funny
OK, I actually read the article and this doesn't sound like "stealing" at all to me. Granted we'd need to see the underlying blogs and topics in question, but let's face it - social awareness of various topics ebb and flow.
Those of you who follow U.S. media may recall "The Summer of the Shark". There was no peak in shark attacks that year. In fact I think it was a below-average year. It just became the socially-focused topic.
Then there's the "everything's now in place" effect. Competing teams coming up with similar vaccines at the same time. Or manned flight.
Just part of the Great Filtered Aquifer of the human experience.
Of course it may well be that humans are just a bunch of damn thieving cheaters.;-)
Re:Few Original Ideas
by
Dystopian+Rebel
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I don't agree that there are "few original ideas" or there is "nothing new under the Sun". However, there are few original thinkers.
If memory serves, a 19th century sociologist by the name of "Darde" posited that out of 100 people, 1 is truly creative and the remaining 99 are echoic.
The research in question suggests the same. And so does the nature of television.
-- Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
CNN? FoxNews? NYTimes?
by
ubiquitin
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I wonder how much different blogs are in this respect than "traditional" journalism. Newspapers have to make efforts at times to ensure that they don't have the exact same headline. Also, it probably isn't too terribly suprising that in a world of mass-media, the collective consciousness is a bit hard to redirect. Mass-originality and memes are opposite concepts.
-- http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
Re:Few Original Ideas
by
Dun+Malg
·
· Score: 5, Funny
I've found that there are very few original thoughts or ideas, and very few people who come up with them. It isn't a matter of plagerism. It's just that there are only so many viable ideas out there. And the more that are already taken, the harder it is to come up with a new one. If you reach too far just to have an original thought, then you end up a wacko.
Interesting, as I've found that there are very few original thoughts or ideas, and very few people who come up with them. It isn't a matter of plagerism. It's just that there are only so many viable ideas out there. And the more that are already taken, the harder it is to come up with a new one. If you reach too far just to have an original thought, then you end up a wacko.
-- If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Are you sure that the right use of the word? A plagiarist is someone who copies wholesale, words and paragraphs not belonging to him. A plagiarist exploits people who attribute depth to some idea, but short-circuits the thought processes that went into creating the idea. Instead the plagiatist copies.
Now if someone reads about an idea, digests it, and is able to communicate the idea BETTER, is that plagiarism?
What is it with you slashdotters? You seem to have a grade school understanding of ideas and plagiarism. Have you ever seen DIFFERENT WORDINGS of the same idea? Have you ever seen DIFFERENT IDEAS worded similarly? Have you ever taken an undergraduate philosophy class? Until you can tell those situations apart and come up with a nuanced opinion, please learn not to label such things as plagiarism. It's akin to calling a flirt a rapist, or a lab mouse a rat.
Don't most non-personal bloggers just circulate links and provide commentary on current events? Like, you know, newspapers? You don't see anyone accusing the Washington Post of plagiarizing from the New York Times when they both publish op-ed pieces on the same topic.
Maybe it's good manners to provide a linkback to the blog you got the link from originally, but omitting it is hardly plagiarism. (A word which the article never uses, incidentally. I'm not on the hate-michael bandwagon, but that blurb headline has some nasty spin.)
-Carolyn
-- Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
Re:It's not "stealing"
by
andy666
·
· Score: 5, Funny
It's not stealing if you don't sell it. It's like punching someone in the dark - it's a victimless crime.
"Stealing" an Idea?!
by
sabat
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
This just goes to show how fucked up we've become.
If I, blogger, quote someone else, even unattributed, or talk about someone else's idea, that's "theft?" Gimme a break. You don't automatically own ideas just because you write them down.
You can't really "own" an idea anyway -- there's no US constitutional provision for that, just an allowance for a limited monopoly to encourage more creation.
Blogs are, by definition, a conversation. Calling that conversation "theft" is ridiculous to an extremem. What, if I'm talking to someone IRL, should I force them to "license" my ideas before continuing?
"Sorry, before we can continue, please sign here and pay this fee. Then we can keep talking about my ideas about how to set up a new centralized login server."
-- I, for one, welcome our new Antichrist overlord.
If memory serves, a 19th century sociologist by the name of "Darde" posited that out of 100 people, 1 is truly creative and the remaining 99 are echoic.
So I guess we can rule you out of the 1% too?
(Sorry, couldn't resist.);-)
straw men, yay!
by
moral+kiosk
·
· Score: 5, Informative
The title of this Slashdot story, as well as most of the comments, have missed the point.
I spoke with Lada Adamic Wednesday, and she gave a talk on this and several other of her research directions. They are not out to determine whether people plagiarize. They are interested in information flow within complex networks. That is to say, if I want to find good information, where should I look? The typical answer has been "those who agglomerate".
It is no surprise to the HP group or anyone that some information sources are simply aggregating agents. But if your area of research is information flow in complex networks, this type of study contains many insights. For example, a common question is "what information nodes are important?". This study seeks to look beyond the naive answer "high-degree nodes" and attribute some importance, in an informational sense, to lower-degree nodes that act as sources for the network.
The iRank scheme mentioned several times in the article, which I read, demonstrates this thrust. A scheme like PageRank will almost always rank most highly the aggregates, because they are highest-degree in terms of backlinks. But who is to say that such a ranking is optimal? If you care about quickly scanning much information, it probably is. But if you care about seeking more detailed or perhaps more well-informed sources of information on a topic, iRank may well be a closer-to-optimal scheme.
The comments regarding this story have been a straw man excercise if i've ever seen one on Slashdot. HP doesn't spend its research money to find out that some information sources gather information from many others and distribute it widely. It does spend its money to find out more about how complex networks operate and how the flow of information can be analyzed and exploited to improve query responses in those networks.
-- It's so much more attractive / inside the moral kiosk.
Slashdot Mirror
And that last story about Microsoft cameras was stolen directly from Yahoo. FP
To understand recursion,
you must first understand recursion.
Of course, this begs the question.. Why are the popular bloggers popular if other bloggers are thinking these ideas up first?
I think it's the fact that the more popular bloggers put their ideas across in a clearer way than the less know bloggers..
it's not the idea that's important.. it's how you present it.
Simon.
You don't say!
I suppose we're going to start burning Shakespeare's works because they were blatantly stolen from other writers, right?
Idea modification and adaptation is not plagiarism - much of human progress in the arts has happened because of this phenomenon, and the internet neither started nor ended it.
It's also how news spreads. Afterall, Slashdot is very rarely the first to report a story, it just links to somebody else who has posted information on a topic. From there, several other media outlets see the story on Slashdot and therefore report on it themselves.
Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes,
So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize -
Only be sure always to call it, pliz, 'research'.
Shamelessly researched from a Tom Lehrer song.
Just yesterday I heard a radio news story about how thousands of people are dying from something or other every year. When I looked into the data deeper, it was an estimate (read: ideologically motivated wild ass guess) by some political group, and had no actual science behind it whatsoever. But it was still just reported without any thought because the group issued a press release.
--- Ban humanity.
About how ideas 'infect' large groups of people, scientifically proving what most people already knew: bloggers steal their ideas from other bloggers. I will post them shortly.
I do support plagiarism in one area: spelling. Please grab a dictionary and look up plagiarism. It's not spelled plagerism. Thanks.
One reason is that good bloggers who don't have many original thoughts are good aggregators. They may or may not state the ideas in a clearer fashion. But they know what people are interested in and bring it together. That's one reason /. is popular. It's a collection of information you'd have to go to hundreds of other places to find yourself.
Developers: We can use your help.
OK, I actually read the article and this doesn't sound like "stealing" at all to me. Granted we'd need to see the underlying blogs and topics in question, but let's face it - social awareness of various topics ebb and flow.
Those of you who follow U.S. media may recall "The Summer of the Shark". There was no peak in shark attacks that year. In fact I think it was a below-average year. It just became the socially-focused topic.
Then there's the "everything's now in place" effect. Competing teams coming up with similar vaccines at the same time. Or manned flight.
Just part of the Great Filtered Aquifer of the human experience.
Of course it may well be that humans are just a bunch of damn thieving cheaters.
If memory serves, a 19th century sociologist by the name of "Darde" posited that out of 100 people, 1 is truly creative and the remaining 99 are echoic.
The research in question suggests the same. And so does the nature of television.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
I wonder how much different blogs are in this respect than "traditional" journalism. Newspapers have to make efforts at times to ensure that they don't have the exact same headline. Also, it probably isn't too terribly suprising that in a world of mass-media, the collective consciousness is a bit hard to redirect. Mass-originality and memes are opposite concepts.
http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
Interesting, as I've found that there are very few original thoughts or ideas, and very few people who come up with them. It isn't a matter of plagerism. It's just that there are only so many viable ideas out there. And the more that are already taken, the harder it is to come up with a new one. If you reach too far just to have an original thought, then you end up a wacko.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Now if someone reads about an idea, digests it, and is able to communicate the idea BETTER, is that plagiarism?
What is it with you slashdotters? You seem to have a grade school understanding of ideas and plagiarism. Have you ever seen DIFFERENT WORDINGS of the same idea? Have you ever seen DIFFERENT IDEAS worded similarly? Have you ever taken an undergraduate philosophy class? Until you can tell those situations apart and come up with a nuanced opinion, please learn not to label such things as plagiarism. It's akin to calling a flirt a rapist, or a lab mouse a rat.
Don't most non-personal bloggers just circulate links and provide commentary on current events? Like, you know, newspapers? You don't see anyone accusing the Washington Post of plagiarizing from the New York Times when they both publish op-ed pieces on the same topic.
Maybe it's good manners to provide a linkback to the blog you got the link from originally, but omitting it is hardly plagiarism. (A word which the article never uses, incidentally. I'm not on the hate-michael bandwagon, but that blurb headline has some nasty spin.)
-Carolyn
Like Daddy always said: if you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit.
It's not stealing if you don't sell it. It's like punching someone in the dark - it's a victimless crime.
This just goes to show how fucked up we've become.
If I, blogger, quote someone else, even unattributed, or talk about someone else's idea, that's "theft?" Gimme a break. You don't automatically own ideas just because you write them down.
You can't really "own" an idea anyway -- there's no US constitutional provision for that, just an allowance for a limited monopoly to encourage more creation.
Blogs are, by definition, a conversation. Calling that conversation "theft" is ridiculous to an extremem. What, if I'm talking to someone IRL, should I force them to "license" my ideas before continuing?
"Sorry, before we can continue, please sign here and pay this fee. Then we can keep talking about my ideas about how to set up a new centralized login server."
I, for one, welcome our new Antichrist overlord.
So I guess we can rule you out of the 1% too?
(Sorry, couldn't resist.) ;-)
I spoke with Lada Adamic Wednesday, and she gave a talk on this and several other of her research directions. They are not out to determine whether people plagiarize. They are interested in information flow within complex networks. That is to say, if I want to find good information, where should I look? The typical answer has been "those who agglomerate".
It is no surprise to the HP group or anyone that some information sources are simply aggregating agents. But if your area of research is information flow in complex networks, this type of study contains many insights. For example, a common question is "what information nodes are important?". This study seeks to look beyond the naive answer "high-degree nodes" and attribute some importance, in an informational sense, to lower-degree nodes that act as sources for the network.
The iRank scheme mentioned several times in the article, which I read, demonstrates this thrust. A scheme like PageRank will almost always rank most highly the aggregates, because they are highest-degree in terms of backlinks. But who is to say that such a ranking is optimal? If you care about quickly scanning much information, it probably is. But if you care about seeking more detailed or perhaps more well-informed sources of information on a topic, iRank may well be a closer-to-optimal scheme.
The comments regarding this story have been a straw man excercise if i've ever seen one on Slashdot. HP doesn't spend its research money to find out that some information sources gather information from many others and distribute it widely. It does spend its money to find out more about how complex networks operate and how the flow of information can be analyzed and exploited to improve query responses in those networks.
It's so much more attractive / inside the moral kiosk.