News report

Google Launches Software to Track Mobile Users
Ajay Kamalakaran, Thomson Reuters
2/5/09
http://uk.reuters.com/article/internetNews/idUKTRE5131XE20090205?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true

Using a cell phone is the one of the main ways we transfer information today. We can call or text to send and receive information; and on newer phones, even access the Web. But how would you feel if your information and whereabouts were being transferred without your knowledge? In the article, Google announces that they are introducing software for cellular phones and other wireless devices that automatically tell your friends and family access to where you are using Google maps.
Google previously released similar software that tracked location through text messaging that failed. It was not explained why, but because in the article it harps at the point that the new program can be turned off, I imagine it failed because of it running through texts the program always on. I think that software like this is for parents to know where their children are, or if a person is traveling. But my concerns with this software is that anyone could know where are at all time. They say that it is only for friends and family, but that does not mean that others would not be able to access your account. There are always hackers, and what if Google could sell information to other companies or the government? Also, if u can turn the software on and off, doesn’t that defeat the purpose of having it, especially if parents were using it to track their children? I just found that this software, though innovative, seems like an invasion of privacy.

Reading response 2

When I wrote the last response posting about Web sites with inaccurate information, the first web site that came to mind was Wikipedia. I felt that the information on the site was mostly erroneous due to the fact that anyone can contribute to the encyclopedia. The article, "Can Wikipedia Ever Make the Grade?", actually surprized me and made me feel a little more confident about the information that I find on Wikipedia. I knew that the Web site had fact checkers looking for trolls, but knowing that they found the purposely placed mistakes within several articles in less than three hours I was amazed. I know that many people could have seen the article between within those three hours, but I thought that the time frame in finding the mistakes could take days or even weeks. Knowing this, I think that a possible solution to finding accurate information on Wikipedia could be to gather information and the next day go back to the same article to see if the facts are still on the page. If so, then it's most likely fact; and if not, it must be false. Also, they said that the articles on Wikipedia were tested to see how many facts were inaccurate compared to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. The results were that Wikipedia had almost the same amount of error as the Encyclopaedia Britannica. I thought that was odd because in high school we were encouraged to consult the Encyclopaedia, especially the well-known Britannica to check facts, and not to use Wikipedia. To know that they both have around three errors per article is eye-opening. This article makes skeptical to what information I am recieving in general, but I think it proved that Wikipedia is more accurate than believed by most.