Today I reviewed an article called “Facebook’s new algorithm can recognize you even if your face is hidden” by Mathew Ingram. I have to say I have always been skeptical of Facebook. The whole idea of keeping in contact with people from high school that I clearly do not have an active interest has always seemed like a waste of time to me. My friend in college started my account one day and I still occasionally log on. I vary rarely use my account and I have mostly pictures that people have tagged me in. It has always been in the back of my mind that Facebook is like a black hole that I just do not understand. One day a few years ago I uploaded a picture and Facebook automatically knew who the people were in my picture. That was enough to freak me out and to almost never upload pictures anymore. When Emily (an individual in my class) suggested on my blog I check out this article about Facebook’s new facial recognizing capabilities, I was surprised and disgusted at the same time. Again I used Jason Ohler’s rubric for evaluating this article.
Was the project well researched and documented?
This document was not heavy with research. This did not in anyway make the article seem less credible. There were embedded links that spoke about specific topics that related to the main theme such as sharing photos on Facebook privately. The author of this article proved successful at both terrifying and reassuring you at the same time. While the thought of recognizing a person in a picture is on the more invasive end, the author did provide in his research how it is beneficial in some instances such as when a very private person doesn’t want their picture online at all. If there was a way to tell Facebook “this is me” I do not want any pictures of me on your website, I wonder how many people would opt for that sort of privacy.
How well did the story work? This trait can address structure, engagement, character transformation or any of the other qualities of story discussed in Part II. In fact, an entire rubric can be devoted to evaluating the quality
This article was well written and it had a pace that kept you interested the entire read. As with any eye opening article, it was something you could not stop reading. I chose to review this article because it related directly to the chapter that I just reviewed. It touched on the issues of privacy on the internet. Towards the end of the article it even referenced a lawsuit that a man had against Facebook for the invasion of privacy.
Flow, organization and pacing: 9/10
Was the story well organized? Did it flow well, moving from part to part without bumps or disorientation
This article was interesting and engaging I almost wish it was a bit longer or it went more into the technical side of what is to come with technology. Just as Lankshear and Knobel were discussing the evolution of technology, I am interested to hear what this author has to say about the implications of “new” technologies. The capabilities of tracking individuals using partial pictures does have many positive implications when considering bank robbers or criminals. With every upgrade in technology there are good and bad repercussions.
One thing this story did not necessarily touch on was the use of citations. This article didn’t necessarily provide much in the way of documentation which leaves a lot of interpretation. I want to read more about this specific topic and how it relates to Facebooks future. Is the algorithm being used now? and if so in what ways? No matter how you look at it, it is kind of creepy and should make everyone think twice about posting personal pictures.
Great read 26/30
I loved this graphic below!
Facebook’s new algorithm can recognize you even if your face is hidden by Mathew Ingram June 23, 2015
New Literacies: Everyday Practices and Social Learning by Colin Lankshear and Michele Knobel. McGraw-Hill Education 2011.