I've seen an uptick in people I respect concluding that the massive increase in badly-behaved web-scraping bot is intentional and just another example of sociopathic AI companies ripping-up long-respected web conventions for the sake of profit

My 2023 predictions on the ScholComm headlines in a few years

The POSI Adopters1 called for feedback on their Proposed POSI 2.0 revisions. You might not be surprised to know that I have opinions.

Imagine pair programming with an eccentric software developer…

As of today (2024-12-02), it has been 1000 days since Crossref updated its [POSI](https://openscholarlyinfrastructure.org/) self-assessment. That translates to almost 2 years and 9 months.

An adaptation of a paper on "AI" that I wrote for the Crossref board for our meeting in November 2023.

I made several predictions in this interview, and it's interesting to see which ones played out.

I was recently asked by somebody to speculate about generalizable application features that might help researchers in their work. I responded to them directly, but thought it might be worth repeating part of my response here. Since the early 1990s I’ve wished that the OS (any OS) would support a “Paste &

Jon Udell and Ross Mayfield have are talking about the use of social software and trust-circles as tools to find relevant and authoritative content on the web. Sounds familiar. I’ve long thought trust circles (amongst other trust metrics) are key to addressing the “Internet Trust Anti-Pattern“. It may sound incredibly un-hip and reactionary, but to hell with the wisdom of crowds.

Will implementing a good information architecture destroy your Alexa rating? Mike Davidson has done a brief analysis of MySpace which basically shows that “Page Views” could be the new “Line Count” in stupid metrics.

In a Guardian article dated Saturday July 8 2006, Pico Iyer talks about how Google and other search engines have distorted the literary interview. He describes how interviewers prepare themselves by researching their subjects online and how search results tend to artificially highlight and emphasize interesting, but effectively trivial information about the interviewee.