Still getting my head around some of these figures, but will share it anyway.
11 plus ones
Shared publicly•View activity
View 3 previous comments
- Some promising developments hidden in the data here.
First of all, the original article cites the source with some respect, but we might also note that the study is conducted (or funded) by a company whose interest is served by convincing you that it's scary out there and you need what they sell.
Second, one element of the "scary" part is the class they call scrapers and deem "potentially malicious." Some portion of that category is also properly deemed beneficial as in the case where a syndicator or curator is gathering material to present it for additional exposure. (My presumption is that much of what's presented on the Internet is there so that it can be discovered, read, and shared.) Certainly there are malicious uses for scrapers, but the entire category cannot be considered en masse as a threat.
Third, the largest part of the presumably dangerous segment is called "spies of sorts" and again there is a portion of that which is potentially beneficial as in the case where an automated agent can detect the behavior patterns of systems which represent a genuine threat.
Finally then, if we aggregate the portion that this study admits is beneficial (the search engines and indexers) along with the beneficial portions of these other two categories, we can see that a noteworthy portion of all the traffic on the internet is a function of (a still crude, but in total) new sort of intelligence which has emerged in our time.
Unless you subscribe to the school of thought which maintains that humans are unique and in some way entitled to exclusive and preferential treatment by the universe -- it may be thrilling to discover that a new intelligent "race" is emerging and that we are the creators.
That's what I see in these statistics. Not for nothing, but I'm finding myself a little bit suspicious lately when I encounter claims of dire threat. I've been sold that mythical wolf a number of times lately.
And I still might buy their software anyway.Mar 23, 2012
- Causality fail. 99% of things that use roads are non human. 100% of things that use electricity aren't human.Mar 23, 2012
- Great analysis. Thank you I was in a bit of a rush this morning, so didn't take the time to interpret this in anyway. Nice.
And - yours was so spot on it made outright chuckle. You're getting all Marshall McLuhan-y on us, eh! Spot on.
- I can't quite figure out weavrs.com and don't have the time to experiment with it right now. Have you tried it?Mar 23, 2012
- Thank you for an opportunity to think the matter through and to write my next blog article! I'll publish in http://techwhine.blogspot.com next Tues.Mar 23, 2012
- I did a little more reading, and some research into Weavrs. They are program constructs that interact with the web through Twitter, their blog, and through a website that allows you to have a conversation of sorts with them.
It does require some time and attention to set one up and configure it. I'm curious to see what my new one (Professor Retort) http://professor-retort.weavrs.info does with his new life.
From what I read, it will take some time for him to develop a personality.Mar 24, 2012
- Let us know,. Thanks.Mar 26, 2012