Curiouser and Curiouser!

Curiouser and Curiouser! on digital-identity http://matt.blogs.it/ RSS feed for topic digital-identity Copyright 2006 Matt Mower Squib/0.1 self@mattmower.com self@mattmower.com en-gb Say no to Plaxo (fix the real problem) Mon, 03 Nov 2003 10:04:39 +0000 This Plaxo thing is insidious. I just got an email from someone I spoke to a while ago which says "I'm just updating my address details, please can you confirm or correct what I have?"  The email is automatically generated by Plaxo and shows a neat card that indicates this guy doesn't really have have my details.  So I think "Okay."  And trott off using the link provided to go update them. But as I'm there I'm thinking "hey... if I change my details again, i've got this work to do again.  And maybe for each person who keeps my details in Plaxo."  He's put the burden of updating my details on to me.  Fine for him, not fine for me.  Of course Plaxo offer the carrot "If you get Plaxo too then you won't have to do this.  We'll do it for you." Of course then I'm signed up for the Plaxo service.  They'll want something in return (and I still have no solution for the other people who will not be using Plaxo).  Some people might call this clever marketing, but I think it's a bit like being blackmailed and I don't like it. For my money  <a href="http://www.kunekt.com/nie/index.php">Kunekt</a> have (or had, I'm not sure if the service is still supported) a better approach.  I keep my details on their server and they provide an RSS feed that can be used to be notified when I make changes.  Two key differences: <ol> <li>The architecture is open, it's just RSS.</li> <li>It doesn't bother you unless you want to use it (and even then it doesn't bother you).</li> </ol> For me, no. 2 is not just an option. If the authors of mail & PIM clients got their acts together even the Kunekt style service wouldn't be needed.  I don't need them to host my contact details.  I already do that in Outlook.  If Outlook could generate & consume contact details feeds that would be all I would need.  Oh happy day! (Of course Plaxo could still play if they would be able to subscribe to my contact details feed.  Of course, whether there is still a need for Plaxo in such a world...) http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00001693.html Mistaken Identity Fri, 14 May 2004 17:36:08 +0100 <a href="http://www.stand.org.uk/">The Stand</a> are stepping up to the plate on ID Card starting with an <a href="http://www.stand.org.uk/mistakenidentity.php3">event</a> on May 19th <blockquote> <h1>Mistaken Identity</h1> <h2>A public meeting on the Governments proposed National Identity Card</h2> Wednesday May 19, 2004; 13:3017:00 hrs The Old Theatre, London School of Economics Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE Organised by <a href="http://www.privacyinternational.org/">Privacy International</a>, in association with <a href="http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk">Liberty</a>, <a href="http://www.statewatch.org/">Statewatch</a>, <a href="http://www.stand.org.uk">Stand.org.uk</a>, <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/">The Register</a>, <a href="http://www.blink.org.uk/">The 1990 Trust</a> and the <a href="http://www.fipr.org/">Foundation for Information Policy Research</a>. Hosted by the Department of Information Systems of the London School of Economics The government has introduced draft legislation for a national identity card. The card system will cost at least £3 billion and is likely to become an essential part of life for everyone residing in the UK. If the draft legislation is accepted by Parliament, everyone will be required to register for a card. Biometric scans of the face, fingers and eye will be taken. Personal details will be stored in a central database. A unique number will be issued that will become the basis for the matching of computer systems. The proposed card may be required to access vital public services and to receive benefits. The government proposes to enforce the programme through numerous new criminal and civil offenses, including provision for unlimited financial penalty and up to ten years' imprisonment. The implications for everyone in the UK are far-reaching. Join us at this important meeting to hear from key figures in the fields of law, politics, security, technology and human rights. Decide for yourself whether this is a plan that should be supported. The meeting is free of charge. </blockquote>I'll be going and I hope lots of other people will as well. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00002235.html Looking for a helping hand... Mon, 09 Jan 2006 20:29:20 +0000 Does anyone know anyone at Google who can help me? I refer to the problem of my blog suddenly and apparently arbitrarily disappearing from the results of a <a href="http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=%22Matt+Mower%22&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8">search for "Matt Mower"</a> that I reported in <a href="http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00002056.html">November</a> and confirmed earlier in <a href="http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00002078.html">January</a>. Google don't appear to respond to a message sent via their request form so what the hell are you supposed to do? It's not like some other Matt Mower suddenly became more relevant than me and knocked me down a peg or two. That I could live with. What has happened is that my blog has just gone and the rest of the search results (which are still primarily about me) have moved up a rung or two. Since everybody these days equates what's in Google with what exists on the web, Google are effectively saying "This guy's blog doesn't exist." How can this be right? Where was my right of appeal? As a blogger, as a person, this sucks. Surely there is some kind soul out there who can help me? Please. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00003167.html So I do exist Tue, 10 Jan 2006 13:01:04 +0000 Some interesting things have been discovered since <a href="http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00002087.html">yesterdays post</a>. First <a href="http://weblog.philringnalda.com/2006/01/09/another-google-loser-heard-from">Phil Ringnalda has observed that I am still in Googles index</a>. Phil who also suffers from Googlitis but is perhaps a little more sanguine about it observes that <blockquote> When your weblog is result 151 for your own name as a phrase it feels like you have been disappeared. </blockquote> He's not wrong. I looked through quite a few pages of results to find my blog but, never guessing it would suddenly be down in the 150's, I obviously didn't go far enough. Still, it is comforting to know that I am still in there somewhere. Thanks for spotting that Phil. Something I want to clear up about Phil's post is that my weblog was never really <a href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0148602/">here</a>. This is a test weblog I created when I was first tested <a href="http://squib.rubyforge.org/">Squib</a>, long after this problem began. I'm glad Phil pointed to it though because I had understood that Userland would have deleted it by now and I'm a little surprised it's still there. My original weblog was <a href="http://radio.weblogs.com/0107808/">here</a> which does redirect to it's <a href="http://matt.blogs.it/">present location</a>. Over night <a href="http://www.terryfrazier.com/weblog/">Terry Frazier</a> emailed to ask whether Googlebot was still indexing my weblog. The answer is that it is, as recently as 4am this morning it went over the entire thing. Good suggestion Ter, but apparently that's not the answer. With reference to a lack of comments on this blog, they will be back soon in some form or other. <a href="http://www.cristianvidmar.com/2006/01/10#When:4:04:34AM">Cristian Vidmar thinks I will never get back the No. 1 slot</a>. But Christian seems to be referring to a search for "Matt" where I was never the first hit (nor even on the first page). I'm talking about hits for "Matt Mower". You'll notice that the top for that search are, directly or indirectly, referencing me. Nothing new has become more relevant. So the situation seems more hopeful. If I'm not in the #1 I am, at least, still there at #151 and Google is crawling my blog regularly. This suggests that I, or somebody, did something to make this happen. If Googlebot keeps visiting then maybe it can be undone. So I am left trying to understand what caused my downfall and what to do about it. I don't favour a general de-emphasis of weblogs as Christian suggests, it's been two months already surely others would be bemoaning their rotten luck as well? And why do I think this is very important? Yahoo, MSN, and Dogpile all put my blog as the #1 hit for "Matt Mower". Yet I never even thought to look and see if it was a general effect. Rightly or wrongly for me, as I suspect for many others, Google *is* search. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00003171.html More on my Google implosion Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:51:01 +0000 I'm working on the theory that <a href="http://weblog.philringnalda.com/">Phil Ringalda</a> is right about Google hating duplicated content. I'm going to try and get the aggregators with copies of my content to stop publishing it and see if that helps to resuscitate me. I never understood the issue until now but I guess this may be an anti-splogging defence. What really ticks me off though is that I am completely guessing. Google offers me no way to understand what has happened. They may be punishing me for something completely beyond my control and I have no way to tell. The more I learn about Google the more it feels like some kind of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinner_box">Skinner Box</a> gone awry. So now I am faced with the prospect of attempting to get any aggregators republishing my content to stop. I've the good folks at <a href="http://www.iaslash.org/">iaslash.org</a> a polite request that I hope they'll act upon. I'm also trying to get the test blog Phil noticed shut down. I notice that <a href="http://www.google.com/search?num=30&hl=en&lr=lang_en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en-us&q=%22phil+ringnalda%22&btnG=Search">Phil has been resusciated</a> so maybe, if I can de-duplicate myself, I have the answer. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00003179.html Another ghost in the machine Mon, 16 Jan 2006 09:06:23 +0000 <a href="http://www.technosight.com/">Ken Yarmosh</a> is another ghost <a href="http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=Ken%20Yarmosh&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8">treading light</a> in Google's index. It looks like Ken talks about much more useful and interesting stuff than I do so it's probably even more frustrating for him. What I want to ask Google is this: How can it be that a <a href="http://www.evectors.com/">page that no longer mentions me at all</a> is the <a href="http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=lang_en&safe=off&client=safari&rls=en-us&q=matt+mower&btnI=Search">number one hit for my name</a>? But of course there is no one at Google to ask. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00003191.html And our survey says... Mon, 16 Jan 2006 14:38:29 +0000 I got my site verified in <a href="https://www.google.com/webmasters/sitemaps/login">Google Sitemaps</a> today and it may have an answer for why I'm tanking in the Google rankings: <img src="http://matt.blogs.it/images/misc/what_google_tells_me.png" alt="What Google tells me"/> Apparently I talk a lot of nonsense that nobody thinks is a worth linking to and it just took Google a little while to catch up with me. Not what I was hoping to hear but I guess it's probably true. Two years ago I was pretty focused on personal KM and intranets. These days I just ramble. Probably my page rank would have suffered less if I had just shut up ;-) Update: except that <a href="http://paolo.evectors.it/">Paolo</a> just showed me his PageRank profile from Google Sitemaps and it is identical to mine, and nothing seems to have happened to the standings of his blog. I guess Google just hates me. http://matt.blogs.it/entries/00003227.html