Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw

DisputeFinder is a Firefox extension, that is a collaboration between Intel Research and UC Berkeley. Its basic premise is to allow readers of web content to understand the broader context of claims made on websites. If a claim about a controversial topic (think global warming, gun control or a “healthy” new diet) is made on a site, users of this plugin will be immediately notified by colored text that there are conflicting viewpoints on that particular topic. Users can submit topics on specific sites as controversial, and support the opposing viewpoint with evidence from another site. Users also have the ability to vote this content up or down, in terms of how useful/accurate they find the new data.

Our class got to have a long talk with John Mark Agosta and Rob Ennals the project lead. We discussed the benefits of citizens (or “webizens” if you will) with good intentions, who spread accurate information online, and the ways that DisputeFinder leverages these intentions to forward the goals of information dissemination.

DisputeFinder sits at an interesting point–rather than between the web browser and the server, it sits between the user and the page, (albeit connecting with lists of disputed claims) not altering the site content at all. Currently DisputeFinder achieves all of its content via avid activists and dedicated citizens, but hopes to create a large enough collection of disputed claims and a precise and smart enough detector of these phrases to implement the functionality of the plugin without the need for individual clicks on every site.

DisputeFinder doesn’t aim to provide conclusions on disputed claims, but rather, hopes to give citizens well-rounded information about topics that are controversial.

How could a browser plugin be leveraged even further to meet these goals? What problems or concerns could a browser-level source of information bring about? How are the struggles of a plugin like this one similar or different to the struggles of Wikipedia?

Another similar service is Turkopticon, which is both a community of Amazon Mechanical Turk users, and with them a Firefox plugin. The plugin allows users to see reviews and ratings for those requesting work on the site. In this way, Turkers (or users of Amazon Mechanical Turk) can decide who to work for based on community standards and also can view the status of their pay for previous jobs.

One of the critical questions about browser plug-ins is how to achieve a large user base. Many services like DisputeFinder in its current iteration depend on crowdsourced information to make their plugin useful.

How do applications like this get critical acclaim, enough to get a vast following like Wikipedia or Yelp? How does a project facilitate activists in ways that form community?

Be Sociable, Share!

• 
•