Difference between revisions of "Talk:Tommy Tjandra"

Latest revision as of 20:33, 20 February 2019

Wen Hoong Ling's Comment

Hi Tommy, your data identity statement is well written and structured! It seems that your online persona is just an extension of your real identity. I think your statement would benefit from having more comparison between your online identity and actual identity. You can do this by personifying the identity created by your online profile, then reflecting on how accurate it embodies your real personality. I like that you included Floridi's quote that really strengthens your argument. In your Google section, you initially said that you were surprised by the search results, but afterwards you said that the results were as expected, which is a little confusing to readers. Also, you should incorporate some images to help illustrate the points that you are making. Overall, good job!

Margaret Trudeau's Comment

Tommy, I enjoyed reading your data identity statement. Your background information on why your profiles are public was something I have not seen many other students writing about. It was refreshing to hear your reasoning, instead of just simply reading that your profiles were public and that's it. I also enjoyed learning about your nonprofit organization back home. Way to go! You present an interesting comparison between DuckDuckGo and Google. Perhaps expanding on this would be a good idea? It is intriguing to me that they both provide the same results. Perhaps they both draw from the same parent sources? Additionally, I think commenting on why you think the data broker websites do not have your Ann Arbor location information would be a good idea. Finally, your quote from Floridi, "the right to privacy is also the right to a renewable identity," was perfect for your data identity statement. It fit right in! Great job on this.

Thomas Bouranis' Comment

I thought the beginning section where you explained your approach to your data identity from the perspective of self-promotion was a great introduction to the article. It provided good context for your discovery process in the later sections. However, as the main theme of your article, I would suggest that you emphasize it more throughout the piece, rather than just in the beginning and the end.

When comparing search engines, it's not clear what the reader is meant to take away from this. It's not clear to me that DuckDuckGo's results were significantly different from Google's, despite your description of the differences in their technology (tracking vs not tracking). Consider trying to make this more relevant to your overall point.

Your sections felt very disjointed and disconnected. Again, emphasizing your main theme in the entire article would help bridge the gap between these sections.

Your conclusion seems to come out of nowhere. You say you are concerned with how much data Facebook and the Brokers know about you, but you never really explicitly say why. Your reference to Floridi is your only major attempt at justification, and while a good quote, it would be better if supplemented by your own reasoning. Finally, you say you regret promoting your digital presence in the past, but again, don't say why.

You should be sure to add some pictures to your final article to improve your engagement with the reader.

In conclusion, this article is a strong effort with all the right individual pieces, but would benefit from putting them together more and making the whole more cohesive.