The next book to read calls the chapters questions. So my goal is to read question one by Christine Hine.

My study goal for my Internet scholarship is coming along well. I ate a bowl of mint chocolate ice cream to celebrate getting the first of the three chapters in this week's goal read. The next chapter I will read is

Hines, Christine. Question One: How Can Qualitative Internet Researchers Define the Boundaries of Their Projects in Markham, Annette N. and Baym, Nancy K. eds. "Internet Inquiry: Conversations About Methods" (Los Angeles: Sage. 2009).

As I start this reading, I see Christine Hines is an scholar of the sociology of science and technology and will be writing about ethnographic method. This may help me stop or set boundaries on my online multiuser game playing studies, if these are indeed studies.

My goal is to read one chapter in each of three Internet books before Wednesday the 26th of August.

I set a goal to read one chapter more from each of three books. I just completed reading one chapter and here is the citation:

Whitty, Monica T., Joinson, Adam N. Chapter 6: Online Deception, fraud, spam and cons in Whitty, Monica T., Joinson, Adam N. Truth, Lies and Trust on the Internet (New York, N.Y.: Routledge, 2009).

So now I have two more chapters to read, one chapter in each of two more books.

Six short term goals that will get my thesis finished by next summer.

These are six short term goals I wrote tonight that will help me get my thesis completed by next summer.

1. Write more entries in my thesis notebook.
2. Continue to write in my learning journal.
3. Open my thesis tex files on my netbook.
4. Read the chapters recommended by my supervisor in the textbook: Knowledge Representation and Reasoning.
5. Return statistics books to the school library.
6. Buy more printer ink.

Human Resources and Macro Organizational studies are now topics I am exploring.

To model a workplace I need to study human resources literature and also macro organizational studies. Both of these studies should also help me in my working life.

I am waiting for my thesis proposal to be approved.

I submitted my thesis proposal to my supervisor on August 4th and have heard nothing back yet. I find this hard to deal with.

I read the forward to Cybershock.

I read the forward by a famous computer person to Winn Schartau's Cybershock. I was for a long while using computer crime as a focus for studies because I was reading so broadly I had to have a focus point or specialty. But Winn Schartau himself as he starts this book in the first chapter admits his book is not advanced study. So I can return that book basically unread only having really read Cap'n'Crunch's forward. I did learn Apple computer co founder Woz spends a lot of time in university libraries like me.

I won't be studying a course this fall

I won't be able to study a course in the semantic web this fall as I have a time conflict with the class schedule. I am still reading this book

Allemang, Dean and Hendler, Jim. Semantic Web for the Working Ontologist: Effective Modeling in RDFS and OWL (Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann, 2008).

I am reading chapter 6 now which is about RDFS and is starting to introduce this schema language.

I am studying knowledge management but am coming across the same papers regurgitated.

As I read more books and papers about knowledge management I am drilling down to the source papers and there seem, in fact, to be fewer original papers in this field.

I am beginning to read business studies.

I borrowed a book on organizations from a macro perspective, another two books on knowledge management and one book on using Microsoft 2007 for project management.

I am reading about Emacs and learning to use Emacs on my Dell Inspiron and my Macbook.

I have been reading the book SAMS Teach Yourself Emacs in 24 Hours. I have read chapter 1 and chapter 3. I did not read chapter 2 as that was about installing Emacs on Windows NT. The book was written by Jesper Pedersen, et al. I have started to use the Diary in the Calendar in Emacs. I hope to become effective at email, code writing, LaTeX and basic word processing in Emacs. I have stated chapter 4 today.

Learning SAS Output Delivery System (ODS).

SAS stands for Scientific Analysis System or Statistics Analysis Software or Statistical Analysis System. I have learned SAS at Carleton university as part of my B.Math in statistics studies and then have further used it as a teaching assistant in statistics. In that work I helped teach SAS to undergraduates in statistics courses. I now use it daily at my workplace in the government.

I have been reading the book: Haworth, Lauren. Output Delivery System: The Basics (Cary, NC: SAS Institute, 2001). So I am studying the new Output Delivery System in SAS. I have read chapter 1 at work and am today reading chapters 2 and 3. I have completed the reading of chapter 2 so far today. Chapters 1 and 2 are merely introductions to what ODS is and what it can do. Although chapter 2 covers how ODS works with SAS procedures (PROC) and the output objects from procedures, and has some syntax for using ODS. Chapter 3 is about using ODS to output HTML files.

Four Supreme Court cases of note last week concerning search and seizure. Application of R. v. Grant as the new standard of detention by police.

This is the key to the four cases of July 17th, 2009.

From R. v. Suberu. 2009 SCC 33 at 5.

Not every interaction with the police, however, will amount to a detention for the purposes of the Charter, even when a person is under investigation for criminal activity, is asked questions, or is physically delayed by contact with the police. Section 9 of the Charter does not dictate that police abstain from interacting with members of the public until they have specific grounds to connect the individual to the commission of a crime. Likewise, not every police encounter, even with a suspect, will trigger an individual’s right to counsel under s. 10(b). According to the purposive approach adopted in R. v. Grant, 2009 SCC 32, detention under ss. 9 and 10 of the Charter refers to a suspension of the individual’s liberty interest by a significant physical or psychological restraint. Psychological detention is established either where the individual has a legal obligation to comply with the restrictive request or demand, or a reasonable person would conclude by reason of the state conduct that he or she had no choice but to comply. The onus is on the applicant to show that, in the circumstances, he or she was effectively deprived of his or her liberty of choice. The test is an objective one and the failure of the applicant to testify as to his or her perceptions of the encounter is not fatal to the application. However, the applicant’s contention that the police by their conduct effected a significant deprivation of his or her liberty must find support in the evidence. The line between general questioning and focussed interrogation amounting to detention may be difficult to draw in particular cases. It is the task of the trial judge on a Charter application to assess the circumstances and determine whether the line between general questioning and detention has been crossed. [3] [23] [25] [28‑29] see case at http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2009/2009scc33/2009scc33.html

I completed reading Working Knowledge by Davenport and Prusak, and now must finish Linda Argote's Organizational Learning.

I did finished reading Working Knowledge by Davenport and Prusak, and now must finish Linda Argote's Organizational Learning.

The goal today is to complete reading Working Knowledge by Davenport and Prusak

I have just finished chapter six. I have about 65 pages left to read in this book. So with the end of the book in sight I am settled into finishing it today.

Reading goals this past weekend are partly done.

I had set out to read chapters three, four and five of the book Working Knowledge this weekend. I succeed and got that reading done. I had also set out to read chapters five and six of the book Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. I only got chapter five read but read it completely which means I read the beginning again. I had also set out to read chapters five and six of my web semantics textbook but only got chapter five read. So either I wasn't working hard enough or I set my goals to high.

Framing quote.

This really frames my thesis.

In general, the greatest value of modeling knowledge processes lies not in reaching an exact understanding of knowledge input, output, and flow rates but in identifying the variables in the model that can be affected by management action.

Davenport, Thomas H. and Prusak, Laurence. Working Knowledge (Boston: Harvard Business School, 1998) at 80.

Studies continue over the weekend.

I got chapter three now read in Working Knowledge and started chapter four. I see that the author of the Complete Idiots Guide to Knowledge Management has lifted her examples from this book I am reading.

Studies continue with a background literature reading term underway.

I have managed to continue reading Working Knowledge by Davenport and Prusak. Focusing on this book is good. I am nearly done chapter two of this book. The book is under two hundred pages long.

I should also read more of the book Knowledge Representation and Reasoning by Brachman and Levesque. I have almost finished chapter five now and still have chapters six, seven, nine, ten and sixteen to read on my supervisor's recommendation. This is about 90 pages of logic to read.

In my course textbook on the semantic web I have started chapter 5 of 14 chapters.

I am trying to focus on school more this summer and it looks like I am recoverying some of my study habits.

This term should be my background literature reading term. I am trying to find more time to read. The problem is I have a full time job every day of the week. This has slowed down other graduate students in the past and is typically a show stopper for something like completing a PhD. I am trying to focus myself by blogging here more.

These past few days I have started to read the textbook for my fall course Semantic Web: Concepts & Technique COMP 4900-C (The course outline is here: http://www.scs.carleton.ca/~bertossi/semweb/syll09.pdf) and am now about one sixth done reading this book on web semantics. Here is the citation to my course textbook:

Allemang, Dean and Hendler, Jim. Semantic Web for the Working Ontologist: Effective Modeling in RDFS and OWL (Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann, 2008).

So far I have read three chapters. I have learned the rational behind the semantic web. I have been introduced to coding in RDF and a few related languages. I am now learning in chapter four about RDF parsers and serializers and RDF stores.

I read one essay in Laurence Prusak's Knowledge in Organizations

The essay I read seemed the most theoretical and shortest in this book. The essay citation is:

Polanyi, Michael. Tacit Knowledge in Prusak, Laurence. Knowledge In Organizations (Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann, 1997) at 135.

This was copyright to Polanyi in 1966. In this brief essay/lecture he explores tacit knowledge as a theory. He has some structure of a theory of this type of knowledge. In this type of knowledge we assume we do not know what we known. This type of knowledge can not really be known but we do know it under the surface of our thinking. He makes his argument referring to psychological experiments. These were popular in the 1960's and earlier. He claims to show that positivist science is a failure as scientific method and says objectivity is not a possible way to know the world. Scientific knowledge is best known and originally know through tacit knowledge.