What Is a Web Resource?

Talking about web resources, we must think about the development of the internet itself. This is because more and more people are familiar with websites. Websites are what you visit every day on the internet. These websites are like an electronic book that consists of many books that you can open and read. Not limited to certain books, there you can also find stories, various entertainment content and so on.

If we assume the existence of a city, in that city there are many houses. Same goes with websites. Websites are like a collection of houses in a city. While the city itself is what we have known as the internet.

There are certainly many types of houses that we can find in a city. Starting from a classic model house, ordinary models, custom home models, to modern models. Just like the contents of the internet, many websites are scattered around. We just need to find out which of the many websites we want to visit.

From Google, Facebook, Twitter, CNN, Kompas, etc. When you open these services on a desktop or mobile device, they are known as websites.

Even though you have interacted with the website every day, maybe many of you do not know what that website means. Through this article, we will discuss about the understanding of the website along with its history, types, and benefits.

See also : Revolution Industries 4.0, the world of AI

The website

Website

In web resource website is a collection of pages on a domain on the internet that are created with a specific purpose and are interconnected and can be accessed widely through the front page (home page) using a browser using the website URL.

The website was first created by Tim Berners-Lee in the late 1980s and was only officially online in 1991.

The initial goal of the Berners-Lee Team to create a website was to make it easier for researchers to exchange or make changes to information.

A website can be owned by individuals, organizations or companies. In general, a website will display information or one particular topic. Although currently there are many websites that display various information on different topics.

The website can be accessed by any device or gadget. With the condition that the gadget meets the technological standards needed to run a website script, script is a part of web resource too. Because not all websites use the same technology. There are websites that only contain simple information that is very light to be opened and accessed. Conversely there are also many websites that contain interesting images and animations but are very heavy to open and take a long time to load page after page.

Website Elements

There are 3 elements that are very vital on the website and also still a part of web resource itself. Without all these elements, your website will never be found and accessed by users on the internet. The three elements in question are:

1. Domain

Domain

If the website is likened to a product, then the domain is the brand. The use of an attractive domain will make people interested in entering a website. The selection of a unique domain name also makes it easy for people to remember it for later re-visit. Many parties are willing to disburse a hefty amount of funds to buy a unique domain. Unique domain provides easy access to users. This web resource also very critical for admin.

Imagine if the contents of your website are very good but it is very difficult to write your website address. Then people will go away. Domain are part of critical web resource.

People will be lazy also to stop by your website unless you provide them with the material they would want to read.

The ease of remembering also provides an important point for users. By giving a unique and easy domain name makes it easy for people who access it to pronounce and type it on their keyboard.

The existence of a slight error in spelling or an error in writing just one letter in the domain can make the website that we are aiming for is not really the website that we are aiming for. We make an example with the name www.car.com will certainly have a different address if we type www.car.co right?

2. Hosting

No less important than domains, hosting has the role to store all the databases (scripts, images, videos, text, etc.) needed to form a website. Lots of hosting service providers with various facilities that you can choose. Hosting is the most important of the web resource facility.

Hosting services certainly favor drive capacity that can store a lot of data for your website. If your website is an entertainment type and requires lots of images and videos, you can be sure your website will need a very large storage, right?

Not only the amount of storage, but also the speed of data access also depends on what hosting we use. Because hosting here is also supported by hardware from the hosting provider. Surely it will be very different capabilities between devices that are branded and have high credibility with ordinary devices whose prices are also not too expensive.

3. Content

Content

Without content on the website, the website can be said to have no clear purpose. Content is a part of web resource. On the website can be in the form of text, images or videos. When viewed from the content that is served, there are several kinds of websites. For example, social media, news websites, buying and selling websites or websites that contain content based on interests, talents and hobbies.

This content reflects who our visitors are and what the focus of the web content that we will be presenting. Content acts like a jarring to catch fish. With the content, visitors will search and see if the website is in accordance with what they are looking for. Untreated content makes visitors confused and dislike the content of the website. Therefore building content is one of the key points that must be considered in making a website so that it becomes a good website. One of the things that make web resource alive is content!

Types of Websites

Website is a great place for displaying information. Initially, the information displayed on the website was only written.

Nowadays you can find various types of websites easily, not only displaying information in the form of writing.

1. Personal Website

Personal Website

Currently available are various services that you can use to create a personal website. Ranging from free to paid services.

For free, you must be willing to have a website address like www.nameofservice.com/your username or www.websitename.blogspot.com.

Website address like the example above is not recommended for those of you who want to have full content, such as the presence of videos and lots of images.

Usually, free website service providers will provide limited resources.

About Adresses

In addition, the address of your website will be difficult to compete in search engines. Therefore we advise you to create a website through domain and hosting provider services.

So you can make a more professional website at www.yourname.com.

Paid websites give you many facilities that allow your website to look good and is easily accessed by existing users. Various supporting facilities you can also get easily to enhance your website.

With paid websites we can modify the appearance of our website easily and well in just a short time. Unlike ordinary websites that need hours to do editing on existing content.

Professional VS non Professional Websites

Not only that, professional website also makes it easy for you to develop your website again with various integration facilities with applications or other devices.

2.Online Store Website

Online Store

Did you know the most popular Indonesian online store right now?

Of course you already know the answer.

Do you want to create an online store with functions that are not much different from the online stores that exist today?

If so, by using an appropriate tool you can make it in hours or even minutes, and your online store website can be accessed via the internet.

There are many types of online stores that you can make according to your wishes. Starting from the online shop with a tracking facility that is very easy for users to find out to what extent the goods they ordered.

Another facility is an automatic price comparison system with other similar items. This online shop has more complicated logic but this can be very helpful for its users. They can find out what prices are on the market without having to open another tab to make a comparison.

3. Blog

Blog

Blogs usually contain articles that aim to share the knowledge, ideas or experiences of the author. Blogs can contain notes from daily activities, personal notes, tutorials and so on.

The purpose of this blog is to share knowledge related to web hosting, internet marketing and other things.

For articles published each blog is different, starting from one day one article or even one article in one week. This depends on the quality of the article made and the number of authors.

There are blogs that aim to share and some are deliberately created with business purposes. Blogs created for business purposes are usually the type of blogs that expose information to users, and these blogs usually have advertisements on their pages as a means to make money.

Professional and unprofessional blogs can be seen from the advertisements displayed. There are blogs that display advertisements with so many compositions that people find it difficult to see what exactly the contents of the blog are because almost 50% only contain ads that are less useful. A good blog will adjust the composition of advertisements with the composition of the web material itself.

Also read; SEO Strategy for WordPress Tutorials

Benefits of a Website

Benefit of a website

Website has many benefits in our lives. You can access social media using the website. Online shopping also takes place on the website. When you need important information, you can also access it through the website.

Benefits of the website not only that, there are still many benefits that you can get from the website. Here are some website benefits that are important for you to know:

1. Building Personal Branding

Starting from the benefits of websites for personal, namely websites for personal branding. With a website you can build strong and trusted personal branding.

You can share your work and portfolio on the website. Whether it’s writing, photos, paintings, drawings, graphic designs, to music. You can build professional personal branding using a website.

Personal branding is indeed not easy to do. You must introduce yourself through the web that you have. Compiling good and interesting content becomes an important point here. If the content we create attracts other people to visit our website, then we can be sure that our branding is successful and only think of the next way to make our brand more known.

2. Sharing Stories and Information

Have you ever read the story from Oprah? Or Maybe you’ve read the traveler’s travel story. They both are examples of successful bloggers with stories through websites.

You can also follow their lead by starting to create a blog. By creating a blog you can share any story or information. From traveling, parenting, technology, finance, to culinary.

Sometimes many people visit a website or blog just because they want to read the experiences of others written on the web. With this experience the reader will be able to build the next steps for what they will plan next.

3. Make money

There are many ways to make money using a website. You can become a blogger and get a lot of endorsements or offers of cooperation. In addition, you can also register a website to Google AdSense to get money from Google ads.

You can also join an affiliate marketing program to make money from a website. Your job as an affiliate marketer is to promote products or services from other companies on your website. Then you can get a commission if you buy through your website.

Another way to make money through websites is to create an online store. You can sell various products or services on your online store website.

How To Make Some Money?

Nowadays a lot of websites are made as money-making machines. This is because there are two goals for website makers, namely developing their website while getting an injection of funds from their readers. This is like diving while drinking water. While creating content, you can also get revenue from there, interesting isn’t it?

The income you can earn from professional bloggers can be the same as you work professionally in other legal jobs. Indeed there is nothing better than a paid hobby. Nowadays it is very popular to work according to a hobby or passion, because it can deepen it with more fun.

Now Making a Website Easier!
Make money online

Creating a website is not as difficult as you think. You don’t need to be a developer or programmer to be able to create a website. Now you can create a website without needing any coding knowledge?

How to?

The trick is to use WordPress. WordPress is a website creation platform that allows you to create a website in just minutes.

With WordPress you can create high-quality websites without having to deal with coding. Simply install WordPress, buy web hosting, choose your favorite theme, install important plugins, and the website is ready.

Apart from wordpres, a personal blog can be a good website if the content is well managed. Registered on a domain that is okay and also pay attention to SEO. Good SEO on a website allows the web to be found easily by others. With good SEO your website’s position can be easily found when people search on search engines like google.

Nowadays SEO is also one of the targets of web masters. They are looking for SEO writers who understand SEO so that their website can be easily found in search engines. Source: SEO ExpertsJasa SEO Profesional in Jakarta, Indonesia

The internet’s founder now wants to ‘fix the web’, but his proposal misses the mark

Terry Flew, Queensland University of Technology

On March 12, the 30th anniversary of the World Wide Web, the internet’s founder Tim Berners-Lee said we needed to “fix the web”.

The statement attracted considerable interest.

However, a resulting manifesto released on Sunday, and dubbed the Contract for the Web, is a major disappointment.

Endorsed by more than 80 corporations and non-government organisations, the campaign seeks a return to the “open web” of the 1990s and early 2000s – one largely free of corporate control over content.

While appealing in theory, the contract glosses over several key challenges. It doesn’t account for the fact that most internet content is now accessed through a small number of digital platforms, such as Google and Facebook.

Known as the “platformisation of the internet”, it’s this phenomenon which has generated many of the problems the web now faces, and this is where the focus should be.

The internet's founder now wants to 'fix the web', but his proposal misses the mark
Tim Berners-Lee is the director of the World Wide Web Consortium, an organisation which aims to develop international standards for the web. SHUTTERSTOCK

An undercooked proposal

Berners-Lee identified major obstacles threatening the future of the web, including the circulation of malicious content, “perverse incentives” that promote clickbait, and the growing polarisation of online debate.

Having played a central role in the web’s development, he promised to use his influence to promote positive digital change.

He said the Contract for the Web was a revolutionary statement.

In fact, it’s deeply conservative.

Berners-Lee claims it’s the moral responsibility of everybody to “save the web”. This implies the solution involves engaging civic morality and corporate ethics, rather than enacting laws and regulations that make digital platforms more publicly accountable.

The contract views governments, not corporations, as the primary threat to an open internet. But governments’ influence is restricted to building digital infrastructure (such as fast broadband), facilitating online access, removing illegal content and maintaining data security.

Missing links

The contract doesn’t prescribe measures to address power misuse by digital platforms, or a solution to the power imbalance between such platforms and content creators.

This is despite more than 50 public inquiries currently taking place worldwide into the power of digital platforms.


Read more: Country rules: the ‘splinternet’ may be the future of the web


The most obvious gaps in the contract are around the obligations of digital platform companies.

And while there are welcome commitments to strengthening user privacy and data protection, there’s no mention of how these problems emerged in the first place.

It doesn’t consider whether the harvesting of user data to maximise advertising revenue is not the result of “user interfaces and design patterns”, but is instead baked into the business models of digital platform companies.

Its proposals are familiar: address the digital divide between rich and poor, improve digital service delivery, improve diversity in hiring practices, pursue human-centered digital design, and so forth.

But it neglects to ask whether the internet may now be less open because a small number of conglomerates are dominating the web. There is evidence that platforms such as Google and Facebook dominate search and social media respectively, and the digital advertising connected with these.

Not a civic responsibility

Much of the work in the contract seems to fall onto citizens, who are expected to “fight for the web”.

They bear responsibility for maintaining proper online discourse, protecting vulnerable users, using their privacy settings properly and generating creative content (presumably unpaid and non-unionized).

The contract feels like a document from the late 1990s, forged in the spirit of “militant optimism” about the internet.

It offers only pseudo-regulation for tech giants.

It also implies if tech giants can demonstrate greater diversity in hiring practices, allow users to better manage their privacy settings, and make some investments in disadvantaged communities, then they can avoid serious regulatory consequences.

Legacies of internet culture

A big question is why leading non-government organisations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Public Knowledge have signed-on to such a weak contract.

This may be because two elements of the original legacy of internet culture (as it started developing in the 1990s) are still applicable today.

One is the view that governments present a greater threat to public interest than corporations.

This leads non-governmental organisations to favour legally binding frameworks that restrain the influence of governments, rather than addressing issues of market dominance.

The contract doesn’t mention, for instance, whether governments have a role in legislating to ensure digital platforms address issues of online hate speech. This is despite evidence that social media platforms are used to spread hate, abuse and violent extremism.

The second is the tendency to think the internet is a different realm to society at large, so laws that apply to other aspects of the online environment are deemed inappropriate for digital platform companies.

An example in Australia is defamation law not being applied to digital platforms such as Facebook, but being applied to the comments sections of news websites.


Read more: A push to make social media companies liable in defamation is great for newspapers and lawyers, but not you


Berners-Lee’s manifesto for the future of the web is actually more conservative than proposals coming from government regulators, such as the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s (ACCC) Digital Platforms Inquiry.

The ACCC is closely evaluating issues arising because of digital platforms, whereas the Contract for the Web looks wistfully back to the open web of the 1990s as a path to the future.

It fails to address the changing political economy of the internet, and the rise of digital platforms.

And it’s a barrier to meaningfully addressing the problems plaguing today’s web.

Terry Flew, Professor of Communication and Creative Industries, Queensland University of Technology

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

On the Battle of Seattle’s 20th anniversary, let’s remember the Aussie coders who created live sharing

Tom Sear, UNSW

Twenty years ago, a group of Australian activists invented open source online publishing, by creating a website that went on to be pivotal in the Battle of Seattle protests.

The violent clash, which took place on November 30, 1999, between anti-globalisation activists and Seattle police, caught the world’s attention. It was also the first large-scale use of technology that allowed anyone to upload stories, photos, and video in a live feed to a website.

Today, online publishing allows multiple people to post text and multimedia content simultaneously to websites in real time, and have others comment on posts.

But this format, used on sites like Facebook and Twitter, was first conceptualised, coded and adopted by a handful of Sydney-based activists back in the 1990s.

These individuals were pioneers in kickstarting the digital disruption of mainstream media, and their actions enabled the world to openly and easily share content online.

Street-based activism

Just days before the events in Seattle, two software programmers, Matthew Arnison in Sydney and Manse Jacobi in Colorado, posted a message on indymedia.org, a new website they had developed.

It read:

The resistance is global… a trans-pacific collaboration has brought this web site into existence. The web dramatically alters the balance between multinational and activist media.

The Seattle Independent Media Centre (Indymedia) website coordinated the protest and allowed reporters to share events to the world, live.

The original Indymedia logo used on the website in 1999, in all its 90s low-pixel glory. Matthew Arnison

The site received 1.5 million hits that week. Arnison had created a movement.

The lead-up

Indymedia’s model was developed by activists in Sydney, several months before it went live on November 30 from a small shopfront in Seattle.

Activist collectives Reclaim the Street and Critical Mass regularly took over public spaces in Sydney during the 1990s.

On the Battle of Seattle's 20th anniversary, let's remember the Aussie coders who created live sharing
A Reclaim the Streets protest on November 6, 1999, at the corner of King and Wilson streets at Newtown, Sydney. (Private collection)

It was the protest-related needs of these collectives that spurred coders’ efforts to find solutions. Programmers including Arnison began writing code that allowed the sharing of stories, images, and live webcasting.

They built a website (j18.cat.org.au/) to allow global coordination and sharing of live video – what Arnison at the time called “frozen media nuggets”.

When the adapted and fine-tuned model went live in Seattle on November 30, word got out.

Wired Magazine covered a scene that foreshadowed the digital newsrooms of today. Arnison and his colleagues had created the first open sharing internet platform.

Arnison told me that before then, “it was very difficult to share photos and post text and stories online, it was impossible to do in real time and without technical skill and special type of access”.


Read more: Death on smartphones: in a world of live streamed tragedy, what do we gain?


Imagine a world where sharing a photo or a story online required complex computer skills and often took up to a day. And a “Kids Guide to the Internet” (in VHS) was required for “all that cybernet stuff”.

The start of Active Sydney

Arnison was also part of the groups Community Activist Technology (CAT) and Active Sydney, which prompted the development of software code that let people upload multimedia media stories, links, photos, video or sound material anywhere, anytime, to go live.

In January 1999, the Active Sydney website was launched.

Active Sydney inspired the Seattle site in the way it created an online space for activists to share information about events and actions, using open source code that Arnison made available to anyone around the world wishing to do the same.

Sydney resident and cofounder Gabrielle Kuiper described the site at an Amsterdam conference in March that year as:

…an online interactive forum for information and inspiration about social change in Sydney… It’s the only website which is linked to an email list operating at a city scale.

Political motives

These days we’re used to the idea of information as a commodity owned and exploited by global online corporations.

In the pioneering days of the internet, the beginnings of data commercialisation existed alongside the notion that “information wants to be free”. Hackers and cyberpunks created open source software that enabled the free flow of online content.

In a post written just two months after Wikipedia went live in 2001, Arnison said:

Open publishing is the same as free software. They’re both (r)evolutionary responses to the privatisation of information by multinational monopolies.

Looking back today, this seems ironic. But in 1999 there was a feeling that information and self-expression would tip the scales towards protesters.

Arnison notes there’s “a different type of asymmetry” at play now. He echoed theorist McKenzie Wark by saying that in today’s world, political economies rely on the asymmetry of information as a form of control.

Twenty years after the Seattle clashes, the roles of protester and politician are reversed.

In 1999, protesters used new online tools to challenge free trade. They deployed a form of citizen journalism that countered mainstream reporting, in a bid to share and obtain authentic messages.


Read more: The Punishing of Anonymous


Today, populist politicians want to be perceived as authentic, so they use live platforms like Twitter to get messages out directly and avoid the filter of mainstream media.

Back then, protesters challenged world leaders beholden to the decision-making power of multinational free trading bodies. Now, some leaders seek to exit large trading blocks and pursue nationalist trade wars.

What we didn’t see coming

When Arnison spoke to me, he noted that one thing early activist communities didn’t predict was the proliferation of online trolling and hate speech.

Hateful and toxic posts were rare in those eventful early days, when a core activity drove content sharing.

Kuiper said at the time they “had no problems with people writing inappropriate or even boring news”.

“Twenty years ago we didn’t envisage how (the internet) could be corporatised or how personal data could be monetised,” she said.

Perhaps the internet will continue to mature and flip on its head yet again.

Arnison hopes so: “I am hoping … there will be a third stage … where we figure out how to manage that toxic behaviour which made this network so wonderful in the first place.”


Read more: How Facebook and Google changed the advertising game


Tom Sear, Industry Fellow, UNSW Canberra Cyber, Australian Defence Force Academy, UNSW

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

‘Please Alexa’: are we beginning to recognise the rights of intelligent machines?

Paresh Kathrani, University of Westminster

Amazon has recently developed an option whereby Alexa will only activate if people address it with a “please”. This suggests that we are starting to recognise some intelligent machines in a way that was previously reserved only for humans. In fact, this could very well be the first step towards recognising the rights of machines.

Machines are becoming a part of the fabric of everyday life. Whether it be the complex technology that we are embedding inside of us, or the machines on the outside, the line between what it means to be human and machine is softening. As machines get more and more intelligent, it is imperative that we begin discussing whether it will soon be time to recognise the rights of robots, as much for our sake as for theirs.

When someone says that they have a “right” to something, they are usually saying that they have a claim or an expectation that something should be a certain way. But what is just as important as rights are the foundations on which they are based. Rights rely on various intricate frameworks, such as law and morality. Sometimes, the frameworks may not be clear cut. For instance, in human rights law, strong moral values such as dignity and equality inform legal rights.

So rights are often founded upon human principles. This helps partially explain why we have recognised the rights of animals. We recognise that it is ethically wrong to torture or starve animals, so we create laws against it. As intelligent machines weave further into our lives, there is a good chance that our human principles will also force us to recognise that they too deserve rights.

But you might argue that animals differ from machines in that they have some sort of conscious experience. And it is true that consciousness and subjective experience are important, particularly to human rights. Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, for example, says all human beings “are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood”.

However, consciousness and human rights are not the only basis of rights. In New Zealand and Ecuador, rivers have been granted rights because humans deemed their very existence to be important. So rights don’t emerge only from consciousness, they can extend from other criteria also. There is no one correct type or form of rights. Human rights are not the only rights.

As machines become even more complex and intelligent, just discarding or destroying them without asking any questions at all about their moral and physical integrity seems ethically wrong. Just like rivers, they too should receive rights because of their meaning to us.

The Whanganui river in New Zealand has been granted the same rights as humans. Duane Wilkins, CC BY-SA

What if there was a complex and independent machine providing health care to a human over a long period of time. The machine resembled a person and applied intelligence through natural speech. Over time, the machine and the patient built up a close relationship. Then, after a long period of service, the company that creates the machine decides that it is time to turn off and discard this perfectly working machine. It seems ethically wrong to simply discard this intelligent machine, which has kept alive and built a relationship with that patient, without even entertaining its right to integrity and other rights.

This might seem absurd, but imagine for a second that it is you who has built a deep and meaningful relationship with this intelligent machine. Wouldn’t you be desperately finding a way to stop it being turned off and your relationship being lost? It is as much for our own human sake, than for the sake of intelligent machines, that we ought to recognise the rights of intelligent machines.

Sexbots are a good example. The UK’s sexual offences law exists to protect the sexual autonomy of the human victim. But it also exists to ensure that people respect sexual autonomy, the right of a person to control their own body and their own sexual activity, as a value.

But the definition of consent in section 74 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 in the UK specifically refers to “persons” and not machines. So right now a person can do whatever they wish to a sexbot, including torture. There is something troubling about this. And it is not because we believe sexbots to have consciousness. Instead, it is probably because by allowing people to torture robots, the law stops ensuring that people respect the values of personal and sexual autonomy, that we consider important.

These examples very much show that there is a discussion to be had over the rights of intelligent machines. And as we rapidly enter an age where these examples will no longer be hypothetical, the law must keep up.

Matter of respect

We are already recognising complex machines in a manner that was previously reserved only for humans and animals. We feel that our children must be polite to Alexa as, if they are not, it will damage our own notions of respect and dignity. Unconsciously we are already recognising that how we communicate with and respect intelligent machines will affect how we communicate with and respect humans. If we don’t extend recognition to intelligent machines, then it will affect how we treat and consider humans.

Machines are integrating their way in to our world. Google’s recent experiment with natural language assistants, where AI sounded eerily like a human, gave us an insight into this future. One day, it may become impossible to tell whether we are interacting with machines or with humans. When that day comes, rights may have to change to include them as well. As we change, rights may naturally have to adapt too.

Paresh Kathrani, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Westminster

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Di publikasi oleh: Garuda Website