- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

nice Chronicle story (U.S.) featuring AoIR-ists
by Charles Ess 13 Jul '11

13 Jul '11

<http://chronicle.com/article/Harvards-Privacy-Meltdown/128166/?sid=at&utm_s ource=at&utm_medium=en> - including Elizabeth Buchanan (chair of our ethical guidelines committee), Alex Halavais (current V-P, soon to be Prez), and Michael Zimmer. Congrats, dear colleagues! - charles ess Institut for Informations- og Medievidenskab Helsingforsgade 14 8200 Århus N. Denmark mail: <imvce(a)hum.au.dk> tel: (+45) 8942 9250 Professor, Philosophy and Religion Drury University, Springfield, Missouri 65802 USA Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23

3 2

First CfP: Third Joint EM+/CNGL Workshop (JEC2011) 'Bringing MT to the User: Research Meets Translators'
by "Венцислав Жечев (Ven tsislav Zhechev)" 13 Jul '11

13 Jul '11

======================================== CALL FOR PAPERS –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– "Bringing MT to the User: Research Meets Translators" Third Joint EM+/CNGL Workshop (JEC 2011) http://web.me.com/emcnglworkshop/JEC2011 –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– The EuroMatrixPlus Project (http://www.euromatrixplus.eu) the Centre for Next Generation Localisation (CNGL) (http://cngl.ie) the Directorate-General for Translation (DGT, European Commission) (http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation) and Autodesk (http://www.autodesk.ch) are co-organising the Third Joint EM+/CNGL Workshop (JEC 2011), entitled “Bringing MT to the User: Research Meets Translators”. The JEC 2011 workshop will be hosted by the Directorate General for Translation (DGT) (http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation) in Luxembourg on October 14th, 2011. In keeping with previous JECs, the format of the workshop is highly interactive with research paper presentations, invited talks and a panel discussion. Premise: Recent years have seen a revolution in MT triggered by the emergence of statistical approaches and improvements in translation quality. MT (rule-based, statistical and hybrid) is now available for many languages for free (on the Web) or for a fee and MT technologies are making strong inroads into the corporate localisation and translation industries as well as large public and administrative organisations dealing with multi-lingual content. Open-source MT solutions are competing with proprietary products. Increasing numbers of (professional) translators are post-editing TM/MT output. MT is a reality for internet users accessing and gisting content which is not available in their native language. At the same time, there has been a degree of disconnect between mainstream academic research and conferences on MT, often (and rightly so) focusing on algorithms to improve translation quality, and many of the important practical issues that need to be addressed to make MT maximally useful in real translation and localisation workflows, with human translators and users in general. Objectives: JEC 2011 brings together translators, users, academic and industrial MT researchers and developers to discuss issues that are most important in real world industrial settings and applications involving MT, but currently under-represented in research circles. Call for Research Papers: We solicit full research papers with industry, academic and/or user background to highlight real-world issues that need to be tackled by new research and recent advancements that improve translation quality, as well as novel and successful methods for the integration of machine translation with translation memories, localisation workflows, human translators and users. Papers should present clearly identifiable problem statements, research methodologies, measurable outcomes and evaluation. Papers are reviewed anonymously. Papers should follow the submission guidelines listed on the workshop website (http://web.me.com/emcnglworkshop/JEC2011/Call_for_Papers.html) with the maximum length being 10 pages in A4 format, including references. Please, do not include your name in the paper text and avoid overt self-references to facilitate the blind review process. If a paper is accepted, at least one author will have to register for JEC 2011 and travel to Luxembourg to present the paper. Workshop proceedings will be made available in hard-copy by DGT, and will be available for download on the JEC 2011 website. Publication of selected revised and expanded papers from JEC 2010 and JEC 2011 in journal or book form is currently under negotiation. Topics include but are not limited to: • Human Factors and MT • Introducing MT into large organisations • MT and language technologies for SMEs • MT/TM in Localisation/Translation and Content Management Workflows • MT/TM Combinations • Post-Editing Support for MT • MT and Monolingual Post-Editing • Smart Learning from Post-Edits • Interactive MT • MT Confidence Scores and Post-Editing Effort • Training Data for MT: Size, Domain and Quality • Data Cleanup and Preparation for MT • Meta-Data Mark-Up/Annotation and MT • Terminology and MT • Interoperability and Localisation/Translation Workflows • Standards and Localisation/Translation Workflows • MT Evaluation • Costing/Pricing MT • MT for Free/for a Fee • Rule-Based, Statistical and Hybrid MT • Linguistic resources for MT • Computing Resources for MT • MT in the Cloud • MT and the Crowd • MT, Games, Video and TV Localisation • (Machine) Translation in Context • Social Aspects of (Machine) Translation: Access to Information as a Human Right Deadlines (all 23:59 GMT -11): 15th August: Submission deadline for papers 12th September: Announcement for submitted papers 30th September: Camera-ready deadline for accepted papers 14th October: Workshop takes place at DGT in Luxembourg Workshop Chair: Ventsislav Zhechev (Autodesk) Workshop Senior PC: Ventsislav Zhechev (Autodesk) Andreas Eisele (DGT) Philipp Koehn (Univ. of Edinburgh) Josef van Genabith, Declan Groves (CNGL) Program Committee: Submitted papers will be reviewed by a joint industry–academia committee. Industry members: Pedro L. Diez-Orzas (Linguaserve), Tony O’Dowd (Xcelerator), Marc Dymetman (XRCE), Andreas Eisele (DGT of the EC), Daniel Grasmick (Lucy Software), Michael Jellinghaus (European Parliament), Will Lewis (Microsoft), Yanjun Ma (Baidu), Spyridon Pilos (DGT of the EC), Alexandros Poulis (European Parliament), Johann Roturier (Symantec), Andy Way (Applied Language Solutions), Ventsislav Zhechev (Autodesk) Academic members: Michael Carl (CBS, Denmark), Jinhua Du (Xi’ian Univ. of Technology), Josef van Genabith (CNGL, EM+), Declan Groves (CNGL), Philipp Koehn (EM+), Philippe Langlais (University of Montreal), Alon Lavie (CMU), Ruslan Mitkov (RIILP, UK), Lucia Specia (RIILP, UK), Eiichiro Sumita (NICT, Japan), John Tinsley (CNGL, PLuTO), Hans Uszkoreit (DFKI, Germany), David Vilar (DFKI, Germany), Martin Volk (UZH, Switzerland) For inquiries please contact Dr. Ventsislav Zhechev at emcnglworkshop(a)me.com For up-to-date information, please visit http://web.me.com/emcnglworkshop/JEC2011 For information about the First Joint EM+/CNGL Workshop, please visit http://www.euromatrixplus.eu/cngl2009 For information about the Second Joint EM+/CNGL Workshop, please visit http://web.me.com/emcnglworkshop/JEC2010

1 0

Re: [Air-L] deception of paypal
by Marj Kibby 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

Gene, I'm very sorry to hear of your expensive experience. However when given a choice of using a credit card or the Bill Me Later service which clearly offers 'more time to pay' I think it is up to the consumer to find out what is involved in the two options. In financial transactions generally "More time to pay" means "More Expensive". Pay Pal has a number of advantages and I hope AoIR contines to offer convenient payment methods. Regards Marj Associate Professor Marjorie Kibby, B.Ed, M.A, Ph.D, FHERDSA Head of Discipline: Film, Media and Cultural Studies School of Humanities and Social Science The University of Newcastle Callaghan NSW 2308 Australia Marj.Kibby(a)newcastle.edu.au +61 2 49216604

1 0

deception of paypal
by gene loeb 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

Attention all, I wanted to make readers aware of the deception of the services used to pay for membership in AIR in May6. At the membership site, there was a choice of paying by pay pal. I an not acquainted with purchasing on line and use a credit card to payThey some bills. Pay Pal appeared to be a convenient way to pay my 45 dollars membership. I thought they would send me a bill. Buried deep in my email, I saw a note from "Billme later.." I thought it was an ad, not knowing what was sent to me. I had no recognation of how to pay my paypal and thought it was linked tpo my visa bank card. Today, I received in the mail a bill from "Billme later", my first such bill. It was for $109, when membership is only $45. I also received a phone message from their customer service. In this conversation, the deception became aware to me. BILLMELATER is an online FINANCE COMPANY linked to PAYPAL. The notice I did see today was difficult for an old guy to realize that Io needed to sigh into a website to get my bill. Further shock: while Congress has recently passed legislation to regulate bank fees, this online company, *billmelater is chaging maimum fees *BECAUSE IT IS REGULATED. Because I didn't realize what was going on, the billing company for PAYPAL purposely waited TWO months to call me and send a bill. *The late fee was $25 FOR THE FIRST MONTH AND $35 +$2 FOR THE SECOND MONTH.* Outrageous and unregulated. The professional organization of Internet researchers allows this to happen or is not knowledgeable. This is not a way to get members. AIR needs to find another way, not allowing PAY PAL to operate. Gene Gene Loeb, Ph.D. .

3 2

Content analysis weblog comments
by John McAuley 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

Hey all, Thanks to everyone who answered my last question. I can add all the suggestions into a digest and post if required. I do have one other question, however. I am conducting a content analysis of weblogs. I have scrapped all the comments into a database, sampled and am currently conducing an inductive categorization approach. HOWEVER, should I be grouping the comments by weblog or does it matter? It is pretty easy to understand the comments in the first place, and I can check the original post if needs be, but I want to ensure I am on terra firma. Thanks y'all, j -- John McAuley ------ Knowledge & Data Engineering Group Trinity College Dublin Ireland ------

1 0

NSF funding for social science in jeopardy
by christina dunbar-hester 12 Jul '11

12 Jul '11

Apologies for cross-posting. -- Christina Dunbar-Hester, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Journalism & Media Studies School of Communication & Information Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 4 Huntington Street New Brunswick, NJ 08901 email: christdh(a)rutgers.edu office: DeWitt 101 (185 College Ave.) web: http://comminfo.rutgers.edu/directory/christdh/index.html phone: +1 732-932-7500 ext. 8180 fax: +1 732-932-6916 ********************************* >From Laurel Smith-Doerr: Dear Colleagues, The House Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice & Science (CJS) is considering changing the 2012 appropriation to eliminate the Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences (SBE). The Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), a coalition to which the ASA belongs supporting Federal funding for the social sciences, is encouraging its members to write to their House Representatives and Senators, urging the House to continue to support the human sciences at NSF. Having had the privilege of serving recently as one of the Program Officers at the NSF in the SBE directorate, I want to endorse COSSA's request, believing that eliminating SBE would be disastrous for the social sciences in the US and for sociology in particular. So I encourage you to write to your House Representatives and US Senators, ideally before the CJS Subcommittee meeting on 7 July, or before the full House Appropriations Committee meeting on 13 July, and at least before the floor discussion scheduled for the week of 25 July. You may want to copy Subcommittee Chair Frank Wolf R-VA and Ranking Member Chakah Fattah D-PA and perhaps other members of the Subcommittee ( http://www.appropriations.house.gov/Subcommittees/Subcommittee/?IssueID=347…) and Appropriations Committee Chair Harold Rogers (R-KY) and Ranking Member Norm Dicks (D-WA) (http://www.appropriations.house.gov) You can find contact information for your representative using the ?Write Your Representative? feature athttps://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml, and you will find a list of Senators, sortable by state, at http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm. We all lead busy lives and if you prefer to send something more or less ready made I suggest something along the lines of the letter made available by the previous Assistant Director of SBE (a linguist) at http://www.lsadc.org/info/NSFSBEletter.pdf. You may copy and paste the text from this letter (make sure the formatting has copied appropriately) and if you have the opportunity, elaborate and tell your representatives something about our field. Furthermore, you might strengthen your argument by pointing to NSF-supported work being conducted at a university in the representative's area. Support will be particularly valuable from the Republican party. I wrote to Scott Brown, using the AD's letter as a starting point. My letter is pasted below (unformatted). Please feel free to forward this request to colleagues, I have taken parts of it from the linguists but obviously it is important for representatives to hear from all of the social sciences. Laurel Smith-Doerr July 1, 2011 Scott Brown US Senator 2400 JFK Federal Building 15 New Sudbury St. Boston, MA 02203 Dear Senator Brown, I am alarmed to hear that the House Commerce, Justice & Science Committee is considering eliminating or severely cutting back the directorate for Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences at the National Science Foundation (NSF). In the US, basic research in the social sciences is funded alongside the natural sciences and engineering, through the same agency. This is unusual from an international perspective and means that the social sciences are done better here, by being more closely integrated with work in the other sciences. Having the full range of basic science funded within one agency has led to more collaborative, interdisciplinary work, with better results on all sides. One major example of this integration is our study of scientific innovation itself, one of the most important drivers of a strong economy (as acknowledged in the 2007 America COMPETES Act, which was led by the Bush Administration but supported across parties). Somehow basic science conducted at lab benches and engineering projects started in garages produce new knowledge products that spark new industries like biotechnology and information technology which give the United States a real competitive edge in the global marketplace. This innovation process is not yet well understood but is a central concern across social sciences including sociology, economics, psychology, and science policy studies. The importance of better understanding the innovation process (in order to facilitate it) has generated the new interdisciplinary area called the science of science and innovation policy (SciSIP). This program at NSF is funding research to scientifically understand the innovation process and which policies are more effective at producing beneficial outcomes in science and technology. NSF is unique in combining experts from the social sciences with experts in natural sciences and engineering. For example, social scientists and chemists in Massachusetts (and other states) have received grants in a collaborative initiative at NSF between SciSIP (in Social/Behavioral/ Economic Sciences directorate) and Chemistry (in Math/Physical Sciences directorate). An article in this week?s Chemical and Engineering News ('Measuring Chemistry's Impact') announces the initiative and its importance to understanding the chemical sciences. This initiative 'Pathways to Innovation in the Chemical Sciences' would not have been possible if social sciences were not part of NSF. More information about this initiative and others in the study of innovation and science policy can be found at the following website: ( http://www.scienceofsciencepolicy.net/page/about-sosp) The integration of all the basic sciences at the NSF represents one of the national treasures of the US, which has yielded much competitive advantage. Massachusetts has been at the forefront of this kind of interdisciplinary research, as it has led innovation and science in general. I urge you to oppose any efforts to weaken that integration, which will be detrimental to our state and our nation. Sincerely, Laurel Smith-Doerr Associate Professor of Sociology Boston University Ldoerr(a)bu.edu

2 1

Re: [Air-L] question: published on the internet
by Andrew Schrock 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

On Jul 11, 2011, at 3:00 PM, air-l-request(a)listserv.aoir.org wrote: > when is something published on the internet? I think a distinction needs to be made between "published" (let's just call this the releasing of information via a publication of one sort or other) and merely being publicly accessible (which can happen more informally in many ways). To my mind, the difference lies in the expectations of authors and the publisher (where applicable). A few cases might help illustrate. danah boyd's public drafts are clearly not formally published, but made accessible to encourage commentary and collaboration. I would consider most blogs to fit with this kind of aesthetic. Accessible, not necessarily spit-polished-final-state, and not published in the more formal sense. Blog posts might be the beginning of a paper that sees more formal publishing, or it might just be its final state. Conference papers are a good example of a gray area. Papers presented at the International Communication Association (ICA) are password-protected but still available online. It's neither made "generally known" nor disseminated "to the public" and not all conference presenters want their papers publicly available. Whether this is "published" depends on the context and discipline. Although most publishers would still consider it unpublished, this isn't a universal. Also see: the flap about getting book contracts from dissertations & the recent piece in Chronicle of higher ed. > does publishing something on the internet make it public? Not necessarily, IMHO. Most journal articles are published but not accessible to those without an academic hookup. When I read "public" I think of a work being easily findable and accessible. Most journals - even those with an online presence - are unfortunately not public access. First Monday - yes. Communication Research - no. It's ironic to me that most scholars, once their work has been published online, put versions up on their personal websites (or academia.edu, etc.) so that it can be more widely found and read. Even as peer-reviewed journal publications are the coin of the realm. > does making something public necessarily make it not private? > > can private information be published and thus be made public? There many, many gradients between private and public, which I think was what Michael was getting at. What is the context? The concept of privacy entails a comparison - private from whom and why - so I am pessimistic about generalizations being possible. My driver's license in my wallet might be visible every time I open it, but I would rather not have it posted on a website. I might have a conversation with a friend about a project I'm working on, and its central ideas are audible to anyone within earshot, but I might not be too keen about having myself recorded and posted online. A Andrew Schrock USC Annenberg Doctoral Student aschrock(a)usc.edu 714.330.6545

2 1

Google to launch Institute for Internet and Society in Berlin in October
by Cornelius Puschmann 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

I thought this might be interesting to some of you: http://googlepolicyeurope.blogspot.com/2011/07/research-institute-for-inter… Coverage in English: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/google-to-open-internet-research… http://www.thelocal.de/sci-tech/20110711-36211.html ...and in German: http://www.zeit.de/digital/internet/2011-07/google-uni-institut http://www.sueddeutsche.de/digital/institut-fuer-internet-und-gesellschaft-… Best, Cornelius -- Dr. Cornelius Puschmann, M.A. Department for English Language and Linguistics Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf Building 23.11, Level 1, Room 21 Universitätsstrasse 1 40225 Düsseldorf Germany +49 211 81 15927 (office) Nachwuchsforschergruppe "Wissenschaft und Internet" / Junior Researchers Group "Science and the Internet" http://nfgwin.uni-duesseldorf.de

2 1

Canadian Spam law may be of interest here.
by Peter Timusk 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

Because we are all voluntarily on this e-mail list we consent to e-mail received from the list is my understanding. Many of us have never met in person nor are family members of each other. Read more on the link if you want. These definitions they make here of personal relationship and family allow those of us who are family or have personal relations (i.e. have met in person) to legally e-mail each other. http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2011/2011-07-09/html/reg1-eng.html Vol. 145, No. 28 - July 9, 2011 Electronic Commerce Protection Regulations Statutory authority An Act to promote the efficiency and adaptability of the Canadian economy by regulating certain activities that discourage reliance on electronic means of carrying out commercial activities, and to amend the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Act, the Competition Act, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act and the Telecommunications Act Sponsoring department Department of Industry REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT (This statement is not part of the Regulations.) Peter Timusk B.Math statistics. BA legal studies Legal studies of the Information Age Vice President Computers for Communites School work blog http://notebook.webpagex.org Some papers www.webpagex.org

1 0

Qualitative Data Repositories
by Aneesha Bakharia 11 Jul '11

11 Jul '11

Hi Does anybody know of any qualitative data repositories? I am looking for open datasets that contain free text responses (eg opened ended survey questions). Regards Aneesha

2 2