Limited Support by WordPress

After several days of test (of unstable running), we are sure that its daily automatic running function does not work well. The hourly one’s running barely well (it’s like they do not actually automatically post hour by hour but generate 8 posts in a roll after 9 hours or so). It could still work if the user do not mind being too alert to read every article (maybe they can read one per day, and we only hope that once the donation appealing news is out we could track it for you in 90 days aftermath). Besides getting money is not that easy, so we assume there are not that many users who is excited to received rss from our site.

這個站運作得有點不穩定,若是設成每日更新一次它並不會更新。若是設成每小時更新一次它會9小時後一次更新8篇。所以對使用者並不算是非常方便,不過我們想也許並不是很多人想要每小時都盯著要捐款。如果一天只找一篇文章看其實還好。我們只希望在災難發生的90天內我們可以透過搜尋引擎替你追蹤到這些可能需要幫助的對象。

Another issue is the content of meta search engines changes quickly, too. During these months we’ve successfully retrieved results from Ask.com, Baidu.com, aol.com, and so on. During our development phase, at some point, they upgraded their technology to protect the spread of information (it’s easy if you don’t want to specify for good or bad purpose suppose the data is produced and blown out), or some engines define their specific APIs. We are unsure if our programming using of them pushed them to upgrade. These might arise from commercial consideration and might have their IP property conflict with the real content providers, but from our point of view, even though there are dreaming claims like big data, it’s about to be isolated (commercialization). So.com (Qihoo 360 search) temporarily takes over our lack of support from Baidu, but right now the information we retrieved from them has changed if you compare the links in our current post with the one on June 9th. We could roughly say it was normal before June 9th, but right now for same keywords we only retrieved information like links to dictionary.

另外一個因素是這些引擎更新技術很快,例如Ask.com,Baidu,AOL,我們都曾能成功使用程式透過這些站找到有用的資訊。我們並不曉得是不是因為我們使用程式去找這些站無意間促使了他們的升級動作。這些升級動作的結果是救災資訊被關閉了。So.com曾短暫取代了百度而幫我們找到很多有用的資訊,但6/9後我們利用程式找到的資訊也”變質”成出現大部份只有字典類的結果。

What happened? In our previous post, we suppose that we could depend on some search engines because of their expertise in indexing and ranking, like standing on the shoulder of giants. But those are still professional enough keep their doors (by setting up new technology from scraping).

怎麼一回事呢?我們之前的發文假設我們可以站在巨人的肩上利用專家整理的資料幫忙找有用的捐款資訊,現在專家們似乎失去了部份能力。

The above two are technology issues; about the charity business issues, the organizations we’ve contacted either tell us please send us the report because they do not know technology too much then they stop contact (which include Paul Walker’s Reach Out Worldwide, http://www.roww.org, while we visited them at Burbank, LA, their manager tells us now they have financial problems too, or the NPO taiwan http://www.npo.org.tw, when we are contacting them several times for possible funding inquiry they do not want to know anything related to Internet but just told us they will forward the information to the outsourcing technology company, period).

前述為科技面的問題,在公益面的問題上我們有嘗試聯絡專業公益團體也未果:例1我們聯絡並訪問Paul Walker先生位於Burbank的Reach Out Worldwide,該團體目前負責人也表示他們現在有財務問題。我們聯絡台灣公益資訊中心幾次,負責小姐也很類似的回應請我們寄文件給她們(因為她們可能覺得系統複雜,嘗試數次解釋未果),會轉交給外包廠商,然後就不了了之。

Actually it’s not that hard, it is just as simple as that we help you to save your time in setting up some advanced search criterion so you don’t have too check (1) if the Paypal link is fake or suspicious (2) if the nonprofit keeps its decent record to some extent, here we thought examining start-up nonprofit does not have to be perfectly good).

其實我們只是幫使用者多檢查幾個步驟以確保捐款連結不是假的,以及這些小公益團體有一定程度的良好紀錄可以說服捐款人。

There are four major components:
(1) A program periodically checks and updates the information provided by Pacific Disaster Center(http://pdc.org).
(2) A web crawler crawling search engines searching for donation request from nonprofits according to the keywords provided by (1)
(3) A paypal checking fetching link to check if the official paypal website has found some error in this appealing.
(4) A program querying national-wide non-profit watchdog group Guidestar (http://www.guidestar.org) for showing the records in links.
During our development phase, we found that there are sites providing similar partial functions.

本站四個主要元件為:
(1) 一隻程式定時查找太平洋災難中心最新全球性災難資料。
(2) 一個透過其他搜尋引擎找
救災請求的程式(關鍵字從(1)得來)。
(3) 一個透過paypal提供功能確定該捐款連結是否有問題的程式。
(4) 一隻透過Guidestar查詢該公益團體紀錄的程式以供捐款者參考。
我們知道有些網站提供部份相似功能但不完全。

So now it becomes that the challenge lies in crossing field applications – it’s hard to make both sides happy if the idea is original. Even when it comes to academical publication, people in meta search engine field have some hesitation in response (we have some friend in that field traveling from UK to Netherland then lost contact). We were facing the 80/20 problem too.

現在的問題變成跨界的應用很難擺平兩方讓他們都高興。甚至我們考慮聯絡學術界詢問meta search研究者研究發表方向都未果(有認識台大專家畢業後赴英轉荷蘭就失去聯絡了)。一樣是大者可能有機會恒大的問題。

We guess which also means if charity business is calculated and controlled due to professional requirement, then people might still get numbed. Another possibility we guess there should be axiom in the sinful oriented universe? Maybe an ambition to get money from charity business is against the nature (here we do not mention those like producing fancy slogans or bracelets) because which might affect the foundation of religions. Maybe there is some hidden rule that either you don’t know technology or you get attracted by technology for their purpose on you. It’s hard to hurdle them.

我們猜想也許這表示慈善事業若太過依賴專業算計會變質,或者是這個世界可能就是設計成贖罪導向,如果想要全然靠慈善事業賺錢幾乎是不可能的任務(不包括印製醒目標語或隊服手鍊等),因為邏輯會有衝突(宗教可能就不知道為什麼會被設計了)。也許要不就是有潛規則像是你會被科技吸引而亂花錢,卻很難駕馭它們。總之劇本走向變數多,我們只能儘量掌控。

The site might still keep running, just in case someone might need it. If you have much more passion for good purpose, we’d love to release the source code to you.

所以我們不會主動宣傳這個網站,但它就在這可以被搜尋到。如果你有熱情我們會很樂意給你程式碼。