A plea for help: convergence, not fencesitting?

The number one objection people seem to have to the FenceSitting position (for the NMC 2004 Small Pieces event) is that it straddles a false dichotomy. I couldn’t agree more, so what I propose to do is specifically draw out the existing points of convergence between the centralized and decentralized poles, and hopefully illustrate where this process might be headed. But I need your help.

Based on the suggestions people have placed on the FenceSitter section of the wiki, I’ve drawn out a couple of issues to focus the argument a little more tightly:

I propose we define Fencesitting as protesting the false dichotomy between centralized and decentralized systems, by suggesting that hybrids and complementary strategies not only are the best approach, but are already emerging.

I devised that wording very quickly, so suggestions or revisions are more than welcome.

To make things a bit more specific I laid out a few topics where we might begin to sketch out why we’ve taken this position… again somewhat arbitrarily and I invite ideas to improve the process.

Here are the topics I listed, which I began seeding with examples:

* Centralized systems are best at…
* Decentralized systems are best at…
* Centralized systems acting like decentralized systems
* Decentralized systems acting like centralized systems…
* Other points of convergence

Again, I want to stress I’m not overly attached to this scheme… I just wanted to sketch out a framework that people might feel comfortable filling in. I’d be grateful for any contribution. Please feel free to offer suggestions how to refine these admittedly arbitrary categories (I really am an arbitrary sort…), or to propose alternative frameworks for building an example-based argument.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on A plea for help: convergence, not fencesitting?

We be moving soon!

Sorry for the downtime over the past couple of days. Apparently, the recent hassles have prompted host David Wiley to pull the plug on the Movable Type weblogs at reusability.org.

I’m bummed for all sorts of reasons. I’ve built up a fairly good complement of links to this site, and a number of postings on this weblog attract significant traffic. It’s a pain to ask people to update their links, RSS subscriptions and bookmarks — I imagine a fair number of people will decide it’s not worth it.

But I have nothing but gratitude for David. I’ll never forget watching him install Movable Type remotely over a coffee break when he visited UBC — this was after literally months of frustration trying to get MT hosting established here. I also enjoyed the association with David via that groovy reusability.org URL — however tenuous. With the similarities in addresses some people would get the impression we were collaborating very closely, and I never tried very hard to disabuse them of the notion.

I’m not sure where I will go yet. We are hosting a significant number of MT weblogs here at UBC, and that’s an obvious destination. Then again, the future of MT’s license muddies the waters somewhat. I’ve also been playing with Plone’s weblog product for the Small Pieces event. I suppose Typepad and WordPress are lurking as options as well.

In any event, a serious drag. But David — don’t feel bad, you provided a great service for free, and all I have to say to you is a great big Hee Haw-style “Saaaaaa-Luuuuuute!”

Posted in Administrivia | 1 Comment

With open systems, comes — “gasp” — process

The Small Pieces free-for-all is slowly taking shape. So far, much of the discussion has been framed around process issues (as noted by Alan and D’Arcy, among others), but that’s cool — participants are feeling their way in an open structure, one that we intentionally left ill-defined. I’ve gotten emails from a couple of very sophisticated web-types requesting clarification, so clearly there is room for more specification, and for adaptation.

My reaction to another “process discussion” was less sanguine, however, when I took a break from a weekend spent unpacking and painting to check the recent changes to the UBC wiki (it’s a tough habit to break). I noticed that an anonymous contributor had started a page prominently linked off the homepage entitled “WhyThisWikiIsn’tWorking” — with no content. So I didn’t even know what “wasn’t working”, just that some sort of attack was likely on its way.

Checking later, I learned that this same unnamed contributor had changed the welcome page on the wiki, which invited participation from “anyone in the learning community”, and restricted it to “UBC Faculty and Students.”

It was accompanied by the WhatsWrongWithThisWiki manifesto — now sporting the slightly more neutral moniker SitePurposeDiscussion, though the thesis had not changed:

The old description on the FrontPage said that this was intended for anyone in the learning community.

I feel like part of the global learning community, but I feel that this space is not intended for me and my ilk.

This seems much more like a space for UBC staff and students to coordinate over.

This is an important distinction.

… I’m making this page because there is presently a tension between public and private. Many people on the private side seem to believe that they are working with public process, and want to work with public process, but don’t seem to understand how it works.

It’s probably a good thing that I didn’t have time to respond right then, as my initial reaction was to mutter a stream of obscenities.

This attack strikes something of a personal sore point, as I have struggled to balance the reasonable expectations of my home institution (which funds the server, and pays the salaries of myself and others who work on the system), and the desire to keep the system as open and inviting to broader participation as possible. I have heard some muted criticisms from others here at UBC (mostly second-hand) questioning the purpose of the wiki, and expressing concerns about the openness of the system. So to be condemned as exclusionary and selfish at the same time — by someone sufficiently empowered to change the welcome message, however briefly — got my dander up.

You can see how I eventually responded in the SitePurposeDiscussion itself. Who knows, the conversation may continue — though I would much rather dedicate this time and energy to Small Pieces. It’s been a good test of my commitment to open systems — how do I respond when things take a turn I really don’t like? (With a mixture of accomodation and annoyance, apparently.) I hope this isn’t a harbinger of battles to come, I haven’t the desire nor the time to engage in meaningless wrangling over the ‘true’ nature of wikiness.

Posted in wikis | Comments Off on With open systems, comes — “gasp” — process

It’s quiet. Too quiet.

It may seem like nothing is happening here, but the horrifying reality is there’s too much happening at once. In addition to the normal workload (involving three different half-day workshops to deliver in three days, among other things), I’ve taken on a couple of pretty big side projects — I shouldn’t talk about them at this point, but both will be public in a few months. It’s meant 14 hour days for the past few weeks… Add in a bout of illness, moving to a new place last weekend, and a Canadian team in the Stanley Cup Finals — the result is a low profile on my public spaces.

Among the victims of neglect has been the FenceSitter Weblog and Resource SuperPortal, which is my piece of the upcoming NMC happening, Small Pieces Loosely Joined, co-led by Alan Levine and D’Arcy Norman.

I am way beyond excitement about this event. It’s a huge kick working with these guys again — and I can’t wait to see them in person at the conference in a couple weeks.

It’s been gratifying to see the response from diverse quarters as word has leaked out (a bit earlier than expected) about what we’re trying to do — whatever that might be. My own hope is that things will turn out nothing like what we expect… that enough participation will kick in from the event itself and remote locations that things will veer off into uncharted territory. Thanks so much to everyone who has already agreed to take part, and if you feel like joining in, consider yourself invited.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have many boxes to unpack. See you in a couple days.

Posted in Abject Learning | 1 Comment

Feed2JS — Kickin’ Out the RSS Jams

People who read this weblog regularly are no doubt tired of my incessant shout-outs for Alan Levine. I know Alan is…

But Maricopa’s new Feed2JS service really raises the bar for displaying RSS feeds online. I needn’t add any hype, the pages speak for themselves just fine.

Posted in XML/RSS | Comments Off on Feed2JS — Kickin’ Out the RSS Jams

The social software juggernaut — coming soon to a PC near you…

I’m going to file this under “no comment”…

Bottom-up collaboration is about exposing information and letting others decide what they want. This eliminates one of the biggest barriers to information flow: The fear that something you send out will not be wanted, when it may be the most important piece of information you have at the moment, though only to someone else who is prepared to recognize and use that information strategically or tactically.

Now, Mr. Gates is just getting this idea, but there is a small army of Microsofties already hard at work on this. As Reuters points out, Microsoft already has 700 bloggers on its payroll. About 1.2 percent of the company’s workforce already blogs publicly and there are myriad internal blogs, wikis, and other forms of bottom-up collaboration going on inside the Redmond, Washington-based giant.

Indeed, in recent months, Microsoft has hired Ward Cunningham, who created the wiki, an easy collaborative work environment, and last year enlisted Robert Scoble, a tireless blogger and former marketer at blog developer Userland Software, to evangelize Longhorn to developers.

Via Roland Tanglao.

Posted in Emergence | Comments Off on The social software juggernaut — coming soon to a PC near you…

Why phones are replacing cars…

A rather bold assertion from The Economist. In a social sense, mobile phones are replacing cars:

Phones are now the dominant technology with which young people, and urban youth in particular, now define themselves. What sort of phone you carry and how you customise it says a great deal about you, just as the choice of car did for a previous generation. In today’s congested cities, you can no longer make a statement by pulling up outside a bar in a particular kind of car. Instead, you make a similar statement by displaying your mobile phone, with its carefully chosen ringtone, screen logo and slip cover. Mobile phones, like cars, are fashion items: in both cases, people buy new ones far more often than is actually necessary. Both are social technologies that bring people together; for teenagers, both act as symbols of independence. And cars and phones alike promote freedom and mobility, with unexpected social consequences.

Via Ratchet Up.

Posted in Emergence | Comments Off on Why phones are replacing cars…

Paper never gets the chance to solidify

I’m down with the essentially anonymous character of wiki co-construction — it may not be a requirement, but it is somehow emblematic of “the wiki way”, whatever the hell that might be…

But sometimes I wish people would sign their contributions. Like this reflection somebody just posted on our space, entitled WhyWiki:

Why Wiki?

I like writing. But sometimes, a la Peter DeVries, I can’t stand the paperwork. After a few hours of writing, I start to notice the fibre of the paper and remember that once upon a time, the page was a nothing but solid, living wood. Then my pen gets heavy, as if stuck in sap, carving gnarled, knotted language into an uncooperative medium. The page transforms into one gigantic block, though not the kind of block used for building houses for stuffed animals or castles for imaginary friends. It’s not a fun block, writer’s block, because it lets you build only by its absence, never by its presence.

Word processors don’t make a difference. Don’t believe me? Try ’em. You will. The problem with word processors is that they are simply paper projected onto a screen. When we type a Word document, it is usually with the intention of printing it onto paper at some point. The Block gets in there, scans itself, downloads your document. E-Blocks. Watch out. Carving words into a screen is only slightly easier than carving them in blood on your arm.

So I wiki. Why? Because it doesn’t matter. Sure, people might read it, but it is electronic, unreliable, ethereal. It is something I don’t entirely understand. But what I like, what I really enjoy about wiki writing, is that paper never gets the chance to solidify against me.

All I know is that the contributor(s) used a wireless connection here on campus. Come out, come out, wherever you are! I’ll pelt you with praise and flower petals.

Posted in wikis | Comments Off on Paper never gets the chance to solidify

Wi-Fi Freakin’ Futurism Fandango!!!!!!!

I like this line from today’s OLDaily

One of the oldest rules of technology is this: people will use technology in ways it was never intended to be used. Futurists fail endlessly to predict the impact of technology because they look at the technology, not the people. But you have to watch the people.

… but I have a rejoinder to his “key question: why would a student travel to campus to access wirelessly when he or she could do it from the Starbucks downtown?”

Being fortunate enough to work at a wireless campus, that’s obvious. Because it’s free, baaaay-beeeee!!!!!!!!

It ain’t free at Starbucks. Secondly (and frankly I’m surprised Stephen didn’t think of this), Starbucks does not serve beer. But the grad student pub here on campus features a delightful selection on tap.

I’d deny having ever set foot in the place, but photographic evidence exists (scroll down).

Posted in Abject Learning | 1 Comment

Big-time publishing fun with personalization…

I had no idea this degree of customization was possible, though it sounds like the technology was supplemented by a significant degree of elbow-grease…

The idea surfaced a year ago at a cocktail party: What if you opened your mailbox to find a national magazine with your name on the cover and the headline “They Know Where You Live!” — under an aerial photo of your house? And what if, when you turned the page, the editor’s note and the advertisements included details about your neighbors?

It was too sexy a concept for Nick Gillespie, editor in chief of Reason magazine, to pass up. So, equipped with subscriber names and addresses, free Internet downloads and some fancy printing technology, Gillespie’s staff and a team of direct-marketing experts produced 40,000 unique copies of the L.A.-based Libertarian magazine — shocking and delighting readers with personalized June issues that were sent out last week.

The cover photos are framed as if viewed through a telescope, and they reveal local landmarks — schools, post offices, football stadiums.

“It’s a little creepy,” says hypnotherapist Lon Waford, whose copy featured his office building in downtown Pocatello, Idaho. “They’ve circled in red exactly where my building is.”

On the back cover, an ad for the civil liberties law firm Institute of Justice tells readers how many homes and businesses in their state have been condemned in the last five years. Inside, an ad for the Marijuana Policy Project, which seeks to reform marijuana laws, tells readers how their congressional representative voted on medical marijuana legislation.

“All of us have read ‘1984,’ ” says Waford. “The possibilities of ‘1984’ are more real than ever.”

…The customization of the magazine was a nifty experiment and a great promotional opportunity for everyone involved, but it was a logistical nightmare. A team of a dozen people in six states, from Connecticut to Arkansas to California, spent several months collating data and publishing test copies before realizing the final product.

“I certainly hope we never do it again,” says Gillespie. “It was a very difficult task of orchestration. None of the main people involved were in the same time zone, much less the same office.” The first step was compiling information. Led by San Bernardino direct-marketing firm Entremedia, the team downloaded maps and free satellite photos of each subscriber’s mailing address — courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey and Microsoft’s TerraServer.com. (Later, higher-quality images were donated by AirPhotoUSA.)

Then hundreds of details on each subscriber’s neighborhood — from the number of children living with their grandparents to the percentage of neighbors with college degrees — were pulled off the U.S. Census Bureau’s website, factfinder.census.gov.

And that was just the free stuff available to anyone with Internet access. With a little bit of money, the issue could have included much more, from a reader’s mortgage payment to his or her favorite brand of deodorant, “but that would start to look kind of scary on the cover,” says Entremedia President Rodger Cosgrove.

From San Bernardino, Cosgrove and his staff spent a week creating a computer file for each personalized cover and stored everything on two hard drives. Then they drove those hard drives to Cal Poly in San Luis Obispo, where all the data were merged and downloaded onto the school’s Xeikon DCP 50D digital web press, a $235,000 machine that can mass-produce unique color copies.

“On one level, an intelligent high school student could acquire these images and juxtapose them with one another,” says Cosgrove. “The trick is writing software to do it tens of thousands of times and have a press that’s capable of doing it at commercial speeds.”

LA Times, This issue will hit you where you live (registration required) via Bookslut.

Posted in Abject Learning | 1 Comment