Monday, October 22, 2012
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Clay Shirkey - Cognitive Surplus and Changing the World
What is a culture of generosity and how can it be used to improve education?
Ushahidi illustrates that the donation of free time and talents plus digital technology equals Cognitive Surplus which focuses on the ability of the public to volunteer time and effort on large projects to create civic value. Civic value of shared information is the value of designing for generosity. There is 1 trillion hours per year of generosity available, and according to Clay, we need to tap into that resource. How can this be applied to education? One way possibly could be a method in which people could share insights into shared problems. By insights, I mean knowledge that is obtained by attaining a clear and deep understanding of a complex problem. If this information could be mined, verified and shared by people, then this could be a type of educational civic value
According to Clay, the gap that we need to traverse is between doing anything and doing nothing. At least those who produce pictures of cats are doing something. Clay suggests that we design for generosity. He cites a study of Deterrence Theory which states that if you want somebody to do less of something, punish that action. Unfortunately, I don't entirely trust in his example of people who are fined for picking up their children late from schools is a disapproval of deterrence theory as much as it is how a minor fine results in people saying it's worth it to continue a bad action. If the fine had been increased substantially, no doubt compliance would have followed suit.
What does it mean to say, "Free cultures get what they celebrate?"
Dean Kamen, one of my heroes of technology-the creator of the "Luke's arm", creator of the Segway, organizer of FIRST robotics competition stated that "free cultures get what they celebrate." This idea is that if we celebrate entertainment and sports, then our youth will produce the very best of that genre. Within the context of this class, if society supports science, technology and designing for generosity, then we get the best civic value that the world can offer.
Ushahidi illustrates that the donation of free time and talents plus digital technology equals Cognitive Surplus which focuses on the ability of the public to volunteer time and effort on large projects to create civic value. Civic value of shared information is the value of designing for generosity. There is 1 trillion hours per year of generosity available, and according to Clay, we need to tap into that resource. How can this be applied to education? One way possibly could be a method in which people could share insights into shared problems. By insights, I mean knowledge that is obtained by attaining a clear and deep understanding of a complex problem. If this information could be mined, verified and shared by people, then this could be a type of educational civic value
According to Clay, the gap that we need to traverse is between doing anything and doing nothing. At least those who produce pictures of cats are doing something. Clay suggests that we design for generosity. He cites a study of Deterrence Theory which states that if you want somebody to do less of something, punish that action. Unfortunately, I don't entirely trust in his example of people who are fined for picking up their children late from schools is a disapproval of deterrence theory as much as it is how a minor fine results in people saying it's worth it to continue a bad action. If the fine had been increased substantially, no doubt compliance would have followed suit.
What does it mean to say, "Free cultures get what they celebrate?"
Eli Pariser - A Web of One
Eli Pariser presents the flip-side of personalization. On the surface, a personalized experience of the web has many positives: an individualized learning experience potentially tailored to an individual's preferred method of learning; targeted advertisements that are actually of potential value to an individual rather than the hodgepodge of semi-useless ads that until now have populated Internet searches; the ability to begin a search on a mobile device and complete it at a desktop computer etc. The flipside is what Eli highlights: the loss of control over content. Ever since I learned that people tend to be captive to sources of news that tend to agree with their political predilections, I purposely tried to seek out opposing points of view. And failed miserably. I find myself the very creature of habit that they describe in those studies. I tend towards reading the Huffington Post as opposed to Fox news because I find myself not wanting to get irritated very much. No doubt those choices feed the very Google and Facebook algorithms that are described by Eli. But then, this isn't the first time a societal conversation similar to this has occurred.
It wasn't that long ago that the fairness doctrine required that broadcasters provide a balanced view of issues by allowing equal time to those on both sides of an issue. At that time broadcasters were considered to be keepers of a sacred trust whereby the public was to be presented news in a relatively objective manner, allowing them to make up their minds as to which side of an issue is more persuasive. This was written into an official document known as the Telecommunications Act. Unfortunately, at least to me, as a part of deregulation, the 80s and 90s saw a weakening of the Telecommunications Act and the enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine was eliminated.
As is the case with many things in life, extremes tend to amplify both good and bad aspects, whereas a balance can exist that offers benefits of both, minimizing the weaknesses. I do want my Internet experience to be tailored to bring me news that aligns well with my interests, but not at complete exclusion of information that may provide an alternative point of view. If Google becomes the sole arbitrator of information on the Internet, then we have a good deal to worry about. Google's upcoming product Google Glass, they will be coming as close as possible using current technologies to pour information directly into our brains. And that's the future that Eli is warning us about.
It wasn't that long ago that the fairness doctrine required that broadcasters provide a balanced view of issues by allowing equal time to those on both sides of an issue. At that time broadcasters were considered to be keepers of a sacred trust whereby the public was to be presented news in a relatively objective manner, allowing them to make up their minds as to which side of an issue is more persuasive. This was written into an official document known as the Telecommunications Act. Unfortunately, at least to me, as a part of deregulation, the 80s and 90s saw a weakening of the Telecommunications Act and the enforcement of the Fairness Doctrine was eliminated.
As is the case with many things in life, extremes tend to amplify both good and bad aspects, whereas a balance can exist that offers benefits of both, minimizing the weaknesses. I do want my Internet experience to be tailored to bring me news that aligns well with my interests, but not at complete exclusion of information that may provide an alternative point of view. If Google becomes the sole arbitrator of information on the Internet, then we have a good deal to worry about. Google's upcoming product Google Glass, they will be coming as close as possible using current technologies to pour information directly into our brains. And that's the future that Eli is warning us about.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
My 20% Project - Augmented Reality or Chinese Calligraphy?
Gaming technology is pushing computer and graphics technologies and creative minds have begun to put the processing power to use outside of traditional gaming. It’s called Immersive reality and it is firmly on it’s way. Trouble is it currently takes a boat load of technology to make it work. When it works well, it works convincingly! Check this jaw-dropping video out if you haven’t seen what can be done with a few well-placed PlayStations and projectors.
Trouble is, it’s difficult to pull off. Of far greater utility and easier to create, hence closer to becoming a reality, is Augmented Reality. I firmly believe that will constitute the “next big thing” from tech giants Google, Qualcomm, Intel and others. The overlaying of relevant information over what is being viewed through a smartphone or glasses will likely become social and learning tool as pitched here by Google in regards to their product Google Glass, due out next year.
In spite of some dangers that the technology may pose: addiction to being “jacked-in,” dependency on always-on information and a consequent loss of critical thinking skills and some possible social issues, this technology will take learning to the next level. For this 20% project, I’m interested in finding some easy-to-use augmented reality software (app) to create either a virtual science field trip, museum tour with augmented paintings or other information-based learning experience.
In a wildly different direction, another skill I’d like to personally learn is Chinese Calligraphy. I speak Mandarin Chinese fairly well, but my reading and writing is way below par. I’d like to take advantage of web-based learning to learn proper technique, benefit from the relaxation that it brings, and also provide a path towards learning more characters.
Of the two, calligraphy is probably more doable in the short term, unless I can find some really easy-to-implement augmented reality.
Trouble is, it’s difficult to pull off. Of far greater utility and easier to create, hence closer to becoming a reality, is Augmented Reality. I firmly believe that will constitute the “next big thing” from tech giants Google, Qualcomm, Intel and others. The overlaying of relevant information over what is being viewed through a smartphone or glasses will likely become social and learning tool as pitched here by Google in regards to their product Google Glass, due out next year.
In spite of some dangers that the technology may pose: addiction to being “jacked-in,” dependency on always-on information and a consequent loss of critical thinking skills and some possible social issues, this technology will take learning to the next level. For this 20% project, I’m interested in finding some easy-to-use augmented reality software (app) to create either a virtual science field trip, museum tour with augmented paintings or other information-based learning experience.
In a wildly different direction, another skill I’d like to personally learn is Chinese Calligraphy. I speak Mandarin Chinese fairly well, but my reading and writing is way below par. I’d like to take advantage of web-based learning to learn proper technique, benefit from the relaxation that it brings, and also provide a path towards learning more characters.
Of the two, calligraphy is probably more doable in the short term, unless I can find some really easy-to-implement augmented reality.
Daniel Pink - A Whole New Mind
Pink views a number of changes that are increasingly affecting how we work, play socialize and act as productive citizens. As children parents told us that to be sucessful in life we should become programmers, software engineers, accountants etc. What they didn't realize, and that manys still don't today, is that rapid technological advances in computer-based (Ray Kurzweil refers to these as Information technologies) the speed of computers, the sophistication of programming etc. are making aspects of those jobs obsolete. Whether change is caused directly by computer programs that now supplant the accountant, or telecommunication which allows accountants in India to do the same work for a fraction of the pay, the end result is that those professions which consist of repetitive tasks and within an area of computer science which has sufficiently modelled the requirements of the job, those are in jeopardy. Pink's message is twofold: society needs to wakeup and realize that those jobs which brought us through the Information age, are precisely those jobs that are vulnerable to technology and job loss. The second major point is to emphasize that it is the right-brained, creative endeavors that will pave the path towards a sucessful future period which he terms the Conceptual Age.
It is the creative side of people that will hold increasingly greater value as we enter the Conceptual Age. It's not that programmers, engineers, accountants, and factory workers are no longer valued. It's just that they will increasingly be marginalized as technology improves and jobs are either absorbed by computer programs directly, or the jobs will be shifted overseas as telecommunications continues to increase the labor market available to corporations. Pink lays out a convincing argument that creativity should share equal status with the emphasis the Information Age has placed on logic. He does so partly by sharing newfound discoveries into the importance of the right-hemispher of the brain which has largely been the poor stepchild of the left hemisphere. He cites research that shows that the right-hemisphere is responsible for creativity. It provides the "big picture" view which integrates the logical observations of the left into a whole where context plays an important role. It is this creative side where value is created and increasingly valued by society and corporations. It is this creativity that computers (so far) have difficulty in achieving, largely because creativity does not necessairly arise from logic and following linear steps. It is an intuitive leap forward in design and vision.
I do agree with Pink that we are moving from a largely left-brained world into one in which creative vision will be necessary for humans to keep ahead of the encroaching tide of automation technology. It isn't difficult to see examples of automation replacing the need for human workers. The automated check-out machines in supermarkets are a good example. It is a repetitive task where items are scanned and bagged and payment is made. The automated checkout machines don't need medical coverage, sick or vacation time, hourly pay or breaks. It is a more efficient means of dealing with high volume. Many jobs are potentially lost due to automation. The advantages to the consumer are large: it takes far less time for me to check out grocieres at the automated check-out than it is to wait in line for a human cashier. A potentially larger issue is facing warehouse workers, where companies have replaced workers with automated machines that move inventory from trucks into warehouses and then deliver the products automatically when inventories run low. The warehouses are run in low-light to no-light situations where heat and airconditioning are turned-off and warehouses run 24 hours/day 7 days per week. Sports and financial investments stories are being well written by algorithms that are posed to replace humans, driverless cars on the horizon, will threaten taxicab and trucker jobs in the near future and the examples go on and on. In order for us humans to be competitive we'll need to do things that computers (and overseas workers) find difficult to accomplish: apply previous and new technologies in creative ways to problems that face us. While prefab technologies may bring some manufacturing back to this country, it will be the creative designs that we can create or purchase that bring value to our creations.
It is the creative side of people that will hold increasingly greater value as we enter the Conceptual Age. It's not that programmers, engineers, accountants, and factory workers are no longer valued. It's just that they will increasingly be marginalized as technology improves and jobs are either absorbed by computer programs directly, or the jobs will be shifted overseas as telecommunications continues to increase the labor market available to corporations. Pink lays out a convincing argument that creativity should share equal status with the emphasis the Information Age has placed on logic. He does so partly by sharing newfound discoveries into the importance of the right-hemispher of the brain which has largely been the poor stepchild of the left hemisphere. He cites research that shows that the right-hemisphere is responsible for creativity. It provides the "big picture" view which integrates the logical observations of the left into a whole where context plays an important role. It is this creative side where value is created and increasingly valued by society and corporations. It is this creativity that computers (so far) have difficulty in achieving, largely because creativity does not necessairly arise from logic and following linear steps. It is an intuitive leap forward in design and vision.
I do agree with Pink that we are moving from a largely left-brained world into one in which creative vision will be necessary for humans to keep ahead of the encroaching tide of automation technology. It isn't difficult to see examples of automation replacing the need for human workers. The automated check-out machines in supermarkets are a good example. It is a repetitive task where items are scanned and bagged and payment is made. The automated checkout machines don't need medical coverage, sick or vacation time, hourly pay or breaks. It is a more efficient means of dealing with high volume. Many jobs are potentially lost due to automation. The advantages to the consumer are large: it takes far less time for me to check out grocieres at the automated check-out than it is to wait in line for a human cashier. A potentially larger issue is facing warehouse workers, where companies have replaced workers with automated machines that move inventory from trucks into warehouses and then deliver the products automatically when inventories run low. The warehouses are run in low-light to no-light situations where heat and airconditioning are turned-off and warehouses run 24 hours/day 7 days per week. Sports and financial investments stories are being well written by algorithms that are posed to replace humans, driverless cars on the horizon, will threaten taxicab and trucker jobs in the near future and the examples go on and on. In order for us humans to be competitive we'll need to do things that computers (and overseas workers) find difficult to accomplish: apply previous and new technologies in creative ways to problems that face us. While prefab technologies may bring some manufacturing back to this country, it will be the creative designs that we can create or purchase that bring value to our creations.
Monday, October 8, 2012
Communities of Practice
Wegner and Lave have taken a concept that has ancient roots, modernized and named it in a way that is understandable and applicable for as long as humans socialize our knowledge. While I believe that individuals can learn effectively if the new information is properly scaffolded and presented, people are motivated in general by others who are interested in similar topics. In my experience in working at NASA, I learned that Engineers really prefer to listen to other Engineers on almost any topic. Since working in support of faculty within a Bay Area Middle School and within higher education institutions at USD and now at Ashford University, it is clear that teachers/professors prefer to "learn" from fellow teachers/professors. There are probably many reasons for the attitude, but one certainly is the sense that others (read "outsiders") just don't get understand matters as clearly as fellow practicioners. Setting aside the times in which it takes an outsider to make change, this thought permeates professions of all kinds where industry jargon supplants regularly understood speech. Not only does it communicate concepts clearly to those in the know, but it also acts as a barrier to outsiders.
Wegner highlights three key characteristics that must be present for there to be a community of practice: A shared domain of interest; the community and the practice. All three are necessary. Regarding organizatinos, I can attest that social networking programs can provide immense leverage to the concept of communities of practice. Ashford University has licensed a social collaboration platform called Jive. It gives employees unofficial time to enter into conversations on select topics such as Critical Thinking and Instructional Design, but also allow those with outside interests to start groups and share best practices and knowledge with others on subjects of their choosing.
Virtual social networking platforms such as Second Life can allow interesting interactions to take place in many fields and interests. The sky seems to be the limit, but I do agree with the Infed article that learning can occur in different ways. I think that there will be competing learning platforms that will come into existence shorty. Augmented reality systems may begin to replace the knowledgable, but fallible colleague with relevant information delivered immediately when needed and in context. For example, "best practices" could be shown in car maintainence. For example, a mechanic pops the hood of a given car, and the augmented system would recognize the make, model, engine-type and tap into databases that overlay schematics onto the mechanics glasses. It would then guide the mechanic through the steps. Other systems, similar to Watson, the IBM computer that beat the world's best Jeopardy contestants, would be available to construct knowedge-building courses. Not just adequate courses, but really great courses that use the most highly-rated materials on the web to create engaging learning experiences.
There are those who feel that Communities of Practice are too limited in scope. Scollon, a previous follower of Communities of Practice feels that a concept of Nexus of Practice is more in keeping with how people learn. That people will cross boundaries to interact with practitioners in other fields in order to learn. They are not constrained by continual connections, but link to "different practices in different sites of engagement and among different participants."
Wegner highlights three key characteristics that must be present for there to be a community of practice: A shared domain of interest; the community and the practice. All three are necessary. Regarding organizatinos, I can attest that social networking programs can provide immense leverage to the concept of communities of practice. Ashford University has licensed a social collaboration platform called Jive. It gives employees unofficial time to enter into conversations on select topics such as Critical Thinking and Instructional Design, but also allow those with outside interests to start groups and share best practices and knowledge with others on subjects of their choosing.
Virtual social networking platforms such as Second Life can allow interesting interactions to take place in many fields and interests. The sky seems to be the limit, but I do agree with the Infed article that learning can occur in different ways. I think that there will be competing learning platforms that will come into existence shorty. Augmented reality systems may begin to replace the knowledgable, but fallible colleague with relevant information delivered immediately when needed and in context. For example, "best practices" could be shown in car maintainence. For example, a mechanic pops the hood of a given car, and the augmented system would recognize the make, model, engine-type and tap into databases that overlay schematics onto the mechanics glasses. It would then guide the mechanic through the steps. Other systems, similar to Watson, the IBM computer that beat the world's best Jeopardy contestants, would be available to construct knowedge-building courses. Not just adequate courses, but really great courses that use the most highly-rated materials on the web to create engaging learning experiences.
There are those who feel that Communities of Practice are too limited in scope. Scollon, a previous follower of Communities of Practice feels that a concept of Nexus of Practice is more in keeping with how people learn. That people will cross boundaries to interact with practitioners in other fields in order to learn. They are not constrained by continual connections, but link to "different practices in different sites of engagement and among different participants."
Sunday, October 7, 2012
My Passion
Yesterday's big news was the price of gasoline in California. I read some comments on the news article and was amazed at the superficial nature of the comments. Beyond the usual name-calling and politically-charged comments, there was a reflection of a basic misunderstanding of the rate of technological change that we are living through right now. My exchange with a one such person follows:
jefs99-
Unfortunately we will be the victim every time there are Middle East conflicts, distribution problems, refinery problems or an industry that is quick to raise prices, and slow to lower them. Solar power electrics vehicles will always be "the future" unless we invest in technologies that improve batteries, capacitors and other solar technologies that are necessary to break this distribution monopoly where each step of the way, we are manipulated to fatten everyone else's wallets at the expense of our own. The solution? Solar panels that charge vehicles overnight for pennies from a virtually infinite free source of energy. We need to move away from old technologies and innovate our way using new innovative technologies where consumers become our own energy suppliers.
#261 - Sat Oct 6, 2012 10:32 PM EDT
calnomad-
Do you think the federal and state governments are going to give up the windfall gasoline tax when you go solar in 2050? Dream on, you will be taxed on the so called free solution to make up for any savings.
#261.1 - Sat Oct 6, 2012 10:36 PM EDT
jefs99-
Go solar in 2050? Hardly. 6-8 years should be enough time for current and near-future research innovations to bring down the price of solar to better than competitive levels, increase the driving radius of electric vehicles and increase reliability. Change is coming and it's for the better: cheaper for us, better for the environment in the long haul, worse for big oil and those who support a concept of dependence I suppose. Within the next two months, the city where I live, San Diego, will add 117 charging stations for electric vehicles at public facilities. That is now.
#261.2 - Sat Oct 6, 2012 11:21 PM EDT
It's not that I believe that my dates are rock solid, but based on everything I've read and the exponential nature of change affecting all technologies and recent studies have indicated that on a price/performance basis solar is no exception, that at least I'm in the ballpark. 38 years of technological development required to bring solar to mass production is not.
Which brings me to my passion. In spite of our experience with technological change, people don't plan very well for it. I would like to look at change we do know of, and bring awareness and tools to better plan for change. I've begun looking at the literature on how people anticipate change and it turns out we tend to plan in a linear fashion. We learn to plan for change in linear ways that are predicated on an underlying assumption that if it took x amount of time to accomplish y in the past, then it will take the same x period of time to accomplish y in the future (Ray Kurzweil, Roy & Christenfeld). While planning everyday tasks, people typically estimate the length of time required to accomplish the tasks by relying on memory to recall how long it took for them to complete the tasks in the past.
Roy and Christenfeld suggest, however, that people’s memory model of past task durations is faulty and creates situations where people regularly underestimate simple task of short duration while overestimating complex task of long duration. Fortunately we can use planning tools to aid our faulty memories, but still it's difficult to plan for accelerating change.
While we plan for ordinary events in linear ways, accelerating technological change does not fit well within linear planning models . Kurzweil, a pioneer in the field of technology trend analysis, observes that the rate of technological acceleration itself is accelerating exponentially, presenting an even greater challenge to the memory-model approach to planning.
Exponential increases in broadband communications, storage and computer processing speeds have rapidly changed the way we view and listen to entertainment, read books, communicate with one another, educate ourselves and build skills. It has permeated nearly every facet of how individuals conduct their lives whether as part of an organization or within their private lives.The acceleration of technology applies to an ever-widening range of disciplines as computation is applied to them - like solar technologies.
As of now I'm of two minds on how to proceed with my PhD studies: Consider applying strategic planning techniques with trend analysis to analyze how disruptive changes, such as online education or augmented reality will affect education in the short, medium or long-term. Another path may be to analyze how augmented reality apps that will begin to hit the market with Google's "Glass" technology, relate to the topic of learning. One topic is macro, the other more micro, but I am passionate about addressing both. This may be determined by the amount of information available to me, as well as the extent and practicallity of designing a research study to answer these questions!
jefs99-
Unfortunately we will be the victim every time there are Middle East conflicts, distribution problems, refinery problems or an industry that is quick to raise prices, and slow to lower them. Solar power electrics vehicles will always be "the future" unless we invest in technologies that improve batteries, capacitors and other solar technologies that are necessary to break this distribution monopoly where each step of the way, we are manipulated to fatten everyone else's wallets at the expense of our own. The solution? Solar panels that charge vehicles overnight for pennies from a virtually infinite free source of energy. We need to move away from old technologies and innovate our way using new innovative technologies where consumers become our own energy suppliers.
#261 - Sat Oct 6, 2012 10:32 PM EDT
calnomad-
Do you think the federal and state governments are going to give up the windfall gasoline tax when you go solar in 2050? Dream on, you will be taxed on the so called free solution to make up for any savings.
#261.1 - Sat Oct 6, 2012 10:36 PM EDT
jefs99-
Go solar in 2050? Hardly. 6-8 years should be enough time for current and near-future research innovations to bring down the price of solar to better than competitive levels, increase the driving radius of electric vehicles and increase reliability. Change is coming and it's for the better: cheaper for us, better for the environment in the long haul, worse for big oil and those who support a concept of dependence I suppose. Within the next two months, the city where I live, San Diego, will add 117 charging stations for electric vehicles at public facilities. That is now.
#261.2 - Sat Oct 6, 2012 11:21 PM EDT
It's not that I believe that my dates are rock solid, but based on everything I've read and the exponential nature of change affecting all technologies and recent studies have indicated that on a price/performance basis solar is no exception, that at least I'm in the ballpark. 38 years of technological development required to bring solar to mass production is not.
Which brings me to my passion. In spite of our experience with technological change, people don't plan very well for it. I would like to look at change we do know of, and bring awareness and tools to better plan for change. I've begun looking at the literature on how people anticipate change and it turns out we tend to plan in a linear fashion. We learn to plan for change in linear ways that are predicated on an underlying assumption that if it took x amount of time to accomplish y in the past, then it will take the same x period of time to accomplish y in the future (Ray Kurzweil, Roy & Christenfeld). While planning everyday tasks, people typically estimate the length of time required to accomplish the tasks by relying on memory to recall how long it took for them to complete the tasks in the past.
Roy and Christenfeld suggest, however, that people’s memory model of past task durations is faulty and creates situations where people regularly underestimate simple task of short duration while overestimating complex task of long duration. Fortunately we can use planning tools to aid our faulty memories, but still it's difficult to plan for accelerating change.
While we plan for ordinary events in linear ways, accelerating technological change does not fit well within linear planning models . Kurzweil, a pioneer in the field of technology trend analysis, observes that the rate of technological acceleration itself is accelerating exponentially, presenting an even greater challenge to the memory-model approach to planning.
Exponential increases in broadband communications, storage and computer processing speeds have rapidly changed the way we view and listen to entertainment, read books, communicate with one another, educate ourselves and build skills. It has permeated nearly every facet of how individuals conduct their lives whether as part of an organization or within their private lives.The acceleration of technology applies to an ever-widening range of disciplines as computation is applied to them - like solar technologies.
As of now I'm of two minds on how to proceed with my PhD studies: Consider applying strategic planning techniques with trend analysis to analyze how disruptive changes, such as online education or augmented reality will affect education in the short, medium or long-term. Another path may be to analyze how augmented reality apps that will begin to hit the market with Google's "Glass" technology, relate to the topic of learning. One topic is macro, the other more micro, but I am passionate about addressing both. This may be determined by the amount of information available to me, as well as the extent and practicallity of designing a research study to answer these questions!
Friday, October 5, 2012
Storifying Tweets
It turns out that Twitter searches no longer have hits after five days of being available. Learn something new everyday!
Monday, October 1, 2012
Googling Myself
When I initially googled myself I was shocked to see that I was five down from the top listing! It included information about my current role at Ashford University. I guess I'm more online than I thought. It cites slide share as the source of the listing, but I believe I only that service once. Kind of surprising. It may reveal more about slide share than it does about myself however.
I think this highlights the fact that being a resident on the web is not necessary to make results searchable on Google. I'd say it was more done as a visitor at this point. I wasn't involved at all with social networking at the time. I think the trend seems to indicate a shifting from the visitor roll to the resident role.
Tribes
I was pretty impressed by Seth Godin's book Tribes. In fact, I see a lot of parallels between Daniel Pink's book A Whole New Mind and this one: both authors feel that the old order is passing in favor of a new one that emphasizes creativity and out-of-the-box thinking over that of the machine metaphor. Initially I was a little concerned that Seth Godin was pushing the leadership concept too hard. Can everyone be a leader at all times? Fortunately he addressed that concern part way through the book by knowledge Inc. said if one cannot be a leader, then it's best to get out of the way and be a follower. I would add to that, to be a good follower. When that is an active follower rather than a bystander.
I hope to have time to post an article that also lends credence to both authors' views that times are changing and being pushed by technology all along the way. One is a Ted talk by Andrew Mcafee who illustrates how jobs are slowly being absorbed by automation.
The other coincidently is an article featured on technology review, MIT's online magazine. It features a new type of robot that can work alongside humans and can be programmed easier than a TiVo.
Overall, I agree with Seth Godin that we hesitate largely due to fear and a lack of faith in ourselves, then we do from the lack of original or great ideas. The question I ask myself is, what do I feel strongly enough in to pursue as a leader? I have a few clues, but I need to define them more clearly.
I hope to have time to post an article that also lends credence to both authors' views that times are changing and being pushed by technology all along the way. One is a Ted talk by Andrew Mcafee who illustrates how jobs are slowly being absorbed by automation.
The other coincidently is an article featured on technology review, MIT's online magazine. It features a new type of robot that can work alongside humans and can be programmed easier than a TiVo.
Overall, I agree with Seth Godin that we hesitate largely due to fear and a lack of faith in ourselves, then we do from the lack of original or great ideas. The question I ask myself is, what do I feel strongly enough in to pursue as a leader? I have a few clues, but I need to define them more clearly.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)