Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
Dr. Eskow: Are you saying that reviewing the text of the proposed lecture - or keynote speech - in advance of same is a bad idea? Are you also saying that in today's college (100) classes it is NOT common that there is little or no Question and Answer by the students of the person at the lectern? If on the second question, you disagree, I encourage you to visit Eugene and see what I have frequently seen here on the Oregon campus. As to the first question, if you are opposed to the idea of students or conference attendees reviewing the materials in advance, then perhaps you could delineate supporting arguments why this is a bad idea? Please try to be direct and on-point. None of us need a reminder there are no silver bullets --- Most of us, even outside of the robed world, gave up on silver bullets at about age 12. However, we do happen to believe that the new tools offer new opportunities; and these should not be easily or quickly disregarded just because they come from people who don't wear robes and headgear of high distinction. At 9:44 AM -0800 2/8/05, Steve Eskow wrote: Mr. Hibbs is apparently confused by my gender as well as by the dynamics of good instruction: perhaps the lady doth protest too much? He asked: and answered his own question: Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Gee...Steve - what caused the jump from my comment that students and attendees would be more informed if in advance of their time in the classroom, or the lecture hall, they viewed the lecture to a contention (by me? by someone else?) that technology is the silver bullet for all the ills in the classroom. Perhaps the lady doth protest too much? At 4:00 PM -0800 2/7/05, Steve Eskow wrote: John Hibbs asks if a technologized alternative to the traditional lecture would enable students to learn more, and suggests an answer: Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? The search for technological fixes for education is of course as old as Socrates who used an early version of Power Point to help the slave boy learn the Pythagorean theorem. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Steve Eskow wrote: Taran says: At the end of the day, people should probably try something new every day. It doesn't have to be technology, it can be walking a different route or maybe eating something new. That's the difference between stagnancy and progress. Like all advice, Taran, this piece is a mixed blessing. A half truth. At most. I live in a rich community in a rich state in a rich nation. A nation where every message seems to be, throw out something old and try something new every day. So: perhaps we need a counter-movement: At the end of every day, try something old. An old piece of clothing. An old book. An old idea that needs a little work to make it useful again. For example: turn off all the new media and read an old book. The bible, perhaps. Or Tolstoy's WAR AND PEACE. (Without enrichment, without links to sound and images and interviews with Tolstoy's great-great-grandson. After reading the unenhanced original, the DVD is ok.) Or: try talking to someone. If our online communities grow and prosper, and our local communities wither and die because we stop talking to neighbors, what a monster have we technoromantics uncaged. The great gift of this technology is that allows me to communicate with Taran, who otherwise would be lost to me. That's why the divide can't be narrowed without it. But I must learn to restrain my joy at these new powers and turn the machine off every day so that I might talk to neighbors. So: in order to get a truth, we might put two half-truths together: Try something new every day; Try something old every day. Steve Eskow To many, doing something old is doing something new. I packed my copies of Newton's Optiks and Principia today. :-) When I read them, they were new. New to me. I agree, there is much to be learned in books, and elder things. The essence which we try to capture is in many of those books, and eludes us even when we capture it. Yes, for clarity - try something new; try something old. But if it's old to you, try something new to you. :-) -- Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxgazette.com http://www.a42.com http://www.worldchanging.com http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net Criticize by creating. Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Taran says: At the end of the day, people should probably try something new every day. It doesn't have to be technology, it can be walking a different route or maybe eating something new. That's the difference between stagnancy and progress. Like all advice, Taran, this piece is a mixed blessing. A half truth. At most. I live in a rich community in a rich state in a rich nation. A nation where every message seems to be, throw out something old and try something new every day. So: perhaps we need a counter-movement: At the end of every day, try something old. An old piece of clothing. An old book. An old idea that needs a little work to make it useful again. For example: turn off all the new media and read an old book. The bible, perhaps. Or Tolstoy's WAR AND PEACE. (Without enrichment, without links to sound and images and interviews with Tolstoy's great-great-grandson. After reading the unenhanced original, the DVD is ok.) Or: try talking to someone. If our online communities grow and prosper, and our local communities wither and die because we stop talking to neighbors, what a monster have we technoromantics uncaged. The great gift of this technology is that allows me to communicate with Taran, who otherwise would be lost to me. That's why the divide can't be narrowed without it. But I must learn to restrain my joy at these new powers and turn the machine off every day so that I might talk to neighbors. So: in order to get a truth, we might put two half-truths together: Try something new every day; Try something old every day. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 8:54 AM Subject: Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3,2005 Steve Eskow wrote: Taran Rampersad writes But you see, people are slow to adopt things. Perhaps this is one of those enduring fictions, helped along as it is by Ev Rogers' taxonmy of early adopters and the like. The speed with which people all over the world are adopting the new technologies is astounding. The digital divide is caused more by poverty than by resistance to change. In a quantitative analysis, that's right. But qualitatively speaking, if the people who can adopt do not adopt, then that has more weight in the context of the technology than poor people being unable to adopt. There are few people who will adopt at the bleeding edge, but it's because of those few people that others do adopt. Consider Linux - a few early adopters assisted in the creation of an operating system which people in poverty could not access. But through the adoption process, it has become extremely accessible to even those in poverty when compared to proprietary software. People are indeed reluctant to disrupt styles of work and play that offer them important satisfactions because an outsider--often a marketer of some new product--tries to convince them that if they throw out the baby as well as the bathwater they will be happier in the long run. This is the main problem. Many of the new technologies are available at no cost, but the generation of mine and the generations preceding it are probably late to adopt because they feel that 'there has to be a catch'. Because of this discomfort, they may not adopt. And yet, there are no 'catches', it simply requires some personal effort. This is why we're using listservs for most of the communication here on the DDN, because many are simply not comfortable unless they can use Microsoft Outlook to inform us when they are out of town (perhaps so that someone can burglarize them and they can make insurance claims? I do not know). Perhaps on a busy day, such as when you sent this, I would not respond because I'm up to my neck in other listservs. I am one of those who prefers to use Outlook and remain comfortable. (I don't quite get the point of the burglarize reference.) I don't choose to get uncomfortable unless there are important benefits --benefits that appeal to me--offered to me in exchange for my discomfort. I don't yet see the benefits--to me--in what you are proposing. I hate to sound like I'm bashing Microsoft products, because I'm pretty balanced about Microsoft products. However, Outlook has shown time and again that it is unsafe and is a dependable vector for viruses. So while we talk about the comfort of the user, perhaps we should talk about the comfort of other people that user communicates with. I'm sorry, I view Outlook as a social disease. It's a personal opinion which is substantiated by all the emailed viruses I do get from people who use Outlook. What Outlook did do is get people using a technology. It did a good job of it as well. But when I get all these viruses emailed to me, I must wonder - should I blame Microsoft for selling something that can do
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
Mr. Hibbs is apparently confused by my gender as well as by the dynamics of good instruction: perhaps the lady doth protest too much? He asked: and answered his own question: Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? This is indeed looking to technology to fix education, on the assumption that the problem is finding ways for education to help student learn more: the quantitative fix. The very notion of learning more is the beginning of a profound misreading of the problem of education. Many of the nonacademics who decide to advise the academy assume that the lecture is a mechanical performance that can, as suggested here, be recorded in advance with no loss of quality or impact: indeed, that the student would learn more if they could rewind the tape, review difficult ideas, etc. This is a very old, endlessly repeated mistake, and would that there was some way to end its reappearance. A good analysis of this mistake is Chapter 3 of Hubert Dreyfus' ON THE INTERNET, titled Disembodied Telepresence and the Remoteness of the Real. The good lecturer picks up cues from the students in front of him, and varies his rhythm, repeats ideas, invites questions, according to those cues. David Blair, a robe, who has taught extensively via interactiver television as well as lectured conventionally, makes interesting and important points in the Dreyfus chapter: In the first place I am often aware of a lot of things going on in the class in addition to a student actually asking a question or commenting. Sometiimes when a student asks a question I can see, peripherally, other students nodding their heads in agreement with the question. This would indicate that the student's question is important to the rest of the class so I will take more care in answering it fully. (This kind of adjustment, of course, cannot take place with a recorded lecture.) ...Second, as I lecture, I'm drawn to the point of view that is most comfortable or informative for me--a point of view that may be different from lecture to lecture or even may change during during a lecture. Perhaps this is simlar to Merleau-Ponty's notion of 'maximum rip.' To find this pooint of view requires that I be able to move around during the lecture sometimes approaching the students closely , sometimes moving away. And much more. Perhaps an important point to make is that we might usefully distinguish using technology to bring learning to those place in the world wherelive instruction is difficult or impossible and giving advice to the Harvards and the Sorbonnes as to how they might improve instruction by videotaping lectures. To repeat the original point of the post in question: the way to improve online education is to listen to the technology, learn its genius and its limitations, and develop instruction that emerges from that genius rather than by mimicking and improving the methods of face-to-face instruction. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Question about M2F -- Was Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
Kevin Rocap wrote: That saidthere is a module add-in for PHPBB (PHP Bulletin Board) called M2F designed to crack the nut of e-mail to forum and forum to e-mail communication. The project web page, FYI: http://m2f.sourceforge.net/ I'm anxious to try M2F but don't want to be on the bleeding edge. Our System Admins are volunteers with limited time to help RTPnet. It looks like M2F is still in Beta. Does anyone know when we can expect an official release? Also, it looks like this is a Mod to phpBB. We recently did an emergency upgrade of phpBB and lost the two mods we had on it. It took quite a while to install those mods. I'm worried about asking the System Admins to install mods that take a lot of time and have to be reinstalled after an upgrade. Judy Hallman ([EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.rtpnet.org/hallman) Executive Director, RTPnet, NC (http://www.RTPnet.org/) ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: Question about M2F -- Was Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
Judy Hallman wrote: Kevin Rocap wrote: That saidthere is a module add-in for PHPBB (PHP Bulletin Board) called M2F designed to crack the nut of e-mail to forum and forum to e-mail communication. The project web page, FYI: http://m2f.sourceforge.net/ I'm anxious to try M2F but don't want to be on the bleeding edge. Our System Admins are volunteers with limited time to help RTPnet. It looks like M2F is still in Beta. Does anyone know when we can expect an official release? Your best bet is to contact the developers. I see that this is available on their site through their forums. I think you can safely register. O_o Also, it looks like this is a Mod to phpBB. We recently did an emergency upgrade of phpBB and lost the two mods we had on it. It took quite a while to install those mods. I'm worried about asking the System Admins to install mods that take a lot of time and have to be reinstalled after an upgrade. If you really want to try it, do a site backup first. The second things look strange, recover from the backup. -- Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxgazette.com http://www.a42.com http://www.worldchanging.com http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net Criticize by creating. Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: Question about M2F -- Was Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
Dear friends, I initially sent this from a non-subscribed e-mail account, so. Original Message Dear Judy, Hi! Deja vu, eh? I know we reviewed this issue of e-mail-to-forum-to-email on our Community Networking list. This is still the only reference to anyone trying to build that functionality into an Open Source product that I know of. And I don't know more information than can be found on their site about when they'll be out of Beta. So, like you, I'd welcome news of other better, potentially easier software solutions. You raise an important additional issue, though, around volunteers and Open Source. I'd say most Open Source solutions do require a bit more attention to the details of installation than do commercial packages installed through an Install Shield wizard (or something similar). It often is not THAT difficult, but you do have to go into PHP files, or do other customized editing of files. That in itself can feel a little iffy to the novice ;-), but feels better when it all works right. Butyou also need some memory or record of what changes you made and to which files if you want to make modifications, upgrades or fixes in the future. And I think that is also the rub. Volunteers are most likely part-time and what one volunteer starts another finishes. The only partial solution I can think of at the moment is to encourage a culture of documentation where volunteers keep a physical or e-notebook for each piece of software regarding what they did to which files, as a kind of helpful history and reference for others. Other ideas? In Peace, K. Judy Hallman wrote: Kevin Rocap wrote: That saidthere is a module add-in for PHPBB (PHP Bulletin Board) called M2F designed to crack the nut of e-mail to forum and forum to e-mail communication. The project web page, FYI: http://m2f.sourceforge.net/ I'm anxious to try M2F but don't want to be on the bleeding edge. Our System Admins are volunteers with limited time to help RTPnet. It looks like M2F is still in Beta. Does anyone know when we can expect an official release? Also, it looks like this is a Mod to phpBB. We recently did an emergency upgrade of phpBB and lost the two mods we had on it. It took quite a while to install those mods. I'm worried about asking the System Admins to install mods that take a lot of time and have to be reinstalled after an upgrade. Judy Hallman ([EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.rtpnet.org/hallman) Executive Director, RTPnet, NC (http://www.RTPnet.org/) ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: Question about M2F -- Was Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
Kevin Rocap wrote: You raise an important additional issue, though, around volunteers and Open Source. I'd say most Open Source solutions do require a bit more attention to the details of installation than do commercial packages installed through an Install Shield wizard (or something similar). This might sound like I am splitting hairs to some - but many Open Source packages are *commercial* packages. Commercial means that it is done for profit, and lots of Open Source software is done for profit. The Free Software/Open Source community does include people who donate their time and energy to software products, and those aren't commercial (yet?!). It often is not THAT difficult, but you do have to go into PHP files, or do other customized editing of files. That in itself can feel a little iffy to the novice ;-), but feels better when it all works right. Butyou also need some memory or record of what changes you made and to which files if you want to make modifications, upgrades or fixes in the future. And I think that is also the rub. Proprietary software - where the code is not available for viewing - tends to be much slicker to install because it will only allow one to install it in certain ways. Most Free Software/Open Source solutions instead allow the user more customizability through editing of the files or what have you. And that is actually going away in the commercial Open Source packages because of the same problem - it *is* scarey for a novice. So 'Open Source' has the same problems as Proprietary software (in the context of 'commercial'), and sometimes more so because it's easy to be intimidated by having to edit a file. A task that people do every day, actually, in English or their native language. Documentation is a key issue in any commercial software, and Open Source/Free Software has had a problem with this. It's getting better, but the real strength tends to be the community. The community always amazes me, though since I am bleeding edge I get to be the one who doesn't get answers. But I write them down when I come up with them, and that's how it works. Volunteers are most likely part-time and what one volunteer starts another finishes. The only partial solution I can think of at the moment is to encourage a culture of documentation where volunteers keep a physical or e-notebook for each piece of software regarding what they did to which files, as a kind of helpful history and reference for others. Other ideas? The concept of the CVS is good if you use such an idea: https://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/ However, for dynamic documentation shared amongst volunteers - Wikis are really the best bet. Yes, people may need to learn how to use Wikis - but they aren't very difficult to use (you can get the basics in under an hour) and allow for the sort of documentation you require. Incidentally, something such as Burrokeet (http://www.burrokeet.org ) is also something worth considering for documentation. It can even take OpenOffice documents and convert them to PDF and HTML - unfortunately, it cannot do that with Microsoft Office products, but Microsoft Office may not be the majority office software in the future. -- Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxgazette.com http://www.a42.com http://www.worldchanging.com http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net Criticize by creating. Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Steve Eskow wrote: Taran Rampersad writes But you see, people are slow to adopt things. Perhaps this is one of those enduring fictions, helped along as it is by Ev Rogers' taxonmy of early adopters and the like. The speed with which people all over the world are adopting the new technologies is astounding. The digital divide is caused more by poverty than by resistance to change. In a quantitative analysis, that's right. But qualitatively speaking, if the people who can adopt do not adopt, then that has more weight in the context of the technology than poor people being unable to adopt. There are few people who will adopt at the bleeding edge, but it's because of those few people that others do adopt. Consider Linux - a few early adopters assisted in the creation of an operating system which people in poverty could not access. But through the adoption process, it has become extremely accessible to even those in poverty when compared to proprietary software. People are indeed reluctant to disrupt styles of work and play that offer them important satisfactions because an outsider--often a marketer of some new product--tries to convince them that if they throw out the baby as well as the bathwater they will be happier in the long run. This is the main problem. Many of the new technologies are available at no cost, but the generation of mine and the generations preceding it are probably late to adopt because they feel that 'there has to be a catch'. Because of this discomfort, they may not adopt. And yet, there are no 'catches', it simply requires some personal effort. This is why we're using listservs for most of the communication here on the DDN, because many are simply not comfortable unless they can use Microsoft Outlook to inform us when they are out of town (perhaps so that someone can burglarize them and they can make insurance claims? I do not know). Perhaps on a busy day, such as when you sent this, I would not respond because I'm up to my neck in other listservs. I am one of those who prefers to use Outlook and remain comfortable. (I don't quite get the point of the burglarize reference.) I don't choose to get uncomfortable unless there are important benefits --benefits that appeal to me--offered to me in exchange for my discomfort. I don't yet see the benefits--to me--in what you are proposing. I hate to sound like I'm bashing Microsoft products, because I'm pretty balanced about Microsoft products. However, Outlook has shown time and again that it is unsafe and is a dependable vector for viruses. So while we talk about the comfort of the user, perhaps we should talk about the comfort of other people that user communicates with. I'm sorry, I view Outlook as a social disease. It's a personal opinion which is substantiated by all the emailed viruses I do get from people who use Outlook. What Outlook did do is get people using a technology. It did a good job of it as well. But when I get all these viruses emailed to me, I must wonder - should I blame Microsoft for selling something that can do that, or should I instead be upset with people who don't care enough about the safety of the data of people that they communicate with? I don't care who people paid, really. That's not my problem. There are other email programs out there (you won't see them advertised because they don't take your money). Mozilla has a great system that I use, which blocks all sorts of things. But it doesn't block everything (but it certainly doesn't send all the garbage that Outlook is often automated to do!). I still get lots of SPAM despite triple filtered email addresses and Bayesian filtering. Is there a better way? I think so. But I suppose until people actually want to improve communication, we're stuck where we are. There are forms which are not as self limiting. As you say, all forms are self limiting - but the degree to which they are self limiting varies. For broad communication with large groups, websites are less self limiting - and are decreasing even further over time. Email hasn't really changed in the last 10 years that much... however, website technology has changed quite a bit, and has shown itself to be more adaptive to the demands we place on this medium. It even uses email as a tool at times. The hand-held hammer is not more limited than the jackhammer or the piledriver: indeed, for certain purposes the more powerful tools are almost useless. A good analogy, but don't forget the 'swiss army hammer'. Much of the technology being discussed is easily tailored for the job. I, for one, don't want to have use shortcuts or insert URLs into a brower to conduct email eschanges: I much prefer the speed and simplicity of the listserv. I may be fooling myself, but I don't believe that preference is because I resist change. *chuckles* You do anyway. It's just easy because you click on the links. I think Outlook still has that ability, but it doesn't allow opening links in
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
John Hibbs asks if a technologized alternative to the traditional lecture would enable students to learn more, and suggests an answer: Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? The search for technological fixes for education is of course as old as Socrates who used an early version of Power Point to help the slave boy learn the Pythagorean theorem. Some may remember an old New Yorker ( a U.S. humorous periodical) cartoon which showed a reel-to-reel tape recorder sitting on the instructor's desk, obviously delivering his lecture. In the classroom were 30 tablet arm chairs for the students. The seats were unoccupied: on each chair was a smaller tape recorder, recording the lecture. The question, Would the students...have learned more embodies a philosophy of education: the problem of education is quantitative, and education, like any business, can produce more learning if it becomes more efficient and one road to such productivity is, of course, technology. That is: if the tape recorder delivers the lecture, the instructor can be doing something else concurrently, a large increase in productivity. And if the tape recorder can take the lecture notes rather than the student, the student can be studying something else while the machine is recording, clearly a further gain in productivity. In his 1962 book EDUCATION AND THE CULT OF EFFICIENCY Raymond Callahan explores the period 1900 to 1930, the span of years during which the business mind and the practices of industrial capitalism permeated the practice of education. In the US it is still common for business executives to write, or have written for them, books outlining their views on fixing education. Recent books by David Kearns of Xerox and Louis Gerstner of IBM come to mind. And in the US legislation like the current No Child Left Behind act are attempting to fix education by imposing the logics and the rhetoric and the practices of industrialism on education: the results are not promising. As budgets are cut, the marketing consultants are flourishing, as they promise to restore enrollments and dollars using the same techniques that sell cereal and cosmetics on television. Callahan wonders early in his book how this penetration of education by the culture of industry and marketing had happened, was allowed to happen. Education is not a business, he says. The school is not a factory. But the schools were indeed allowed to become little businesses, little factories. A more recent study that rehearses much the same ground is Bill Reading's THE UNIVERSITY IN RUINS. Narrowing the digital divide will clearly require that we enlist the new communication technologies. The new technologies do not determine how we use them to do the work of learning. We can the new tools according to the logic of the factory, or we can use them in a way that respects the culture and the needs and the rhythms of those who teach and those who learn. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? - Original Message - From: John Hibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 11:18 AM Subject: Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005 At 3:31 PM -0800 2/6/05, Steve Eskow wrote: My point is that although we call both forms conferences, they really have little in common with each other. Better: they ought not to resemble each other, since they are using different technologies with different strengths and weaknesses. The fac-to-face conference ought to improve by understanding and exploiting the virtues of assembling people together what you are calling proximity. The online form ought to exploit the lack of proximity--the overcoming of time and space restrictions at the expense of proximity. It seems to me the same could be said for conventional education (vs. distance education). In conventional education, as with most physical conferences, the students (attendees) come to class (keynote), sit quietly, - and go on their merry way. Do they learn? Were they motivated? Or did they just get their Attendance Sheet marked as proof of appropriate reverence? Would the students (attendees) have learned more if they had listened, in advance, to the lecture at a time convenient to them? Or if they had read the text commentary and looked at the links provided - all well in advance of the physical meeting place? Had they been able to insert
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Steve Eskow wrote: Steve Eskow wrote: The listserv is a mode of dialog that fits the genius of the online environment, and thus there are thousands of them, and they will continue to flourish and multiply. and Taran Rampersad replied: Listservs are self limiting because in propagation, they split the attention of people. If all listservs are equal - and they are not, because our judgement brings weight which makes them unequal - and a person subscribes to one listserv, then they spend their time 'there'. Introduce another listserv, the attention would be split 2 ways. 3 listservs, 3 ways. And so on. theregy illustrating the genius of the listserv and its natural fit with this online medium:: the easy, unforced flow of dialog over time, with folks like me choosing to enter into a discussion, or not, and folks like Taran choosing to engage with me, or not. I hope, Taran, we can avoid talking past each other. :-) I was not comparing listservs to other forms of communication that emerge from the grain of this online medium, like content management systems or Wikis. I could as well have used these last two to make my point, which was and is that all three are designed to fit this medium, while the conference is an import from the face-to-face world, an alien format that is uncomfortable online, no matter how it is tweaked. Taran, you talk of self limiting. All form are self-limiting. When I spend my time traveling to a conference, and attending that conference, travel and attendance limit me to that one event. More than that: if there are ten break-out sessions scheduled from 9am, to 11, I am self-limited to one session and missing nine: no, the time-space structure of the conference limits me to one of ten sessions. Why imitate that form online, and repeat that same limitation, when online all ten sessions can be so organized that I can attend all of them?. Exactly. But you see, people are slow to adopt things. This is why we're using listservs for most of the communication here on the DDN, because many are simply not comfortable unless they can use Microsoft Outlook to inform us when they are out of town (perhaps so that someone can burglarize them and they can make insurance claims? I do not know). Perhaps on a busy day, such as when you sent this, I would not respond because I'm up to my neck in other listservs. There are forms which are not as self limiting. As you say, all forms are self limiting - but the degree to which they are self limiting varies. For broad communication with large groups, websites are less self limiting - and are decreasing even further over time. Email hasn't really changed in the last 10 years that much... however, website technology has changed quite a bit, and has shown itself to be more adaptive to the demands we place on this medium. It even uses email as a tool at times. The online medium needs designs that don't begin by limiting themselves to mimicking a face-to-face form. A face to face form like the conference. I don't necessarily agree with this. We must not forget our roots either. Man is a social creature, and as such the senses play an important part. Face to face conferences are social gatherings - maybe some things are discussed, maybe not. But they are social gatherings, in the hopes of attaining some purpose that the attendees wish to achieve. How odd for me to defend face to face conferences - and yet, if web conferences incorporate audio and video, what is missing from the conference? Proximity? The ability to have dinner or drinks with each other? I do not ask that to be flippant, and it is not rhetoric - I don't think anyone knows the answer, and in a way we're being forced to answer that very question. Oddly enough, both the Cathedral and Bazaar deal a lot with social gathering. Bonfires or grand events about Linux... even voting. I wonder how much voting would change if candidates took part in web conferences instead of broadcasting and only answering questions that the speechwriters and strategists want answered. As a sidenote, here's an interesting thing to look at for US politics and bandwidth: http://www.longdarkteatime.com/2005/01/broadband-democracy.html In the end, we have to do things which increase participation on the internet - which means that we have to adapt our use of it to this purpose. And that means that we need to adapt things which are less self limiting and more inclusive. Take for example this Yale conference - the discussion has been neglected by the organizers. This tells me that they aren't too serious about the Global Flow of Information, and it sends me a signal that there will be little discussion - instead, there will probably be the same dull monologues that we can get from anywhere. Therefore, I have come to take this conference as an aberration; they are not practicing what they preach. Drive by postings to mailing lists in the hope of advertising an event
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Taran Rampersad writes But you see, people are slow to adopt things. Perhaps this is one of those enduring fictions, helped along as it is by Ev Rogers' taxonmy of early adopters and the like. The speed with which people all over the world are adopting the new technologies is astounding. The digital divide is caused more by poverty than by resistance to change. People are indeed reluctant to disrupt styles of work and play that offer them important satisfactions because an outsider--often a marketer of some new product--tries to convince them that if they throw out the baby as well as the bathwater they will be happier in the long run. This is why we're using listservs for most of the communication here on the DDN, because many are simply not comfortable unless they can use Microsoft Outlook to inform us when they are out of town (perhaps so that someone can burglarize them and they can make insurance claims? I do not know). Perhaps on a busy day, such as when you sent this, I would not respond because I'm up to my neck in other listservs. I am one of those who prefers to use Outlook and remain comfortable. (I don't quite get the point of the burglarize reference.) I don't choose to get uncomfortable unless there are important benefits --benefits that appeal to me--offered to me in exchange for my discomfort. I don't yet see the benefits--to me--in what you are proposing. There are forms which are not as self limiting. As you say, all forms are self limiting - but the degree to which they are self limiting varies. For broad communication with large groups, websites are less self limiting - and are decreasing even further over time. Email hasn't really changed in the last 10 years that much... however, website technology has changed quite a bit, and has shown itself to be more adaptive to the demands we place on this medium. It even uses email as a tool at times. The hand-held hammer is not more limited than the jackhammer or the piledriver: indeed, for certain purposes the more powerful tools are almost useless. I, for one, don't want to have use shortcuts or insert URLs into a brower to conduct email eschanges: I much prefer the speed and simplicity of the listserv. I may be fooling myself, but I don't believe that preference is because I resist change. Steve E said: The online medium needs designs that don't begin by limiting themselves to mimicking a face-to-face form. A face to face form like the conference. And Taran said: I don't necessarily agree with this. We must not forget our roots either. Man is a social creature, and as such the senses play an important part. Face to face conferences are social gatherings - maybe some things are discussed, maybe not. But they are social gatherings, in the hopes of attaining some purpose that the attendees wish to achieve. How odd for me to defend face to face conferences - and yet, if web conferences incorporate audio and video, what is missing from the conference? I think here we are indeed talking past each other. My point is that although we call both forms conferences, they really have little in common with each other. Better: they ought not to resemble each other, since they are using different technologies with different strengths and weaknesses. The fac-to-face conference ought to improve by understanding and exploiting the virtues of assembling people together what you are calling proximity. The online form ought to exploit the lack of proximity--the overcoming of time and space restrictions at the expense of proximity. When forms like email and listservs and newsgroups continue to flourish and multiply despite the appearance of better forms like web sites, perhaps the explanation is not the rather tired one of resistance to change, but the continuing strength and vitality of a form that is maintaining its usefulness. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
A piece of theory might be useful in thinking about conferences online. The time-space geographers and sociologists are teaching us that space and spatial configurations aren't merely containers that hold the events that go on within them, but are constitutive: that is, they shape, or constitute, those activities. So: if a conference is going to take place in a building that has a lecture hall and classrooms and seminar rooms, those spaces, and the need to have all activities take place in real time, help to shape the structure of what we call a conference. We've learned, I think, from our experience with distance learning that when you move instruction from the bounded spaces of a campus to the new environment of cyberspace, the tendency is to replicate in the new environment what has always been done in the bounded spaces. So: we do online instruction in much the same way we do it on campus in classrooms, and we are given software that insures that we do the new work in the old ways. And so many institutions and their faculty new to distance learning look for ways to move all of the same real-time apparatus of instruction as it exists on campus intact and unchanged as it migrates online. It would seem that we want to do the same with conferences. For example: if the exigencies of time and space constraints of :real means that we have to crowd all of the speakers and all of the discussion into one day, or three days, why that's what we're going to do with online conferences: jam the experts into the old program formats. I'm aware that there are other besides me who find virtual conferences virtually unsatisfactory, and tend to avoid them--mostly because they use formats designed for face-to-face conferences which don't work as well online. The listserv is a mode of dialog that fits the genius of the online environment, and thus there are thousands of them, and they will continue to flourish and multiply. If we want to make good use of experts around the world meeting together and sharing their expertise widely we might do better to search for forms of such collaboration that are suited to this medium, and the search for such forms might be hastened if we didn't try to mimic the face-to-face conference. Steve Eskow [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: Tom Abeles [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: The Digital Divide Network discussion group [EMAIL PROTECTED]; John Hibbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 8:56 AM Subject: Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3,2005 John has hit the nail on the head. First, for a global flow conference its decidedly being seen through US eyes. Secondly, the home base for the conference organizers is the Yale Law School which further narrows the scope of the conference and finally, as John has so perceptively picked up on, its a conference where most of the materials could just as easily be put up as a web cast or even as web pages with comment software to allow exchanges between all. And, in that respect it is anachronistic. Additionally, in most of these cases, panelist have expenses covered making the movement of bodies to the conference a decidedly costly event when most could be conferenced. This conference provides a brilliant opportunity to better understand where the golobal flow of information is, today. thoughts? tom abeles John Hibbs wrote: With all due respect, Eddan, why do I have to travel to Yale to participate in the conference? Arguably, Web based conferences are better than physical ones. And a whole lot cheaper. Nope, we can't duplicate the warm and fuzzy the comes from shoulder to shoulder linkages at physical conferences. But everything else can be done exceptionally well, especially for attendees of a kind that are likely to attend the Global Flow of Information Conference. NOTE: Several times we have tried to hold combination conferences - where there are virtual and physical attendees. I am not sure these work well enough to justify the work and handicaps. However, I deeply believe in the idea that one-to-many lectures and power point presentations (in all their glory) should be put up on the web in advance of the physical convention. Attendees can do themselves a real service by viewing these presentations in advance, leaving more time for QAthe best part of all lectures, in my opinion. At 7:08 AM -0500 2/3/05, Eddan Katz wrote: The Information Society Project at Yale Law School is proud to announce that registration is now open for The Global Flow of Information Conference 2005, which will take place on April 1-3, 2005, at the Yale Law School. http://islandia.law.yale.edu/isp/GlobalFlow/registration.htm ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Steve Eskow wrote: The listserv is a mode of dialog that fits the genius of the online environment, and thus there are thousands of them, and they will continue to flourish and multiply. Listservs are self limiting because in propagation, they split the attention of people. If all listservs are equal - and they are not, because our judgement brings weight which makes them unequal - and a person subscribes to one listserv, then they spend their time 'there'. Introduce another listserv, the attention would be split 2 ways. 3 listservs, 3 ways. And so on. As someone subscribed to about 1000 RSS feeds, Google alerts and about 100 email lists, I find listservs to be very limited in that I only focus on a few. One of these lists is the DDN list (obviously). But when I spend time on the DDN, I'm not spending it on the WSIS Civil Society lists, or the Latin American ICT lists, or what have you. Infoglut. I am now up to about 4000 emails a day, with about 400 SPAM messages that sneak through filters and Mozilla. Content Management Systems and Wikis are actually superior to listservs in many regards. The allow online discussion, people can participate as needed, they are indexable by search engines (nowadays many listservs are, so it's hardly an advantage), threads can fall under multiple contexts without being replicated in cyberspace... you don't have to tell people when you are out of the office every message, you can use HTML or an equivalent if you so desire, and it's possible to even setup posting by email for those who wait for the bleeding edge to coagulate. Listservs are best for immediate discussion. But they really suck for a lot of other things when compared to the newer online tools available. I'm actually trimming out listservs now, not because they lack value but because I have to prioritize my time. The new DigitalDivide website is a definite step in the right direction. It's bridging a cultural divide between email, RSS and content management systems in a good way. There's a few things I have ideas on, like creating a 'Digital Divide weblog' off of the list which handles each new topic as an entry, and anything with 'Re:' in it as a response to the entry. Why is that important? One of the main problem of listservs is that people have to know about them. Another aspect is that someone who is busy may not participate on the list, but they might post a comment to a weblog entry. Accessibility. -- Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxgazette.com http://www.a42.com http://www.worldchanging.com http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net Criticize by creating. Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
Hi Andy Actually, this is done currently in asynchronous conferencing systems where there are a number of options. The system can notify a participant that a post has been made and you can go to to read and respond, sometimes the post is sent and the system can select how you can respond, either from your email or by going to the site. Each has trade-offs. These have been around. I have suggested a long time ago in a past far-far away that such a system is better than listservs because it keeps topics threaded and lets folks track only the threads of interest, while being alerted of new threads. Some asynchonous systems allow internal cross listings/linkings and other user driven features. These are over 20 years old- ancient by web time. One of the problems with listservs with floating communities such as DDN is that few threads have a long life- short attention spans and other pressing issues tend to lead most discussions into quick, terminal, illnesses. One of the problems is that a general list often leads to ideas that go off-list on a person-to-person exchange when specifics seem better conducted in private. This says that the lists serve a number of purposes much like breaks and receptions at a conference. The social dynamics of lists are often not a subject of discussion and I am not sure if they have been or need to be studied other than for an academic. thoughts? tom abeles Andy Carvin wrote: Hi Taran, Actually, this is something I've contemplated on and off for the last couple of years. While the current version of the DDN website doesn't allow category tagging in its blogs, we could always use Movable Type, which we have installed on the CMC website (http://cmc.edc.org). Were you envisioning that this would be done automatically, or would you expect to have a person or persons posting and categorizing each message? I imagine this would take some editorial judgment, and thus be done manually. Anyway, it's an interesting idea; I'll talk it over with my EDC colleagues. ac The new DigitalDivide website is a definite step in the right direction. It's bridging a cultural divide between email, RSS and content management systems in a good way. There's a few things I have ideas on, like creating a 'Digital Divide weblog' off of the list which handles each new topic as an entry, and anything with 'Re:' in it as a response to the entry. Why is that important? One of the main problem of listservs is that people have to know about them. Another aspect is that someone who is busy may not participate on the list, but they might post a comment to a weblog entry. Accessibility. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
Hi Andy I would defer to the software experts on this list- I know there are a number of open source asynchronous systems out there. Blogs or weblogs started out as personal journals or musings of individuals. Some have grown a number of similar features to the ones I have suggested and which have evolved over time. I am interested in functionality more than trying to differentiate by type. In reality many of these ideas are now merging and we are only a few baby steps away from an open source 3D conference space such as Croquet where even more flexibility will be available, including avatars. If you can define functionality and those here can agree as to what might be desired, we can see what is available with both functionality and flexibility. thoughts? Andy Carvin wrote: Hi Tom, Are any of these tools free or open source? What would you see as the pros and cons of these tools versus having a blog capture DDN list messages? thanks, ac Tom Abeles wrote: Hi Andy Actually, this is done currently in asynchronous conferencing systems where there are a number of options. The system can notify a participant that a post has been made and you can go to to read and respond, sometimes the post is sent and the system can select how you can respond, either from your email or by going to the site. Each has trade-offs. These have been around. I have suggested a long time ago in a past far-far away that such a system is better than listservs because it keeps topics threaded and lets folks track only the threads of interest, while being alerted of new threads. Some asynchonous systems allow internal cross listings/linkings and other user driven features. These are over 20 years old- ancient by web time. One of the problems with listservs with floating communities such as DDN is that few threads have a long life- short attention spans and other pressing issues tend to lead most discussions into quick, terminal, illnesses. One of the problems is that a general list often leads to ideas that go off-list on a person-to-person exchange when specifics seem better conducted in private. This says that the lists serve a number of purposes much like breaks and receptions at a conference. The social dynamics of lists are often not a subject of discussion and I am not sure if they have been or need to be studied other than for an academic. thoughts? tom abeles Andy Carvin wrote: Hi Taran, Actually, this is something I've contemplated on and off for the last couple of years. While the current version of the DDN website doesn't allow category tagging in its blogs, we could always use Movable Type, which we have installed on the CMC website (http://cmc.edc.org). Were you envisioning that this would be done automatically, or would you expect to have a person or persons posting and categorizing each message? I imagine this would take some editorial judgment, and thus be done manually. Anyway, it's an interesting idea; I'll talk it over with my EDC colleagues. ac The new DigitalDivide website is a definite step in the right direction. It's bridging a cultural divide between email, RSS and content management systems in a good way. There's a few things I have ideas on, like creating a 'Digital Divide weblog' off of the list which handles each new topic as an entry, and anything with 'Re:' in it as a response to the entry. Why is that important? One of the main problem of listservs is that people have to know about them. Another aspect is that someone who is busy may not participate on the list, but they might post a comment to a weblog entry. Accessibility. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
I agree with defining the functionality. But I would rather define the funtionality without talking about the technologies first. People have a tendency to skew a design by their requirements, and in doing so they leave a lot out. If a person asked me for a vehicle with four doors, I would automatically think of a car. But maybe they need an airplane. ;-) Tom Abeles wrote: Hi Andy I would defer to the software experts on this list- I know there are a number of open source asynchronous systems out there. Blogs or weblogs started out as personal journals or musings of individuals. Some have grown a number of similar features to the ones I have suggested and which have evolved over time. I am interested in functionality more than trying to differentiate by type. In reality many of these ideas are now merging and we are only a few baby steps away from an open source 3D conference space such as Croquet where even more flexibility will be available, including avatars. If you can define functionality and those here can agree as to what might be desired, we can see what is available with both functionality and flexibility. thoughts? -- Taran Rampersad [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linuxgazette.com http://www.a42.com http://www.worldchanging.com http://www.knowprose.com http://www.easylum.net Criticize by creating. Michelangelo ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
[DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
The Information Society Project at Yale Law School is proud to announce that registration is now open for The Global Flow of Information Conference 2005, which will take place on April 1-3, 2005, at the Yale Law School. http://islandia.law.yale.edu/isp/GlobalFlow/registration.htm Please register early, as seating is limited. This ground-breaking conference will bring together policymakers, lawyers, technologists, social activists, and academics to discuss globalization and the law in terms of information flow. Patterns of information flow are one of the most important factors shaping globalization. Today, all sorts of entities -- individuals, groups, countries, and international organizations -- are trying to promote and control the flow across national borders of different kinds of information, including intellectual property, scientific research, political discourse, brand names, and cultural symbols. Ever-proliferating digitally networked environments subject information to yet new methods of distribution and manipulation. Control and influence of information flow will help define who holds power in the global information economy. This conference will explore these patterns of information flow and their political, economic, social, and cultural consequences. We will explore four key questions: * Can the flow of information across borders be controlled? If so, how? * Whose interests will be affected by flows of information across borders? Who will be empowered and who will lose influence and authority? * What role can and should law play in securing freedoms, rights, and democratic accountability as individuals, groups, and nations struggle over control of information flows? * What lessons can we learn about how to regulate information flow from past experience with other kinds of flow across borders, such as flows of goods, services, people, and capital? We invite you to join leading experts in academia, industry, and the non-profit sector to debate the patterns, problems, and power of information flows in six different contexts: (1) Governance (2) Economics (3) Culture (4) Politics (5) Science (6) Warfare For more information about the conference, with full descriptions of the panels above and a full speaker list, please visit http://islandia.law.yale.edu/isp/GlobalFlow/index.html. Eddan Katz Yale Law School Executive Director Information Society Project http://islandia.law.yale.edu/isp/ ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr.1-3, 2005
At 9:16 AM -0500 2/3/05, Andy Carvin wrote: John, I think that's a little unfair. Arguably, Web based conferences are _different_ than physical ones. Some events work great virtually - others I've seen have been a flop. Forgive me if I left the impressions that virtual conferences should replace physical ones. They shouldn't. And they won't. There is far, far too much gain from meeting face to face for that to ever, ever happen. BUT . I submit conferences of a type mentioned should have as much virtual as is reasonable and cost effective. How much is that? 1.Keynoters: I would suggest that all keynoters should pre-record their remarks with the (archived) recordings made available almost exactly at the same time as the real time live deliveries. These recordings can be made over the telephone and uploaded as MP3 files for very, very small dollars without any more technical ability than talking into a telephone. I would think every single keynoter would LOVE to know h/h speech would be available worldwide immediately after delivery. 2 Presenters: I would suggest that all presenters who are at ease with uploading their power point slides and audio would also do that in advance of the real time deliveries. (And, for those that are not, themselves at ease, the organizers should seek volunteers who can help in this regard.) The organizers and the presenters should seek to have as many who come to the physical conference view these so that the time remaining can be used for real time questions and answers. Why go to a lecture if you are just going to sit back and get fed what you can see on a web site in your pajamas? 3.Blogs: I think conference blog site - and links to presenter blogs - are very, very helpful and should be promoted by the organizers. These sites are VERY helpful for those attending physically - an up-to-the-minute electronic bulletin board so people can find each other, make last minute announcements, etc. etc. etc. 4. Listservs: I also think that a conference litserv has some advantages. While at the conference, people check their mail. Again, a conference list serv can give reminders and last minute updates. Isn't it nice when you get up in a hotel room to check you mail and find that an email has gone out reminding all those at the conference to come to YOUR presentation? 5. Real Time?: And, for the really ambitious who would like some components to be webcast in real time, this should also be explored. Cell phones and very, very affordable telephone call centers linked to the Net make this an interesting subject to explore further. THE MOST IMPORTANT: Changing the culture! Isn't the most important part of all of this to cause people to re-think how they can improve deliveries? cut costs? increase outreach? Who on this list needs to be reminded that we live in a Google-ized, globalized, nanosecond, net-connected world? Isn't it fair to ask conferences organizers presenting themes like improving 'global information flow' and 'reducing the digital divide' to walk-the-walk, not just talk-the-talk? With all due respect, John Hibbs http://www.bfranklin.edu/johnhibbs I'm a big advocate of virtual conferences and have hosted several already, but I don't see them as a complete replacement of real-world gatherings. Not everyone is as comfortable with virtual events as you are, and they don't contribute as much as they would if it had been in person. Also, the personal networking that happens at real conferences still beats the networking at virtual conferences much of the time. My personal preference is to host conferences that have both online and offline components, but that doesn't mean one can always replace the other without losing something in the process. -- --- Andy Carvin Program Director EDC Center for Media Community acarvin @ edc . org http://www.digitaldivide.net http://www.tsunami-info.org Blog: http://www.andycarvin.com --- ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
Gentlemen, This topic to me sounds a bit broad and general. What exactly do you all mean by when you say the flow of information throughout the world. Dose it refer to the media or something else? In many aspects of the world that we live in, the flow of information relating to the media is heavily concentrated on the western perspective. What exactly about the voices of the miniorities of the world? How do they mix into all of this? I would like to hear some feedback. -Omar Alansari (Kreger) --- Tom Abeles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John has hit the nail on the head. First, for a global flow conference its decidedly being seen through US eyes. Secondly, the home base for the conference organizers is the Yale Law School which further narrows the scope of the conference and finally, as John has so perceptively picked up on, its a conference where most of the materials could just as easily be put up as a web cast or even as web pages with comment software to allow exchanges between all. And, in that respect it is anachronistic. Additionally, in most of these cases, panelist have expenses covered making the movement of bodies to the conference a decidedly costly event when most could be conferenced. This conference provides a brilliant opportunity to better understand where the golobal flow of information is, today. thoughts? tom abeles John Hibbs wrote: With all due respect, Eddan, why do I have to travel to Yale to participate in the conference? Arguably, Web based conferences are better than physical ones. And a whole lot cheaper. Nope, we can't duplicate the warm and fuzzy the comes from shoulder to shoulder linkages at physical conferences. But everything else can be done exceptionally well, especially for attendees of a kind that are likely to attend the Global Flow of Information Conference. NOTE: Several times we have tried to hold combination conferences - where there are virtual and physical attendees. I am not sure these work well enough to justify the work and handicaps. However, I deeply believe in the idea that one-to-many lectures and power point presentations (in all their glory) should be put up on the web in advance of the physical convention. Attendees can do themselves a real service by viewing these presentations in advance, leaving more time for QAthe best part of all lectures, in my opinion. At 7:08 AM -0500 2/3/05, Eddan Katz wrote: The Information Society Project at Yale Law School is proud to announce that registration is now open for The Global Flow of Information Conference 2005, which will take place on April 1-3, 2005, at the Yale Law School. http://islandia.law.yale.edu/isp/GlobalFlow/registration.htm ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message. = The United Islamic Emirates of Madasena (UIEM) LONG LIVE THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE!!! JUSTICE FOR PALESTINE!!! FREEDOM FOR IRAQ!!! ALLAHU-WAK-BAR!!! ALLAH IS THE GREATEST!!! http://www.marchforjustice.com/index.php __ Do you Yahoo!? All your favorites on one personal page Try My Yahoo! http://my.yahoo.com ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
All: First, please allow me to introduce myself .. my name is Sudhir Raghupathy, and I am a recent MBA graduate from Case Western University in Cleveland, Ohio. I was intrigued by your conversation as it comes at an opportune time to share my view - I agree wholeheartedly with Tom and John : that the future of conferencing lies in Virtual Conferencing. While I concede there is value in face-to-face connection, this could be catered to regional audiences, thus minimizing travel expense, time lost, and environmental impact (fuel expenditure, emissions). Perhaps this is a good segway to provide an exemplar of such a virtual conference : it is the Second Annual Conference for Business as an Agent for World Benefit. If the goal and misison of this mailgroup is to collaborate to help close the Digital Divide - conferences like this one need to be accompanied with efforts to provide maximal access to the internet for all the world's citizens. This conference, which I have helped to promote and support, represents one of the most noble goals I have ever known. Here are the details for the conference - THE SECOND INTERNATIONAL ON-LINE CONFERENCE Shaping Tomorrows Business Leaders Today: Changing Society by Changing Management Education February 24-25, 2005 The event is free, but registration is required. Please click here or call (216) 368-3809 to register If link above doesn't work: http://www.weatherhead.case.edu/bawb/forms/conferenceFeb05.cfm The 2005 Online Conference: You are invited to participate in the 2nd International On-line Conference for Business as Agent of World Benefit. This event will be held entirely on-line through collaboration with our technology partner iCohere, Inc. The unique on-line environment offers an exciting new forum for conferencing - with participants attending from their home or office around the world as their schedules permit. Using this exciting new approach for online collaboration, the conference will focus on exploring ways that management teachers and scholars can shape tomorrow's business leaders by integrating business and society into the classroom. Keynotes Include: · Judith Samuelson - Founder and Executive Director of the Business and Society Program at The Aspen Institute · Ellen Kallinowsky Head of United Nations Global Compact Learning Forum · David Cooperrider - Professor and Chairman of the World inquiry for Business As An Agent of World Benefit, at the Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University Call for Submissions: We invite you to submit case studies, curriculum examples (including readings, syllabi, example assignments, etc.), dialogue starters, and workshop proposals that relate to the conference theme. Details about the various kinds of submissions and how to submit materials can be found on our website. Any questions, contact: Lindsey Godwin, Research Associate for the B.A.W.B. World Inquiry, at [EMAIL PROTECTED] We welcome your partipation in this important educational opportunity! I welcome the opportunity to get to know change leaders like yourselves better - feel free to contact me! Kindest and Best Regards, Sudhir Raghupathy Founder, Cleveland Net Impact www.net-impact.org Tom Abeles [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John has hit the nail on the head. First, for a global flow conference its decidedly being seen through US eyes. Secondly, the home base for the conference organizers is the Yale Law School which further narrows the scope of the conference and finally, as John has so perceptively picked up on, its a conference where most of the materials could just as easily be put up as a web cast or even as web pages with comment software to allow exchanges between all. And, in that respect it is anachronistic. Additionally, in most of these cases, panelist have expenses covered making the movement of bodies to the conference a decidedly costly event when most could be conferenced. This conference provides a brilliant opportunity to better understand where the golobal flow of information is, today. thoughts? tom abeles John Hibbs wrote: With all due respect, Eddan, why do I have to travel to Yale to participate in the conference? Arguably, Web based conferences are better than physical ones. And a whole lot cheaper. Nope, we can't duplicate the warm and fuzzy the comes from shoulder to shoulder linkages at physical conferences. But everything else can be done exceptionally well, especially for attendees of a kind that are likely to attend the Global Flow of Information Conference. NOTE: Several times we have tried to hold combination conferences - where there are virtual and physical attendees. I am not sure these work well enough to justify the work and handicaps. However, I deeply believe in the idea that one-to-many lectures and power point presentations (in all their
Re: [DDN] Yale Global Flow of Information Conference - Apr. 1-3, 2005
John has hit the nail on the head. First, for a global flow conference its decidedly being seen through US eyes. Secondly, the home base for the conference organizers is the Yale Law School which further narrows the scope of the conference and finally, as John has so perceptively picked up on, its a conference where most of the materials could just as easily be put up as a web cast or even as web pages with comment software to allow exchanges between all. And, in that respect it is anachronistic. Additionally, in most of these cases, panelist have expenses covered making the movement of bodies to the conference a decidedly costly event when most could be conferenced. This conference provides a brilliant opportunity to better understand where the golobal flow of information is, today. thoughts? tom abeles John Hibbs wrote: With all due respect, Eddan, why do I have to travel to Yale to participate in the conference? Arguably, Web based conferences are better than physical ones. And a whole lot cheaper. Nope, we can't duplicate the warm and fuzzy the comes from shoulder to shoulder linkages at physical conferences. But everything else can be done exceptionally well, especially for attendees of a kind that are likely to attend the Global Flow of Information Conference. NOTE: Several times we have tried to hold combination conferences - where there are virtual and physical attendees. I am not sure these work well enough to justify the work and handicaps. However, I deeply believe in the idea that one-to-many lectures and power point presentations (in all their glory) should be put up on the web in advance of the physical convention. Attendees can do themselves a real service by viewing these presentations in advance, leaving more time for QAthe best part of all lectures, in my opinion. At 7:08 AM -0500 2/3/05, Eddan Katz wrote: The Information Society Project at Yale Law School is proud to announce that registration is now open for The Global Flow of Information Conference 2005, which will take place on April 1-3, 2005, at the Yale Law School. http://islandia.law.yale.edu/isp/GlobalFlow/registration.htm ___ DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list DIGITALDIVIDE@mailman.edc.org http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the body of the message.
