Academia

Universities & Poker: gambling for & with students

Times are hard for most universities. One argument for this is that there are too many institutions offering university courses in Sweden (see the Swedish debate). We are simply too few people to support the institutions. So it’s not surprising that the universities and polytechnics/university colleges are fighting to get students to apply to their courses.

The University College of Borås is now offering a 7,5 credit (full Swedish academic year is 60 credits) course in Game Theory & Poker. The purpose of the course is to increase the students fundamental understanding of game theory applied to poker. The course begins with an introduction to game theory and games with incomplete information (specifically poker). The focus of the course is on the mathematical side, psychological and cognitive aspects of the game are ignored. 

OK, so I can understand how poker can be used to illustrate game theory, but to put the focus squarely on the gaming aspect does little for the understanding and development of game theory as a subject.

Online poker has become a big subject in Sweden. It is, strangely enough, often presented in the media as being exciting and profitable. Young people (read: university students) are attracted by the lure of the online lifestyle and easy money. By presenting the course in such a way the university college of Borås is contributing to the glamourisation of gambling – which most people should know tends only to make the house rich, not the players.

In addition to this, the course is an example of the how low can we go mentality the scramble for students. Naturally I sympathize with the universities need to increase the number of students but the way in which this is done is not irrelevant. Teaching poker is hardly the basis of useful skills in the job market or in life.

Can the teachers, department & university honestly say they have the best interests of the students in mind by creating and offering this course?

Posted on by mklang

Students and Technology

Remember Michael Wesch? He created the excellent video The Machine is Us/ing Us about web2.0. Its message: The Machine is us was very nicely argued. Prof Wesch is back again with another video, A Vision of Students Today, about the student life today. Mainly (but not only) about the relationship between teaching and technology.

The students surveyed themselves and this resulted in the following statements – but don’t stop here – the film is very much worth watching both for its message and presentation. Here are some of the statements which arise from the survey:

  • I complete 49% of readings assigned to me
  • I will read 8 books this year, 2300 web pages & 1281 facebook profiles
  • I facebook through most of my classes

The film contains two important quotes – the first my McLuhan (1967)

Today’s child is bewildered when he enters the 19th century environment that still characterizes the educational establishment where information is scarce but ordered and structured by fragmented, classified patterns subjects and schedules.

and the second from 1841 when Josiah F. Bumstead said about the inventor of the blackboard:

The inventor of the system deserves to be ranked among the best contributors to learning science, if not the greatest benefactors of mankind.

Don’t make the mistake of interpreting Wesch as a luddite. It is very important to be able to criticize technology. The amazing thing is that we are allowed to criticize cars without being accused of luddism but if you are critical towards IT you stand accused of wanting to return to the stone age.

Wesch is making an important point that teaching should be more relevant and less dependent upon technology. Simply adding technology, or supplying it to students, does not improve teaching, learning or education.

Prof Wesch Digital Ethnography Blog

Oh, and while you are there check out their Information R/evolution video.

Posted on by mklang

Internet Censorship China

Reporters Without Borders and Chinese Human Rights Defenders (a Chinese Internet expert working in IT industry) has produced a study on the Chinese official system of online censorship, surveillance and propaganda. For obvious reasons the author of the report prefers to remain anonymous. The RSF press release promises:

This report shows how the CCP and the government have deployed colossal human and financial resources to obstruct online free expression. Chinese news websites and blogs have been brought under the editorial control of the propaganda apparatus at both the national and local levels.

… [The report] explains how this control system functions and identifies its leading actors such the Internet Propaganda Administrative Bureau…, the Bureau of Information and Public Opinion… and the Internet Bureau…

Internet censorship is a vital topic any work in this area is very welcome. Two PhD thesis’ of interest in this area are Stuart Hamilton’s To what extent can libraries ensure free, equal and unhampered access to Internet-accessible information resources from a global perspective? and Johan Lagerkvist The Internet in China: Unlocking and containing the public sphere.

Posted on by mklang

Plagiarism Saga

Following the embarrassing case of plagiarism at my university (Göteborg) has turned into a long process (here, here, here and here).

The brief outline of the case is that a researcher acting as a supervisor for a mastes thesis used some of the students work in a conference paper without referencing the work of the students. Apparently the students were mentioned in the oral presentation of the paper. Not that this matters.

May 2005: The conference when the paper was presented.

November 2005: The plagiarism is addressed by the Faculty, unsure what they actually did probably just decided to send the errand on to the ethics committee.

May 2006: A split ethics committee is not in agreement and send the case on to the National Science Council (Vetenskapsrådet)

March 2007: National Science Council reaches the conclusion that the researcher had behaved in an unethical manner by plagiarising student essays.

June 2007: The expert group at the Science council reach the same conclusion.

September 2007: The Human Resources Committee at Göteborg University is the body with the power to punish the researcher for her actions is unable to act since the university failed to notify the researcher, in writing, that disciplinary actions could be taken. This notification must take place within two years of the waking of the errand.  This means that since nobody at the university bothered to notify the researcher in writing during the past two year no disciplinary actions can be taken.

This situation has been handled incredibly badly….

Posted on by mklang

Free Software Conference

On the 7-8 December Göteborg will be hosting the first Free Software Conference Scandinavia (FSCONS). The event, which is already promising to become an important event on the Free Software calendar, is a good mix of techies and freedom folks.

While the techies will be able to enjoy talks on squid, gtk, GnuTLS and OpenMoko (among others) the non-techies (like myself) will be talking about digital rights, consumer rights, free software licensing & women in IT.

I am looking forward to speaking on the topic of Digital Rights

In an Internet-based participatory democracy we are particularly dependent upon our technological infrastructure. The qualities of digital communication and interaction create a situation where the user is often incapable ensuring the integrity and security of the communications infrastructure. Therefore we are becoming increasingly dependent upon experts to ensure the openness, accessibility and freedom of the infrastructure of our democracy. This session will address the threats and opportunities faced by users in a digital participatory democracy and the steps we need to ensure the openness of digital democracy.

But I am particularly looking forward to listening to (and discussing with) people like Shane Coughlan, Anne Østergaard and Fernanda Weiden. It’s nice to see that events such as this (and the Stallman lecture) are being arranged in my hometown.

Great Work by the tireless Henrik!

Posted on by mklang

7 Ways To Ruin A Technological Revolution

Here is an online talk by one of the most interesting of tech-lawyers, the intellectual James Boyle talk is on YouTube and the subject is 7 Ways To Ruin A Technological Revolution. From the abstract:

If you wanted to undermine the technological revolution of the last 30 years, using the law, how would you do it? How would you undercut the virtuous cycle that results from access to an open network, force technological innovation into stagnation, diminish competition, create monopolies over the basic building blocks of knowledge? How many of those things are we doing now?

Boyle has been an impressive figure since his book Shamans, Software and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society came out in 1997 since then his writings include Papers on the Public Domain (James Boyle ed. 2003) and Bound by Law – A ‘Graphic Novel’ (a.k.a. comic book) on Fair Use.

He has also been central in the launching of Creative Commons and Duke Center for the Study of the Public Domain.

(via DigitalKoans)

Posted on by mklang

Open Access Films

The Open Access movement is gaining momentum and still there are too many people who are unaware of what it is all about, its goals and effects. There are some very persuasive arguments being presented by key people but don’t worry if you have missed out on these. They are available on YouTube

Film One is a conversation with Sydney Verba, Director of Harvard University Libraries and professor of political science, and Charles Nesson, Professor of Law on the serials crises and the fact that “even Harvard” cannot afford the developments. 

Film Two is Chris McManus, a researcher at UCL, describes why research needs to be openly shared not only by other researchers but also by the general public. 

Film Three is an interview of researcher Erik Svensson the Department of Ecology, Lund University by Lund librarian Helena Stjernberg on the pros and cons of Open Access.

You might also want to look at the short ad boosting the Public Library of Science, maybe not so informative as fun! The last film is an occupational film from 1947 about the library profession, and becoming a librarian it’s kind of cute – also it shows the idea and image of the librarian of the time.

librarian.jpg

Librarians (circa 1947)

Being a natural skeptic I must admit to not being totally persuaded by the educational value of YouTube but I did enjoy these films.

Posted on by mklang

For as little as £25…

Aab_homeApparently the British Library cannot afford to take care of all its old books and has come up with scheme to protect their books: Adopt a book.

“The beneficiary of your gift can enjoy benefits such as a personalised bookplate added to your chosen book and the chance to view it on a behind the scenes tour. Adopt a Book supports our conservation team, helping us preserve the world’s knowledge for future generations.”

How to adopt a book:

(i) decide what level of donation you wish to make,
(ii) add a title from the list to your shopping basket, and then
(iii) go the checkout to give your details and make your gift.
You can choose for the certificate and, where applicable, tour vouchers to be sent to yourself or directly to the beneficiary. We use first class post and aim to reply within three working days.

This is really a good cause but the whole tone “For as little as £25…” makes the whole thing a bit of a car boot sale. Hardly the way to engender a deepened respect for old valuable books… or is it just me?

(via Biblioteksrelaterat)

More news from the British Library is their increased digitalisation project. The British Library has begun a new digitalisation project. This entails the digitalization of over 100 00 books. The focus is on 19th century literature which has not been issued in new editions. It is hoped that the Internet will breathe new life into the old books.

(via Humaniorabloggen)

Posted on by mklang

One ring to…

And finally here it is. The ring which all my work has been leading up to. In Sweden the choice stands between the doctors hat or the doctors ring. Never heard of anyone buying both and considering the fashion statement of this pleated hat the decision to choose the ring was easy.

doktorshatt.jpg

the doctors hat

The ring is not really much of a major fashion statement but it does seem slightly more usable and practical than the hat. The ring is worn on the second finger on the left hand – the same hand as the wedding ring. So as my friend quickly pointed out – I look like I am very married.

The ring has a laurel wreath motive around it which actually gives it a bit of a tacky look. Really not sure if I will use the ring on a regular basis (not because of the married look) but I felt that after all the work I had earned it.

da_ring.jpg

It doesn’t feel like I am married – more that I belong to some kind of strange club…

Posted on by mklang

Information overload is passé

It used to be called information overload but after reading Jonny’s latest post on the Industrial IT Group blog I have been educated, updated you might even say, that the current term is actually frazzing.*

Frazzing, short for frantic multitasking, refers to a form of mental channel switching caused by all the distractions we face today: cell phones, sms, e-mails, and loads of web interactions. We should be warned, or so they tell us, about the danger of new technology and the ways in which they disrupt our working life.

Jonny, you make an interesting observation that a CEO of a tech firm, quoted as saying,

“There’s plenty of technology. There’s way too much technology, in our opinion, and certainly too much complexity in technology.”

may in fact be a closet luddite. The argument is – that if people don’t get, or cannot handle, the technology you are secretly against it. Of course the underlying argument is that the luddite’s are wrong and technology is good. You continue:

Yes, when people are trying to get more done by doing several things at once, it often means that they are able to do nothing particularly well. Technology that is supposed to make us more productive by keeping us connected may only enhance this problem. Then again, technology may be something else than a productivity tool? If people are bored at work and editing their Facebook profile all day, maybe the problem isn’t Facebook?

Despite the fact that I recently posted a diatribe on web 2.0 in general and Facebook in particular I agree with you. The problem is not the technology but rather our ability to interact and control it (do not interpret this as a slippery slope – the same argument cannot be used for Cocaine).

The technology is useful and the way in which we interact it defines the way in which we are capable of handling technology without frazzing. But I still have a question: Why aren’t you on Facebook? Your argument would have been more potent if he were there…

So Jonny, choosing to handle technology by not using it…. isn’t that a bit…. well…. you know…. Luddite?

—

* the problem of information overload or frazzing is old and established. In 1984 Jacob Palme wrote an article entitled: “You have 134 unread mail! Do you want to read them now?” In Computer-Based Message Services, H. T. Smith (Ed.), IFIP Proceedings, Elsevier North-Holland, New York.

Posted on by mklang