design

Army 2.0

You might be excused for getting the impression that the US military is struggling to understand how they should be using Internet technology. On the one hand they recently began an effort to control what their soldiers are posting online (War blogs silenced) and now they have blocked access to sites such as YouTube and Myspace.

The reason for this? Bandwidth.

The US says the use is taking up too much bandwidth and slows down the military’s computer system.

But a US Strategic Command spokesman said a “secondary benefit” was to help operational security.

At the same time the military have realised the potential impact of sites such as YouTube and have started putting material online.

The Pentagon only recently started posting its own videos on YouTube, showing soldiers in action in Iraq in a move designed to reach out to a younger audience and to show the successes of the US military. (More on this over here).

But the best quote in this BBC article is the honest: “The cyberspace battle space was not one that we were particularly operating well in” Lt Col Christopher Garver, US Army.

Yes… we have noticed…

Lex Ferenda has more including the order (AP report | full text of order) and a increased list of blocked sites:

â??To maximize the availability of DoD network resources for official government usage, the Commander, JTF-GNO, with the approval of the Department of Defense, will block worldwide access to the following internet sites beginning on or about 14 May 2007.â??

www.youtube.com
www.1.fm
www.pandora.com
www.photobucket.com
www.myspace.com
www.live365.com
www.hi5.com
www.metacafe.com
www.mtv.com
www.ifilm.com
www.blackplanet.com
www.stupidvideos.com
www.filecabi.com

Posted on by mklang

Questioning Technology

Kevin at Question Technology was at the CHI 2007 conference and found a really interesting paper and presentation called “Questioning the Technological Panacea: Three Reflective Questions for Designers” (Eric Baumer and Bill Tomlinson).

They discussed three questions that product designers should ask:

  1. “Given a technological solution, are there other, possibly non-technological solutions that could address the same problem equally well, if not better?”
  2. “Is the problem being addressed perceived as a problem by the proposed users, or is the situation being unnecessarily problematized by designers?”
  3. “By focusing on a specific problem, is the solution treating a symptom and hiding the cause?”

This paper was part of the “alt.chi” program at CHI, which is a forum for unusual work that wouldn’t ordinarily get published by the conference.  Alt.chi submissions are posted and reviewed in an open public forum.

Read the paper!

Posted on by mklang

Teaching with powerpoint

In November last year I wrote about my concerns about powerpoint misuse in an entry called do you hand out your handouts. Emeritus Prof John Sweller has presented research showing that powerpoints are not really good pedagogical tools.

Basically the human mind cannot effectively take in, process, understand and remember information which comes simultaneously from two sources. Therefore the lecture two sources of input (heavy powerpoints and the lecturer’s voice) becomes a cognitive overload for the short-term memory.

This work is part of his development of cognitive load theory (wikipedia).

Sweller writes on his website:

Cognitive load theory (e.g. Sweller, 1988; 1994) is an instructional theory generated by this field of research. It describes learning structures in terms of an information processing system involving long term memory, which effectively stores all of our knowledge and skills on a more-or-less permanent basis and working memory, which performs the intellectual tasks associated with consciousness. Information may only be stored in long term memory after first being attended to, and processed by, working memory. Working memory, however, is extremely limited in both capacity and duration. These limitations will, under some conditions, impede learning.

The fundamental tenet of cognitive load theory is that the quality of instructional design will be raised if greater consideration is given to the role and limitations, of working memory. Since its conception in the early 1980’s, cognitive load theory has been used to develop several instructional strategies which have been demonstrated empirically to be superior to those used conventionally.

Not all powerpoint is bad. For example showing a diagram and explaining its meaning is useful since it shows the same information in two different forms. These both reinforce each other.

I have never really liked powerpoints overfilled with text so now I have a reason to like them even less. The problem (as always?) lies in finding a good balance between visual aids that reinforce the message and distraction. But what really annoys me is my own dependence on powerpoint in my role as a teacher. In the long run I want to develop myself and leave technology behind.

Posted on by mklang

Greener Apples

No need to be cynical or pessimistic about the effect of lobby campaigns or the power of collecting people online. Greenpeace launched an environmental campaign against Appleâ??s lack of environmental policy. On 2nd May Steve Jobs published a second public letter (the first was against DRM) listing environmental hazards connected with Apple computers and the steps Apple was taking to remedy the situation.

It is generally not Appleâ??s policy to trumpet our plans for the future; we tend to talk about the things we have just accomplished. Unfortunately this policy has left our customers, shareholders, employees and the industry in the dark about Appleâ??s desires and plans to become greener. Our stakeholders deserve and expect more from us, and theyâ??re right to do so. They want us to be a leader in this area, just as we are in the other areas of our business. So today weâ??re changing our policy.

This is a good first step towards taking Apple to the forefront of environmental concerns as well as its firm position as a design leader. This approach also shows that design and environmentalism are not incompatible.

Greenpeace has responded on their campaign site with the words “We are cheering!”…

It’s not everything we asked for.  Apple has declared a phase out of the worst chemicals in its product range, Brominated Fire Retardants (BFRs) and Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) by 2008. That beats Dell and other computer manufactures’ pledge to phase them out by 2009. Way to go Steve!

It’s nice to know that the machine of my choice has just made a little less guilty.

Posted on by mklang

Landmines – ban the technology

Certain technological artefacts should never have been designed, manufactured or used. Among these is the landmine. Its horrible impact is not only on the combatants but rather on the civil population which needs to live with the slowly decaying lethal devices for decades after the land was sown with them. Organisations such as the No More Landmines in the UK are working to ban them as legitimate weapons. These organisations need all the support that they can get.

The problem is that people are interested in a conflict while it is active and making headlines. When “peace” is achieved public interest declines considerably. This is unfortunate as the landmines remain. The cost of removing landmines is extremely high and almost impossible to meet for worn torn countries.

So how does one attempt to ensure that people’s interest remains focused on the landmine problem? Well artist & activist Will St. Leger came up with a novel and shocking approach. On Sunday 1st April he placed 100 fake ‘landmines’ made from stenciled metal plates in park around Dublin, Ireland.

Will explains: “The reason for doing this was to get people asking themselves “what if the world I walked in was littered with landmines?” They’re nearly all gone now, the Police took away most of them when a tourist called the emergency number to report ‘Landmines’. Afterwards, I wondered who the people of Laos, Cambodia and Iraq gonna call when they step on real landmine?”

landmines1.jpg

 (via Wooster Collective)

Posted on by mklang

Bad Attitude

The blog Bad Vista puts a nice perspective on the difference in attitude between free and proprietary software:

As the GPL preamble says:

The licenses for most software and other practical works are designed to take away your freedom to share and change the works. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software–to make sure the software is free for all its users.

In contrast, a typical Microsoft Vista EULA says:

The software is licensed, not sold. This agreement only gives you some rights to use the software. Microsoft reserves all other rights. Unless applicable law gives you more rights despite this limitation, you may use the software only as expressly permitted in this agreement. In doing so, you must comply with any technical limitations in the software that only allow you to use it in certain ways.

See the difference in attitude?

Posted on by mklang

The Third Draft

The third draft of the GPLv3 has been released. The draft is a result of feedback from various sources (general public, official discussion committees, and two international conferences held in India and Japan). The draft incorporates significant changes since the previous draft (July 2006). This draft is planned to be the penultimate draft prior to the formal release of the official GPLv3.

Changes in this draft include:

* First-time violators can have their license automatically restored if they remedy the problem within thirty days.
* License compatibility terms have been simplified, with the goal of making them easier to understand and administer.
* Manufacturers who include the software in consumer products must also provide installation information for the software along with the source. This change provides more narrow focus for requirements that were proposed in previous drafts.
* New patent requirements have been added to prevent distributors from colluding with patent holders to provide discriminatory protection from patents.

    The draft will be open for comments and discussion for sixty days. Following this the FSF will release a “last call” draft, followed by another thirty days for discussion before the FSF’s board of directors approves the final text of GPL version 3.

    Richard Stallman, president of the FSF and principal author of the GNU GPL, said, “The GPL was designed to ensure that all users of a program receive the four essential freedoms which define free software. These freedoms allow you to run the program as you see fit, study and adapt it for your own purposes, redistribute copies to help your neighbor, and release your improvements to the public. The recent patent agreement between Microsoft and Novell aims to undermine these freedoms. In this draft we have worked hard to prevent such deals from making a mockery of free software.”

    Posted on by mklang

    Technology Ethics Report

    UNESCO has recently published a report entitled “Ethical Implications of Emerging Technologies” – The work was carried out by Mary Rundle and Chris Conley (Net Dialogue) at UNESCO’s request. Here is the text from the press release

    In presenting results of this examination, the report first tells an introductory story of how the technologies covered relate to one another. Next, infoethics goals are presented. Then, for each technological trend surveyed, the report contains a short chapter drafted in lay terms to provide an overview of the relevant technology and to highlight ramifications and concerns. The report then summarizes this infoethics analysis and revisits the story of the emerging technologies. Finally, the report offers recommendations on ways to advance infoethics goals in anticipation of these oncoming technologies.

    The ethical, legal and societal implications of ICTs are one of the three main priorities of UNESCOâ??s Information for All Programme and UNESCO was recently designated as the Facilitator for the implementation of Action Line C10 â??Ethical Dimensions of the Information Societyâ?? of the Geneva Action Plan adopted by the World Summit on the Information Society.

    The full report is available here. At a first glance the 89 page report seems interesting and relevant. I am looking forward to  reading it.

    (via Question Technology)

    Posted on by mklang

    Iron Harvest

    If we ignore the nationalistic/romantic ramblings of some deranged people there is a consensus that war is not a good thing. Certain wars (unfortunately not all) get a great deal of media attention – which may lead to popular cries for peace. â??Secretâ?? or unpublicized wars are harder to end.

    The end of war is naturally worth working for. But it also brings with it a loss of interest in the region and the people involved. This is natural since most people (me included) tend to see the end of fighting as the solution. Naturally there is a need for reconciliation and rebuilding but thatâ??s about it.

    But, this complacent attitude of mine was too be rudely disturbed when I came across the term â??iron harvestâ??.

    The term is used by farmers in Belgium and France to describe the yearly amount of WWI ordinance found while plowing their fields. It’s more than 80 years since the war ended and still enough war garbage appears to motivate a term of its own.  â??The French Département du Déminage recover about 900 tons of unexploded munitions every year. Since 1945, approximately 630 French démineurs have died handling unexploded munitions.â?? (Wikipedia)

    But naturally the problems do not stop with an old war. As recently as 2006 the conflict between Israel and the Hezbollah in Lebanon resulted in up to one million unexploded cluster bombs (BBC News). Estimates made by U.N. officials indicate that 90 of all cluster bombs used were launched during the last 72 hours of the conflict (Washington Post)

    These small lethal bombs are left lying about in fields and in ruins. This slows the pace of economic and social recovery since the fields are too dangerous to use and rebuilding takes much longer. Not to mention all the accidental casualties and fatalities which occur when people come into contact with these lethal bombs.

    Theoretically such ordinance should be easily prohibited by the present rules of war but unfortunately they are not. Therefore special legislation is required. Belgium has gone the furthest among countries and banned cluster bombs completely. Other countries are also working towards this goal.

    Replying to questions in Parliament, the Swedish Minister of Defence (December 2006) has stated the governments is going to play an active role in international work against cluster bombs including working for an international ban and actively participated in the coming Norwegian conference on banning cluster bombs. The minister also stated that he was going to do away with Swedenâ??s supply of a (all?) cluster bombs (bombkapsel 90), create a Swedish ban on cluster bombs, and stop the production of bombkapsel 90 for the Swedish JAS 39 Gripen fighter.
    Lets hope he keeps his promise.

    Unsurprisingly, the UK and US are for cluster bombs â?? or rather against the banning of the bombs (great article by Monbiot)

    Somewhere behind all the politics there is a designer. Once again we need to ask â?? what kind of mind designs technology like this? After a hard day at the drawing board does he or she go home to his family and smile? What will he/she till his/her children when they ask what he does? â??Daddy designs bombs which kill childrenâ??

    I donâ??t think soâ?¦

    Posted on by mklang

    Butterfly Effect

    Small unimportant acts can have major effects. We may not see them when they small actions happen but then the results can explode in the future. Whether you choose to call it syncronicity or chaos theory it is mind-boggling when you think about it.

    Or what about Theresa LePore? Remember her? She redesigned the Florida Ballot slips. These managed to confuse enough voters so that Bush won the election. Now after enough chaos in the Middle East to confuse anyone (and to cause no end of intended and unintended effects) they are about to hang Saddam.

    Here is a great short movie called Spin (its on YouTube). I think its a nice illustration of the butterfly effect… It’s also a very cool short movie. Unfortunately I cannot embed it into the posting as this keeps breaking my blog.

    Posted on by mklang