Skype is getting slower on Aliant’s Network

My ISP is Bell Aliant and I subscribe to their high speed Ultra service, which has a download speed of around 600 kbps from the Aliant server. A recent speed check on SpeakEasy showed the following:

Last Result:
Download Speed: 5163 kbps (645.4 KB/sec transfer rate)
Upload Speed: 543 kbps (67.9 KB/sec transfer rate)

My problem over the past couple of months is that the quality of the calls on Skype is getting much worse. I thought that it was a problem with my connection, because the people I called said that there were gaps in my transmissions, making it almost impossible to understand me.

I had this problem on a call to California the other day and later on a call to Switzerland. In each case we switched to Google Talk and then we had clear, telephony-quality, calls. The cause of the problem was not my connection speed.

There seems to be either a decrease in the quality of Skype’s VoIP, or something else is affecting this service. Does Google Talk use a different transmission protocol? Is someone on the network blocking or slowing-down Skype’s service? I’d be interested in hearing about similar problems or ways to fix this.

Our Commons in Sackville Update

I presented an overview of the Commons at the Renaissance Sackville AGM last night to a very attentive and interested crowd. It was a great experience to see the reaction of such a diverse audience and understand what aspects of the Commons resonate with different people.

For the record, here is my presentation, complete with links:

Our Commons

The Commons is an idea that has been evolving over the past two years. During that time, we’ve had discussions throughout our community involving many groups and interested people.

The idea started in 2005, when the Atlantic Wildlife Institute began looking at building office space for its Wildlife Emergency Response Network. It was decided that this should be to be located in Sackville, as AWI had just completed a $400,000 infrastructure project in building its learning centre in Cookville.

The office for the network needed to be in a more visible location, and we thought that an “Environmental Services Center” would be the right concept for outreach and even economic development.

Discussions over the past year with several community groups and individuals changed our understanding of what was really needed in our community. Several non-profit organisations, especially in the environmental and cultural sectors, told us about their need for space. Individuals with home-based businesses or independent artists and artisans also needed space, outside of their homes, as full-time office or studio rental was too expensive an option.

From these conversations emerged the idea of a place to nurture and grow groups that will sustain our community – economically, culturally and environmentally. This is our Commons.

So why is this necessary at this time?

Let’s go back a bit in time. About one hundred years ago, Western society shifted from an agrarian to an industrial economy. This changed the way that most people lived and worked; from following the cycles of the land and the seasons, to punching a time-card.

One invention that contributed to this massive shift was the mechanical tractor, requiring fewer people to farm a piece of land. Prior to the tractor, farms were limited to about 40 acres.

The other innovation was the creation of the road system – allowing workers to commute to the new factories that needed people to operate their machinery and build the new engines of production. This also spurred the development of larger, industrial-size schools.

Sackville was affected by this revolution; with the decline in wooden ship-building and family farming. We also had the creation of the local foundries to hire the local men and attract more people “from away”. The presence of a university helped to buffer some of these changes, providing jobs and contracts.

Today, in 2007, we are witnessing a similar change. The Industrial Age is giving way to the Internet Age, or what some call the Conceptual or Creative Age.

The Internet is changing most aspects of our lives. We are living through the biggest economic transformation in history – from a physical capital economy to one of human creativity.

US and Canadian data show a continuing decrease in manufacturing sector jobs and an increase in creative jobs – these jobs include entertainment, art, science, technology, design, and many others.

Creative work currently accounts for one-third of the US economy, and it is increasing. It’s expected that knowledge or creative workers will outnumber manufacturing workers in North America by 2015 – that’s in eight years.

Today, knowledge is the new currency.

How work is done and how wealth are created are already changing – witnessed by the phenomenal growth of companies like Google, Amazon and eBay. These companies are built on knowledge, not physical capital. For example, the Standard & Poor financial index comprises over 85% intangible, or non-physical, assets.

There are three other factors that are changing how we will be able to create wealth in the Internet Age. These are what Dan Pink calls the 3 A’s:

  1. Asia – whatever can be done in a cheaper labour market will be outsourced.
  2. Abundance – in the developed world, we have almost all of our basic needs met and we can buy almost any product; just look at electronics.
  3. Automation – any work that can be standardized will be automated by computers.

Let’s face it, business as usual, based on industrial age assumptions and management theories, or basically everything we learned in school and at work, won’t work any more.

Let me note emphasize that knowledge work is not information processing.

First of all, knowledge work requires creativity.

Creativity itself is a conversation – a tension – between individuals working on individual problems and the professional communities they belong to. This applies to all knowledge workers, whether they be artists or software engineers.

Strange as it may seem, conversation is the real work of knowledge workers. Because knowledge work is pretty well any work that cannot be standardized, knowledge workers continuously work at the cutting edge of their expertise, growing with their field of practice. But these knowledge workers need to converse with other knowledge workers. For them, it is essential to be members of what are known as communities of practice.

Today, with ubiquitous access to the Internet and knowledge tools, knowledge workers can live anywhere. Research by CEO’s for Cities also shows that environment and culture are the two key factors in attracting and retaining knowledge workers. Knowledge workers first decide where they will live, then what they will do.

That means that for Sackville to be successful in the Internet Age, which will have fully arrived by 2020, we will need to become an attractive community for knowledge workers. If not, who will generate the wealth that we will need to sustain our community?

We should remember that those regions that experienced growth during the early Industrial Age were not the same centres that were thriving during the Agrarian Age. During any period of major economic and technological change, there will be winners and losers.

There is no standard formula for future success in the Internet Age. However, we must start experimenting with ideas that can help us build resilience into our community. We already have strengths in the environmental and cultural sectors, but these various organisations are dispersed and fragmented. There is no way for anyone to quickly understand and connect with all of the environmental and cultural work being done in this community.

We are also missing strong linkages between these two sectors and the business sector. Furthermore, we need to create an Internet Age business sector that works with fundamentally different business rules than any Industrial Age business ever did.

Here are some of the new rules of business:

  • As I mentioned, intangible assets have greater value than tangible or real assets.
  • For knowledge-intensive businesses, the cost of physical capital is minimal.
  • The knowledge that Internet Age workers need is constantly expanding and changing.
  • Many successful businesses today are based on fostering communities on the Internet.
  • On the Internet, you can make money by giving almost everything away for free.
  • Finally and most importantly – Trusted relationships are now our most valuable assets – this harkens back to the days when a person’s word was their bond.

So how can a Commons help us prepare for the Internet Age?

As I said, for a community is to thrive in the Internet Age, it must be attractive to knowledge workers. These workers need to be connected to other knowledge workers so that they can remain creative. They need to have constant access to fresh ideas. One way to attract knowledge workers is to offer the right physical space and connections.

Secondly, most knowledge workers are not traditional salaried employees, they don’t need conventional office space. Many are starting to create their own alternative work and community spaces in cities such as London, Toronto, Kingston, Vancouver and more locally – Charlottetown. Several variants of Commons are being established at this time.

Our Commons will be our place that will help to build trusted relationships. It is a Third Space, being neither a dedicated office nor your home. Individuals will be paying members, but the cost of membership will be much less than renting a dedicated office.

For example, there will be shared space to Work; to Meet & Converse; to Create; and to Learn & Teach.

The Commons will focus on our local area but it will be a node in a network of connected commons. When traveling, members of the Commons will be able to use other commons to build trusted relationships. This reciprocity is already being discussed between various Commons.

At this initial stage, we see the following objectives for our Commons.

  1. To foster cooperation between entrepreneurs and non-profit organisations.
  2. To provide space for the increasing number of environmental and cultural organisations in our area who need a more permanent address.
  3. To reduce the barriers to self-employment.
  4. To bolster the establishment of a diverse cultural space to attract and retain creative people in the Tantramar region.
  5. To provide home-based businesses with a place for local networking.

We have developed a business plan that will ensure the operation and financial viability of the the physical premises. We have also spoken with many people in the community who are interested in becoming members. A preferred site has been chosen and we are currently examining our financing options. If all goes well, we may begin construction by the end of the year.

Finally, I’d like to emphasize that real change happens at the local level. We need to take courage and get excited about our future. Perhaps we can think of our Commons as a local garage to tinker with all of these ideas.

So what are we going to do next?

  • buy some land
  • talk to lots of people about the idea
  • build a Commons and sign up members
  • pay off bills & pay our taxes & nurture our community

Customers ask Dell for Linux

Dell has created a “sort-of” open user community site (Dell insists on owning all of the suggestions) to generate ideas on how to improve Dell products & services. The most popular suggestion on Dell Idea Storm is to provide computers with pre-installed Linux; followed by a suggestion to have Windows boxes with pre-installed OpenOffice.org alongside MS Office.

I think that this year may be the tipping point for desktop Linux with the Linspire and Ubuntu canonical partnership announced recently. The partnership may result in a more user-friendly Linux desktop for the mainstream.

If Dell follows the suggestions (382 comments on suggestion #1 so far) from the crowd, there may soon be an easy way for your average user to get on the open source cluetrain.

Update: Dell will soon be selling Linux-loaded desktop PC’s and notebooks

International Student Film & Photo Festival

This note was recently sent to me and I thought it would be worth passing on. It looks like a fun project for students. I’m told that either individual students or schools can enter:

River Valley Middle School proudly presents the 4th Annual River Valley International Student Film and Photography Festival. This year the festival is open to all schools (public and private) in all countries. The submission deadline will be the end of September 2007. Judging will take place in 3 locations throughout Canada and China during October with the awards show and webcast in December, 2007.

We have two divisions of the festival, Video and Photography. The Video division will be made up of Documentaries, Commercials, Drama’s, Comedies, and Animation’s. The Photography division will be made up of Landscape, People and Experimental categories. Schools can submit 9 photographs per category, for a total of 27 photographs and one film per category for a total of 5 films from each school.

The films must be no longer than 4 minutes in total length and must have been produced during the 2006 and 2007 school years. Films must be in AVI, .MOV or DVD format. Films will not be accepted that are in VHS or Mpeg format. Photographs must be digital, in jpeg, tiff or Raw format, with a resolution size capable for a 5 x 7 image and must have been produced during the 2006 and 2007 school year. Movies and Photographs will not be returned.

To view additional festival requirements and samples of winning Photographs and videos from previous year’s please check out the festival site: http://rvms.nbed.nb.ca/rvsvf/index.htm

This is a free contest which promotes student accomplishments and creativity.

Coyote Teaching

coyote.jpg

We’ve been talking about free-range learning, but another powerful metaphor is coyote teaching. Eric Hoefler [dead link] writes a thought-provoking article on the creative and destructive power of coyote, the trickster:

Tricksters live in between, answering yes and no at the same time and sincerely meaning both & thus, they are frustrating figures who offer no real answers, only more questions.
Tricksters are boundary-breakers and disruptors; they violate laws, morals, and customs; they invite chaos; they are disturbing and unsettling — but this very attribute is also part of their power to create and invent.
Tricksters are sneaky, greedy thieves — but their persistence is admirable and often leads to new solutions to a problem.
Tricksters are holy beings — though generally despised by the respectable members of the pantheon, they still rank as divine, meaning their methods may be oppositional, but what they do has lasting significance.

Coyotes leading free-range chickens has some interesting implications, but may illustrate the dynamic tension that is necessary for break-through learning. I’d suggest reading all of Hoefler’s post, and I intend to follow-up on some of the references.

D + 3 (years)

intersection.jpg

My first post on this blog was on February 19th, 2004. The themes of learning, work & technology have remained the same, and over time I’ve added communities, the commons and informal learning.

I can’t imagine stopping this blog, as it’s been a wonderful way to take my half-baked ideas and get some great input from a worldwide community. I must say that I have been the primary beneficiary so I’ll continue to selfishly plug away.

Thanks to everyone who has joined in the conversation, as I really appreciate all of the feedback; positive and negative.

Perhaps it’s all about the technology

I’ve commented many times that the pedagogy is always more important than the technology, and it’s a common statement from many folks in the training and education field. However, I’m wondering if that’s not quite correct. Perhaps it’s all about the technology.

Consider the classroom. The technologies that are selected have a direct impact on the learning context. Desks, whiteboards, curriculum, class duration and tests are all technologies. By limiting access to certain technologies and adopting others, one makes decisions that strongly influence learning. Some technologies empower users while others empower administrators. If it wasn’t about technology, then the best education venue would still be a cave wall and we would not have made any progress since then.

The industrial schoolhouse was a technology designed to educate more students and prepare them for an industrial workplace. Some technologies we use, others we ignore and some we ban. These decisions indicate where we stand in terms of our ideas about individual rights, democracy, critical thinking and education itself.

Unless you’re teaching in Plato’s cave, you’ve made decisions about technology; implicit or explicit. Anyway, I’m starting to think that it’s all about the technology, or the technology choices that we make.

Unschooling, our only option

We hit another brick wall this week and have pretty well decided to just stop trying to take on the public school system. The event that started it all was a school project requiring the creation of a poster on a selected disease. If nothing else, graduates of our school system will be highly-qualified poster makers.

The project completed on time by our son and a small group of students. However, the deadline was extended several times over many weeks, and the teacher would not accept any of the completed projects. This group of students then asked another teacher if they could store the posters in another classroom, which was allowed, but these posters were subsequently thrown in the garbage. Some said they saw the teacher throw them out, while the teacher said the janitor did it. It doesn’t really matter.

The teacher who assigned the project then told these students (the ones who had actually completed the project on time) that they would still have to do the project but would be given more time. Some of the students, like our son, had done the project at home and had a back-up electronic copy. Those who did the work on school computers did not have a copy.

The event created a bit of an uproar in our house. It reinforced my understanding that at school, doing the work and jumping through hoops is more important than learning. Confirmation of learning did not require another poster. I should add another important fact – all of the students did the identical project last year, and we even have last year’s poster filed away in a closet as proof.

This was not a very demanding project for the Grade 7 level and I question its validity. Pick a disease, look it up on the Net and create a poster that explains four aspects of the disease. Make sure the poster looks pretty so that it can add to the classroom decor. No discussion of how to use online resources, how to determine if a source is reliable or how to conduct research in general. In fact, these students have never in seven years of schooling been shown any process to do research – online or offline. This is what we concentrate on at home, on our own time.

We decided to just redo the poster and submit it without a fuss. We know from experience that if we complain, each family will be told to take it up with the individual teacher. We have made similar complaints over the past several years and have been assured by the administration that our concerns will be addressed (This is not a complaint that our boys are not getting good marks, as they both have consistently had +90% averages). We were told last year that projects would not be repeated from one year to the next for no reason.

We have realised that we cannot change the dictatorship of the classroom; the fact that the students are completely disempowered; an irrelevant curriculum; or that parents’ input is ignored by these “professional” teachers. I’ve noticed how the term professionalism gets thrown about a fair bit when school reform is discussed around here, especially by the teachers’ union. Let me again quote David Shaffer’s definition, from How computer games help children learn:

A professional is anyone who does work that cannot be standardized easily and who continuously welcomes challenges at the cutting edge of his or her expertise.

I agree with this definition. What I am seeing in the public school system are teachers who do not welcome challenges at the cutting edge of their expertise and whose output is becoming more and more standardized.

I am beginning to believe that demographics play a significant in this. Given that In 1999/2000, 34% of [Canadian] teachers were aged 50 or over, there is an obvious generation gap. For example, many teachers, the vast majority that we have encountered, have avoided any use of information and communication technologies to support their teaching. Given their age, it is common to hear that they don’t want or need to learn any new stuff before their eventual retirement.

As a result, the real digital divide seems to be between baby-boomer teachers and the Net generation. The examples given in class bear no resemblance to reality outside of class. The wonderful opportunities to link students to other learners around the world are lost. Even tools as simple as class blogs to post the homework assignments are not used. If the average age of our teachers was closer to 30 than 55, I feel that the situation might be different. When I was in school in the 1960’s and ’70’s we had many keen, young and energetic teachers. Perhaps the current situation will rectify itself in time.

Demographics or not, our mounting frustrations include arbitrary evaluations, irrelevant projects, a system that stonewalls any attempts at real conversation, and schools with little connection to the realities of the Internet Age. Therefore, we have decided that soon we will be unschooling in our own home.

unschool-bus.jpg

I cannot see any other option, as the problems are evident, the system will not change, and staying in the school system only gives it undeserved credibility. In September, we will be submitting our letter to New Brunswick’s Minister of Education:

The Minister shall, on application of the parent of a child, exempt in writing the child from attending school where the Minister is satisfied that the child is under effective instruction elsewhere.

Growing, changing, learning, creating

The conversation around informal learning has been heating up a bit lately, with Stephen Downes’ critique of Jay Cross’ mixer analogy, as well as Bill Brantley’s attack on the entire book.

Personally, I’ve really appreciated the insight that Tom Haskins has brought to the conversation. Tom picked up on my connecting informal learning with critical theory and then proceeded to develop the free range chicken metaphor. Tom followed this post with an examination of how informal learning on the Web eliminates the middle man, and therefore puts a lot of jobs in jeopardy (my last post is an example of how difficult it can be to continue the course-based e-learning business model).

Learning from learners and learning without content delivery – offers “no further income” for centralized production enterprises. It’s a similar problem that file sharing gives CD manufacturers, blogging gives print journalism and digital video gives movie houses. Perhaps a better term than early adopters would be ‘early defectors” or free agents, cultural creatives, long-tailers or Web 2.0 entrepreneurs.

Perhaps this is why the conversation is heating up. It’s dangerous to question other people’s modus vivendi.

Tom Haskins is a relatively new voice in the cross-connected blogs that I have consistently followed over several years, but he has been thought-provoking and respectful at the same time. Definitely worth a read at Growing, changing, learning, creating, if you haven’t been there yet.