The Auricle

I do like the US' National Public Radio 'On the Media' programme. There's invariably something interesting and last week's (3 June 2005) episode was no exception. First we got to hear about the bad guys (although it's sometimes difficult to work out who they are) and then we got to hear about the good guys, i.e. the BBC of course. The whole show is available as a podcast http://wnyc.vo.llnwd.net/o1/otm/otm060305pod.mp3 but you can also listen to individual items as a media stream. Assimilators may prefer the transcripts but you'll miss out on the examples that can only really be conveyed in audio, e.g. the George Bush and Rolling Stones' Sympathy for the Devil mash-up.

For the uninitiated a mash-up is a Frankenstein blending of usually two different musical recordings or a musical and speech recordings, e.g. The best of George Bush's speeches to the disco beat of The Final Countdown:) In the best mash-ups it's hard to hear the joins.

Anyway dear reader, I digress, two items of from the 3 June programme were of some relevance to our technology assisted learning focus.

First was the bad guys (your choose which are which:) Darknet item which explored the growing tension between corporate media interests who view any modifications to their products as derived works (and therefore the work of criminals) and members of the Darknet community who view themselves as creatives not criminals and for whom commercial media products are just another source for the development of new creative artefacts. Whilst criminals do inhabit the Darknet the inability or unwillingness of the corporate media interests to discriminate between creative works and criminal activity, e.g. piracy is simply driving the problem further into the Darknet and so increasing criminality and ultimately damaging new forms of creative culture.

Now to the good guys. The second One the Media item was called Press Potlatch (Ed: what's a Potlatch?) in which the BBC's Backstage initiative was the focus. The sequencing of this item after the Darknet item was really clever since it highlighted the contrast between the knee jerk “let's crush these thieves” approach of the commercial media interests and the BBC's “let's tap into and channel this public desire to exploit and extend what we produce”.

The irony here is that there are already very successful commercial companies like Google and Amazon learned the benefits of opening up their database a long time ago. Yet the large media interests seem deaf, dumb and blind as they embark on their mission to criminalize the world:)

Take the music industry. They still seem hell bent on selling relatively expensive CDs or poor quality downloads and inhibiting those abominations called mash-ups (some of which are very creative). Meanwhile, anyone who has popped over to GarageBand will find some music which is the equal, or better, of any of the signed acts. Can't say I've seen my teenage daughter particularly interested in 'Top of the Pops' recently, she's much more into those unsigned bands. Ah … well, after the lawyers have had their feast and destroyed a significant part of the consumer base I dare say we'll eventually get a more balanced approach.

In the interim, 2 cheers for the BBC … give us more … more … more:)

If you want to automatically download programmes for use in your media player instead of listening to them live then the new BBC Podcast trial has now got an index page at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/downloadtrial/subscribe.shtml

Just copy the relevant Web addresses from the index into your favourite podcast application and it will do the rest.

Interesting news on the open-source betrothal front with Moodle (usp = high student centredness) and LAMS (usp = high teacher design) deciding to live together and perhaps even becoming more integrated if things work out. The concept here appears to be that Moodle provides the course management whilst LAMS provides its activity-based digital lesson planning capabilities (Macromedia Flash essential). The joint Moodle LAMS press release (PDF) is, as we would expect, pretty upbeat with this first pass at integration achieving single login (so only one user Id and password will be necessary) and the inclusion of LAMS structured learning activity sequences to Moodle course pages, i.e. a Moodle activity could now be a whole sequence of LAMS activities. Alternatively, the LAMS and Moodle Integration - Walkthrough indicates that it will also be possible for a LAMS activity sequence to incorporate a Moodle activity within its structure.

We won't know until we actually see the fruits of the integration, but it seems to me that it's going to be important here that the cognitive load on both students and course authors due to confusion over what activity comes from where (or belongs to where) doesn't become too much.

Moodle already has the concept of learning activities, but so does LAMS. It's going to be pretty interesting, therefore, to see what the impact of LAMS integration within Moodle is going to have upon Moodle activities and development ethos. For example, what will Moodle come to be perceived as? Primarily, a teacher oriented system? Primarily, a learner oriented system?

Despite these reservations I can certainly see the sense of the integration. LAMS activities need to link to functional elements and having direct access to Moodle's assets makes some sense. For example, if a LAMS activity requires to discuss a topic or concept then Moodle's discussion forums can be called into play instead of depending on functionality external to Moodle. The richer Moodle functionality becomes the richer LAMS becomes. Of course, in this scenario, LAMS could become so dependent upon Moodle that it ceases to have an indepndent life outside of this platform:)

Nothing ventured, nothing gained and so I welcome this initiative. It's going to provide one interesting case study and the synergies may well outweigh any disadvantages.

As the LAMS Foundation's FAQs indicate LAMS is an IMS Learning Design 'influenced tool' rather than a reference implementation of this most challenging of the IMS specifications although an export capability for the formal IMS LD specification is promised.

At the moment, the majority of the global higher education sector and supporting cast, e.g. academic publishers and database brokers/owners still seem keen to ring fence what they perceive to be their prime assets or 'crown jewels' e.g books, journals, data, VLE 'courses' etc … let's call these resources. But we live in a world of distributed digital resources and increasingly 'open' systems and so the idea that any one institution or one repository can possibly meet all needs is distinctly past its sell-by-date. So what are some of the resource access options for HEIs wanting to dip their toe in this potentially stormy water? To start the ball rolling we could fling a conceptual grenade (and then duck) by suggesting that our institution's content is not the crown jewels at all. Students come to institution x for a variety of reasons, but you're unlikely to hear them declare that it's the wonderfullness of the content that brought them there. Why? Is it because they usually never get to see the module/programme content until they've actually signed up?

Of course, nowadays, online learning tools and environments do offer the opportunity for 'tasters'; but do make sure that your tasters are really representative of what they can expect throughout their time with you and not just marketing 'specials' or you have just provided a complainant with the evidence they require to prove your marketing wasn't matched by the reality.

Anyway, back to the conceptual grenade and crown jewels.

To defend yourself against the response to your attack upon the perceived 'crown jewels' it will become necessary for you to assert that the jewels are actually something much less tangible. The jewels which attracted the students include the institution's perceived status in the global and national marketplace. The perception can be based on a multiplicity of criteria with surveys by the national press in the UK playing a signficant part. Such surveys inevitably focus on the facilities, support infrastructure, attrition, employment in the area of study post graduation, research rating etc. So the irony here is, if you're feeling really radical, you could boost your crown jeweldom by persuading your institution that it could adopt an open/public access policy and make all its content available because students come to the institution for the real crown jewels, i.e. the process, the interaction - with leaders/experts in a field and other students and above all the official document at the end which proves, yes, they were 'there'.

Those institutions which adopted a full or partial open resources policy, e.g. MIT, Utah State University, and in the UK the University of Southamptom don't seem to have suffered unduly and, if anything, have gained considerably from their decision.

But the HE community is pretty conservative and such open access policies would be a step too far for many. So for those HEIs perhaps willing to share, but not with everyone, we enter the world of collaborating/cooperating consortia or federations, trust relationships, and access management.

Those wishing to go down this road need to ponder questions like:

How can institution A and publisher B and institution C and database broker D and institution E enable particular users who meet particular criteria to have access to resources which may be sited at any one of the co-operating entities? Of course, we could irritate the hell out of users (as we do) by requiring an individual registration and login for each resource request. Or … enter stage left … there's middleware.

Working quietly and perhaps out of the spotlight of the glamour tools are the middleware projects which are part of the JISC Core Middleware Programmes. For example there's Guanxi and KC-Rolo which both use Shibboleth.

Def 1: Shibboleth - Old fashioned doctrine or formula of party etc., catchword; word or custom etc. regarded as revealing person's orthodoxy. (Little Oxford Dictionary of Current English 6th Edition)

Def 2: Shibboleth - a custom, principle, or belief distinguishing a particular class or group of people. — ORIGIN originally in the sense a word or sound which a foreigner is unable to pronounce: from Hebrew, 'ear of corn' (according to the Book of Judges, chapter 12, the word was used as a test of nationality because of its difficult pronunciation). (Ask Oxford: Oxford Dictionaries)

At risk of being a gross simplification of a set of complex interactions and certainly some pretty tortuous jargon, e.g. Handle Service, Attribute Authority, WAYF, Shibboleth Handle Indexical Reference Establisher, Shibboleth Attribute Requester, as best I understand it, Shibboleth at heart is based on the premise that if I try to request a restricted resource from a particular resource 'container' the container will ask Where are You From? (a WAYF) and as long as the WAYF response belongs to the federation or 'club' and that federation member institution can automatically confirm that the user who requested access to the resource is a user with the appropriate attributes, e.g. 'member of University x' or 'student-on-course xyz' then said user gets access to that resource and any other resource permitted within the federation. Shibboleth, is a bit like the duck which moves serenely through the water, but is paddling furiously beneath the surface. Whilst the user may experience a single login to multiple federated resources there are a lot of interactions between, potentially distributed, systems taking place which are invisible to the user.

I attended a JISC eLearning Programme meeting in Birmingham (UK) recently (5 and 6 April 2005) where there were Shibboleth presentations and demonstrations. Guanxi and KC-Rolo provided interesting examples of working implementations. But before I proceed I need to add a new word to the lexicon of tortuous but memorable terminology and that is to 'Shib' or be 'Shibbed', i.e. to adapt an existing resource container so that it can participate in Shibboleth interactions.

Guanxi has 'Shibbed' the open source Bodington learning environment/LMS and KC-Rolo has done the same to the open source Moodle VLE.

So what! you may say … what's the added value?

Well it appears to mean that if a student at institution A wants access to a Moodle course at institution B and as long as A and B are in the same Shibboleth federation the student's request for access should be granted without him/her having to have an account at B because B automatically requests A to authenticate/authorise the student. Such Shibboleth federation agreements are trust-based and assume that the user information directory/database systems in A are reliable and valid.

And that's the key issue.

Participating institutions in a Shibboleth federation need quality user information with attributes, e.g. yes … we have a Derek Morrison and he is a 'member-of-staff' or he is a 'student-on-module xyz', or whatever the required attributes are. So, if I understand things correctly, it seems that the first stage in an institution's 'Shibbing' process is a review and enhancement of its user information base, whether that be database or directory based.

It's rather ironic, however, that because the status and quality of user information bases is so variable that the best way to demonstrate the concept is to 'Shib' a couple of learning environments because they have embedded user information stores, i.e. Bodington and Moodle. Ideally, such user information should be outside of any specific environment but, neverthless this makes for the rather interesting scenario of the open source Bodington being used only for its authentication/authorisation contribution to a Shibboleth federation and therefore facilitating one-time logins to a range or other resources which could include Blackboard, WebCT, Moodle etc etc:) So if you want to experiment with Shibboleth then the Bodington environment appears to contain at least some of the bits you need.

Putting aside open access arguments, Shibboleth appears to be the type of technology which may help to spell the demise of the VLE as we currently know it. If, that is, as was being demonstrated at the JISC meeting, it becomes the norm for the people to seamlessly access resources and services distributed across their federations as well as the wider internet.

But doesn't Athens do something like this? Yes it does, but Athens isn't an open system. Shibboleth, claims to work co-operatively with Athens however, which is probably in both parties' interests … at least in the short to medium term.

JISC Inform 9 (Spring 2005) contains a four page special on Shibboleth entitled 'Connecting People to Resources' available in plain html or pretty pdf). The article certainly employs excellent graphic design to put over what can be a very complex topic. After reading this I was left wondering, since it was asserted that Shibboleth can guarantee that only eligible people get access to services and that it protects their personal identity, why it's not being employed as part of the new NHS Personal Electronic Health Records system (aka the NHS Care Records Service. If Shibboleth is good enough for Higher Education use surely there's some millions to be saved here? But a search for 'Shibboleth' on the National Programme for IT in the NHS site which is hosted by the new government agency 'NHS Connecting for Health' proved futile. We should note however, another JISC Middleware project called IMPETUS (Infrastructure for Multi-Professional Education and Training Using Shibboleth) a collaborative venture between the University Hospitals of Leicester, the University of Leicester, and De Montfort University but, as the project name suggests, there's no patient orientation here. So over to the JANeT NHS-HE Connectivity Project I went but, again, nothing about Shibboleth could I find there. So is Shibboleth's absence from this context due to lack of joined up thinking or is it simply not suitable?

On 13 April 2005 JISC announced the adoption of Shibboleth as the solution for access management for the communities they serve.

Despite the JISC decision there are other open source solutions out there which certainly don't have the sophistication/complexity of Shibboleth but which I include for the record. There's the distributed identity system OpenId (formerly Yadis) or TypeKey (centralized registry maintained by Six Apart). Of course there's always Microsoft's Passport which, like TypeKey has a centralized registry, but it would be too much to consider trusting access management to any proprietary system/infrastructure over which they community has little or no control … wouldn't it?

In conclusion, I've presented two contrasting approaches here. Approach one is to open up and stop thinking of the resources your institution creates as 'crown jewels'. Instead think of this as an opportunity to give back what the taxpayer has usually paid for. Approach two was to adopt an access management solution which controls who can get access to the perceived jewels but which also allows a degree of sharing of resources between institutions who 'trust' each other.

It would be good to see more examples of each approach within the UK so that, in a few years time, we can judge which has proved to be the more effective. Either would be better than the current 'lock away/down the content' ethos which seems to dominate HE thinking and which leads to constant reinventions of the wheel (with just a little customisation so it fits within my context of course) 🙂

Some Auricle readers may remember that, back in February, the UK's BT gained a lot of positive publicity from their announcement that they were uprating their broadband for existing customers to 2 Mbps. I'm one of those existing customers and today I offer my experiences of trying to benefit from what was promised. I do this only because, if I have problems navigating this space, what hope has someone for whom information and communications technology isn't their day job? I signed up to domestic broadband pretty much as soon as it became available in the UK although it's interesting how the term 'broadband' was redefined to include rates as low as 512 Kbps or even less. Nevertheless, even the always on 512K service was welcome because it became possible to connect to the resources and sources I need to work when at home.

What's really annoying is that BT Openworld and BT Yahoo gained the positive publicity from their annoucement leaving the impression that this was all done and dusted and would be completed within 5 months. Now I know that someone has to be at the end of the chain but as February, March, April, and May passed, and still no upgrade, I thought it was time to find out when this was going to happen.

Problem number one. Whom do you telephone?

Although I originally signed up with the BT Openworld service somehow I've been passed on to BT/Yahoo Broadband. Now the BT/Yahoo site does offer telephone numbers for technical support, account queries, sales etc etc but what do you know? … there is only an email facility for complaints. I used this facility a few weeks ago only to eventually receive an anodyne reply which in essence said they had no date, i.e they couldn't help me. Salt was rubbed in to the wound when some time later the quality department of BT/Yahoo contacted me (by email) to see if I was happy with the support I had received!

Anyway, not to be defeated, I set about trying to get a human voice to respond in real time to my perfectly reasonable query of when I would be uprated to the 2Mbps service as promised. So I thought I would start with the technical support number. So off I went to what was going to one of several telephone journeys to what I think was India (I assume at least some of the support has been contracted out to the subcontinent).

The technical support person was polite but could shed no light … except for the following gem. Yes, if I was a new customer I could have 2Mbps straight away but, no, as an existing customer no date had yet been set for my upgrade … but perhaps September or October?

So there we have it folks. If we are naive enough to think that existing customers are the priority then think again. Like parts of the finance sector it's the new sign-ups that are the focus; the inertia of the existing customer base is likely to sustain the business model even though existing customers are, in effect, getting a poorer quality service.

Following the call to BT/Yahoo technical support line I simmered gently for 30 minutes or so before deciding to explore alternatives to what BT/Yahoo had to offer. For example, for the same price, UK Online Broadband (part of the EasyNet empire) offers 8Mbps with a 500GB cap as opposed to BT/Yahoo's 2Mbps and 30GB cap. UK Online is one of the few Local Loop Unbundled (LLU) suppliers, this means that they've got their own equipment in BT exchanges and so can compete more vigorously than those providers who are just simply leasing bandwidth from BT. Unfortunately, UK Online isn't available in all parts of the UK with only something like 18% of the UK population being so covered. But, apparently, my part of Bath falls within the 18%.

Nevertheless, my research had uncovered the secret to getting things done. It's called the MAC, i.e. the Migration Authentication Code. Most reputable broadband providers have signed up to an industry code where they have agreed to make it as easy as possible to migrate from one supplier to another by providing a MAC (which you give to your new supplier). Although BT/Yahoo hadn't provided a complaints telephone number they had provided a discontinue their service number and so I rang this. Off I went to India again where a charming lady wanted to know why I wanted a MAC, she then put me on hold whilst she had a long conversation with 'I know not who' before coming back to me with another number which I could ring and they would immediately arrange my 2Mbps upgrade. So yet another telephone call where an equally charming lady, at what turned out to the BT/Yahoo UK based sales line, would be glad to upgrade me 'without charge' … I think I was meant to be grateful although this was what they promised would be happening automatically without users having to do any pushing.

So the moral of the story seems to be show the same loyalty to your supplier as they show their existing customer base. BT and BT/Yahoo have had a monopoly position which they have exploited to the full. Their monopoly is no more and they are going to have to sharpen up their provision. Their earlier trumpeting of 2Mbps provision was a triumph of marketing but disadvantaged their existing customers relative to new ones. Message to BT, don't prioritize your new customers over your existing user base.

But, let's face it, 2Mbps provision isn't that great. But BT et al will ration that bandwidth for as long as they can because that's what their business model is based on. But, as UK Online demonstrates, it's possible to provide a better service for the same price.

And so I've given into temptation. Today I went back to BT/Yahoo Broadband who, after another attempt to disuade me, gave me the all important MAC. I filled in my details on the UK Online site and made the switch to their Broadband 8000 service (8 Mbps) service which, given my distance of 2.5 Kilometres from the Kingsmead exchange in Bath, should give me around 4-5 Mbps bandwidth. I'll report back in the next few weeks if my switch proved successful or not.

So why is all this important? When there's sufficient bandwidth getting into the home then that is going to help redefine the nature of the services we use and what is the work place or learning place. For example, as Skype already demonstrates using Voice-over-IP it's possible to have a higher quality conversation (at times) without a telephone being present. And if you want to view/edit that document, talk, walk, view and listen all at the same time then increased bandwidth makes all that possible.

So let's not think of 2Mbps as leading edge or an act of generosity by suppliers like BT. In reality, we are still paying a premium price for not very much. But I suppose, if my business model had been based on decades of extracting premiums from telephone users, it must be kind of hard not to try the same thing as services all migrate online.

Some major players are now entering the mobile device market. I think what we are seeing is the start of a change in which such mobile devices will very much become the norm. This change will offer considerable opportunities for learning and teaching, but will also become a significant challenge to our existing infrastructures and processes. In my recent post Filling up experiences at the online filling station (continued) I mentioned the new PalmOne Lifedrive which like the Dell Axim has a relatively large display for a PDA, but also has a 4GB hard drive (a la iPod).

In previous articles on this theme I also drew attention to the Microsoft concept model the Ultra Mobile tablet PC 2007 a memory only device which could exploit Microsoft's 64-bit version of their ubiquitous operating system. However, far from leading the curve, Microsoft could be trailing it.

Now Nokia (yes they of mobile phone fame) have entered the fray with their new Nokia 770 Internet Tablet - a Linux handheld device with a 800×480 resolution display with wireless networking and media players etc etc

And lest we think that all this innovation is coming from the usual suspects take a look at some recent Indian innovation. India's Encore Software has developed the Mobilis devices. The Linux based Mobilis has solid-state memory (so no hard disc) and an integral 7.4 inch LCD display (VGA resolution). A combined wireless networking and GPS option is also available. Encore claims that the Mobilis has been designed for use by India's rural populations. The Encore site is a bit sparse so if you want a quick overview of this development I found the recent CNET news article Indian firm unveils low-cost Linux-based PCs (10 May 2005) quite informative.

The more I see, hear and read, desktop megaboxes are beginning to look distinctly like steam trains. Those looking for more portable computer solutions are going to be spoilt for choice. For example, if you are prepared to eschew Windows Wal Mart can now offer you a sub USD 500 laptop.

But before we get carried away on a wave of techno-enthusiasm at a level equivalent to an Apple computer evangelist gathering 🙂 I thought it might be useful to draw some comparisons with a blast from the past, i.e. the Network Computer concept first promulgated by Larry Ellison the CEO of Oracle way back in 1996-1997.

The CNET article Ellison ressurects network computer provides a useful overview of what was being proposed by Ellison for version 2 of his vision in 1999. Ellison's model was a 'thin client' or information appliance device which would have no hard disk but would receive output from applications situated, and depend upon storage, on a central server. At the time Microsoft responded to the Ellison vision by offering the market their version of the thin-client: the NetPC.

Of course part of this vision was that because applications would be running on a central server but only displayed via the network device that they could 'rented' and voila! a whole new business model would open up.

The Ellison/ Gates vision of the network computer/information appliance didn't happen way back then … but could it now? Of course those who hark back to the days of mainframe computers and dumb terminals where there was total central control may still want to embrace the earlier Ellison/Gates vision, i.e. kill the 'thick client' or desktop computer.

Like most things humans do, however, we tend to swing from one extreme to the other before finally (perhaps a long time later) realising we need to cherry pick the best bits from the alternative visions and dump the dysfunctional and over-restrictive aspects.

The personal computer revolution grew out of the end-users recognition that they now had some degree of control and so any attempt to force people back into walled gardens is ultimately doomed to failure. We, nevertheless, can see such attempts in the mobile phone arena where some modern mobiles are in effect quasi PDAs with multimedia capabilities. Want music or movies via your mobile phone? … Sure no problem … as long as you get them from us … The result? … How many mobile phones with MP3 player capability allow you to download the MP3s direct from a PC?

But let's get back to comparisons with the original vision of the Network Computer/NetPC with what is coming down the slipway now.

The emerging generation of information appliances/tools are capable of useful local processing and storage whilst still being able to connect to the internet for communication and refreshment of content on the local appliance. Add the growth of broadband and wireless networking to the mix and you could indeed implement much of the original EllisonGates vision. But that local processing and storage potential of the new devices is critical because they remove total reliance on a central server; this keeps central services as the servant not the master. What Ellison and Gates didn't take account of at the time was the ever smaller ever higher capacity hard discs and the increasing global capacity for producing memory chips; making solid-state memory devices with their apparent instant-start more available.

So there's some really powerful tools going to be at our disposal. At the moment the available offerings are still too expensive, but costs will fall.

The current generation of artefacts are no longer just gadgets for geeks, but are instead becoming useful tools. We've already got PDAs with usable displays that actually do some useful work, can connect to the internet, play a variety of rich media, and have either solid-state storage or, as the PalmOne Lifedrive example shows, have its own hard disc. We've also got ultra-portable laptops, e.g. the Fijitsu Siemens Lifebook or Sony equivalents, which can do much that the average office desktop can do. But as a recent convert to such devices I would say that the PDA has the edge in how often I carry it around with me. The Lifebook (not to be confused with the PalmOne Lifedrive) is a great laptop and it certainly beats carrying around some of the earlier generation of luggables but it's still ~1.5 Kg and it won't fit in a pocket. Of course the laptop can do a lot more than the PDA but the latter is small enough, light enough, and useful enough that I don't have to think twice about taking it with me, and that's the true test.

In parallel to PDA's we've also got iPod like devices that can store extensive music collections again either in solid-state memory or in minature hard discs. But this surely begs a question? Why not just invest in one converged device that does it all (a la the PalmOne Lifedrive)?

Now if I was an Apple seeing my iPod market getting squeezed by the Creative, Sony et al it might be tempting to apply our design and marketing expertise in this new information appliance market:) … now wouldn't that be interesting? … Oh wait, now I remember, didn't Apple discontinued their Apple Newton in 1998? … Pocket OS X anyone? 🙂

Imagine this. You teach 'Intellectual Property' at your institution. You are invited to make a presentation on the 'Legal Use and Benefits of Peer-to-Peer Networks' to a conference hosted by your institution. Everything's fine until that phone call. Apparently, vested commercial interests don't like the theme and have threatened to make life 'difficult' for your institution unless your presentation is stopped. Couldn't possibly happen here … of course not … objectivity … academic freedom and all that. Hmmm … read on. Read about Jorge Cortell and weep.

But we're OK … I mean P2P and other open source work is actually written into the HEFCE E-Learning Strategy and the work of JISC … And no 'vested interest' is going to attempt to influence/inhibit work when it's being signalled at this level … are they?

If you don't understand what all the fuss is about then you can crystalize your understanding around the P2P technology of the moment, BitTorrent, the purpose of which is described so cogently by Wired News who in describing the new BitTorrent search functionality explain that:

“BitTorrent speeds internet file transfers by shifting the bandwidth burden off the publisher, and distributing it among users downloading the file: Everyone downloading a file over BitTorrent is unobtrusively uploading it to other users at the same time so that large, popular files actually move at a faster rate than obscure ones.”

What's got the 'vested interests' so rattled and hyper-reactive is that the files being so efficiently transferred can easily be their movies, putative hit singles, computer games etc etc.

For example, here's an extract from the Motion Picture Association of America's press release BitTorrent Facilitating Illegal File Swapping of Star Wars On Day of Opening (19 May 2005) their response to the use of BitTorrent (which is only a protocol for file transfer remember) in disseminating pirate copies of the new Star Wars Movie. The MPAA's CEO said:

“There is no better example of how theft dims the magic of the movies for everyone than this report today regarding BitTorrent providing users with illegal copies of Revenge of the Sith. The unfortunate fact is this type of theft happens on a regular basis on peer to peer networks all over the world,”.

You can read the above as “peer-to-peer is bad”.

The 'vested interests' such as MPAA want peer-to-peer to go away because they can't control it easily because there's no single strangle point, or 'controlling mind', or even a central server. So let's see if we can find a Senator looking to make a name for him or herself and get this P2P stuff banned.

We've had centuries of centralized control over information/data flow and suddenly it's all breaking down. What do you mean you don't want me to scribe for you any more and that you've learned to read and write for yourself? What do you mean you're using Google to find what you want? … you need a qualified librarian to help you identify quality-assured resources don't you? 🙂

So quick, quick … “Let's ban the technologies which are losing us this control and lean on those who can disseminate this heresy … We don't care about your academic freedom, there's billions at stake here.”

Now I don't have any problems with clamp-downs on organized crime (in whatever form that takes) but let's not confuse perpetrators of crime with the tools they use (or abuse) or suck ever more people into the quagmire of redefined criminality because they, say, view something beyond a permitted seven day period (a la the BBC iMP).

The reality is that P2P is not going to go away. It's just so efficient. As broadband grows the potential of P2P will grow with it. For example, consider the LionShare project started, initially, by Penn State University, but is now a partnership of some of the leading HE institutions and collaborations around including MIT, Simon Fraser University, OKI, and Internet2, and is backed by a significant Mellon Foundation grant.

The BBC's announcement of a video download service for broadband users should be a cause for celebration. But their new interactive Media Player (iMP) carries a sting which could have implications far beyond this project. For a bit of background read the Guardian article BBC invests in a world of endless repeats and then pop over to the BBC press release where we find the following statement:

“iMP could just be the iTunes for the broadcast industry, enabling our audience to access our TV and radio programmes on their terms - anytime, any place, any how - Martini Media.”

Now the above is a bit confusing. Is iMP for the broadcast industry or the audience? Whose terms? The broadcast industry or the audience's?

And are new restrictions in iMP being promoted as advances? For example the press release states:

“The BBC's interactive media player (iMP) is a new application in development which will allow users to download tv and radio programmes from bbc.co.uk to their PC or laptop and watch or listen to them for seven days after the transmission date.”

But the BBC's current media player (a front end to RealPlayer) already allows us to listen to radio programmes, so what's new? Ahh … does the following quote provide us with the answer?

“The pilot will use digital rights management software to delete programmes seven days after the programme has aired on TV and users will no longer be able to watch it. DRM also prevents users emailing the files to other computer users or sharing it via disc.”

So there you have it … the self destroying equivalent of the video or audio tape is the improvement. You will watch or listen within 7 days … none of this nasty time-shifting beyond the permitted period for us. Now let's think about the potential implications of this.

Let's imagine that over the last twenty years of so you've got used to recording television programmes using your video tape recorder. You can watch and rewatch these programmes when you like. How would you like it if you've set the VTR (or the modern equivalents the PVR/DVDR) to record a few episodes of your favourite soap/documentary programme (or whatever) whilst you were on holiday but your VTR decides to delete a few of these recordings because you've gone beyond an arbitrary seven day period. You wouldn't be happy would you?

But this is exactly what this work-in-progress, the BBC iMP is apparently going to do. The Beeb is giving with one hand but taking away with another.

The iMP proposal has implications way beyond the BBC trial. As the internet grows in importance as a means of media distribution, if we are not careful users will find themselves using services and devices which are more, not less, restrictive than what we are currently used to. Ironically, unless we straighten out our thinking the net result will be an increase, not a decrease, in piracy and other illegal activity as users and developers move to cirucumvent such restrictions on their former freedoms.

The BBC confuses me. On the one hand we have the excellent podcast trial where certain worthy radio programmes (no music here) allow you to download in seconds what would otherwise take you 30-60 minutes to listen to live (or record). Great! This is an affordance. The quality of my life has improved in some small way as a result. But video, now that's a different matter … high value stuff here … public can't be trusted … might actually share with each other …. even email it to friends and colleagues overseas … might destroy franchizing and scheduling … nasty, nasty, nasty … get control … what's the solution? … I know! … a timed self destruct and we are back in control.

The problem is the apparent solution is going to really annoy your customers … you know what I mean? … the ones who pay the licence fees. It's a bit like Sony's Librie e-book where you're meant to 'rent' your book from the approved suppliers and you've only got a certain time to read it because it going to be 'disabled' if you don't. The last time I looked the paper-based books I purchased or borrowed are still prepared to let me read them, even years after the initial purchase or borrow.

Now I understand why the BBC feels it needs to go down this road. The DRM system helps provide rights holders with the illusion that their material is 'safe' and ensures that there's enough going into the archive to make it worthwhile for consumers to consume. But let's not kid ourselves, what we're looking at here is a model which puts the broadcasters back in control. Let me repeat the earlier quote:

“iMP could just be the iTunes for the broadcast industry, enabling our audience to access our TV and radio programmes on their terms - anytime, any place, any how - Martini Media.”

'iTunes for the broadcast industry' … yes for the broadcast industry … 'enabling our audience to access our TV and radio programmes on their terms - anytime, any place, any how - Martini Media' … absolutely not.

I leave you with this happy thought. Fast forward 10 years to the point when the BBC is renegotiating its charter. It's not difficult to imagine that by then the primary means of dissemination is no longer the terrestial broadcast system at all but is a variant on the iMP distribution model. Still got that old video recorder in the attic? Turn it on just to remind yourself what the old days used to be like:)

Further reading

http://www.bbc.co.uk/webwise/askbruce/articles/bbc.co.uk/imp_1.shtml

http://www.bbc.co.uk/broadband/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/04_april/14/pod.shtml

There's a new podcast interview available today in which I interview Brian Kelly of UKOLN about his reflections on the 14th International WWW Conference held in Japan in May 2005. Non PDA users can download the MP3 file from the Most Recent Auricle Podcasts panel at the top of Auricle. (PDA users may not see this panel). If you don't have the Podcast software (which will automatically do the downloading of new MP3 files for you), or if you want to find out about the other podcasts we have on offer then just click the orange Podcast button at the bottom of the menu. If you click this button, you'll also find more information about podcasting.

Now I'm still someone who reckons that the average web page is best viewed at a minimum of 1024×768 resolution … which isn't an unreasonable expectation for someone with even a modest desktop or laptop nowadays. But my recent adoption of a PDA has rattled the bars of my cage a little. Suddenly design elements which seemed so 'essential' from my desktop/laptop centric view of the world are in danger of being downgraded to 'desirable' or maybe even the lower category 'nice'. In my recent post Filling up experiences at the online filling station I said that “most Web resources at the moment conveniently ignore the format of ultra portable devices, but, as the user base grows, that's going to become a big issue. For example, I hadn't been aware of how badly Auricle displays on a PDA, so that's something I'm going to have to fix.” So I've had a go, and it's been quite an eye opener.

So using Auricle as a handy subject for experimentation, I reworked it to try and make it more usable when accessed from a PDA like the Dell Axim X50v. Prior to the rework, users got the desktop view and that was it. The format was, to say the least, PDA hostile.

There was quite a lot of work involved mainly because the method I had used to detect and switch style sheets was javascript dependent and so that was the first to go. I've introduced a new stylesheet detection and switching system which now works with the Dell PDA. I've also created a new PDA stylesheet to supplement the other, more desktop/laptop oriented, options.

Creating this required me to think more about what the primary entities in Auricle are for a PDA user, i.e. the newest postings. And so, in the new PDA style these are given priority with all other entities either pushed to the bottom of the display (or hidden). Also, the PDA stylesheet should allow text to flow and wrap according to the screen size of the device and so I've removed any constraints on the width of the content area. Such constraints made aesthetic sense for a desktop/laptop, but became a problem in a PDA.

I've also created a much smaller Auricle graphic for the PDA style since the previous version took up much too much real estate in a small device.

I've eschewed trying to autodetect what type of device is connecting to Auricle (non geeks should hide their eyes for a second 🙂 …. using say HTTP_USER_AGENT to identify say a 'Windows CE' device … ok, you can open your eyes now. There are just so many different type of PDA and other mobile devices out there that I thought I would keep my world simple for the moment. If all mobile devices would identify themselves with, say, a 'small device' identity then that might help. Even if that was the case this solution is far from perfect because one device may be like the Dell Axim X50 and have a 640×480 VGA resolution (which was the standard on desktop machines not so long ago) and another may have a 1 inch postage stamp of a display. So for now, switching style sheets is a manual process based on what the users see when they first enter Auricle. To help switching to an appropriate style sheet I've put style switch links at the top of Auricle so that PDA users can at least have a fighting chance of viewing something useful.

I'm also experimenting with hiding Auricle entities when a user chooses the PDA style. At the moment only the 'Syndicated Sites' drop down menus and display pane have been given this treatment, i.e users choosing the PDA style don't even see them.

I know there's a lot more I can do to improve things, but this is new territory for us and it will take us some time to get up to speed. So our humble adjustments to Auricle are a start, not an end point.

One thing is for sure, we are just seeing the start of a portable device revolution which is going to have a major impact on what is possible and how institutions respond. For example have a look at the new PalmOne Lifedrive which like the Dell Axim has a relatively large display for a PDA, but also has a 4GB hard drive (a la iPod).

Like many HEI's my own instiution is now facing the, sometimes uncomfortable, reality that personal and sometimes highly mobile devices are with us. We have many thousands of such users on a typical campus, but, yet, most policies are still geared to fixed computing assets which the institution provides. But this comfortable certainty is destined for the technological dustbin. Small personal internet connectable devices now mean that more people will own or carry one just because its so easy and what's more they'll expect to use their device when they get to wherever they are going.

So what's the instiutional policies to be when users from different countries and cultures turn up with a variety of wireless capable devices of varying sizes, varying operating systems, in varying languages? How do you support say a device with, say, a Chinese or Russian variant of an operating system?

Ban them? Ignore them? Allow them, but only support a subset of them?

On a related matter is the experience of my colleague Brian Kelly from UKOLN who has just returned from WWW2005 in Japan where the W3C's Mobile Web Initiative was announced. Although a WiFi network was available at the conference and there was free broadband access in his hotel, delegates were expected to bring their own networked device - there were no PCs provided at the conference. As he suggests: “Perhaps an indication of a changing environment.”

Could we be looking to a medium term future where, apart from very specialist needs, that universities concentrate on providing a secure, but usable and widespread networking infrastucture, but begin to move away from providing banks of standard institutional desktop PCs in library and learning centres (or their equivalent)? Could the money so saved could then be redirected to support?

Wannabe small display device gods will also find a useful overview of the issues and some really helpful information at the css-discuss Wiki Handheld Stylesheets site. Alternatively, pop over to the End All Guide to Small Screen Web Dev.