Final Project Idea – Taking it for granted: Wi-Fi as a ‘Dial Tone’

Thesis

Each leap and evolution in technologies and the socialization of them creates expectations of a standard.  One example is “land line” telephony.  The dial tone is the first noise you hear when you lift the phone from the cradle, if the line is working.  If you do not hear the dial tone, you know something is wrong, but you expect to hear a dial tone and generally do not notice it otherwise.  Other examples of technologies we expect to just “be there” include television, radio and, more currently, connectivity, both wireless and cell.

Continue reading

Prediction, Research and Application

Once I get past the first wave of the “theory and academia” tone and presentation in Christensen and the article from Decision Sciences and start pondering how these writings have proven themselves so far, the points being made become more applicable to the problems I encounter at work. The Uses and Gratifications (UG) paradigm I found of particular interest.

Continue reading

Trends Project – Citation and article

My first search using some UW Library tools brought me this article.  The citation looks like this:

Schmidt, T., Townsend, A. (2003). Why Wi-Fi wants to be free. Communications of the ACM, Volume 46 (issue 5), pg. 47 – 52

I will be using this article as it discusses a grass-roots movement around building a wireless network that is pervasive and free.

Trends Project – Early idea

I would like to look at generational “dial tone” communications technologies.  By this I refer to the technologies, platforms and “take it for granted” habits and actions each generation has about communications.This project would also entail a forecast as to what the next “dial tone” might be.

Trends – Discussion Questions #1

  1. When considering boundaries as defined by Lessig, how do we consider internal, psychological boundaries? If Ann Arbor Jake is a quiet, unassuming student at the University of Michigan in “meat-space”, but a murderous misogynist online in cyberspace, does that constitute a single person?  How does it have legal or moral impact in “meat-space”?  Why should it?
  2. Which is more likely to have long-term impact on the “regulability” of digital civilization: governments, business models, ideologies, sociological evolution, technology or something else? Why?
  3. If code can be hacked and laws have loopholes, how stable or reliable can the limn space be and how can that be perceived?  Desirable, undesirable or indeterminate?

Truly wonderful things: Pandora, Webcasting see victory in Senate

This is wonderful. I can’t express how happy I am that Pandora will continue…especially with the track record of IP openness in Washington.

Truly wonderful things: <CNET> Pandora, Webcasting see victory in Senate

This is wonderful. I can’t express how happy I am that Pandora will continue…especially with the track record of IP openness in Washington.

Intriguing item – FaceBook and Twitter use in the Enterprise

<eWeek> Facebook, Twitter Use in the Enterprise Sparks Hot Debate – In the face of a Gartner report that says that corporations shouldn’t ban Social applications like Twitter, debate rages over their benefits, challenges, and launches a side debate on whether or not people can ACTUALLY multi-task (the answer is no….).

Comment – Pam’s Book Review

Great review, Pam!

I haven’t read Shirky yet, and your review as well as the discussion and recommendations by numerous others in our class have placed on my Wish List. I your summary, I like that you note Shirky’s inclusion of both successes and failures of the social phenomena. Considering the kinds of organizational strengths that the political parties and political action organizations like MoveOn.org have found and mined to date, it’s interesting to note that it still takes an actual letter, phone call or physical visit for an individual’s voice to be duly noted. I wonder when, if ever, that will change?

Continue reading

Reflection – 8/18/08

This class was a great wrap-up. I liked the discussion led by Paolo and Peter. While their article was dated (which by itself was interesting), it provided a bit of a prelude to the consideration of the next 5,000 days of the Internet.

Continue reading