On the matter of YouTube, I’m afraid it will rarely, if ever, be a viable option for dialup users for this sort of material. From my experience, 3 to 4 minutes of load time per megabyte is about the best speed we can expect to get, if that. Thus, factoring in traffic and other variations, the average YouTube vid of, say, eight minutes in length can take up to an hour, or even considerably more, to load.

So, for a 90 minute vid, we’re looking at, what, 8 hours of loading? Ten hours? More? Even setting aside the random disconnections by ISPs that still routinely plague dialup users, and the accompanying problems that are only partially resolved by the use of download management apps, that kind of load time just isn’t practical.

Be that as it may, I do well understand that some courses and materials are simply of a nature that can’t be well adapted to a non-video format.

Thanks again for your reply, and for your hard work on this important project.

–DKM

Thanks for your note, and certainly I appreciate your concerns, which are very valid.

In general, when it comes to the Stanford courses that I have worked on, we try to do the courses in audio for the reason that you outlined above. In this case, however, we needed to use video because the course relies heavily on showing/analyzing maps, and we felt that too much would be missed in an audio version. While I realize that downloading video over iTunes isn’t feasible with a dial up connection, the YouTube version should work. You might need to be a little patient, but you’ll at least get the benefit of seeing the maps, which is core to the course. I hope this works you.

Dan

I don’t mean for this comment to sound like an accusation, but it’s extraordinarily frustrating that so little (important) media is produced with any consideration for dialup users. There are countless millions the world over, and yes, even here in the gold-plated US of A, who do not have the luxury of accessing a broadband connection. And yet, those who rely on dialup connections due to economic disadvantage are every bit as much in need of access to good information — even more so, I would argue.

There are a handful of media outlets — democracynow.org and antiwar.com are two excellent examples — that remain keenly aware of the importance of providing dialup-friendly options. But among most providers who are themselves economically privileged, at least in relative terms, it seems that such sensitivity to the importance of accessibility is plunging headlong into extinction. Especially considering the lofty rhetoric in praise of OER (open educational resources) and its importance for the future of humanity, this kind of de facto technological discrimination and marginalization of huge segments of the population … well, frankly, it comes off as downright bizarre.

Does that make any sense?