Harvard Releases OpenScholar 2.0

Har­vard Uni­ver­si­ty has now released ver­sion 2.0 of Open­Schol­ar, an open source soft­ware pack­age that lets schol­ars build per­son­al and project-ori­ent­ed web sites in a mat­ter of min­utes. It’s a quick, easy, and free solu­tion (minus one mean­ing­ful caveat below) that allows aca­d­e­mics to build an online home for their “CV, bio, pub­li­ca­tions, blogs, announce­ments, links, image gal­leries, class mate­ri­als,” and even sub­mit pub­li­ca­tions to online repos­i­to­ries, such as Google Schol­ar. You can see an exam­ple of Open­Schol­ar in action here.

Now here’s the one impor­tant rub. Before a prof can start using Open­Schol­ar, some­one on his/her IT staff will need to install the soft­ware on their uni­ver­si­ty’s servers. Har­vard does­n’t host the solu­tion. The video above and Wired Cam­pus offer more details …

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Making the Case Against Laptops … With Liquid Nitrogen

Pro­fes­sors are increas­ing­ly sour­ing on stu­dents bring­ing their lap­tops to class. Some are ban­ning them. (The Wash­ing­ton Post has more on that.) And some are ban­ning them emphat­i­cal­ly. Like the physics pro­fes­sor from the Uni­ver­si­ty of Okla­homa. (Watch the video above.) What’s the solu­tion? Maybe this stu­dent has the right idea (said in jest).

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 8 ) |

Where Is Technology Taking Us?

A recent Front­line doc­u­men­tary, Dig­i­tal Nation: A Life on the Vir­tu­al Fron­tier, asks just this question–particularly with regard to edu­ca­tion. Sub­jects include atten­tion span, mul­ti-task­ing, and the doubts of one-time tech­nol­o­gy evan­ge­list Dou­glas Rushkoff. But while some see tech­nol­o­gy as an obsta­cle to clear think­ing and human inter­ac­tion, oth­ers see it as essen­tial to con­tem­po­rary edu­ca­tion.

I have to say the whole sub­ject res­onates with my own ambiva­lent technophil­ia. You can watch the doc­u­men­tary above or here (and the trail­er fol­lows), but don’t for­get to check your news feeds, twit­ter, and face­book while it’s on in the back­ground.

Wes Alwan lives in Boston, Mass­a­chu­setts, where he works as a writer and researcher and attends the Insti­tute for the Study of Psy­cho­analy­sis and Cul­ture. He also par­tic­i­pates in The Par­tial­ly Exam­ined Life, a pod­cast con­sist­ing of infor­mal dis­cus­sions about philo­soph­i­cal texts by three phi­los­o­phy grad­u­ate school dropouts.

Top 10 Reasons Why iPad Marks Kindle’s Death

Caveat: If you missed it, yesterday’s post was 10 Rea­sons iPad Will Not Kill Kin­dle. So take every­thing here with appro­pri­ate grains of salt.

10.) Books with graph­ics. Many books con­tain pho­tos, graph­ics and dia­grams that the Kin­dle does not han­dle well, if at all. When peo­ple real­ize that the iPad will do this flaw­less­ly, they’ll head in that direc­tion. Exam­ple: while read­ing the new Carv­er biog­ra­phy on my Kin­dle, an expe­ri­ence that I loved, I had to miss out on all of the pic­tures col­lect­ed from Carver’s life. Once you take into account news­pa­pers and mag­a­zines, there’s even more weight on iPad’s side.

9.) Cost: Seri­ous­ly, Ama­zon real­ly over­stepped their bound­aries when they set Kindle’s price at around $300, as they did. If they had made it $100 or less, they would have prob­a­bly have sold 4 or 5 times the num­ber of devices, hook­ing more read­ers to their book­store and their device. Look at Gillette as an exam­ple: which costs more—the razor or the razor blades?

8.) “I love my Kin­dle!” – less than two mil­lion peo­ple have bought the Ama­zon prod­uct. By com­par­i­son, over forty mil­lion iPhones and iPod Touch­es have been sold. No one knows how many folks will rush out to buy an iPad, but if pre­vi­ous iPhone sales and the buzz around the iPad are any indi­ca­tion, this is going to be anoth­er big win for Apple.

7.) iPad is a Kin­dle: just use that free Kin­dle app on your iPad and you’ve got the whole Kin­dle store wide open to you. You can even take your whole Kin­dle library right over to Apple’s iPad with the Kin­dle App.

6.) Cost, again: with iPad com­ing in at a low $499 for a device that’s much bet­ter made and fea­tures much more capa­bil­i­ty than the Kin­dle, with at least four times the mem­o­ry… well, you get the pic­ture. Oh jeez… I just found out the Kin­dle DX goes for $489. Oh, Mr. Bezos… what are you think­ing?

5.) Capa­bil­i­ty. Peo­ple don’t want a ded­i­cat­ed read­ing device: if you can car­ry around a device the size of your e‑reader, but also use it to check email, surf the web, watch TV and movies, lis­ten to music, use office-type apps, etc. then that’s going to win in today’s econ­o­my.

4.) Book pric­ing. It looks like Apple, the dia­bol­i­cal pricers of all songs at $.99, might wind up being the pub­lish­ers’ dar­ling in the e‑book mar­ket by pric­ing their titles high­er than Ama­zon has been. So far it looks like ibooks will be clos­er to the $14.99 price point that pub­lish­ers like. Right now, as evinced by this past weekend’s squab­ble between Ama­zon and Macmil­lan, pub­lish­ers appear to be fed up with Amazon’s pric­ing strat­e­gy. Apple may just become pub­lish­ers’ white knight. (more…)

The Open v. Closed Culture Smackdown

Nina Paley and Jaron Lanier are fac­ing off in a friend­ly, pub­lic radio smack­down, debat­ing the pros and cons of open/free cul­ture. (Lis­ten to the audio below). As a quick refresh­er, Nina Paley got a good amount of press last year when she cre­at­ed Sita Sings the Blues, a prize-win­ning ani­mat­ed film, and then released it to the pub­lic under a Cre­ative Com­mons license. Jaron Lanier, mean­while, is often called the “father of vir­tu­al­i­ty,” and his new book, You Are Not a Gad­get, takes a fair­ly hard­line stance against Web 2.0 and the free/open cul­ture move­ment it engen­dered. And now the debate record­ed by WNYC in NYC:

NOTE: You can find Sita Sings the Blues (and 125 oth­er films) in our col­lec­tion of Free Movies Online.

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 17 ) |

The History of the Seemingly Impossible Chinese Typewriter

The Chi­nese lan­guage has tens of thou­sands of char­ac­ters, and many have con­sid­ered it near­ly impos­si­ble to fit these char­ac­ters onto a sin­gle work­able type­writer. But that has­n’t stopped inven­tors from try­ing … and, to a cer­tain degree, suc­ceed­ing. Stan­ford his­to­ri­an Thomas Mul­laney is now writ­ing the first his­to­ry of the Chi­nese type­writer, and he has found evi­dence for numer­ous patents and pro­to­types that incor­po­rate the most com­mon­ly used char­ac­ters. In addi­tion to mak­ing a polit­i­cal impact in Chi­na, these machines have also poten­tial­ly influ­enced inno­va­tions in mod­ern com­put­ing. You can read more about Mul­laney’s work on Stan­ford’s Human Expe­ri­ence web­site, and also watch him dis­cuss his work in this YouTube clip.

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

Jaron Lanier Makes “Open Culture” a Buzzword

Last week, Jaron Lanier, the father of vir­tu­al real­i­ty, pub­lished his new book (You Are Not a Gad­get) and an accom­pa­ny­ing op-ed in The Wall Street Jour­nal. The WSJ piece begins:

All too many of today’s Inter­net buzz­words— includ­ing “Web 2.0,” “Open Cul­ture,” “Free Soft­ware” and the “Long Tail”—are terms for a new kind of col­lec­tivism that has come to dom­i­nate the way many peo­ple par­tic­i­pate in the online world. The idea of a world where every­body has a say and nobody goes unheard is deeply appeal­ing. But what if all of the voic­es that are pil­ing on end up drown­ing one anoth­er out?

Lanier goes on to make the case against Web 2.0. Using “crowd­sourc­ing” to build free prod­ucts (think Wikipedia), Web 2.0 ends up pro­duc­ing infe­ri­or con­tent and soft­ware code. It slows down inno­va­tion. It destroys intel­lec­tu­al prop­er­ty and the finan­cial struc­ture that incen­tivizes cre­ative indi­vid­u­als and insti­tu­tions. And final­ly it dis­em­pow­ers the indi­vid­ual, the real source of inno­va­tion. (Lanier says, “I don’t want our young peo­ple aggre­gat­ed, even by a benev­o­lent social-net­work­ing site. I want them to devel­op as fierce indi­vid­u­als, and to earn their liv­ing doing exact­ly that.”) If you think this sounds like Ayn Rand phi­los­o­phy (see vin­tage clip) graft­ed onto tech talk, you’re prob­a­bly right. And from here, you can decide whether you want to buy the book or not.

On a per­son­al note, I find it amus­ing that “Open Cul­ture” qual­i­fied as an “Inter­net buzz­word,” accord­ing to Lanier. As you can imag­ine, I track the use of the expres­sion fair­ly close­ly, and quite frankly, it did­n’t reg­is­ter on any radar until Lanier’s piece came out (and we got a simul­ta­ne­ous men­tion in AARP’s mag­a­zine). All you have to do is look at this Google Trends chart. It maps the usage of “open cul­ture,” and you can see how it goes from nowhere to ver­ti­cal in 2010, right when Lanier’s op-ed gets pub­lished. So what can I say to Jaron Lanier, but thanks (in a thanks, but no thanks kind of way) and may you sell a mil­lion copies of You Are Not a Gad­get…

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 2 ) |

Disruptive Technology: Student Brings Typewriter to Class

A lit­tle case of dis­rup­tive tech­nol­o­gy in Com­put­er Sci­ence 1301 at Geor­gia Tech…

via Andrew Baron

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 2 ) |

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast
Open Culture was founded by Dan Colman.