A Small Rant That Won't Fit In a Tweet

Most universities these days OFFICIALLY communicate with students via email– that is to say, electronic communication is every bit as important as the very few items you might get by post.  Oshkosh went as far as to collect signatures from students on a form that said, “yes, I understand how to check my email and that I have to read it.”  Milwaukee does not do that, but it doesn’t change the fact that most departments do not send out mail.

The most common grumpy comment from a student on that front?  “Oh, I don’t check that address; I just have [insert popular webmail app here].”  That is all well and good, because forwarding your campus mail to another address is dead frakking simple, takes 2 minutes, and you NEVER HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT AGAIN.  I cannot understand why this is such a huge hurdle for people.  What is it that makes them not do it?  Laziness?  Ignorance?  What?

Sometimes I want to slap people.

Another Antiquated Industry

From my daily perusal of the ‘tubes, I came across a bit from TorrentFreak about how Radiohead is going to testify on behalf of alleged music pirate and threat-to-the-integrity-of-the-industry Joel Tenenbaum (Kyle and I touched on this story back in podcast #5).  If you’re interested in the ongoing struggle of The RIAA vs The World, this is a good one to follow, as the case has gone much farther in court than most.

This marks another occasion where Radiohead is coming down on the side of the 21st century music consumer.  They made big headlines back in 2007 when they released ‘In Rainbows’ online, allowing purchasers to name their own price (you could opt to pay as little as zero monies).  The band is also one of the more prominent names in the Featured Artists Colaition, a lobby group that says they’ve tired of the RIAA speaking and acting on their behalf.

I think it’s great to get the artists themselves involved in this debate.  There seems to be a lot of energy spent wondering whose best interest the parties in question really have in mind.  Hearing from the creators of the music we are “sharing” goes a long way to settling that.

However, I also look at the list of artists in the coalition and I see a lot of names that have made a lot of money making records.  That is not to say that they are right or wrong, or that their efforts are misguided.  I just feel like it’s easy to say “I can give my music away,” or, “I’ll release this myself, directly to my fans,” when you have a fan base that numbers in the millions and you’ve already completed a record deal that had the backing of a major label.  Would a struggling artist you’ve never heard of that is trying like hell to get their music exposed to a larger audience be as quick to denigrate the larger Industry– the very vehicle by which artists have historically made their way onto the airwaves and into our ever-evolving music players?

Maybe they would, and that’s the question.  Every traditional method that we’ve had for consuming media is currently being challenged by the speed and ease of exchange that we can get on the Internet.  For creators of music, film, and literature, the Internet has the potential to serve as a new, direct-to-consumer vehicle for disseminating their work.  This is not a stunning revelation by any means, as there are examples of how this could play out all over the web right now.  The current question is whether this direct-to-consumer method will overcome our traditional business models and become THE mainstream path for artists to share their work.  This Tenenbaum case will probably serve as a landmark ruling in one direction or the other.

What I would love to see from the Featured Artists Coalition is not just a voice for the artists in this debate– I would like to see the ones that have made millions in albums, concerts, and merchandise lift up those whose voices are not yet relevant to the larger audience.  I would like to see this group be at the forefront of innovation for new methods to get creative works into the hands of consumers.  Clearly, there are structures in place.  Like so many things, it comes down to, yes, financial backing, but also the will of those who CAN be agents of change to do it.

Bracket Kudos

Have to give props to whomever (I assume it would have been a Michigan resident) actually had Michigan State in the title game.  I mean, seriously?

It was just me against one of the kids who works in the office; we both filled ours out at the last minute, after the first games had tipped on 3/19, actually, and neither one of us were (a) huge fans, or (b) able to pick one than one of the Final Four successfully.  I needed UConn to get to the title game in order to win (he was 2 points ahead coming into this weekend).  It seemed like a lock.  And it SOOO just wasn’t.

Anyway, I’m sure that somewhere under the bridge there is a college basketball fan pumping his or her fist at the fantastically lucky turn of events.  I know that I did back in 2003, when I knew just as little (or maybe less) about college hoops and randomly selected a 3-seed and the 12th-ranked team in the country to win the whole thing.  And they did.  Luck could not possibly get dumber if you gave it an ice-cream-scoop lobotomy.

Have a delightful Monday…

A Couple Chilly Days En Route To a Warm Season

As I peer out the window and shake my head on this somewhat chilly April morning, I also took a minute to read Andrew Revkin’s Dot Earth blog from Friday in the New York Times online.  The piece talks about a paper that is set to be published in Geophysical Research Letters on the tendancy to see short-term cooling trends in an overall warming cycle for the planet.

Beyond just mention of that paper, though, he touches a bit on the importance of some standardization of terms and measurements when we (ALL of us) talk about climate change.  That’s sort of what I was getting at in that post from a couple weeks back where I mentioned the new climate literacy publication from the NOAA.  I think it’s great that this debate is moving out of the perceived realm of hippie fanaticism and into serious, mainstream science.  It’s the only way we’ll make notable progress toward solving the environmental problems of the 21st century.

Growth Will Be Exponential

Astute colleague David G. Schrubbe sent over a link about the first robot to make an autonomous scientific discovery.  A little blurb from the piece on labspaces.net:

Using artificial intelligence, Adam hypothesised that certain genes in baker’s yeast code for specific enzymes which catalyse biochemical reactions in yeast. The robot then devised experiments to test these predictions, ran the experiments using laboratory robotics, interpreted the results and repeated the cycle.

Just to reiterate, the robot did this WITHOUT HUMAN INTERVENTION.

What the Hell Is Mind-Mapping?

I mean “what the hell is mind-mapping?” in a”what-the-hell-is-it-good-for” sort of way.  Lifehacker had a write up about mind-mapping software the other day, and the only other reason I thought of it is that they are really hot and bothered about the whole concept at work– to the extent that some outrageously expensive software licenses were purchased and they want us to plot all of our procedures and processes out this way.

I really don’t see the point.  Seems like a lot more work that it’s worth.  Since it’s a “free-form” medium, the first thing you have to do when you look at something like this is figure out what the system (if any) was for the person who made the “map.”  If you are making one yourself, you have to dream up a system.  It seems a lot more straight-forward and easy for collaboration if you work with a commonly-used, easy-to-understand model that people are trained on early in life.  Y’know, like an outline.

If anyone wants to describe to me how or why this is useful, I’m all ears.  But I don’t get it.  I guess I don’t quite get the extent to which we’re moving away from being a society that writes things down into one that draws pictures and puts stuff on TV.  In my mind, this mind-mapping phenomenon is an extension of that.

… and GET OFF MY LAWN!!

Digital Packrat

As I pulled some old “archived” mail out of backup and dumped it back into my main profile in Thunderbird (thinking “what the hell, I have plenty of disk space”), I realized how insane it’s getting, the amount of email that I’m collecting (and I’m sure plenty of you are, too).

I have archives back to 2002, and I’d have all my mail clear back to 1998 if it hadn’t been for a few unfortunate accidents shortly after I moved to Bozeville.  All together at this point, we’re talking about roughly 16,500 messages.  That’s really not even that many in 6-plus years.

But the thing I got to thinking about is, “what am I DOING with all this stuff?”  Is it just a mental barrier to overcome, that even if I never look at those messages again, they’re not really taking up any more physical space in my life?  After all, harddrives are only getting bigger, and even as it is, that T-bird profile is just barely over a gigabyte.  So the space issue really shouldn’t bother me.

Is it the organization, then?  I used to try to file everything really carefully in folders, but the advances in search within my client (and on the Googles, for that matter) have really made organization a moot point.  I still keep a few folders around for things that definitely need their own distinct space but might not have common qualities or attributes (thereby, making “searching” them a more difficult proposition), but my single largest folder is the general archive, called “_DONE”.  This is where mail goes when I have read it, replied to it or taken other action as needed, and it’s OK to be moved out of the inbox.  My point is, it’s not like it’s going to be easy for me to find something in there.  I could do a search on that folder if I knew what it was I was looking for, but…

I guess it’s the relative uselessness of all the mail that is bothering me here.  I look at that “_DONE” folder and think, what purpose is that giant pile serving? It seems like there should be some other function that I can leverage from a store of data like that.  Seems there should be something about that much information that should make my life easier.

I guess I got a blog post out of it, but that’s not saying much.

I come back to the idea that it’s a mental hurdle to overcome– I have been trained to know that keeping a lot of junk around that you don’t need is bad; that a person needs to sort through that stuff and get rid of it if it’s not useful anymore.  Furthermore, as far as email specifically is concerned, for about the first 10 years that we had it, unless you were POP’ing into your account and keeping messages on your own computer (i.e., you had webmail only), you HAD to get rid of mail.  It was a daily/weekly/constant battle.  Now our space is virtually unlimited, and as more and more of our information moves into a digital space, maybe that sort of thinking just isn’t relevant.

What are you doing with all your mail?  Are you still throwing any of it away?  Does it all just sit in your ever-expanding inbox, or do you do something else with it?