Student debt poll

The TimesOnline’s ‘student debt’ poll: annoying for all kinds of reasons

beerandsmoke2“Would you pay an extra penny on income tax to subsidise students?” asks the TimesOnline in this worst-of-all-kinds-of-survey.

Why is this so annoying?

Firstly, because the question is pretty meaningless.  If you don’t think so, then take it seriously for a moment and try to answer it yourself.  Yes?  No?  It depends…?

It’s annoying because the issues of student debt and the way that education is funded are far more complex than this dumbed-down, ‘web-friendly’ question implies.

Secondly, because I’m not prepared to talk about subsidising education until we talk that other big student expense that never gets talked about: alcohol and drugs.

But guess what?  When did you last hear ANYONE honestly account for the part that alcohol and drugs played in their ‘£15,000′ overdraft?  Funny isn’t it?  They don’t, ever.  It’s always ‘tuition fees, books, rent, food’.

Booo!  Party-pooper!

In case you think I’m being fuddy duddy, I’ve been there and done it myself.  First as a student at university (where I spend a healthy amount on drink and drugs) and secondly as a university lecturer (where – like most, if not all of my colleagues – I also spent a healthy amount on drink and drugs).

So it’s not about a moral highground.  It’s about honesty.  In answer to your question, TimesOnline: ‘No.  I’m not prepared to subsibise ongoing cultural denial about the trouble our education system and our students are in with alcohol and substance abuse.’

Now, which box should I tick?

The Venus Project: Beyond Politics, Poverty and War….

Picture 2

..but not Shopping, ok?

The Venus Project claims to be “a bold, new direction for humanity that entails nothing less than the total redesign of our culture.”

Top of the drop down list of ways to ‘Get Involved’?  Why, through the Store of course, where you can purchase DVDs and other Venus Project goodies (including T-Shirts).

Sorry if I this sounds critical, but is there anyone else out there who thinks that the first thing we might need to lose in a total redesign of our culture is our attachment to selling each other stuff?  Hmmm?

Maybe I’m wrong.  Maybe social media and online shopping can fix the world.  What do you think?


FriendsReunited: what’s it really worth?

FriendsReunited is worth about as much as RMS Titanic shortly after it hit the iceberg.

titanic4It doesn’t matter how big or fancy your ship is – or how many souls there are on board. If it’s sinking, it’s worth nothing in a financial sense. You can’t do anything with it except watch with grim fascination as it slips beneath the waves.

But there is a lot to be learned about social media from its demise.

FriendsReunited started with a great idea – to use the web to reconnect people with other people. Nothing wrong in that – it’s what people want to spend all day doing, given half a chance. So where did it go wrong? Two big – simple – mistakes.

1) Horrible, clunky, counterintuitive and frustrating user interface. Yes. It was an awful experience. Whenever I used it, I had no idea where I was or what I was doing. The site developers couldn’t see past their own thought-processes. Full steam ahead, no matter what was happening around it.

2) Even the free membership wasn’t worth the effort, so there was no chance for those poor people in First Class. Ok, that’s stretching the Titanic analogy a bit but developers beware. If you’re trying to charge for what other people do better for free, you’re history.

Meanwhile, expect to see the social media war become anything but social over the next couple of years as the big players seek to herd all the people in the world on board a single, um, unsinkable network. :-)

LinkedIn: Social media as ‘Walled Community’?

LinkedIn wants you to share stuff with it’s community first, your community second

I’ve said this many times before, but I think LinkedIn makes social media hard work.

Why? Not least because of its clunky ‘what do I do now’ functionality.  But also because it wants you to stay within its walls more than it wants to recognise the way you want to use social media.  It has something of an AOL feel to it.

I keep getting the occasional invitation to connect and the odd link from LinkedIn.  I go to there, accept the invite, say hello sometimes… and then sort of grind to a halt thinking ‘what can I do now?’

This morning, I got a link from an online reputation group I subscribed to in LinkedIn.  I went there, had a read and decided ‘I’d like to Tweet that’.  I clicked the ‘Share this’ button and found myself being offered the opportunity to share the link with people in my LinkedIn network.  Pity I wanted to share it with my Twitter network.

And there you have it.  Social Media as walled community.  This network versus that network – all vying to own the member pool.

So long as there’s revenue to be dreamed of and grasped, will there ever be a totally open social media network?  One which sets out to seamlessly interface with every other network of choice?

Personally, I doubt it.  What do you think?

Anderson. Chris. Plagiarism? You decide (ho hum)

Has best-selling author plagiarised other works for his new book?

usury

Note: The image (above) is not my work.  I copied and pasted if from the Virginia Quarterly Review without their permission.  Bad? Maybe.  But at least there’s no risk of you thinking it’s my own work.

Has Chris Anderson, editor of Wired and author of ‘The Long Tail’ plagiarised Wikipedia (and other sources) in the writing of his new book?  What if he has?  Who the hell cares anyway? In this era of cut-and-paste mashup where everybody lifts everything and nobody owns nothing…

These people seem to care.

And actually, I do too.  A lot.

For some people the issue of plagiarism is some old-fashioned educational nonsense from the good old, bad old days of dull, authoritarian education.  You know, those musty pre-internet days when children were made to read, write and spell properly if they were to stand any chance of growing up to be well-adjusted adults capable of going to war with each other and despoiling the planet.

By the time I quit lecturing in 2004 at a well-respected University in the West of England, students were not only committing plagiarism for their ‘written’ work (‘pasted’ would be a more accurate term) but they were doing it for their practical graphic design work too.  Yes.  Their practical work.  I remember one revealing after receiving a high 2.1 degree that he had simply borrowed his final year practical work.  His contempt for the system that couldn’t – or wouldn’t – detect his plagiarism was equalled only by the contempt he had for his own lack of motivation and effort.

Judging by his comments in today’s thread and on his own blog, Anderson seems determined to play down the accusations of plagiarism and in so doing, I personally think he further damages his credibility.  Why?  Because this isn’t a failure to properly cite sources.  It isn’t an accidentally-dropped pair of quotation marks either.  It is a conscious act of copying, pasting and editing text into a document and formatting it so that it ends up reading as his own words.

I for one am glad the issue is out in the open and thank Chris Anderson for – unintentionally – raising it.  But is this really an issue of intellectual property and copyright in the digital age?  Could it instead be about plagiarism as a symptom of the decline of critical thinking in our culture?

WP 2.8: Upgrade madness

90% of existing plugins won’t work after you upgrade to WP 2.8

This means that if you follow the instructions to ‘please update now’ you’re going to suddenly find your site not working.  Excellent. Superb. Wonderful. That’s what I call progress.  Add to that the fact that WP 2.8 doesn’t actually upgrade or work 100% properly, according to this review.

I don’t know about you, but I’m up to here with this ridiculous upgrade culture I find myself in.  Every time I manage to get my site just about working again after the previous cosmetic WordPress upgrade, they – someone! – go and release another version.  This usually breaks my site again.  Either the installation doesn’t work or the plugins don’t.

Do any of you ever ask why we do this?  Who decides?  Does it have to be this way?

I don’t want 2.8.  I didn’t actually want WP 2.7.1 – certainly not the hassle of upgrading it (which isn’t very simple or clear).  Strangely enough, I didn’t want 2.6.1 either because 2.5 worked just fine but in Digital Britain you don’t get a choice.

500 years since Henry VIII came to the throne

And this is how far we’ve evolved?

dickViagra spam.  We’ve all had it.  (Haven’t we?!?!).  It comes in all shapes and sizes: there’s the text-only, ‘appeal to your sense of masculinity’ kind.  There’s the ‘picture of the yummy pills’ kind.  And now this.  An appealing ‘before and after’ dong picture.

So here we are, 500 years after the coronation of Henry VIII.  In that time, we’ve mastered trans-oceanic navigation, created the industrial revolution, risen into the air, sent men to the moon and invented the digital computer. All for what?

So that our economies can fall apart because we’re all too greedy to stop consuming and too technologically rapt to stop ruining the environment?  And because – if the explosion of spam of all kinds is any kind of mirror – too guided by our dicks to evolve beyond the blood-thirstiness of the 16th century.

Ah well.

Twitter staff don’t get high on their own supply

liotta1Twitter staff not taking own medicine, reports ReadWriteWeb

I wonder why?

Could it be that they’ve got better things to do? Like doing stuff in real life? Or planning what to do with all that lovely money they’ll make when someone eventually buys Twitter?

A post in ReadWriteWeb asks why Twitter staff seem to be using Twitter in a very different way from everyone else.

Something tells me that this won’t be a popular view, but I think that social media are inherently addictive in nature and deliberately so.  They’re designed to plug into the ego and to ‘fix’ how we feel about ourselves. Twitter is the new cigarette: once you started, you just can’t stop.  Sure you can.  Go on then.

‘Don’t get high on your own supply’ was the watchword of the smart drug dealer of the 1980s. Watch ‘Goodfellas’ and you’ll understand why.

The mark of a true dealer is he that gives enough away for free to build a customer base that can’t do without his stuff – yet stays in control by not using himself.  The mark of a true addict is how ferociously he/she fights to defend his need to use what the dealer supplies.

What do you think?

Read the ReadWriteWeb post here.