15. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags: ,

In my little corner of the blogosphere, we haven’t had this conversation in a while. You know, the “where are the women” conversation. Partly that’s because many of the blogs I read are by women, and the men I read seem to be pretty much aware that there are women bloggers out there and that they’re pretty darn good. Maybe it’s because we have Bitch, Ph.D in our corner. I don’t know.

But in the tech world, especially the web development world, the issue of gender diversity has once again raised its head. I first saw mention of this at Kimberly’s blog, and followed many of her links to fill myself in. I guess the firestorm started with Jason Kottke’s post listing the specific gender breakdown of many of the most high profile tech conferences. Then Eric Meyer claimed he didn’t care about diversity, which prompted a couple of responses from Anil Dash. Go read them yourself and then come back here. Substitute computer science, physics, chemistry conferences (or programs, for that matter), and the arguments are the same. “Women aren’t really interested. I can’t find any women speakers. I’m appealing to my audience, which is 95% male (hmm, wonder why).” The fact that they use the same arguments regardless of the field is a huge red flag. It says, we don’t want to look at ourselves and figure out why we can’t see past our biases; we want to lay the blame elsewhere. They refuse to examine the real issues behind why there aren’t more women in these roles.

I’m not an industry person. I’d say I classify myself more as a student of technology rather than a creator of that technology. Therefore, I’m not likely to be called on as a participant in those conferences. However, I’m certainly involved in supporting the future women of tech. As is Mr. Geeky (probably to a much larger degree). And we both regularly see bias in the work we do. Mr. Geeky has taken teams of women to programming competitions, robot competitions, conferences. There have been far too many times when his team were the only women there. It’s 2007, people. This should not be happening. But you know, when the guys treat you like a secretary instead of a future computer scientist, you kind of lose your taste for the field. Read Female CS Gradstudent or See Jane Compute. Plenty of examples of men acting stupid.

Even in 2007 women, actually girls, are still often not encouraged to pursue anything really technical. It starts very early. I was talking to some high school teachers at an all girls’ school who were lamenting that none of their students took the CS courses offered at the boys’ school next door. I’m thinking it’s because they don’t want to be the only girl in the room. It takes a lot of guts to participate in that kind of environment and if you haven’t been playing around with computers or programming before this point, it’s easy to be intimidated.

To put this whole thing in a framework I am often using, the phenomenon follows many of the principles of emergence. We have a system that follows pretty simple rules: pick people we already know, who are already famous. Changing the system requires changing the rules. But there’s a tendency toward staying the same. There’s a tendency to connect to the people who are already connected. We have to try to go against the those tendencies. And that’s going to take some serious effort.

I’m getting tired but I have a little more to say about self-selection and some other related issues.

15. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags: ,

For a post on women and technology. It’s on the brain. Feel free to add your questions and comments, etc. and I’ll address them.

14. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags: ,

Hold onto your hats. Ironically, there’s no mention of the DMCA in the suit. YouTube already took down thousands of “unauthorized” videos. There’s an excellent discussion of the suit here. There’s some speculation that the suit has been brought simply because YouTube has been so successful. It’s by no means the only video sharing site out there with unauthorized material.

13. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags:

Several of you had mentioned having trouble viewing my feed when I went to the new blogger. I’ve had a feedburner feed for a long time. Now, I’m officially switching over. It’d be great if everyone could subscribe to that feed by clicking the link in the sidebar or below.

Subscribe in a reader

13. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags:

Doing my project 365 has been more challenging than I thought. Often, I get to the end of a day and realize I haven’t taken a single picture. When I think back over the day, I don’t think of great photo opportunities I’ve missed. Partly that’s because I tend to go to work, sit at my desk all day (broken up by a few meetings), and go home. I don’t do very different things each day. I don’t pass by different things. Since the weather has been kind of yucky until recently, I haven’t gotten out much on the weekends either. I’m hoping that once the weather improves I’ll do more and see some different sights. Right now, I feel like the most boring person on earth.

10. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags: , ,

I wasn’t going to write about this anymore, but I can’t help myself. Yesterday, the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property held a hearing on the issue of downloading on college campuses. Congressman Howard Berman suggests that colleges aren’t really doing enough to combat piracy. He claims colleges are hypocrites, saying:

Perhaps the most ironic issue is that many universities expect others to respect and protect their IP rights to scholarly works and inventions, but seem to disregard or close their eyes to the theft of the creative works of others. (via Ars Technica)

This is so far from the truth as to be laughable. I floated a question about how other schools were handling this situation to an email list of other IT managers. I got lots of responses outlining various strategies. Everyone is taking this seriously. Though we may serve as ISPs for our students, we don’t have the same resources as those ISPs. For example, most ISPs keep log files for 180 days, something we don’t do for space reasons. Now, though, we’ll be rethinking that.

In addition to having to rethink some of our practices, it was suggested that colleges and universities apply filtering software to our networks. We already do a lot of monitoring of our network. What they’re talking about is purchasing a commercial product. In some places, such a purchase may not cause an undue burden, but in places (like ours) where we’re already stretched pretty thin, this could be a real problem.

As our attorney said, what we really want to do is get back to what we’re here for: educating students. All of this is a big distraction.

Let me point out, for the record, that two of the key Congressmen advocating for these stricter measures are democrats. If any of your representatives are on this list, you might consider writing them.

09. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags: ,

Ironically, after my last post, I started doing some searching to see what else was going on with this recent RIAA crackdown and I found out that Gizmodo has declared a boycott. They did not suggest the boycott in order to increase downloads or condone illegal downloads, but to point out that you can buy music from non RIAA labels (at eMusic, for example) or go see a show or buy band merchandise, all of which puts more money in the artists’ pockets instead of the RIAA’s. I did my part by joining eMusic. Check out all the posts at Gizmodo on the RIAA boycott–very informative.

In a separate, but related find, that might interest the politically-minded among you, was Open Congress. I’m following the fair use bill and the new dopa bill. Who knew one day I’d use RSS to track Congress.

08. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags: , ,

The RIAA is increasing its efforts to stop downloading on college campuses. Their new strategy involves sending out settlement letters to students. The letters, presumably, will be more threatening than the current takedown notices they send out regularly. I happen to be our campus DMCA agent. I’m the one who receives those takedown notices and who forwards them to the students. I had read the article referenced above, but because we receive so few notices in the first place (about 1/month), I figured we probably didn’t have anything to worry about. Monday morning, however, I received a notice that one of these letters would be sent soon. The language was indeed more threatening and the word “subpoena” appeared in the letter. So we traipsed off to the lawyer’s office to discuss strategy.

I’m not thrilled to be the DMCA agent. I know downloading is illegal. I don’t condone it. But I believe that it is (maybe just was) a reaction to an industry that didn’t keep up with the capabilities of new technology. Even though the industry does now provide legal ways to download music, movies, and tv shows, there’s still the DRM issue. Many people, myself included, have issues with DRM. For some, that means they find legal ways to obtain DRM-free music. Others resort to downloading.

Even though I will do my job as the DMCA agent, I was still feeling a little creepy about the whole thing. The new strategy felt a little more draconian, and I didn’t want to become more draconian in response. Kenneth Green articulates a possible reason for my discomfort. College students may be unfairly targeted. Why isn’t the RIAA going after more individuals in homes? Or better yet, people who make pirate copies of CDs and DVDs? In fact, Green says, the strategies offered by the RIAA to combat illegal downloading smack of extortion (one option is to provide access to legal music downloading). Green says that when asked about why the RIAA was focusing on colleges instead of ISPs, they said “the consumer broadband providers view litigation as a cost of doing business, while, in contrast, the RIAA knows that colleges and universities, when presented with the threat of litigation, will ‘jump.’” In other words, we may be low-hanging fruit for them.

At some point, I think the RIAA is going to have to figure out ways to allow people to buy music legally and to share it legally, not via these P2P programs, but in similar ways that we always have–the digital version of mixtapes. DRM sometimes makes this difficult. Maybe I’m being idealistic, but maybe if they stop treating their consumers as criminals, they’ll stop acting like criminals. A little mutual respect might go a long way.

Tags: , , ,
06. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags: ,

Steve over at Pedablogy continues the conversation about how much faculty should or shouldn’t learn about the technology they use in their teaching. He mostly agrees with me (I’ll get to the disagreements in a moment). One point he makes bears unpacking a bit:

On the other hand, I’m not an IT professional and it doesn’t make sense for me to try to become one. As an economist, it’s not my comparative advantage. So where do you draw the line?

Steve recognizes that what I and others on the IT side do is a professional activity. It’s something we work at, that we study, that we sometimes have advanced degrees in, etc. Just as I will never become a professional economist, I wouldn’t expect Steve to become an IT professional. All I ask is for some mutual respect. I will respect the faculty member’s knowledge of their content area and I hope they will respect my expertise in technology and its application to teaching. I sometimes think this equation gets messed up. I am expected to have respect for the faculty member because they have a Ph.D. and tenure while I do not receive the same respect in return. This is a subtle thing. It’s not always an upstairs/downstairs explicit kind of snobbery, but it’s there sometimes. I’ll concede that maybe this is my issue, but I’ve been in enough conversations with enough IT people to know that there’s a grain of truth to this.

Where, indeed, does one draw the line? As Gardner says in the comments, we don’t want to be treated as “a drop-off shop for faculty who wanted someone else to do all the techie stuff and hand them a turn-key finished product.” The reason we don’t want to be like Kinko’s is that it feels kind of degrading (not to knock those who work at Kinko’s) re: what I just said above. We may not know much about chemistry, but we know good ways to help people learn chemistry. And we’d like the opportunity to talk about what we know rather than just be told what to do with an image or a video. My favorite question is, “What do you think?”

On the other hand, I totally understand that a lot of these things are very time-consuming and not always the easiest things to learn. Today, I had someone stop by to work on some video. I’ve worked with this person before, doing a little teaching and little fishing. The last video I processed ran into problems and it took me basically all day to troubleshoot what the problem was and get it into an appropriate format. Before that, s/he had been sitting with me, watching what I was doing. When the person showed up today and I was 10 minutes away from going to a meeting, I wanted to do the work myself rather than going through being watched and running into problems again. On another hand, with a little planning, we probably could have done something more compelling than simply processing these videos ad hoc. It could have been more than just the photocopy version of multimedia. That’s where my professional skills could have really helped. Like many faculty I work with, this person hadn’t planned ahead.

Steve says we shouldn’t expect faculty to learn something new without our support, and I totally agree with that. I think I need to really understand how difficult it is sometimes for faculty to learn these things and that they’re sometimes uncomfortable with the messiness of technology. I think we need to work together on an individual basis to figure out what’s the best approach for each individual faculty member. At the same time, I think we can set some policies and procedures that can create some acceptable expectations. My biggest fear is that we’ll offer to do some tasks for faculty and we’ll be so overwhelmed we can’t keep up. Then no one benefits.

I still think it’s important for faculty to at least have an appreciation of how what they’re using works and how it can benefit them and their students. Too often, I think faculty don’t know what’s possible even with the tools they’re already using. Partly that’s something I need to educate them about, but it’s hard to get their attention. I just keep trying.

Update: Tim articulates what I know is going on in faculty member’s heads all the time. Heck, it goes on in my head sometimes. There’s a lot there. Go read.

05. March 2007 · Write a comment · Categories: Uncategorized · Tags: , , ,

A while back, I wrote something about whether it really mattered if I recycled or took public transportation or voted a certain way. My question was, does it really make a difference? And if it seems like it doesn’t make a difference, and if, from a practical standpoint, it’s onerous for me to recycle/ride the bus/whatever, then maybe I shouldn’t do said thing (or at least I shouldn’t worry about it). Readers said (and I wish I could find the post) that small things can make a big difference and that I should keep recycling/walking/doing small good things because I do have an effect and besides, it’s the right thing to do.

In a meeting today, this very tension between the practicality (or more correctly, perhaps, the easiness) of doing something and the social responsibility of doing something different came into play. One might think that in my line of work, this doesn’t happen very often. Education is an admirable pursuit, after all. But, there are still people involved and it’s still in some ways a business and so, conflicts arise. The question at hand was whether students and faculty would consider using a different tool if they found out that the company that makes the tool were doing something they found to be socially or morally irresponsible. Interestingly, most of the students and faculty said they’d rather not change, that changing depended on what the company was doing. Semi-unethical business practices were okay, but using child labor was not. For them, there was a pretty high threshold before they’d be convinced that change was necessary. Change for them was more problematic than a company’s business practices.

In my mind, they were being practical. Changing their practices would be time-consuming. They might have to learn how to use something new, and it might not be easy to learn. They may, in fact, lose some functionality (even if they gain new functionality). They were used to this tool, even if it wasn’t perfect. This is the tension that occurs all the time in lots of ways for many people. For me, it’s the reliance on a car and having a car that doesn’t get the greatest gas mileage. It would be really difficult for me to change that. I’d have to move or buy a hybrid car or extend my commute to triple the time by taking the bus. All of those options are difficult from a practical standpoint, for financial or other reasons. But . . . if using less gas became a huge important issue for me, then I’d probably find a way to make one of those options work. For the faculty and students, it’s the reliance on software that they are comfortable with and that “everyone else uses.”

In my ideal educational software environment, we’d use only open source software. (And let’s forget for the moment that I’m not using open source software right this second. I could. I just didn’t.) Why? Because I think education is too important a venture to leave up to corporations who don’t understand anything about education. Let’s use Microsoft products for a moment. They were created for an office environment. Yeah, we use Word and Excel in the education environment, too. But do you think developers are sitting around thinking about how to make those products better for their educational users? Um, no. Not that Open Office is either, but someone could make something. Maybe someone could develop a tool that helps students learn how to do citations correctly as they’re typing papers. The thing is, it’s open! You could do it if you wanted to.

I think of an academic environment as a place where ideas are shared, not where they’re sequestered away. I think of it as a place where people work together in order to learn. A college or university provides opportunities for those both physically and virtually. The software we use should espouse those principles and should make it easier (not harder) for students to collaborate, for faculty to work with each other and their students, for everyone to share resources, to communicate, and to learn. I don’t want to see education as yet another market to be leveraged. Surely, we rise above capitalism a little even if we can’t escape it entirely.

In the 80s, when I was in college, we protested in order to get the college to divest from South Africa. Shouldn’t we consider all our purchases as carefully as we might consider our investments? Maybe this isn’t a big enough issue to protest over, but certainly, it’s worth having a debate. For myself, I know I could be convinced that I should make the gas issue more important, important enough for me to change. And changing software is a lot easier than moving.

Bonus points if you have any idea what software I might be talking about here (and then I’ll put it in the label).