The article “Archivists Struggle to Preserve Crucial Records as Paper Gives Way to Pixels” in The Chronicle of Higher Education, by Florence Olsen, addresses the concerns over maintaining records of online information. The article focuses on important university documentation.

Several questions came to mind regarding the article:

1) If the information discussed is so crucial, why wasn’t it’s archival discussed before it was only documented online-only?

2) How does the tough decision of what to keep and what to throw-away in the digital world differ from the hard-copy world? Presumably the same decision must be made considering physical documents. Based on what records needed to be kept pre-Internet, it seems as though it would be fairly simple to know what online documents to print and archive.

3) Do we really need archived documentation of these items? Our culture (and that of Sweden and Germany) value written documentation much more than other countries. In areas like the Middle East, word-of-mouth agreements are valued with the same emphasis we place on written legal documents.

4) Why would you agree or disagree with the importance placed on keeping long-term records of grades? If they were archived for a year or two, wouldn’t that be sufficient?

5) Why not just print out copies of anything that needs to be archived?

The document “Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0” by W3C provides basic guidelines for improving mobile Web site usability. This is a useful reference document for mobile site creators. From an academic perspective, the paper provides useful insights as to why certain features are or are not acceptable on the mobile platform.

For example, W3C’s regulatory suggestions include limiting the content on WAP pages and keeping externally linked resources to a minimum. The paper makes it clear that the overarching problem on mobile sites is that they are improperly designed for mobile use, and not properly transferred from PC formats.  “Many Web sites and pages make for a poor user experience when they are viewed on a mobile device” and “Many Web pages are laid out for presentation on desktop size displays, and exploit capabilities of desktop browsing software.”

Several questions came to mind, and the answers would provide a relevant context for digesting the “Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0” document:

1.       How much of a problem is created due to developers failing to follow these best practices? It seems as though the only loss or detriment is to the developer himself – in having an unusable site.

2.       As version 1.0, was there not a previous document of this type? Were former developers simply expected to filter through numerous other documents (such as Web Content Accessibility Guidelines and Device Independent Working Group concepts) to obtain this information? It is surprising that this agregated paper was just released in July 2008.

3.       Similarly, is W3C the only organization of its type? Meaning, are these Best Practices supported by the rest of the industry and streamlined/agreed upon by all factions of the mobile industry?

According to the About.com posting, “Jamster Slammed for Mobile Selling Practices,” by Stephen Lawson, the ringtone company Jamster/VeriSign was in a business of ill-repute in 2005.

Some questions come to mind while reading Lawson’s article:

1) Did Cingular acquire AT&T or vice versa?  Lawson states “Cingular, which now owns AT&T Wireless…”

2) Analyst Eddie Hold metions “confused subscribers” and says, “There’s no such thing as an easy-to-read wireless bill.”  Why do you think this is the case? Is confuse-a-consumer an intentional tactic employeed by the carriers?

3) Lawson draws an intersting conclusion at the end of his article. He assumes that two incidents are correlated, but he does not give evidence for his statement. He presents the statement that Jamster advertised on Nickelodeon, and then states that Jamster’s business dependedon exploiting children who would force their parents to buy ringtones. I found the idea that Jamster’s business depended on the kids market to be a bit extreme. What do you think of this statement?

“In the case of Jamster, the service is advertised heavil on TV channels such as Nickelodeon that are aimed at children, according to the suit. (Jamster also advertises on PC World.) The company depended on drawing young mobile users into the service and then having their parents pay the charges, which appear on the monthly cell phone bill, the suit alleges.”

I enjoyed reading the Technologies of the Third Mediamorphosis chapter of Roger Fidler’s 1997 book, “Mediamorphosis Understanding New Media.”One of his main points is that despite common perception, the catalytic events for today’s digital media presence occurred before World War II. The chapter made me question which of these generally comes first: the need for new technology (as Fidler argues) or the emergence of disruptive technology that is dismissed as unnecessary until widely adopted. I have read articles that support each side. Several questions came to mind as I read:

1) How do you think Benkler would react to the following statement by Fidler? “All [new forms of communication in the past two centuries] have had a profound influence, during this brief period, upon nearly every facet of our social, political, and economic systems, as well as our cultural identities and perspectives.” (p. 82)

2) Fidler also states, “the development of railroads created a ‘supervening social necessity’ for instantaneous communication and feedback across sectors.” What in today’s society parallels this development/relationship (if any)?

3) Ada Byron is mentioned on page 85, as an invaluable contributor to the development of digital language. Why does there seem to be a lack of information about her in the works of other authors? She seems like an interesting subject, particularly as a female contributor to technology.

4) In 1827, the Journal of Commerce “gained a much envied reputation for its innovative systems for news gathering” (p. 86). How will innovative systems for news gathering continue to emerge/prevail in the future?

5) Fidler states that the telegraph succeeded because it was recognized by major enterprises (p. 86). How does this compare to what it takes for an invention/innovation to succeed today?

6) Fidler also mentions that the telegraph brought about an expectation of immediacy in news reporting (p. 87). What role does this play in the development of America’s business methods? (Was this the beginning of the U.S.’s business standard of wanting things immediately and workers not taking time to relax – unlike countries like Sweden which offer copious holiday/vacation time or Spain which offers siestas and a more leisurely perspective to work-life-balance?

Based on the article “As We May Think”:

1. What kind of civilian-physicist response was there post-war that encouraged Vannevar Bush to publish this article? (ex: were the physicists themselves really THAT impacted? They most likely had physicist-type jobs before the war led them to war-time physics; what prevented them from returning to that type of pre-war work?)

2. What parallels can be drawn between the article and present-day human experience?

This line from 1945 seems to have some relevance today: “The summation of human experience is being expanded at prodigious rate.”

The recent article on the stock market news Web site Seeking Alpha, “The Wireless Application Marketplace: Apple, Google, Microsoft and RIMM” by Option Dragon, offers a look at the emergence of wireless application marketplaces.

With the huge success of Apple’s iPhone App Store, other industry leaders are rushing to get a share of the market. Google, T-Mobile, Microsoft and RIMM (Blackberry) are debuting their own versions of application marketplaces. The significance of these new marketplaces is that they support the notion of open software development for cell phones.

Google and T-Mobile work under the Open Handset Alliance and T-Mobile is offering the services on any of its handsets (unlike AT&T’s dependence on the iPhone for its cut of the application marketplace). And, despite being notoriously closed, Microsoft is launching Skymarket for its Windows Mobile 7.

These signs signify that mobile technology is indeed the future of computing. A couple of questions can be asked:

1.       With the movement toward open software and loosened cellular controls, what does this mean for Microsoft?

2.       With so many conflicts of interest between these companies (as the author describes), does this foreshadow an aggregated marketplace for the future?

Questions for Collective Action speaker:

1. Do you see collective action as more of a pro or con for society?
   (Any pre- and post-digital age examples?)
   
2. Can a rise in collective action be seen in parallel with the rise of the digital age?
   
3. What do you expect the reaction to future collective action to be?
   (Embraced vs. feared?)
   

Guest Lecture (skype in): Howard Rheingold, author, Smart Mobs:

1)      What are the future (or present) regulations for controlling harmful smart mobs?

2)      What digital-related career areas do you foresee being ones for which this is a good time to “get in” early, or which companies/fields? (or one that is still “early” to the outside world)

3)      What general principles have you found to be the keys to success?

4)      What shoes are you wearing today?

Three discussion questions regarding Chris Anderson’s The Long Tail:

1. Page 186 addresses the decline of newspapers and the prevalence of blogs. Compared to newspapers, blogs have “more checks and balances,” “specialize in particular topics,” and have “virtually no costs.” There is no mention of ethics in this section at all. What role to ethics play these days? Are ethics the final upper hand or distinction that trained journalists have over bloggers?
2. Page 169 quotes Business Weekregarding the explosion of variety: we went from a culture of “I want to be normal” to “I want to be special.” The “I want to be special” category includes wanting the biggest and the best items. Page 185 states that now “we’re entering a micro-culture era, when we’re all into different things.” Does Anderson overlook that there is likely still an “I want to be special” category within his predicted “we’re all into different things” culture? Isn’t the recent “I want to be special” really just “I want to be high-end”? If so, will the high-end market of “I want to be special” drop in popularity as people try to be different, and some remain at “I want to be high-end” while other differentiate themselves as “I want to be frugal/resourceful”? Moreover, will there always be a level of same-ness (whether we are all the same in the trend of wanting to be “special” with $100+ jeans, or the same in all wanting to be “different”)? Aren’t these idenifyable cultural shifts just trends because they result from mass movements of same-ness?
3. Do you agree/disagree with Anderson’s statement on page 173 that compared to brick-and-mortar shoppers, online customers have “a lot more help” and that the selection process is “easier” with minimized “post-selection regret”?  My response is that while online is useful for ease in browsing, the benefits are not as strong as Anderson conveys. I recognize the benefits he notes, however, when clothes-shopping I browseonline more than actually purchase online. Suggested products from “people like you” does not always help me know how an item of clothing will fit my body. When shopping online, one must purchase multiple sizes so they can be tried on, or be prepared for lengthy process of mailing-back a return in order to get the size corrected — which will sometimes just drive customers to a brick-and-mortar store anyway.  For example, if I order something online from Nordstrom and it doesn’t fit, I will be likely to “give-up” and just go to Nordstrom in-person to get what I need or to make the return.