Synthetic worlds – real community, real money

“The membrane is allowing not only economic factors to seep through, but social and cultural ones as well. People all over the world are connecting in new ways through the technology moving from a calculation model to one of communication. Our children will grow up knowing people in Africa, Asia and Europe and see it as the norm. They will lose sight of geographical distance and explore cultures and people my grandfather had no chance of meeting. The new world offers limitless expanses of both digital and analog connection and understanding, and brings the world closer together. New social connections can overcome geography, culture, and sometimes even language. Most companies find a team of 25 unruly on a project, but in WoW guilds take part in raids every night creating a sense of group connection and goal achievement. The identities that form in these communities allow people to explore and play with their own identities. The world might not recognize your leadership skills, but you can learn and mature them in a virtual world and then apply them to the real world. All this can create a close, strong bond of friendship and community.”

I think it’s about time that the media began to also cite the usefulness of virtual worlds, besides the usual hype and sensationalism (thanks Mark!).

Another article in my own campus newspaper also cites the usefulness of the Second Life virtual world in education.

Is Multitasking More Efficient?:

“New scientific studies reveal the hidden costs of multitasking, key findings as technology increasingly tempts people to do more than one thing (and increasingly, more than one complicated thing) at a time. “

“The researchers say their results suggest that executive control involves two distinct, complementary stages: goal shifting (“I want to do this now instead of that“) and rule activation (“I’m turning off the rules for that and turning on the rules for this“). Both stages help people unconsciously switch between tasks.”

“Rule activation itself takes significant amounts of time, several tenths of a second — which can add up when people switch back and forth repeatedly between tasks. Thus, multitasking may seem more efficient on the surface, but may actually take more time in the end.”

“Understanding executive mental control may help solve “fundamental problems,” says Meyer, “associated with the design of equipment and human-computer interfaces for vehicle and aircraft operation, air traffic control, and many other activities in which people must monitor and manipulate the environment through technologically advanced devices.”"

This article, and the study that goes with it, seems a bit slanted if you ask me. When I was first told about this piece a sweeping statement was made like: “Oh, kids aren’t multitaskers! Ha, ha! They’re wasting time… Haven’t you seen the new study?” Yet the study only proves that we polychrons are wasting milliseconds… yes, “tenths of a second”… as we switch from task to task. I think the overall assumption or argument that says multitasking wastes time needs more than just milliseconds to convince me.

However, the idea that we can cut out even those few tenths of a second by better understanding our executive controls and innovating our UI now becomes even more appealing to me. I mean… isn’t that the idea behind the dashboard widget and the firefox plugin? To bring the functionality of one thing to another and yet keep the same interface?

Is Multitasking More Efficient?:

“New scientific studies reveal the hidden costs of multitasking, key findings as technology increasingly tempts people to do more than one thing (and increasingly, more than one complicated thing) at a time. “

“The researchers say their results suggest that executive control involves two distinct, complementary stages: goal shifting (“I want to do this now instead of that“) and rule activation (“I’m turning off the rules for that and turning on the rules for this“). Both stages help people unconsciously switch between tasks.”

“Rule activation itself takes significant amounts of time, several tenths of a second — which can add up when people switch back and forth repeatedly between tasks. Thus, multitasking may seem more efficient on the surface, but may actually take more time in the end.”

“Understanding executive mental control may help solve “fundamental problems,” says Meyer, “associated with the design of equipment and human-computer interfaces for vehicle and aircraft operation, air traffic control, and many other activities in which people must monitor and manipulate the environment through technologically advanced devices.”"

This article, and the study that goes with it, seems a bit slanted if you ask me. When I was first told about this piece a sweeping statement was made like: “Oh, kids aren’t multitaskers! Ha, ha! They’re wasting time… Haven’t you seen the new study?” Yet the study only proves that we polychrons are wasting milliseconds… yes, “tenths of a second”… as we switch from task to task. I think the overall assumption or argument that says multitasking wastes time needs more than just milliseconds to convince me.

However, the idea that we can cut out even those few tenths of a second by better understanding our executive controls and innovating our UI now becomes even more appealing to me. I mean… isn’t that the idea behind the dashboard widget and the firefox plugin? To bring the functionality of one thing to another and yet keep the same interface?

Is Multitasking More Efficient?:

“New scientific studies reveal the hidden costs of multitasking, key findings as technology increasingly tempts people to do more than one thing (and increasingly, more than one complicated thing) at a time. “

“The researchers say their results suggest that executive control involves two distinct, complementary stages: goal shifting (“I want to do this now instead of that“) and rule activation (“I’m turning off the rules for that and turning on the rules for this“). Both stages help people unconsciously switch between tasks.”

“Rule activation itself takes significant amounts of time, several tenths of a second — which can add up when people switch back and forth repeatedly between tasks. Thus, multitasking may seem more efficient on the surface, but may actually take more time in the end.”

“Understanding executive mental control may help solve “fundamental problems,” says Meyer, “associated with the design of equipment and human-computer interfaces for vehicle and aircraft operation, air traffic control, and many other activities in which people must monitor and manipulate the environment through technologically advanced devices.”"

This article, and the study that goes with it, seems a bit slanted if you ask me. When I was first told about this piece a sweeping statement was made like: “Oh, kids aren’t multitaskers! Ha, ha! They’re wasting time… Haven’t you seen the new study?” Yet the study only proves that we polychrons are wasting milliseconds… yes, “tenths of a second”… as we switch from task to task. I think the overall assumption or argument that says multitasking wastes time needs more than just milliseconds to convince me.

However, the idea that we can cut out even those few tenths of a second by better understanding our executive controls and innovating our UI now becomes even more appealing to me. I mean… isn’t that the idea behind the dashboard widget and the firefox plugin? To bring the functionality of one thing to another and yet keep the same interface?

Google recently bought Jaiku, a micro-moblogging site (that’s micro-blogging like twitter + mobile blogging) that also keeps track of when you post to your blog (via an RSS feed) and when you post to your flickr. It also posts a timestamped record of what you listened to on iTunes or Last.fm and what you last bookmarked on Del.icio.us. So they take all that info and put it into a feed or “lifestream.”

Now, I teach 2d Foundations and Drawing… which aren’t necessarily heavy on computer use (all my students keep blogs, use a textbook wiki, photoshop, that’s about it). But I was thinking about how great it would be if I did have a feed, or if we all had access, to a “classroom feed” or Classstream that would work something like this:

10:14pm Allison finished 15 thumbnails for homework
1:42am Anthony posted link to article on Fred Wilson
9:37am Bob posted to blog: Principles of Gestalt
12:00pm Johnny needs feedback on sketch for assignment – visit blog
3:30pm Anthony posts picture from Toledo Museum of Art
and so on…

How could you see this useful in your class? In an online class?

Google recently bought Jaiku, a micro-moblogging site (that’s micro-blogging like twitter + mobile blogging) that also keeps track of when you post to your blog (via an RSS feed) and when you post to your flickr. It also posts a timestamped record of what you listened to on iTunes or Last.fm and what you last bookmarked on Del.icio.us. So they take all that info and put it into a feed or “lifestream.”

Now, I teach 2d Foundations and Drawing… which aren’t necessarily heavy on computer use (all my students keep blogs, use a textbook wiki, photoshop, that’s about it). But I was thinking about how great it would be if I did have a feed, or if we all had access, to a “classroom feed” or Classstream that would work something like this:

10:14pm Allison finished 15 thumbnails for homework
1:42am Anthony posted link to article on Fred Wilson
9:37am Bob posted to blog: Principles of Gestalt
12:00pm Johnny needs feedback on sketch for assignment – visit blog
3:30pm Anthony posts picture from Toledo Museum of Art
and so on…

How could you see this useful in your class? In an online class?

Google recently bought Jaiku, a micro-moblogging site (that’s micro-blogging like twitter + mobile blogging) that also keeps track of when you post to your blog (via an RSS feed) and when you post to your flickr. It also posts a timestamped record of what you listened to on iTunes or Last.fm and what you last bookmarked on Del.icio.us. So they take all that info and put it into a feed or “lifestream.”

Now, I teach 2d Foundations and Drawing… which aren’t necessarily heavy on computer use (all my students keep blogs, use a textbook wiki, photoshop, that’s about it). But I was thinking about how great it would be if I did have a feed, or if we all had access, to a “classroom feed” or Classstream that would work something like this:

10:14pm Allison finished 15 thumbnails for homework
1:42am Anthony posted link to article on Fred Wilson
9:37am Bob posted to blog: Principles of Gestalt
12:00pm Johnny needs feedback on sketch for assignment – visit blog
3:30pm Anthony posts picture from Toledo Museum of Art
and so on…

How could you see this useful in your class? In an online class?

Passively Multiplayer or PMOG

The PMOG Research paper

A while back I heard about Justin Hall’s idea for a Passively Multiplayer Online Game that would track your web surfing and give you points. An idea based off of the leveling system used in MMORPGs (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games).

It has occurred to me that much of what has been established as regular practice in e-learning could easily be tracked with such “myware” (spyware that consicoulsy tracks the data your computer generates for personal benefit) and later reported to the teacher in terms of stats and points.

Currently, PMOG only tracks the sites you frequent. Passively, you don’t have to do anything to “play” but go about your normal online lives. However “quests” can be created so that you may actively choose to explore what others have. Further improvements to the game are in development, such as tracking how often/much you contribute to peer production sites like Wikipedia, Flickr, YouTube, etc…

Imagine being able to track a student’s involvement in class by the number of “quests” they complete… quests that the educator, or better yet, the students create. These quests can be based on research, blogging, editing or gathering information, collaboration, or communication.

Also, a fictitious element has been added that divides players (by the data of course) into a certain archetype of internet personality. See pic at left for more info.

There is still a lot of work to be done in the way the system works (it doesn’t actually track how often you blog, post picks, or edit wiki’s at this time). But I see great potential here for:

• engaging the student through competition in rank
• identification of study habits (good or bad)
• easily tracking what materials are most attractive vs. beneficial
• and what Hall calls “Literacy for Personal Data Control” or actively tracking one’s own digital paper trail

As the younger generation continues to dissolve the idea of “privacy”, I see this type of software evolving into a ‘paying’ game, where players are gladly rewarded with currency for completing quests. Many online survey sites already pay (check out opinions2cash.com) and even Google asks to track your web history while you are logged in. By the time we start actively using this in education, our students may already be “playing”.

Passively Multiplayer or PMOG

The PMOG Research paper

A while back I heard about Justin Hall’s idea for a Passively Multiplayer Online Game that would track your web surfing and give you points. An idea based off of the leveling system used in MMORPGs (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games).

It has occurred to me that much of what has been established as regular practice in e-learning could easily be tracked with such “myware” (spyware that consicoulsy tracks the data your computer generates for personal benefit) and later reported to the teacher in terms of stats and points.

Currently, PMOG only tracks the sites you frequent. Passively, you don’t have to do anything to “play” but go about your normal online lives. However “quests” can be created so that you may actively choose to explore what others have. Further improvements to the game are in development, such as tracking how often/much you contribute to peer production sites like Wikipedia, Flickr, YouTube, etc…

Imagine being able to track a student’s involvement in class by the number of “quests” they complete… quests that the educator, or better yet, the students create. These quests can be based on research, blogging, editing or gathering information, collaboration, or communication.

Also, a fictitious element has been added that divides players (by the data of course) into a certain archetype of internet personality. See pic at left for more info.

There is still a lot of work to be done in the way the system works (it doesn’t actually track how often you blog, post picks, or edit wiki’s at this time). But I see great potential here for:

• engaging the student through competition in rank
• identification of study habits (good or bad)
• easily tracking what materials are most attractive vs. beneficial
• and what Hall calls “Literacy for Personal Data Control” or actively tracking one’s own digital paper trail

As the younger generation continues to dissolve the idea of “privacy”, I see this type of software evolving into a ‘paying’ game, where players are gladly rewarded with currency for completing quests. Many online survey sites already pay (check out opinions2cash.com) and even Google asks to track your web history while you are logged in. By the time we start actively using this in education, our students may already be “playing”.

Passively Multiplayer or PMOG

The PMOG Research paper

A while back I heard about Justin Hall’s idea for a Passively Multiplayer Online Game that would track your web surfing and give you points. An idea based off of the leveling system used in MMORPGs (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games).

It has occurred to me that much of what has been established as regular practice in e-learning could easily be tracked with such “myware” (spyware that consicoulsy tracks the data your computer generates for personal benefit) and later reported to the teacher in terms of stats and points.

Currently, PMOG only tracks the sites you frequent. Passively, you don’t have to do anything to “play” but go about your normal online lives. However “quests” can be created so that you may actively choose to explore what others have. Further improvements to the game are in development, such as tracking how often/much you contribute to peer production sites like Wikipedia, Flickr, YouTube, etc…

Imagine being able to track a student’s involvement in class by the number of “quests” they complete… quests that the educator, or better yet, the students create. These quests can be based on research, blogging, editing or gathering information, collaboration, or communication.

Also, a fictitious element has been added that divides players (by the data of course) into a certain archetype of internet personality. See pic at left for more info.

There is still a lot of work to be done in the way the system works (it doesn’t actually track how often you blog, post picks, or edit wiki’s at this time). But I see great potential here for:

• engaging the student through competition in rank
• identification of study habits (good or bad)
• easily tracking what materials are most attractive vs. beneficial
• and what Hall calls “Literacy for Personal Data Control” or actively tracking one’s own digital paper trail

As the younger generation continues to dissolve the idea of “privacy”, I see this type of software evolving into a ‘paying’ game, where players are gladly rewarded with currency for completing quests. Many online survey sites already pay (check out opinions2cash.com) and even Google asks to track your web history while you are logged in. By the time we start actively using this in education, our students may already be “playing”.