Author: grabe

As we attempt to become more conscious of our energy consumption, we do need to consider the energy demands of our technology. I started thinking about this (again) when I encountered a blog post indicating that Google was using its power as consumer to require chip manufacturers to increase the temperature at which computer chips fail. The server farms Google operates require a hefty investment in energy for cooling and greater tolerance for heat would reduce cooling costs. What I know about the energy demands of server farms I have learned from Tom Friedman (Hot, flat and crowded) and technology does use a lot of energy.

You get a sense of the same issue when you enter a school computer lab. My department’s computer lab is located next to my office and we sometimes run the fan on the air conditioner even in the winter. The windows are sealed so using the air conditioner to pump in some sub zero air is the only way to cool the room.

I operate a high end Macintosh in my office. It turns out the Mac has 4 fans evidently necessary to keep the system functioning. I seldom put much strain on this equipment. The most demanding thing I do (programming) is probably the least demanding of my computer. The power of my old 2e would easily keep up if I know how to work using the command line and could connect to my servers.

I wonder if “thin client” technology would save energy – no hard drive, mostly just the energy to power the monitor on the client side. What about the demands on the server side. Perhaps server farms should be located in North Dakota. At least the cost of cooling in winter should be lower.

I just finished viewing a short video of Maine’s past Governor Angus King talking about the rationale in support of Maine’s 1:1 initiative. Whatever you think of spending for this particular tech initiative, the Governor’s grasp of educational issues and his arguments for technology were impressive.

Watching this video reactivated this uneasy feeling I have had for some time regarding technology innovation in my own region. At one point, I was convinced that North Dakota was a national leader at the K-12 level. We benefited from and hopefully encouraged developments in our neighbor to the east – Minnesota. The days of MECC represented a heady time and I remember making trips to regional conferences and returning with disks of new educational software. Working in higher education, I was convinced that K-12 folks were far ahead of us.

I do not feel this way anymore and I am not sure whom or what to blame. I think NCLB may have taken K-12 folks out of the game. While those of us in higher education are facing ever more frequent calls for demonstrations of accountability, at least we have yet to identify some standardized tests by which this accountability will be measured.

I also think the good times in ND may be a problem. Yes, I am willing to claim these are relatively very good times. We have a regional advantage that includes agriculture at record prices, oil, and Canadian shoppers. In a state with a small population, the amount of money involved from what many would consider unlikely sources can have a significant impact. Unfortunately, these benefits can be distracting. I was convinced when I regarded North Dakota as innovative that this leadership was a function of our rural setting. Distance education and software were an attempt to compensate for a lack of diversity and the limited offerings that are economically feasible in small schools. Perhaps, the innovation evident in Maine stems from similar challenges. Perhaps now there is less local pressure because the political and public pressure to look forward is less intense.

Big mistake!

The relatively recent focus on “cloud computing” has a vaguely familiar feel to those of us who have been involved with technology for a while. Some of my early ed tech research was conducted with a PDP 11/34 mini computer “serving” a dozen “dumb terminals”. The terminals were basically a keyboard and monitor and everyone connected to the same “remote” computer. Remote in this case meant “in another room”.

A recent NY Times article indicates that “thin client” computing may be on the rebound. The “hook” is often financial assuming that many users can share programs (software) and hardware (server) with the result that the work stations can be less powerful and thus less expensive.

Cloud computing is very similar. For example, many users with low end hardware can connect via the Internet and use Google docs rather than invest in many copies of Microsoft Word.

What is the difference? One difference might be the openness/extensiveness of the network. A thin client architecture serving a company is different than an Internet-based service available to everyone. Perhaps a second difference is how completely “clients” must subject themselves to “the system”. One model of the thin client approach assumes users are connecting with the bare minimum of hardware and software and cannot perform actions that allow independence – e.g., storing local copies of work completed. In contrast, Google Apps allows local storage of resources and through the use of Google Gears independence from the Internet.

While some are concerned that cloud computing is a trap, I am concerned only to the extent the options are few and inexpensive opportunities come at the expense of becoming dependent on one or two providers.

Tags: cloud

A warning appeared in my mail box this morning. Writing a scam must be kind of an art – you obviously cannot offer that much information and yet you must convince the recipient you are attempting to address a very specific problem. I am tempted to write back and ask which of my accounts has generated this concern, but it is probably better to just ignore the request.

From emailaccount@antivirus.com

Important notice, harmful virus was detected in your account which can be harmful to our subscriber unit, you are to enter your password here{_______}to set in an anti virus in your user account to clear up this virus so we do need your co-operation in this, because providing us with this personal information we enable us insert in your account information into our anti virus machine for clean up. We are sorry for the inconveniences this might have cost you.

After 48 hours of providing this information you are advise to change up your password.

Failure to do this, we are sorry to let you know that, your account will be deleted immediately to prevent it from arming our subscriber unit.

Fellow fish and “subscriber units”, beware the lures of the phisherperson.

Here is a comment on the present down turn in the economy and the web 2.0 resources we have been promoting for education.

Today, I read comments from several venture capitalists (e.g., Ron Conway) as they offered advise to those they support. The comments expressed concern that while the present financial situation did not originate with online apps and services (like the Internet bubble of a few years ago) tight money would eventually impact tech companies hoping to make their mark with Internet services. The advice was to economize.

Of course, those companies that can find a way to make it through the lean times will likely find they have less competition on the other side. It reminds me of the rise of the Bubba Gump shrimp company – this likely makes no sense unless you are fans of Forest Gump.

My concern is that I invest too much time and perhaps resources I have created in an online (probably free) service that has no way to generate funds. The idea that good services will be bought up by Google, Microsoft, etc. or catch the eye of those with venture capital may not hold in the short term. For example, Yahoo, owner of Flickr, fell below $14 today. Time to back up just in case.