Showing posts with label google. Show all posts
Showing posts with label google. Show all posts

Saturday, May 18, 2013

OK, Teacher

Jeff Utecht has a post worth reading on his Google I/O Reflection:
If you haven’t seen the demonstration of what is coming to the Chrome Browser than you need to watch this. How does this change the classroom?
The entire search presentation starts at 2:03:41 of this video, and it's worth 15 minutes of your time. If 15 minutes is too long, then just watch the 7 minutes of Johanna Wright's part at 2:11:29.

So, "OK, Google" is interesting and, combined with the other announcements by Google, may truly change "search as we know it" as they claim. But, as Jeff asked, I'm particularly interested in how it might change how we look at our classrooms. If our technology is becoming more and more responsive to our individual needs and requests, shouldn't our schools?

"OK, Teacher, I want to know more about . . ."

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

Stranger Than Fiction

On November 27, 2006, I posted this which said, among other things,
In September of 2015, Google and Apple announce the first shipping quantum computer, the Imagine . . . 
Then later in the presentation,
In April of 2019, Google and Apple announce the EyeMagine, a new version of the Imagine that utilizes a display that is projected onto the user’s retina, eliminating the need for an external display. The EyeMagine is the size of a deck of cards and wirelessly transmits data to the retinal projector mounted on eyeglass frames. The image size is controlled by the user, but can simulate up to a 56 inch display. Most users typically use it as a heads-up display supplement to “real reality”, providing a variety of information about whatever environment they are interacting with.
Last week the New York Times posted this,
That’s because later this year, Google is expected to start selling eyeglasses that will project information, entertainment and, this being a Google product, advertisements onto the lenses. The glasses are not being designed to be worn constantly — although Google engineers expect some users will wear them a lot — but will be more like smartphones, used when needed, with the lenses serving as a kind of see-through computer monitor.
And this week Wired reports,
On Tuesday, IBM revealed that physicists at its Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, New York have made significant advances in the creation of “superconducting qubits,” one of several research fields that could eventually lead to a quantum computer that’s exponentially more powerful than today’s classical computers.

According to Matthias Steffen — who oversees Big Blue’s experimental quantum computing group — he and his team have improved the performance of superconducting qubits by a factor of two to four. “What this means is that we can really start thinking about much larger systems,” he tells Wired, “putting several of these quantum bits together and performing much larger error correction.”

David DiVincenzo — a professor at the Jülich Research Center‘s Institute of Quantum Information in western Germany and a former colleague if Steffen — agrees that IBM’s new research is more than just a milestone. “These metrics have now — for the first time — attained the levels necessary to begin scaling up quantum computation to greater complexity,” he says. “I think that we will soon see whole quantum computing modules, rather than just two- or three-qubit experiments.”
Huh. As I said in that post,
I think this is a case of where the truth will end up being stranger than fiction.
Of course, I also had Google purchasing a controlling stake in Apple in 2013, which is clearly silly. Now that Apple has almost $100 billion in cash and a $500 billion market cap, perhaps they should consider buying Google . . .(Mr. Cook, feel free to call me for advice).

Picture several years from now combining the current versions of the eyeMAGINE, Google Goggles, Siri, Wolfram Alpha and quantum computing. We better get started writing the school policies to ban these things, 'cuz we sure wouldn't want our students to have these capabilities . . .

Yep, stranger than fiction.

Monday, February 22, 2010

Google Apps for Education: Is It the Right Choice for Our Students?

I went to Learning 2.0: A Colorado Conversation (2010 Edition) on Saturday. Scott Elias, Deanna Dykstra and team (with a special shout out to the students that did the streaming) did a great job putting on a worthwhile event.

I think I was a little distracted during the morning sessions for some reason and didn’t contribute much, but settled in during the afternoon. The day ended with some round table discussions, and I participated in one centered on Google Apps for Education. This allowed me to continue a conversation I had been sporadically having with Bud Hunt via email and I brought up a couple of issues that had been troubling me. Now, to be clear, I don’t think anyone else at the table completely shared my concerns, but since they are still troubling me I’m going to share them here on the blog in order to help my own thinking (and perhaps yours).

My first concern is what happens to our students’ stuff when they graduate (or leave the district before that)? Because of the nature of Google Apps for Education, all student work (Docs, Gmail, Sites, Groups, etc.) is tied to their Google Apps domain login, which is very helpful and convenient as long as they are students in our district. The problem comes when they leave – what happens to their stuff? Most – if not all – districts are going to delete student accounts after they leave – which will delete all their stuff.

Now, I know there are ways you can get some or all of your stuff out of Google Apps. It’s fairly easy to download all your files, and I know there are ways to get your emails out. And – depending on the settings in your domain – you may be able to transfer ownership of documents (although we haven’t had any luck with Sites yet) outside of the domain (to your non-apps Google account, for example). But, from my perspective, there are major issues with this. What’s the likelihood of the majority of our students successfully doing this on their own? Either because they don’t think of it (or don’t think of it in a timely fashion before things are deleted), they have technical difficulties, or they can’t imagine wanting to keep any of it in the afterglow of graduating.

The second major issue is their digital footprint. If out students produce stuff that’s worth keeping, and stuff that’s remarkable (employing Seth Godin’s use of that term), then we would hope that other people will have taken note of their work and will reference it. They’ll bookmark it, Diigo it up or Evernote it, use it as a reference, etc. When we delete their account, we delete their footprint. The Google Sites they’ve created? Gone. The Google Docs they’ve published to the web? Possibly gone. (If they transfer ownership outside of the domain I think the URL will stay the same. If they download all their docs it will not.) All the links and digital conversations centered on that work? Broken and incomplete.

Can we address some of those issues (give them directions and procedures for downloading/transferring their docs, talk to them about why they might want to keep their stuff)? Sure, but it seems like a pretty clunky solution to a possibly serious problem, one that we should address before jumping on the Google Apps bandwagon (and still doesn't address the footprint issue). If your school/district is using Google Apps for Education, do you have plans and procedures in place to deal with this? If not, shouldn’t you have had that before you put your students in there?

I know a lot of folks will suggest that not much of what students do in K-12 is worth keeping. There is certainly some truth to that, but I would hope that it’s not completely true. (And that perhaps if we were doing a better job that would change, as what does it say about what we do now that none of it is worth keeping, but I digress).

This all leads to the second question I asked in that round table session: Why go to Google Apps for Education at all? Bud Hunt gave a very good answer, one that I agree with about 80%. I can’t do it justice, but basically he said that it gave our students a platform to work and publish, and to keep that work from year to year throughout their schooling, and that we can manage it as schools/districts, all of which is a big advance over what many of us have now. (Even with three hours of sleep, Bud is much more articulate than I am.)

But my current thinking it that the advantages of going to Google Apps for Education do not necessarily outweigh the disadvantages. In addition to the “worth keeping” and “digital footprint” issues above, add in that their Google Apps domain login doesn’t give them access to all the other Google tools that a non-domain Google account gives them (Reader, Blogger, YouTube, etc. etc. etc.). So if our students want to use those (and I certainly want them to), then they’ll have to create a separate Google account anyway, which adds a layer of complexity and also negates some of the supposed advantages of having a Google Apps domain (ability to manage accounts/passwords; kids have one place to go to get their stuff).

I just can’t help thinking that we’re putting in all this time and effort (including on-going management) to go to Google Apps for Education, when really it gets us less than what we have if we don’t. Not only does it give us less, but it may actually undermine what we want to do with students. If we want them to be safe, effective and ethical users of the Internet, let’s not create a semi-walled (and only temporary) garden that limits their ability to learn, create, publish, distribute and interact. Let’s not hamstring their ability to create a digital footprint that they’ll be proud of. Let’s not put additional barriers in their way that make it more difficult to manage the artifacts of their digital learning and their digital life. (And if this sounds like many of my arguments against many of the Internet filter policies that are currently in place, the resemblance is purely intentional. I wonder if the popularity of Google Apps for Education is at least partially due to the increased level of control it gives us over our students?)

How about instead of spending all this time and effort setting up and managing Google Apps for Education, we spend it teaching our students how to responsibly use the full suite of Google Apps themselves? How about we teach them how to manage all of their digital work, whether it’s with Google or somebody else? How about we teach them backup plans and exit strategies for all these “free” Web 2.0 tools? How about we help them think more intentionally and purposefully about the work they are doing and the footprint they are creating? How about we model the behaviors we’d like to see them imitate?

Which do you think is going to be better for our students in the long run? (I'm truly asking that question, not just making a rhetorical point.)


Photo Credit: Sand Footprint Texture, originally uploaded by Lars Christopher Nøttaasen

Monday, December 07, 2009

Google Goggles: Why Didn’t I Think of That?

So, Google Goggles is now in beta in Google Labs and available on Android phones.
Humorous name aside, the product looks to be a huge leap forward in the field of visual search — by which I mean, you point a camera at something and Google figures out what it is.
Here’s a little video explanation.



As the Tech Crunch article mentions, it’s somewhat similar to ShopSavvy. I’ve used the ShopSavvy demo video in my last couple of presentations, replacing another video I had been using of an iPhone app called Bionic Eye. That made me think of an earlier post of mine where I said:
This is a nice little app for what it does, but imagine what it’s going to evolve into: a portable heads-up display for everything. Yes, right now it lists restaurants, subway stations (in certain cities), and wifi hotspots, but it’s not that hard to extrapolate a few years into the future where this app – or something like it – connects you to all the available information about whatever you’re looking at.

It doesn’t really matter whether it’s on an iPhone-type device, or whether it’s mounted on your eyeglasses, it’s going to be with you effectively 24/7/365 (only “effectively” because you can still choose to turn it off), have 99% uptime, and is going to get better every hour of every day as more information is added to it. Practically every urban location will be geotagged and infotagged (think Google Street View on steroids), extending further and further beyond urban areas with each passing year. In fact, I imagine the app will evolve into a two-way app, with users adding to the database as they go about their daily routines, constantly adding more locations and more data to the database.

Perhaps a few more years down the road artificial intelligence object-recognition software will be embedded, maybe even with some simple sensors to analyze the material it’s looking at, so that the app will be able to peer into just about any object and return information about it’s chemical composition, various useful facts about it, and ways the object can be used.
Huh. Maybe I shouldn't have changed my major.

Seriously, though, the truth is ending up stranger than fiction . . .

Thursday, May 14, 2009

Things Just Changed. Again.

Do you teach math? Science? Geography? Economics? Health? Business? Language Arts?

Wait, let me start over.

Do you teach?

Wait, let me start over again.

Are you alive, and curious?


Okay, that’s better. I think this is worth 13 minutes of your time. Go watch it, then come back.

I believe Wolfram Alpha is supposed to go live tomorrow. It’s obviously still very, very new (will they change its name to Wolfram Beta later? That will mess up the URL’s. Kidding.) It will be interesting to see what kinds of searches lend themselves to this more computational approach and what kinds don’t, but I still think this is another big step in how humans find, access, digest and repurpose information. Designed to “compute answers to your specific questions,” this once again should make us examine what we are doing in our classrooms, and how we should best prepare our students to be successful in an age with this much computational firepower.

What facts (discrete pieces of information?) do we need to know in order to develop deep understandings of important concepts, and what facts can we just google or wolfram (or will the verb be alpha)? What previously unknown relationships might be teased out of the data by the Wolfrom Alpha algorithms, or what will humans looking at this data in new and unique ways discover? What new questions will we learn to ask, or will we learn to ask old questions in new ways? (You can also view a much longer talk by Stephen Wolfram at the Berkman Center. No, I have not watched it all yet.)

Also note that Google is evolving as well. Joyce Valenza has a good summary post over at School Library Journal that discusses the new features. I also thought this quote she shared from a Google presenter was interesting,
If users can’t spell, it’s our problem. If they don’t know how to form the syntax, it’s our problem. If there’s not enough content, it’s our problem.
Hmm. I wonder whose problem it is if our students don’t know how to question, ask/search, find, evaluate, synthesize, repurpose, remix, and solve problems using tools like Google and Wolfrom Alpha?

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Thomas Friedman is Stealing My Ideas

Kidding. But in his latest Op-Ed piece he posits Steve Jobs going to GM and creating the iCar. If you think back to 2020 Vision, I had Apple teaming up with Google, creating the iMagine (and then the EyeMagine), and Google purchasing Ford and creating an electric car with wireless mesh capabilities. I decided to call that car the gCar, not the iCar as Friedman suggests, but I still want royalties.

And, looking back, do you remember who I had as President in 2018? As I said in that post, "I think this is a case of where the truth will end up being stranger than fiction." Umm, yep, I think that was an understatement.

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Google Gets the Flu

Google is using its search trend results to help the CDC fight the flu:
We have found a close relationship between how many people search for flu-related topics and how many people actually have flu symptoms. Of course, not every person who searches for "flu" is actually sick, but a pattern emerges when all the flu-related search queries from each state and region are added together. We compared our query counts with data from a surveillance system managed by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and discovered that some search queries tend to be popular exactly when flu season is happening. By counting how often we see these search queries, we can estimate how much flu is circulating in various regions of the United States.
Bottom line? The CDC has more and better data, but it's delayed data - Google is up to date. Want to see where flu is on the rise right now? Go to Google Flu Trends and take a look at the individual state data. Here's today's take on Colorado:


I think we will see more and more of this - Google (and others) being able to tease meaningful and helpful information out of the humongous data streams. They'll be able to pick up on trends, make hypothesis, and then follow up on the data to test those hypothesis and come to conclusions that humans would either never come up with, or would come up with much later. (Again, this reminds me a little of the data mining inferred in 2020 Vision.)

Wednesday, October 08, 2008

Political Debates 2.0

I ran across a couple of interesting posts from ReadWriteWeb that show the changing nature of politics in a read/write, searchable, always-connected world.

First, this points to a post on the Google blog that includes a real-time graph of search terms during the vice-presidential debate.


Many people were simply interested in understanding the meaning of particular terms. Governor Palin called Senator McCain a "maverick" several times, sending many viewers to Google to query definition of maverick, what is a maverick, and define:maverick.

When Biden mentioned that the "theocracy controls the security apparatus" in Iran, users searched for the meaning of theocracy — as they did when he spoke of the windfall profits tax.
Go read the post as they go on to discuss problems with spelling (nuclear, Ahmadinejad, and McClellan/McKiernan), searching for historical references, and checking on which Article of the Constitution actually talks about the executive branch.

Google also has a new post up on last night’s town hall Presidential Debate:


Similar to last Thursday, people sought to understand the meaning of several words mentioned in the debate: morass, commodity, junket, cynicism, and cronyism to name a few. In the chart below you can see four of the most popular queries during the debate. People were quite interested in both Meg Whitman and Warren Buffett, who were mentioned as potential candidates for the Secretary of Treasury, but the biggest rising query was Senator McCain's paraphrasing of Theodore Roosevelt's motto. Both candidates spoke against genocide while discussing the role of the United States as a peacekeeper, and as we saw in the vice presidential debate, nuclear energy and weapons were prominent topics.
They go on to talk about differences in searches from swing states, which reminds me a little bit of one of the things I was thinking about when I created 2020 Vision (Google having access to so much disparate data and the ability to possibly bring it together in unique ways to discover new “truths” – could be used for good or evil, I know). I think both of these are fascinating examples of how our ability to access information in real-time can make substantive changes in the way we do almost everything.

The second post on ReadWriteWeb had to do with CurrentTV and Twitter’s collaborative broadcast of the first presidential debate.
In 1960 seventy million people watched Kennedy and Nixon engage in the first Presidential debate ever broadcast live on TV.

And not a single viewer could post a comment.

These days things are different. Tonight, far fewer people probably watched the Current.tv and Twitter collaborative broadcast of Obama v. McCain - but scores of them participated, 140 characters at a time. It worked very well. You can get some idea from the 1 minute of video embedded below.




I agree that things are definitely different, but I think I would have trouble watching, listening and reading the tweets. It’s that old multitasking thing again, but some folks can probably do it much better than I can. But whether I like it or not, things are definitely changing. I could see a debate in the near future when the “spinners” from each campaign are doing live text commentary overlaid on top of the video.

Even more interesting and useful, I think, would be delayed text commentary (or even audio or video) overlaid on top of the debate. Where you get some very knowledgeable folks with an historical perspective (and not overly partisan) to give insightful commentary (text, audio, or video) as you view the debate, with links embedded for viewers that want to learn more. What a powerful learning experience that could be, whether you watched the debate live and then watched it again, or perhaps even skip the live debate and just watch the "enhanced" version.

While it would take more time to view the debate that way, I think it has the potential to be much more useful. For me, I’ve always wondered about how valuable the debates really are. I know that’s a somewhat heretical view, but I’m not sure how much being a good debater – particularly the way our current political debates are run – is related to being a good President. It’s such an artificial situation – questions that are unknown in advance and often unrelated to each other, with a limited amount of time to answer them, and without being able to tap into other resources (both information and human resources). Which is why the answers always end up being mostly unsatisfying, playing to sound bites and talking points. I sure hope that’s not how our President operates day to day. (And, yes, the parallels to the artificial situations we have in school are striking, and somewhat depressing.)

When you look at our current presidential candidates, neither one is a particularly good debater. Senator Obama gives a good speech but tends to ramble in a debate. Senator McCain does well in town hall situations, but doesn’t do particularly well in a debate, coming off as too rehearsed and too much of a scold. And, like in pretty much all political debates I’ve seen, they often answer a very different question than the one that was asked. While I think debates can provide some insight into the character of each candidate, I really don’t think that completely parallels how good of a Chief Executive they would be. It’s a setting that will not be repeated as they perform their job duties, yet we continue to act as though the debates are the ultimate test of whether a candidate is prepared to be President. Yes, I want them to be able to function in such a setting, but I don’t think the “best” debater is necessarily going to make the best President.

Sorry for the digression. In any event, I think the read/write/searchable/participatory/real-time/always-connected web has great potential to make citizens much more informed and knowledgeable voters. Just like the ability to access information illustrated by the real-time searching on Google, the ability to connect with others anywhere in the world in real-time (or delayed time, for that matter) can also make substantive changes in the way we do almost everything. And doesn’t that mean schools need to help students learn how to do these things really, really well?

Friday, July 25, 2008

Shift Happens Statistic of the Day

According to the Google Blog, the number of web pages in the Google Index:

              26,000,000 in 1998
        1,000,000,000 in 2000
1,000,000,000,000 in 2008 (July) . . . and growing by "several billion" every day.


Perhaps we do live in exponential times . . .

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

Arapahoe Artists - Your Chance to Doodle 4 Google

Okay AHS students, here's your chance to display your artistic talent:
Welcome to Doodle 4 Google, a competition where we invite K-12 students to play around with our homepage logo and see what they come up with. This year we're inviting U.S. kids to join in the doodling fun, around the intriguing theme "What if...?"
Here are some more details, and it looks like AHS has to register, but I'm pretty sure Hitchens will be happy to do that for you. And while I think having your doodle displayed on the Google home page for 24 hours is enough incentive, there are some other pretty cool prizes.

Saturday, February 02, 2008

Is it 2011 Already?

Okay, first Google invests in solar energy. Now Microsoft is trying to buy Yahoo. Now, admittedly, I didn't have this happening until 2011, but I still think I deserve to get a small cut from these things. (Let's see, 1/100th of 1% of $44.6 billion is . . . anybody have Steve Ballmer's email address?)

What's next? Hmm, it'll be interesting to see the results from Super Tuesday . . .

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Can GooglePanels and the GoogleGrid be Far Behind?

Okay, this is a little scary:

According to Google’s news release, the company “is hiring engineers and energy experts to lead its research and development work, which will begin with a significant effort on solar thermal technology, and will also investigate enhanced geothermal systems and other areas. In 2008, Google expects to spend tens of millions on research and development and related investments in renewable energy. As part of its capital planning process, the company also anticipates investing hundreds of millions of dollars in breakthrough renewable energy projects which generate positive returns.”
Umm, it was exactly one year ago today that I posted 2020 Vision. Hmmmm . . .

Monday, November 19, 2007

Three to Think About

Sometimes I run across things one after another that seem connected to me but I’m not always sure about the connection. So, I’m not going to try to connect the dots this time, but just share and let you make any connections you see.

Amazon announced/released their Kindle e-book reader:

"Books have stubbornly resisted digitization," he elaborated. "I think there's a very good reason for that, and that is, the book is so highly evolved and so suited to its task that it's very hard to displace."

. . . Kindle tips the scales at a total 10.3 ounces--"That's less than a paperback book," Bezos said--and uses an "electronic ink" technology to mimic paper, not a computer screen.

. . . The battery life, company representatives said, will last several days to a week. A charger can juice up the battery in a matter of two hours.

Notably, Kindle does not require a PC for synchronization or any software to be installed. "Instead of shopping from your PC, you shop directly from the device. The store is on the device, and then the content is wirelessly and seamlessly delivered to the device," Bezos explained.

. . . Bezos also announced that dozens of newspapers, from The New York Times to France's Le Monde, would also be available for the device, as well as magazines and 300 of the most popular blogs, such as BoingBoing and Slashdot. "On Kindle, newspapers are delivered while you sleep, automatically," he said. The publications will receive a cut of the subscription fee revenue, as no advertising will be displayed on them.

Additionally, Kindle comes with an electronic dictionary and access to Wikipedia. Each device, as News.com reported, also provides the user with a personal Kindle e-mail address so that word-processing files such as Microsoft Word documents, as well as image files, could be sent to the e-book reader.

Livescribe (via Jeff Whipple, and you really need to watch the three demo animations to get the feel for it):

The Livescribe paper-based computing platform – a smartpen, paper, software applications, and development tools – will be available online beginning in Q1 2008. The smartpen will be less than $200. Additional dot paper will be available at prices comparable to standard paper products.
  • Listen to your class lecture by just tapping on your handwritten notes.

  • View & listen to your notes on your PC and search by keyword.

  • Email your written & audio notes to your classmates or study group.

  • Translate a word or phrase by simply writing it on paper.

  • Download one or more languages to your pen computer.

  • Practice your pronunciation by tapping on a word and listening

  • Write & send a message directly from your notebook.

  • Create & send an animated voice message from your paper.

  • Post a message, drawing or animation (with voice) to your blog or Facebook profile.
Google-backed Genetic Testing Launches (and more):

Google Inc-funded 23andMe launched on Monday and began offering a DNA saliva test for $999 per person, which would help users of the online site learn about their genes, inherited traits, family trees, and participate in research.

"The mission of 23andMe is to take the genetic revolution to a new level by offering a secure, Web-based service where individuals can explore, share and better understand their own genetic information," said Linda Avey, who co-founded 23andMe with Anne Wojcicki.

I think the first two obviously have more in common with each other than the third one, but the phrase “individuals can explore, share and better understand” seemed to sum things up nicely for me.

Any thoughts?