… you can’t win either way … Steal This Comic from xkcd

Related posts:

1. Freebies
2. Still Here
3. Updating

Early impressions:

Good

• Vista installed very easily.
• Tablet functionality is excellent – a vast improvement on the earlier software. Handwriting recognition is much better.
• Aero glass looks good. Even though the graphics score of this machine is only 3.0 it looks great.
• I installed Ultimate Edition so I have access to Media Centre. Looks good – as above. I don’t think that my aging TV card will work under Vista. Might need to find a new one.
• It seems to be more stable than XP. I hope that I am not tempting fate here!
• Ready Boost – it’s happening, and I think I’m faster!

Bad

• I have set Firefox to be my default browser but Vista doesn’t listen – I am not impressed with the fact that I can’t get IE7‘s new tabs to open in the background.
• I haven’t got Remote Desktop or Logmein working to my server yet. I haven’t tried hard though.
• Constant dialogue boxes and “are you sure?” questions could drive me demented very quickly.

EDIT: I am not impressed with having to go to the Microsoft Site and download the Mobilie Device Centre to get my iPaq Pocket PC to synchronise with Vista. That’s something that should have been sorted for RTM.

Indifferent

• The sidebar. Not sure yet.
• I haven’t got the power options sorted yet.

The geek in me wants the latest and greatest operating system on my computer. The pragmatist knows that it’s really important to get my work done on a well functioning computer. At this point I won’t be dropping my XP partition anytime soon. Certainly I’ll get more work done on Vista because it won’t let me do my usual morning’s scoot through FeedDemon opening masses of links in the background for a later peruse . On the other hand I think it could be faster than XP and I haven’t had the annoying 20-30 second freeze that is an annoying ‘feature’ of Tablet Edition on the M00.

There are a couple of things concerning me about Vista – one being the DRM and content protection measures built into the operating system (read here). On the other hand, in my line of work I will be asked to support Vista reasonably early this year.

Related posts:

1. MS Vista
2. Tablet @ Work – Day 1
3. Reinstalling XP Tablet Edition

When it comes to music files, Bill Gates simply had this to say in summary; “People should just buy a CD and rip it. You are legal then.”

Except, of course, if you live in New Zealand.
Full story

Related posts:

1. Legal March
2. Licenced
3. Digital Content Strategy

Will we be able to legaly copy that brand new CD so that we can listen on that lovely new teacher laptop so thoughtfully subsidised by the Ministry of Education? Possibly. Sort of.

Clause (e) is the condition that I can see causing the most confusion and potential grief. Its not at all clear that you can play your music on a work computer, and if you do you probably are required to do so in a private office or with headphones. No listening to your co-workers music allowed! This very limited interpretation is supported by clause (f) which suggests that you have to own any computer you play music on, i.e. no using one provided by your employer. Why do I think we’ve just changed one stupid, unenforceable law for another that will see some workplaces continue to ban digital music… Link

What about copy that DVD for the computer or the media player (generous fellow that Santa bloke)? Possibly. Sort of. We we be allowed to videotape Sunday night’s Christmas movie and watch it next Christmas Eve? Possibly. Sort of. Lend it to a friend? Possibly. Sort of.

The other type of format shifting allowed under the bill is time shifting. This is the provision that makes VCRs legal while simultaneously making that collection of carefully recorded video cassettes on your shelf illegal. Yes, you can record “solely for the purpose of viewing or listening to the recording at a more convenient time” but only if you can’t access it from an on-demand service (and yes that might require a payment). However, you only get to keep that copy for as long as is “reasonably necessary for viewing or listening to the recording at a more convenient time.” Link

As presented in Parliament the bill offers little more than half measures. Whilst there has been some discussion on the web, no one in the ‘mainstream’ media has even approached some of the apparent contradictions and sops offered by this piece of legislation. There is a lot more to the whole thing than just being able to watch a DVD on a phone or video iPod. The bill is about rights of ownership of information and ideas. It’s about whether this country follows other nations into implementing draconian protection measures that may end up being used against innocent consumers and lining the purses of those whose pockets are already deep and full.

It’s time to read and think for ourselves. Some local and overseas blogs have picked up what’s happening and attempted to get the discussion going.
Today’s Hard News (guest Green MP Nandor Tanczos), earlier Russell Brown post and some well thought out background from Stephen Marshall.

Also

Synthetic Thoughts

Gadgetophile

Kim Weatherall

Related posts:

1. Ripper
2. Format Shifting
3. Linkeracy – 13th March 2008

This morning’s Sunday Star Times had a spend-up-before -Christmas glossy about some of the exciting new technologies available to consumers at the moment. Apart from giving some computer buying advice that was well out of date (60-80GB hard drive anyone?), the mag had some information about digital audio and video players – MP3 players to most of us.

To most people, you buy your iPod / MP3 player and copy your CDs onto the large empty space. Then you copy all of your friends’ CDs. At some point, people over 40 contemplate copying their entire vinyl collection to their computers and iPods. Most give up when they remember they haven’t got a turntable or find out what a new needle costs.

The problem is that under existing New Zealand law it’s illegal to copy your CDs onto the music player that you just (legally) bought. I’m often asked in professional development sessions about how to do this and teachers are incredulous when I explain what the law says and talk about the implications. Then they’ll ask about downloading music. When I point them to Coketunes or Ampifier they look at me even more incredulously – music is supposed to be free right?

One evening last week I took a cruise around the web and found myself at Sarah McLachlan’s website. I discovered that she had a new album out and decided to listen to a few tracks. I liked what I heard so headed to a couple of NZ sites to see if I could get the CD. $50 to bring it in. I headed back to Sarah’s own site and disovered that I could downlaod the entire album for $9.99 – Canadian dollars of course. Furthermore,

“All audio downloads are available in the popular MP3 format, encoded at 192kbps. The files are not encrypted with digital rights management or copy protection software. Offering this format puts no obstacles in the way of you enjoying your music on your computer, transferring it to your media player, or burning it to CD. This format puts an amount of trust in you to obey copyright laws and not share your files. ” link

Of course I paid my money and downloaded the MP3s. I have the songs on my computer and will pop them onto my MP3 palyer for when I’m away from my computer.

I like this trusted copyright model. The artist (label?) has entrusted me with the right to play her music as and when I choose. I’m perfectly happy to comply with the request to keep the files to myself. Ten bucks Canadian – less than $14 in our currency. What could be better?

Could musicians and their labels in New Zealand do a similar thing? Of course they could. Would New Zealand consumers respect the model? With realistic pricing models like this one and with more information I think that they world. Someone just has to make a start.

Related posts:

1. Ripper
2. Legal March
3. A New Voice

“The draft New Zealand Digital Content Strategy is a sub-strategy of the Digital Strategy, and is the government’s five-year vision for unlocking New Zealand’s stock of content and providing all New Zealanders with seamless, easy access to the information that is important to their lives, businesses and cultural identity.”

This is an important document for digital citizens to read. It seeks to address the debate about the ownership and management of digital information. A bit like the draft curriculum, this is a document that is out there for public consumption and comment.
The draft categories three types of content – formal, informal and commercial. Russell Brown (who has been part of the development of the strategy) has already developed this threefold categorisation further. Russell says,

“…you can spend years strategising and still be stuck with a basically top-down model that institutionalises all decisions and fails to capture the dynamism that drives the Internet community. The emphasis here remains on the institutional capture of both content and decisions about content.”

And further (as may interest Artichoke)

“I’d like to know how a New Zealand Creative Commons licence will interact with the generally obstructive practice of Crown Copyright, for one thing.” (italics added by me)

New Zealand has not yet adopted a localised Creative Commons license. Those of us that do slap a Creative Commons license on our blogs, photos or other works are doing so in hope that at some point the license will have some formal standing in New Zealand. There is a group that is working towards the New Zealand “jurisdiction-specific” license. It’s possible to follow some of the work being done by subscribing to the Creative Commons – New Zealand Mailing List.
I hope that the Draft Digital Content document gets people thinking and talking about digital content and ownership and all of the surrounding issues.

Related posts:

1. The Digital Strategy
2. Content Sharing
3. Licenced

“Trusted computing and digital rights management are complementary technologies that are beginning to be deployed internationally. They are expected to become commonplace. Although they may offer benefits, they will also introduce potential risks to the integrity of government-held information. In 2006, a New Zealand government working group, established under the E-government Interoperability Framework (e-GIF), developed principles and policies regarding government use of these technologies to mitigate the risks. Government-wide principles and policies will ensure a common approach, and reduce the prospect of inconsistencies and interoperability issues.”

Too much information? Too many big words?

This DRM and trusted computing business is all part of New Zealand’s digital strategy. As that website says, the digital strategy is:

“…a strategy for ensuring New Zealand is a world leader in using information and technology to realise our economic, environmental, social and cultural goals. The Digital Strategy isn’t just about technology … it’s about people and their ability to connect to the things that matter to them.”

The digital strategy is the way that our government belives that we are going to be able to move from being a twentieth century agricultural economy to a twenty-first century ‘knowledge economy. It’s all about getting back up the OECD rankings.

They say that, “agreeing on a common set of principles and policies that reflect their requirements, governments can more effectively influence ICT product vendors to develop standards and features that will meet these requirements“? So, the NZ government are planning on setting up systems that will be used by other goverments around the world.

Does this matter?

Of course it does. DRM (digital rights management) is a lot more than the technology that stops you ripping a DVD or sharing your downloaded music with your mates. This could be expanded to the way that things are done or the way that information and ideas are accessd. Potentially this could mean that we Kiwis woiuld be unable to look at a government website unless we used a web browser of their choice. Given the choices would that be a web browser developed under open souce (Firefox) or one developed by Microsoft or Apple?

And what about our part in this as educationalists? We need to do some reading and do some thinking and talking. We are part and parcel of delivering the government’s digital strategy. Think about it.

I wish that I could claim some orignal thought about all of this. Sadly I can’t. In fact I am also saddened by the fact that I didn’t find out about this by reading our local media. I discovered this through BoingBoing.net.

“Cory Doctorow, of the University of Southern California Annenberg Center for Public Diplomacy and a contributor to the high-profile technology weblog boingboing, wrote yesterday that the guidelines make no mention of what he calls “the disastrous impact of DRM on open source”, despite the government’s official policy of encouraging open source.” ZDNet, Australia

The first ZDnet post (Rob O’Neill)

Cory Doctorow’s first post

ZDnet’s second post (Rob O’Neill)

Cory’s second post

Related posts:

1. Digital Content Strategy
2. The Digital Magimix
3. Format Shifting