Tale of an inefficient review (day 107)

I spent the day reading a thesis today.  I'm an external on a MSc defense on Tuesday.  I'll read it again tomorrow and formulate some questions.   As I was reading I wondered how I could be more efficient at making notes on what I was reading and formulating questions from the notes.  Also wondered how the system could in turn be useful for the student when revisions are necessary.

I prefer reading the thesis on paper and make notes in the margins.  I would prefer the notes be stored electronically with appropriate context.   I don't really want to stop reading to open up my computer and type so perhaps an e-book type of idea would work.  Adobe has done lots of work on a system for review and annotation of documents but I can't say I've ever used it officially.  I've left tons of comments on grad student papers submitted to me as pdf but I haven't enabled a shared review of any kind.   I think it would be useful for my students to dialogue back and forth on the comments.   It's like all the pieces of the puzzle are around but they are just not integrated. 

Ideally, the thesis would be submitted to me on an e-reader with a stylus and could write my comments in the margins.  The review would be shared with the student and other committee members but only after the defense is finished.  While the defense is going on, I would have easy access to my comments (visual list) and could modify them based on the student's input and the input of the other committee members.  After the defense she can look at my comments and ask me more questions.  Each time I open up my e-reader I could see comments that are awaiting a reply.   This would be my ideal situation.  As it is, she will do the same thing that I did: take 3 paper copies with her and flip through to consolidate and address each point.  This is tedious and it may actually miss some crucial points like sections of the thesis that were flagged individually by all committee members for slightly different reasons...pointing to a general problem with the section.  Add to this the fact that I used a black pen to make my comments (should have used red!) and her revision task will not be as efficient as it could be.

A song for this point.

Google waved and people craned their neck to see (day 97)

Google Wave made a splash.  It broke on the beach of cloud tools.   It was a private beach though everyone could see something was going on from the parking lot.  Soon there were paparazzi posting unauthorized pictures, and who you knew became something to be evaluated and mined.   This has happened before.  I remember not having a gmail address.  I remember who did.  I remember how I became in.  How early was I into the wave?  What number was I?  I want to know but much like my Francis Bacon degree of separation (2),  I wonder what such a number really buys me besides social anxiety.  Soon everyone will be in the wave and we'll all be wondering what we're supposed to be doing.

I don't think I've ever opened a tool that confused me as much as Google Wave did at first glance.  It really stumped me.  The feeling was uncanny...like familiar and foreign at the same time and mixed with a unsatisfied anticipation.  I clicked and felt really lonely.  I added some people to my wave.  I said some mundane things like 'what is this for'?  I forgot about it.  I read a report about it.  I came back to it.  There were more people so it felt less crazy to say something less mundane.

I've now figured out that Google Wave is a sort of mix of email,wiki, google docs, and IM.  It's a mix of synchronous and asynchronous.   It may be a replacement for email but the average wave message seems to have more commitment than the average email.  There seems to be more purpose to the wave and more community.  There also seems to be more longevity to the conversations.   So maybe the workflow is that you 'move' email conversations to the wave when they become too complex for email and you need more collaborative authoring.  

The best part is that it's a protocol so it can be reskinned.

A song for this post.

Did I just help you? (day 27)

I have a dilemma.  Do I bring my computer to the Okanagan this weekend so I can write on the blog and not miss a day even though I can't upload (no internet connection), or do I just declare a blog vacation due to a broadband accident?  My obsessive side says bring the computer, there may actually be some cool stuff that happens in the OK.   My adventurous side says no don't bring the computer, do something completely different.  Maybe I'll bring the computer for the option and then see what I feel like when I get there.

Today I went to a great talk at Emily Carr about collaboration.   Jer Thorpe and Simon Levin talked about their projects,  including 'Just Landed', 'Big Picture', 'Glocal', and 'CodeLab'.  An interesting question came up at the end of Jer's talk about the definition of collaboration and whether it is truly a collaborative action to create an art piece or a visualization from data that was contributed freely but with no specific intent toward the author of the visualization or otherwise.   For example. 'Just Landed' takes data from the twitter feed and scans for words that would indicate someone has just arrived in a new location.  The application then looks up where that twitter author comes from and deduces the start and end point of travel in order to visualize it as a dynamic path.   The vast majority of twitter authors whose data was used have no idea the visualization exists.  Is this ok?  For this visualization, I would say yes it's fine and it's wonderful that it was made possible and most people would be pleased to have contributed without having to do anything extra.   The data in 'Just Landed' was anonymized so issues of privacy didn't occur.   But there is a line to be drawn I believe.   That line might just be begged by visualizations because their specific purpose is to make visible derivative data --- trends and patterns.   So while we contribute all kinds of tidbits about ourselves we may not want anyone analyzing that data for things about us that we would rather remain private.  This exact case came up recently when MIT students announced that they could deduce someone's sexual orientation by their list of friends on Facebook.  Well maybe, but should you?  And should you announce that?  In any case, the question remains.  Should there be a pingback when your twitter data gets analyzed for patterns?  Sounds like a logistical nightmare.

The one thing to celebrate is perhaps the overall collaborative intent of sharing such volumes of information.   We obviously didn't have the worst in mind when we slipped into the experiment that is social networking.  That's human nature, and I like that part of it.

Until Tomorrow or Monday,

A song for this post.

A homeless guy fed us

Here's an unlikely story. Steve and I went for a long long walk in Stanley Park last Sunday. We ended going around the sea wall, through the park, out by the lost lagoon and the Heron's colony, and back through St-Paul's towards Yaletown. If this means nothing to you, it's enough to say that it was a 4 hour walk and by the time were were heading home it was 7:30pm.

We were starving and as we walked a short stretch near Davie we could smell the food. Neither of us had any cash or means to get cash. We talked about how crazy it was to be surrounded by food but have no way to access it. We talked about begging. We talked about what it must feel like to be homeless and penniless. We talked about the Vancouver Street Retreat that is being planned. All the while just aching to get home and eat.

Just as we were crossing the last park before getting to our building we run into a homeless guy that Steve had talked to before (Danny). Danny says hello and starts talking to us. We talk for a bit but then tell him that we're very hungry and need to get home. He says "Oh I have food...here! Take this!" and hands us an untouched large portion of chicken fried rice. We feel bad about taking his food but he assures us that he has had 4 pieces of pizza and he's not hungry. Steve heartily digs in.

We keep talking for a bit and we can tell Danny is getting a little anxious. He wants money. It's not clear why but the discussion touches on marijuana...and later beer. Hearing no judgement from us he suddenly admits that he is a 'user' and that he's been lying about the other drugs. He is needing his fix. He needs $10 ("that's how much it costs?" I'm incredulous). But of course we have no money on us. But we're across the street from our apartment...we have money there...he's given us food..and all he wants is a fix. Ok, all morality aside, seems like $10 will make him very happy. I promise to return with $10.

I return a few minutes later with $20 and I give it to him. He then admits that the story about the 4 pieces of pizza is a lie. This is crazy! "Why didn't you eat the food?" He says that the heroine makes him not hungry. I can't tell if this is the complete truth or if he was planning on selling the food the whole time? Or? In any case, he is smiling and telling me he's "going right now" to get a fix at the safe injection site. Just before he leaves he tells me that I shouldn't kid myself, all panhandlers are users.

With all this reading about narrative and fiction and non-fiction and possible world theory, the stories Danny tells are such a mix that they are an invitation to ride uncertain ground without insisting on a truth break.

stardust at home

This image appeared as I was doing my scientific duty at stardust at home. It's time to come clean. I'm addicted to looking for stardust. It's a combination of the delight of finding beautiful images like the one above, a healthy sense of competition, a desire for stardust glory, and yes obsessive compulsion. I had to share.