One of my more random blog posts, but inspired by a tweet from @andytuk:
These are games from the BBC micro, C64 and other retro machines I would like to see either emulated or re-coded into new versions to play on the iPad/iPhone - in no particular order:
C64 versions:
Impossible Mission
TrollyWally - for the music more than the game
Little Computer People
BBC versions:
Thrust
Sentinel
Arkanoid
Llamatron
Hampstead
HHG2TG
The Hobbit
Repton 1, 2, 3
Airlift
Arcadians
Starship commander
Elite (this was the game mentioned that started me thinking)
Exile
Thunderstruck
Citadel
Manic miner
Jet set willy
Castle Quest
Alien 8
Nightlore
Sabre wolf
Uncle Claude
Imogen
Chuckie Egg
Frak!
Cholo
Others:
Speedball
Gobbiins 1, 2
Barbarian
Tempest
I'm very aware (having played many of these recently on emulators) that they would really need sprucing up to stand up today, but they all had that "just one more game" element to their gameplay that many more visually polished modern games lack.
Ah, e by gum an' by 'eck, I remember when all this was fields...or Mode 2 graphics. :)
- Posted using BlogPress from mobile device
2010/05/31
Thoughts on an iPad - so far
Prompted by a question on twitter from @jamesclay @markpower I thought I'd take a moment to record my feelings about the iPad having used one now for a few days.
First the obvious - it is a big iphone/ipod (could be either depending if you get the 3G or not and if you count the iPhone 'phone' features as relevant). That's fine for me as this was exactly what I was looking for and it's certainly working as a casual web surfing/tweeting/etc platform while watching TV.
Also obvious to anyone who's held one - it's heavy. Thin, well made and satisfying to hold but certainly heavy. Ideally for me it needs to be less than half the weight to allow me to hold it comfortably for long periods of web browsing, but the stand held, as does adopting strange postures resting the weight on different parts of the body.
I had anticipated all the existing iPhone apps I'd invested in (even the free ones requiring an investment of time to get used to) to work, and so far I've not been disappointed. However, the native iPad apps taking advantage of the drastically improved screen space put the iPhone apps to shame and so I've ended up hunting down many native iPad versions/equivalents for the same apps instead. I doubt many people would want to put up with the scaled up graphics of iPhone apps when there are native alternatives as the improvement is dramatic.
Some of the first new apps I invested in were the Apple office productivity apps, Pages, Numbers and Keynote as demonstrated in the keynote launch as I have in mind using the iPad in work - and also to be able to advise colleagues on their utility. I'm pleased to say they seem very useful, although I have yet to really try them in earnest for real work. The key for me will be how easily I can adopt a working practice which will give me access to the docs I need to refer to in meetings and create notes at the same time. I suspect it will remain a compromise compared to a "real computer" at least until OS4 and some semblance of multi-tasking.
The next app I tried was the Apple iBooks as I know a lot of people are interested in the iPad as a new publishing revolution. The apps seems OK as reader apps go, although it doesn't appear to allow annotation of the books which is a major omission for me. The book store seems slick and easy to use - yet again Apple making it very easy to part you from your money - but the book prices are excessive in my view. If e-books are really going to work, they need to offer either a significant saving over the physical versions, or provide valuable additional content/features. The Alice In Wonderland Book app is an example of how the platform can add a whole new level of involvement and 'magic' to books, but unless that is replicated with other books, personally I'd prefer a paperback to reading on the iPad screen and paperbacks are much nicer to hold to read than the too heavy iPad.
Before I reflect on the other apps I've tried, a few notes on the additional peripherals I've got.
The wireless bluetooth keyboard works very well. Its a standard Apple device designed for the Macs primarily and as such, it lacks a few of the dedicated iPad keys which the dock keyboard includes (home button in particular). This is slightly irksome, but not a show stopper. I've not been able to replicate the issue I'd read on the net of losing the onscreen keyboard if you don't "unpair" the wireless keyboard first. Once paired, I've found I can just switch off the keyboard and the iPad makes the onscreen keyboard available again.
The dock - simple but effective. It is a pity you can only dock the iPad in portrait orientation though, particularly as the nice photo frame feature means the majority of the photos are scaled down and only use a fraction of the screen.
The Photo connection kit - I've only tried the SD card reader so far which works OK but has crashed frequently when selecting more than only a few photos to selectively import. I haven't found a pattern to this yet but my guess is a memory leak in the built in app.
I haven't tried the VGA out converter yet but I have previously used the composite video out cable on the iPhone and I'm expecting it to just work. In case anyone didn't realise, this doesn't replicate the whole device onto the external video. It is only certain apps which support it.
I haven't yet configured the SIM I bought to try the 3G network to judge that aspect. I only got the 3G version for the few times I'll be out of wifi signal range so this hasn't been a priority.
Wifi reception seems OK although not quite as strong as the iPhone in my flat. It is much quicker however, boasting approx 80% quicker downloads according to Speedtest.net app.
The Apple default carry case is best described as 'functional', but I suspect I'll be investing in an alternative quite soon.
The built in apps have all be improved over the iPhone versions. Perhaps the most important such app for me is the Mail. This no longer has the modal approach and presents the choice of e-mails/folders alongside the current open e-mail. The spell checker now built into the OS certainly helps too (which the iPhone will have with OS4).
The App store emphasises iPad specific apps much more than I had expected. It's actually quite difficult to just browse iPhone apps now and although they do still show up in search results, they have been depreciated to a bottom separate list. The app store is more irritating to browse than the iPhone version as it's slower to move from page to page in the results and loses it's place in a long list frequently when returning to the list after looking at the details of an app. With long lists that are slow to scroll through, this makes older/less popular apps almost impossible to stumble upon.
iTunes however is a much improved experience. It presents the information more clearly and works quicker.
The calendar app is a joy compared to the iPhone. It's like opening a real diary compared to trying to use one through a keyhole. Its still (currently) limited in the same ways as the iPhone app - only able to connect to one Exchange account, unable to configure which calendar appears in which colour, incorrectly shading whole days for all day events even when the events are flagged to be "free" etc, but it's a big improvement.
Other apps:
RSS reader choice - News Rack. I used and liked MobileRSS on the iPhone, and while this still works on the iPad, it's only in scaled up graphics form so I looked for a native iPad equivalent. I wanted something that would sync with Google reader in particular and settled on News Rack. It offers integration features with InstaPaper, Twitter, Facebook, email etc. can provide downloaded cached reading and offers a simple toggle between RSS and web view. There may be other apps which are better as I haven't tried others, but I did read all the blurb and reviews on all the RSS apps before making my choice. I was tempted by the Star Trek inspired LCARS Rss reader app, and I may go back to have that just as a gimmick as using the iPad does feel very Star Trek :)
Blogging - BlogPress which I already had for the iPhone also provides a native iPad experience and so I'm sticking with it.
Twitter - Twitterific. I prefer SimplyTweet on the iPhone, mostly for giving me an indication of how many unread tweets there are in my stream so I can adjust the depth to which I read or skim according to how much time I wish to give it, but there doesn't appear to be a native iPad version of this so far. The iPhone version works, but the text suffers a lot from the scaling. I've also tried Tweetdeck which works well too but I don't like how that scrolls to the most recent tweets on start up - I prefer starting at the oldest unread tweets and moving forward in time.
Office apps - Office2 HD. This seems a well featured MS Office like tool with reasonable compatibility (some reports of issues with older Office docs). I basically got this as a backup for the Apple apps and because it offers loading/saving to google docs / mobileME and other WebDAV storage options, which could be more convenient than the Apple sync through iTunes approach.
Note taking - Daily Notes. I like the look of this app for keeping reflective journals under different categories which I think will prove useful. Time will tell.
Remote Desktop - RDP. I've used this app for a while on the iPhone to access my Work PC when I really need the software only available on it and I'm delighted with the improvement the same app provides on the iPad. It effectively gives me a full Windows 7 experience in my hand. If only it was able to automatically start the VPN connection needed rather than having to start that manually.
Fun Stuff - I haven't tried many iPad specific games (yet), but here's a list of entertainment type apps I have tried:
WeatherPro HD - I've used the iPhone equivalent to this for a while and I like the radar and satellite views as well as the detailed breakdown of expected weather factors. It's apparently possible for me to transfer the paid for in app purchase of more detailed info I have on the iPhone to the iPad too, but it's not supported directly within the app yet but I will do this eventually.
F1 Timing '10 CP - if you like watching F1, this app makes it much more engaging, but it's not cheap. It only lasts one season and it works out about £1 a race, but the detailed track view with real time tracking of the cars, detailed timing screen and live news feed works well as an accompaniment - particularly on the races with little overtaking when the exact gaps on track for pit stops / traffic etc are all invisible but vital to the result.
IMDB - yes, the web site works but this app makes searching and navigating the info much easier and quicker.
SketchBook Pro - a 'mini-photoshop' complete with layers, blending effects etc. Again, I've used the iPhone equivalent of this for a while and it's drastically better on the larger iPad screen. Anyone who thinks the iPad is just for consuming content should try this app. (they should also note this whole post was created on the iPad :)
Flickr Photos - makes browsing flickr as easy as the local photo albumn
Web Albums - the same for Picasa. What would be great is an app that worked as well as these that also worked with Flickr/Picasa/MobileMe etc albums, but for now I need separate apps.
Wikipanion - obviously a Wikipedia browser that works well.
Plane Finder HD - anyone who looked at the images of the empty skies due to the ash cloud on the web/flash based site will recognise this. Its the same experience but without the flash. I don't really have a use for this except passing interest but it works well and might be useful for frequent flyers.
That's it for now. I've only had a few days with it so my views my change. I'd be interested to hear how others get on :)
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
First the obvious - it is a big iphone/ipod (could be either depending if you get the 3G or not and if you count the iPhone 'phone' features as relevant). That's fine for me as this was exactly what I was looking for and it's certainly working as a casual web surfing/tweeting/etc platform while watching TV.
Also obvious to anyone who's held one - it's heavy. Thin, well made and satisfying to hold but certainly heavy. Ideally for me it needs to be less than half the weight to allow me to hold it comfortably for long periods of web browsing, but the stand held, as does adopting strange postures resting the weight on different parts of the body.
I had anticipated all the existing iPhone apps I'd invested in (even the free ones requiring an investment of time to get used to) to work, and so far I've not been disappointed. However, the native iPad apps taking advantage of the drastically improved screen space put the iPhone apps to shame and so I've ended up hunting down many native iPad versions/equivalents for the same apps instead. I doubt many people would want to put up with the scaled up graphics of iPhone apps when there are native alternatives as the improvement is dramatic.
Some of the first new apps I invested in were the Apple office productivity apps, Pages, Numbers and Keynote as demonstrated in the keynote launch as I have in mind using the iPad in work - and also to be able to advise colleagues on their utility. I'm pleased to say they seem very useful, although I have yet to really try them in earnest for real work. The key for me will be how easily I can adopt a working practice which will give me access to the docs I need to refer to in meetings and create notes at the same time. I suspect it will remain a compromise compared to a "real computer" at least until OS4 and some semblance of multi-tasking.
The next app I tried was the Apple iBooks as I know a lot of people are interested in the iPad as a new publishing revolution. The apps seems OK as reader apps go, although it doesn't appear to allow annotation of the books which is a major omission for me. The book store seems slick and easy to use - yet again Apple making it very easy to part you from your money - but the book prices are excessive in my view. If e-books are really going to work, they need to offer either a significant saving over the physical versions, or provide valuable additional content/features. The Alice In Wonderland Book app is an example of how the platform can add a whole new level of involvement and 'magic' to books, but unless that is replicated with other books, personally I'd prefer a paperback to reading on the iPad screen and paperbacks are much nicer to hold to read than the too heavy iPad.
Before I reflect on the other apps I've tried, a few notes on the additional peripherals I've got.
The wireless bluetooth keyboard works very well. Its a standard Apple device designed for the Macs primarily and as such, it lacks a few of the dedicated iPad keys which the dock keyboard includes (home button in particular). This is slightly irksome, but not a show stopper. I've not been able to replicate the issue I'd read on the net of losing the onscreen keyboard if you don't "unpair" the wireless keyboard first. Once paired, I've found I can just switch off the keyboard and the iPad makes the onscreen keyboard available again.
The dock - simple but effective. It is a pity you can only dock the iPad in portrait orientation though, particularly as the nice photo frame feature means the majority of the photos are scaled down and only use a fraction of the screen.
The Photo connection kit - I've only tried the SD card reader so far which works OK but has crashed frequently when selecting more than only a few photos to selectively import. I haven't found a pattern to this yet but my guess is a memory leak in the built in app.
I haven't tried the VGA out converter yet but I have previously used the composite video out cable on the iPhone and I'm expecting it to just work. In case anyone didn't realise, this doesn't replicate the whole device onto the external video. It is only certain apps which support it.
I haven't yet configured the SIM I bought to try the 3G network to judge that aspect. I only got the 3G version for the few times I'll be out of wifi signal range so this hasn't been a priority.
Wifi reception seems OK although not quite as strong as the iPhone in my flat. It is much quicker however, boasting approx 80% quicker downloads according to Speedtest.net app.
The Apple default carry case is best described as 'functional', but I suspect I'll be investing in an alternative quite soon.
The built in apps have all be improved over the iPhone versions. Perhaps the most important such app for me is the Mail. This no longer has the modal approach and presents the choice of e-mails/folders alongside the current open e-mail. The spell checker now built into the OS certainly helps too (which the iPhone will have with OS4).
The App store emphasises iPad specific apps much more than I had expected. It's actually quite difficult to just browse iPhone apps now and although they do still show up in search results, they have been depreciated to a bottom separate list. The app store is more irritating to browse than the iPhone version as it's slower to move from page to page in the results and loses it's place in a long list frequently when returning to the list after looking at the details of an app. With long lists that are slow to scroll through, this makes older/less popular apps almost impossible to stumble upon.
iTunes however is a much improved experience. It presents the information more clearly and works quicker.
The calendar app is a joy compared to the iPhone. It's like opening a real diary compared to trying to use one through a keyhole. Its still (currently) limited in the same ways as the iPhone app - only able to connect to one Exchange account, unable to configure which calendar appears in which colour, incorrectly shading whole days for all day events even when the events are flagged to be "free" etc, but it's a big improvement.
Other apps:
RSS reader choice - News Rack. I used and liked MobileRSS on the iPhone, and while this still works on the iPad, it's only in scaled up graphics form so I looked for a native iPad equivalent. I wanted something that would sync with Google reader in particular and settled on News Rack. It offers integration features with InstaPaper, Twitter, Facebook, email etc. can provide downloaded cached reading and offers a simple toggle between RSS and web view. There may be other apps which are better as I haven't tried others, but I did read all the blurb and reviews on all the RSS apps before making my choice. I was tempted by the Star Trek inspired LCARS Rss reader app, and I may go back to have that just as a gimmick as using the iPad does feel very Star Trek :)
Blogging - BlogPress which I already had for the iPhone also provides a native iPad experience and so I'm sticking with it.
Twitter - Twitterific. I prefer SimplyTweet on the iPhone, mostly for giving me an indication of how many unread tweets there are in my stream so I can adjust the depth to which I read or skim according to how much time I wish to give it, but there doesn't appear to be a native iPad version of this so far. The iPhone version works, but the text suffers a lot from the scaling. I've also tried Tweetdeck which works well too but I don't like how that scrolls to the most recent tweets on start up - I prefer starting at the oldest unread tweets and moving forward in time.
Office apps - Office2 HD. This seems a well featured MS Office like tool with reasonable compatibility (some reports of issues with older Office docs). I basically got this as a backup for the Apple apps and because it offers loading/saving to google docs / mobileME and other WebDAV storage options, which could be more convenient than the Apple sync through iTunes approach.
Note taking - Daily Notes. I like the look of this app for keeping reflective journals under different categories which I think will prove useful. Time will tell.
Remote Desktop - RDP. I've used this app for a while on the iPhone to access my Work PC when I really need the software only available on it and I'm delighted with the improvement the same app provides on the iPad. It effectively gives me a full Windows 7 experience in my hand. If only it was able to automatically start the VPN connection needed rather than having to start that manually.
Fun Stuff - I haven't tried many iPad specific games (yet), but here's a list of entertainment type apps I have tried:
WeatherPro HD - I've used the iPhone equivalent to this for a while and I like the radar and satellite views as well as the detailed breakdown of expected weather factors. It's apparently possible for me to transfer the paid for in app purchase of more detailed info I have on the iPhone to the iPad too, but it's not supported directly within the app yet but I will do this eventually.
F1 Timing '10 CP - if you like watching F1, this app makes it much more engaging, but it's not cheap. It only lasts one season and it works out about £1 a race, but the detailed track view with real time tracking of the cars, detailed timing screen and live news feed works well as an accompaniment - particularly on the races with little overtaking when the exact gaps on track for pit stops / traffic etc are all invisible but vital to the result.
IMDB - yes, the web site works but this app makes searching and navigating the info much easier and quicker.
SketchBook Pro - a 'mini-photoshop' complete with layers, blending effects etc. Again, I've used the iPhone equivalent of this for a while and it's drastically better on the larger iPad screen. Anyone who thinks the iPad is just for consuming content should try this app. (they should also note this whole post was created on the iPad :)
Flickr Photos - makes browsing flickr as easy as the local photo albumn
Web Albums - the same for Picasa. What would be great is an app that worked as well as these that also worked with Flickr/Picasa/MobileMe etc albums, but for now I need separate apps.
Wikipanion - obviously a Wikipedia browser that works well.
Plane Finder HD - anyone who looked at the images of the empty skies due to the ash cloud on the web/flash based site will recognise this. Its the same experience but without the flash. I don't really have a use for this except passing interest but it works well and might be useful for frequent flyers.
That's it for now. I've only had a few days with it so my views my change. I'd be interested to hear how others get on :)
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
2010/05/20
BSL songs - Imagine
As I mentioned in the previous blog post about why I've started to learn British Sign Languge, I was inspired by watching someone sign along with a choir.
Recently, I've been trying to learn the signs for this song as practice - particularly as it was used in the TV show Glee (yes, I watch it, so what? :) and just found this guy on YouTube who has produced signed versions of many songs. Take a look, see if you agree it actually adds something to the song to see it signed:
Recently, I've been trying to learn the signs for this song as practice - particularly as it was used in the TV show Glee (yes, I watch it, so what? :) and just found this guy on YouTube who has produced signed versions of many songs. Take a look, see if you agree it actually adds something to the song to see it signed:
2010/05/16
British Sign Language - reflections and resources
I've been learning British Sign Language (BSL) for a few weeks now, and I've been collecting online resources to help support my learning along side the weekly 2 hour long traditional face-to-face instructor lead sessions, and I thought it might be useful to reflect on my experience to date and also group together those resources in one place.
Why did I want to learn BSL?
Well, in my youth, I read a book called "Dune" (also a film) which included in it the concept of 'secret hand languages' that the protagonists used to convey secret conversations while overtly talking about completely different subjects, and that started my facination with sign language. I was also inspired when I saw a choir perfrom in America with a sign interpreter who I felt added an additional emotional nuance to the performance in addition to the music and singing. Most recently, a collegue of mine approached me if I could support her learning BSL as a proffesional development to provide an additional string to her customer service skills, which I was glad to be able to do. That was the final nudge I needed to actually get around to start learning BSL myself too.
So, what is it like to learn BSL?
Well, in a word - fun. The instructor I'm sure has a lot to do with that, but so to does the diverse group of people I'm learning it with, and so too does the process of learning a new language in itself.
I've learned (a basic level of) French and German many years ago and I always enjoyed learning those new languages too, and BSL is definately a language in it's own right - recognised as such formally by the British Government in 2003 following on from research into American Sign Language back in the 60's acording to the booklet we're given :-). It's worth noting that contrary to perhaps popular belief, sign language is NOT international with significant variation between countries. In fact, one of the aspects I keep finding most challenging is the amount of variation even within the UK, which is directly akin to dialects in spoken English.
As a result of these regional variations, I find it difficult so far to differentiate between some different signs which are interchangable due to local variations (the sign for red having 3 different signs at least) and others where there is a "correct" sign but where it varies due to context (eg evening - which seems to have 2 distinct signs, one for when something is looking ahead "I'll see you this evening" and another for when its an 'ending' "Good evening"....but I may have the reasons why you use one or the other wrong!)
Initially, the learning process is quite intimidating as you are instructed to "turn off" your voice and that everything - EVERYTHING, should be done in sign right from the start. This is akin to some language learning I have experienced where the entire class is to be conducted "Auf Deutch", but is somehow more intimidating initially as using your voice is so ingrained.
Before starting the classes, I had spent some time learning the alphabet in finger spelling and a few phrased I thought might be useful ("I'm sorry, I missed that, again please" etc), but almost immediately I hit the issue of regional variations as at least 1 of the letters I'd learned from YouTube clips were taught subtly differently (B). However, I was glad that I had done this pre-work as it allowed me to pick up many of the more subtle details right from the start.
The grammar for BSL is different to English, and that's still something I'm getting to grips with. We're told that the structure of phrases always puts the object first - so "Where do you work?" becomes "Work where you?". I'm mostly getting this right now (I think) by just imagine it's Yoda speaking, but some phrases I keep getting wrong yet as it just doesn't feel like it flows correctly to me, but it's getting more natural with practice.
The DVD provided in the matterials in the first class was also quite intimdating initially. The content has no subtitles or audio to help one follow the signing and the participants seem to be signing at 1000mph and way to quick to follow initially, but 5 weeks in now when I watch it all again, it's already becoming "obvious" what they are saying and only feels a little too quick to follow easily.
One interesting thing I've realised is that I'm "hearing" what people are signing now without consiously translating things, and I'm begining to be able to sign things as I think them without consiously thinking about the right sign - but it's very early days for this to be completely unconscious yet.
As with any learning, the secret seems to be practice, practice and more practice. Unfortunately, I don't have someone good at signing I can practice with that regularly, but I do try to watch programmes on TV with a signer and I try to sign along with people as they talk on TV. I also try to sign along with song lyrics as I listen to them. My range of vocabularly is way too small to do this practically and my finger spelling for the words I don't know how to sign is always going to be too slow, but the practice certainly feels like it's helping :)
Anyhow, on to the online resources I've identified so far:
British Deaf Association:
http://www.bda.org.uk/
British Sign Language:
http://www.britishsignlanguage.com/
...includes this useful list of signs:
http://www.britishsignlanguage.com/words/groups.php?id=3
SignStation (perhaps my favorite resouce so far):
http://www.signstation.org/
...which includes this mobile version of a sign dictionary:
http://www.signstation.org/mobile/
Deaf Station
http://www.deafstation.org/
Part of deafstation - a collection of Phrases:
http://www.deafstation.org:8080/phrase_book/pb/English_BSL_Menu.wisdom
...and a mobile version of the same:
http://www.deafstation.org:8080/phrase_book/pb/English_BSL_Menu.wisdom?userAgentEQUALSgprs_xhtml
iPlayer SignZone (useful to practice watching TV with a signer):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/categories/signed/?page=1
Sonia Hollis YouTube content:
http://www.youtube.com/user/soniahollis#p/u/6/IDWaisildX0
An interactive sign dictionary (aimed at children and some quite different to what is taught on the course) - needs Shockwave:
http://www.learnbsl.org/learnbsl.html
Royal Association for Deaf people:
http://www.royaldeaf.org.uk/
Useful book:
The Easy Way Guide to Signing available from http://www.jakbooks.com/
Plymouth School of British Sign Language:
http://www.bsl-plymouth.org/index.html
(I will probably add more to this list as I find them later)
Why did I want to learn BSL?
Well, in my youth, I read a book called "Dune" (also a film) which included in it the concept of 'secret hand languages' that the protagonists used to convey secret conversations while overtly talking about completely different subjects, and that started my facination with sign language. I was also inspired when I saw a choir perfrom in America with a sign interpreter who I felt added an additional emotional nuance to the performance in addition to the music and singing. Most recently, a collegue of mine approached me if I could support her learning BSL as a proffesional development to provide an additional string to her customer service skills, which I was glad to be able to do. That was the final nudge I needed to actually get around to start learning BSL myself too.
So, what is it like to learn BSL?
Well, in a word - fun. The instructor I'm sure has a lot to do with that, but so to does the diverse group of people I'm learning it with, and so too does the process of learning a new language in itself.
I've learned (a basic level of) French and German many years ago and I always enjoyed learning those new languages too, and BSL is definately a language in it's own right - recognised as such formally by the British Government in 2003 following on from research into American Sign Language back in the 60's acording to the booklet we're given :-). It's worth noting that contrary to perhaps popular belief, sign language is NOT international with significant variation between countries. In fact, one of the aspects I keep finding most challenging is the amount of variation even within the UK, which is directly akin to dialects in spoken English.
As a result of these regional variations, I find it difficult so far to differentiate between some different signs which are interchangable due to local variations (the sign for red having 3 different signs at least) and others where there is a "correct" sign but where it varies due to context (eg evening - which seems to have 2 distinct signs, one for when something is looking ahead "I'll see you this evening" and another for when its an 'ending' "Good evening"....but I may have the reasons why you use one or the other wrong!)
Initially, the learning process is quite intimidating as you are instructed to "turn off" your voice and that everything - EVERYTHING, should be done in sign right from the start. This is akin to some language learning I have experienced where the entire class is to be conducted "Auf Deutch", but is somehow more intimidating initially as using your voice is so ingrained.
Before starting the classes, I had spent some time learning the alphabet in finger spelling and a few phrased I thought might be useful ("I'm sorry, I missed that, again please" etc), but almost immediately I hit the issue of regional variations as at least 1 of the letters I'd learned from YouTube clips were taught subtly differently (B). However, I was glad that I had done this pre-work as it allowed me to pick up many of the more subtle details right from the start.
The grammar for BSL is different to English, and that's still something I'm getting to grips with. We're told that the structure of phrases always puts the object first - so "Where do you work?" becomes "Work where you?". I'm mostly getting this right now (I think) by just imagine it's Yoda speaking, but some phrases I keep getting wrong yet as it just doesn't feel like it flows correctly to me, but it's getting more natural with practice.
The DVD provided in the matterials in the first class was also quite intimdating initially. The content has no subtitles or audio to help one follow the signing and the participants seem to be signing at 1000mph and way to quick to follow initially, but 5 weeks in now when I watch it all again, it's already becoming "obvious" what they are saying and only feels a little too quick to follow easily.
One interesting thing I've realised is that I'm "hearing" what people are signing now without consiously translating things, and I'm begining to be able to sign things as I think them without consiously thinking about the right sign - but it's very early days for this to be completely unconscious yet.
As with any learning, the secret seems to be practice, practice and more practice. Unfortunately, I don't have someone good at signing I can practice with that regularly, but I do try to watch programmes on TV with a signer and I try to sign along with people as they talk on TV. I also try to sign along with song lyrics as I listen to them. My range of vocabularly is way too small to do this practically and my finger spelling for the words I don't know how to sign is always going to be too slow, but the practice certainly feels like it's helping :)
Anyhow, on to the online resources I've identified so far:
British Deaf Association:
http://www.bda.org.uk/
British Sign Language:
http://www.britishsignlanguage.com/
...includes this useful list of signs:
http://www.britishsignlanguage.com/words/groups.php?id=3
SignStation (perhaps my favorite resouce so far):
http://www.signstation.org/
...which includes this mobile version of a sign dictionary:
http://www.signstation.org/mobile/
Deaf Station
http://www.deafstation.org/
Part of deafstation - a collection of Phrases:
http://www.deafstation.org:8080/phrase_book/pb/English_BSL_Menu.wisdom
...and a mobile version of the same:
http://www.deafstation.org:8080/phrase_book/pb/English_BSL_Menu.wisdom?userAgentEQUALSgprs_xhtml
iPlayer SignZone (useful to practice watching TV with a signer):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/categories/signed/?page=1
Sonia Hollis YouTube content:
http://www.youtube.com/user/soniahollis#p/u/6/IDWaisildX0
An interactive sign dictionary (aimed at children and some quite different to what is taught on the course) - needs Shockwave:
http://www.learnbsl.org/learnbsl.html
Royal Association for Deaf people:
http://www.royaldeaf.org.uk/
Useful book:
The Easy Way Guide to Signing available from http://www.jakbooks.com/
Plymouth School of British Sign Language:
http://www.bsl-plymouth.org/index.html
(I will probably add more to this list as I find them later)
2010/05/06
IPD vs Innovators or System reliability vs unplanned/untested changes /via @Jamesclay @bobharrisonset
Just read this via @jamesclay:
http://blogs.msdn.com/ukschools/archive/2010/05/06/network-managers-and-teachers-have-a-relationship-problem.aspx
First, I have to agree there is an issue and that the issue is about the relationship rather than either side being at fault. This is the reason use of the phrase "innovation Prevention Department" for such issues irks me as it implies fault.
However, I think the issue can be restated in a way that might inform perception of the fundamental nature of the issue which both sides see differently.
I'll use the terminology of the article and refer to network managers (NMs) and teachers, but in ITIL terms this would be Change Advisory Board (CAB) and Change requestor.
In the overall organisation, it is the role of the NM to provide reliable, effective and efficient IT systems for the organisation to utilize. The enemy of all three of those is change (although change can also be essential to deliver 'effective').
Teachers need IT systems that work when they need them to, they need the IT systems to cost as little as possible to allow the organisation to spend on other things too (like stopping the roof leaking, keeping the lights working etc), and they need the IT systems to provide them with the right tools for them. So they also need reliable, efficient and effective IT systems. But unlike the NMs, they often want change too. They new change to use the latest, most stimulating tools they can. They need change to apply the latest paedagogic practices. They need change to avoid students disengaging with technology that seems dated.
Now, NMs role is to deliver IT systems which meet the needs of the organisation, but those needs include a lot more constraints than just delivering the changes which teachers need. The constraints are at least financial, time/staff levels, architechtural and technical.
Let's put it bluntly, change costs. Change is expensive. Change brings risk.
When a NM's performance is assessed on the bottom line or system availability, or implementing major projects which don't directly address teachers tools (eg deploying a new OS), then that determines the priorities for and other change. The organisation has dictated those priorities in terms of the investment in staffing or other resources available or the choice of KPIs the NM is assessed against.
In ITIL, it is the role of the change advisory board to understand the business needs of the organisation and to ensure that changes are appoved or rejected to reflect those needs. If an organisation priorises innovation (change=risk and cost) over reliability then the CAB should reflect that and authorize changes which have the potential to cripple the systems or bankrupt the organisation (to make an extreme case).
Very few organisations as a whole are happy with risk, even fewer are happy with higher IT costs than they can get away with - and that sets the tone of which changes can be accomodated when requested.
To manage change in that environment means that it's impact needs to be assessed, it requires the transition to be managed (including training etc), it needs the changed to fully documented (so future changes can be assessed meaningfully) and it needs these costs to be factored in along with any product costs.
This all takes time, and resources. The fewer resources available, the more time it takes. It also cost real money as a result - such that even changes which may seem trivial to the person requesting a change may end up costing significant sums which are not justified by the operational advantage the change might bring.
Does this mean that teachers shouldn't seek to innovate? Of course not. Does this mean that NMs are those preventing innovation and worthy of desparaging? Of course not.
The phrase IPD seems to me to be used when innovators are prevented by wider organisational prorities (cost/risk/etc). The people being labeled with the insulting term are no more at fault than those seeking to innovate themselves - who's costs on the organisation through seeking innovation reduce the resources available to deliver someone elses innovative request elsewhere in the organisation.
Sometimes, NMs may resort to bad practice shortcuts to save costs to the organisation incurred by processing a change request by rejecting it out of hand, by inventing reasons to reject something. While this may seem tempting from their perspective, it is ultimately shortsighted.
Teachers too may get frustrated by having their requests rejected and seek ways around due process instead. Again, this is bad practice as it leads to non-compliance (in quality terms) which can lead to significant additional costs to the organisation and reducing the capacity for future change even further.
In the worst cases, both sides adopt these bad practices and lose sight of the common organisational objectives which points to systemic failiure of the continual improvement process management (usually senior mangment responsibility if not actively involved).
The solution? Both sides need to return to the basics and recognise each others roles, and most importantly the organisational priorities.
In any case, this improvement process will _never_ be helped by name calling, and using the phrase IPD falls into that trap.
-- Posted from my phone
http://blogs.msdn.com/ukschools/archive/2010/05/06/network-managers-and-teachers-have-a-relationship-problem.aspx
First, I have to agree there is an issue and that the issue is about the relationship rather than either side being at fault. This is the reason use of the phrase "innovation Prevention Department" for such issues irks me as it implies fault.
However, I think the issue can be restated in a way that might inform perception of the fundamental nature of the issue which both sides see differently.
I'll use the terminology of the article and refer to network managers (NMs) and teachers, but in ITIL terms this would be Change Advisory Board (CAB) and Change requestor.
In the overall organisation, it is the role of the NM to provide reliable, effective and efficient IT systems for the organisation to utilize. The enemy of all three of those is change (although change can also be essential to deliver 'effective').
Teachers need IT systems that work when they need them to, they need the IT systems to cost as little as possible to allow the organisation to spend on other things too (like stopping the roof leaking, keeping the lights working etc), and they need the IT systems to provide them with the right tools for them. So they also need reliable, efficient and effective IT systems. But unlike the NMs, they often want change too. They new change to use the latest, most stimulating tools they can. They need change to apply the latest paedagogic practices. They need change to avoid students disengaging with technology that seems dated.
Now, NMs role is to deliver IT systems which meet the needs of the organisation, but those needs include a lot more constraints than just delivering the changes which teachers need. The constraints are at least financial, time/staff levels, architechtural and technical.
Let's put it bluntly, change costs. Change is expensive. Change brings risk.
When a NM's performance is assessed on the bottom line or system availability, or implementing major projects which don't directly address teachers tools (eg deploying a new OS), then that determines the priorities for and other change. The organisation has dictated those priorities in terms of the investment in staffing or other resources available or the choice of KPIs the NM is assessed against.
In ITIL, it is the role of the change advisory board to understand the business needs of the organisation and to ensure that changes are appoved or rejected to reflect those needs. If an organisation priorises innovation (change=risk and cost) over reliability then the CAB should reflect that and authorize changes which have the potential to cripple the systems or bankrupt the organisation (to make an extreme case).
Very few organisations as a whole are happy with risk, even fewer are happy with higher IT costs than they can get away with - and that sets the tone of which changes can be accomodated when requested.
To manage change in that environment means that it's impact needs to be assessed, it requires the transition to be managed (including training etc), it needs the changed to fully documented (so future changes can be assessed meaningfully) and it needs these costs to be factored in along with any product costs.
This all takes time, and resources. The fewer resources available, the more time it takes. It also cost real money as a result - such that even changes which may seem trivial to the person requesting a change may end up costing significant sums which are not justified by the operational advantage the change might bring.
Does this mean that teachers shouldn't seek to innovate? Of course not. Does this mean that NMs are those preventing innovation and worthy of desparaging? Of course not.
The phrase IPD seems to me to be used when innovators are prevented by wider organisational prorities (cost/risk/etc). The people being labeled with the insulting term are no more at fault than those seeking to innovate themselves - who's costs on the organisation through seeking innovation reduce the resources available to deliver someone elses innovative request elsewhere in the organisation.
Sometimes, NMs may resort to bad practice shortcuts to save costs to the organisation incurred by processing a change request by rejecting it out of hand, by inventing reasons to reject something. While this may seem tempting from their perspective, it is ultimately shortsighted.
Teachers too may get frustrated by having their requests rejected and seek ways around due process instead. Again, this is bad practice as it leads to non-compliance (in quality terms) which can lead to significant additional costs to the organisation and reducing the capacity for future change even further.
In the worst cases, both sides adopt these bad practices and lose sight of the common organisational objectives which points to systemic failiure of the continual improvement process management (usually senior mangment responsibility if not actively involved).
The solution? Both sides need to return to the basics and recognise each others roles, and most importantly the organisational priorities.
In any case, this improvement process will _never_ be helped by name calling, and using the phrase IPD falls into that trap.
-- Posted from my phone
2010/04/24
Response from @lindagilroy re:#debill #deact
I've still not written up my notes from the meeting last weekend with Mrs Gilroy, but I have just received the following email which includes at least taking note of one of the specific issues I raised in that meeting, the problem of benchmarking the success of the act in reducing copyright infringement since the figures used for existing levels are based on poor evidence and are more propaganda than seriously useful.
So, at least one of the issues may get a more specific reply at some stage.
Anyhow, below is the email and we'll have to see what happens on May 6th I suppose to see what happens next:
=======
Thanks for coming to meet with me last Sunday.
Luke kept a note of the concerns we discussed and I have kept this for future reference. Should I continue to be the elector's choice on the 6 May I will keep in touch with you about the processes which flow, or may flow, from this Act.
I have asked the Secretary of State to comment on the point raised by Nick on the base line for measuring progress on reducing illegal copyright infringement. I will contact you when I have his reply.
Do copy me into any representations you make on the consultation about the notification process in reducing copyright infringement.
Best wishes
Linda Gilroy
Labour & Cooperative Candidate for Plymouth Sutton & Devonport
Website:www.lindagilroy.org.uk
Twitter: www.twitter.com/lindagilroy
Facebook: www.facebook.com/lindagilroy
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/LindaGilroyPlymouth
Promoted by J. Furzeman on behalf of Linda Gilroy, both at 21 Durnford Street, Plymouth, PL1 3QF
======
-- Posted from my phone
So, at least one of the issues may get a more specific reply at some stage.
Anyhow, below is the email and we'll have to see what happens on May 6th I suppose to see what happens next:
=======
Thanks for coming to meet with me last Sunday.
Luke kept a note of the concerns we discussed and I have kept this for future reference. Should I continue to be the elector's choice on the 6 May I will keep in touch with you about the processes which flow, or may flow, from this Act.
I have asked the Secretary of State to comment on the point raised by Nick on the base line for measuring progress on reducing illegal copyright infringement. I will contact you when I have his reply.
Do copy me into any representations you make on the consultation about the notification process in reducing copyright infringement.
Best wishes
Linda Gilroy
Labour & Cooperative Candidate for Plymouth Sutton & Devonport
Website:www.lindagilroy.org.uk
Twitter: www.twitter.com/lindagilroy
Facebook: www.facebook.com/lindagilroy
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/LindaGilroyPlymouth
Promoted by J. Furzeman on behalf of Linda Gilroy, both at 21 Durnford Street, Plymouth, PL1 3QF
======
-- Posted from my phone
2010/04/18
Applying the Apple 'Hype Cycle' in HEi IT?
After following the incredibly successful hype cycle of Apple with the iPad (including the 'shortages' delaying the launch in Europe - which may or may not be deliberate), I was struck with the thought of why many IT system changes in HEIs tend to meet resistance rather than being eagerly seized upon.
We don't manage the hype well enough.
Hype is not just about singing a product or services praises. It's not just marketing and press releases or even demos and briefings.
To get the hype cycle right involves subtle psychology, careful timing, attention to detail, leveraging social networks and of course under promising and over delivering. (and probably 1,001 other things)
I could make reference to the 'popularity' of VLEs in HEI, or almost any other product and I'm sure there are (rare?) examples of institutions getting the hype cycle right - sometimes, but we (in IT) need to at least be aware of our roles in the perception of our services and how important that is in the success or otherwise of projects probably even more so than getting the technology itself 100% right.
If the hype cycle is right, and the product isn't fundamentally flawed, people will put up with 'foibles' because they have a relationship with the product, a vested interest in in working because they already wish it to work.
Get it wrong and even the slightest problem will have people giving up and seeking alternatives or complaining.
OK - all obvious stuff to anyone in marketing I know, but I wonder how many of my collegues in all branches of IT really think in such terms, and even if they do, if it's treated with enough importance in project plans and resource allocation?
-- Posted from my phone
We don't manage the hype well enough.
Hype is not just about singing a product or services praises. It's not just marketing and press releases or even demos and briefings.
To get the hype cycle right involves subtle psychology, careful timing, attention to detail, leveraging social networks and of course under promising and over delivering. (and probably 1,001 other things)
I could make reference to the 'popularity' of VLEs in HEI, or almost any other product and I'm sure there are (rare?) examples of institutions getting the hype cycle right - sometimes, but we (in IT) need to at least be aware of our roles in the perception of our services and how important that is in the success or otherwise of projects probably even more so than getting the technology itself 100% right.
If the hype cycle is right, and the product isn't fundamentally flawed, people will put up with 'foibles' because they have a relationship with the product, a vested interest in in working because they already wish it to work.
Get it wrong and even the slightest problem will have people giving up and seeking alternatives or complaining.
OK - all obvious stuff to anyone in marketing I know, but I wonder how many of my collegues in all branches of IT really think in such terms, and even if they do, if it's treated with enough importance in project plans and resource allocation?
-- Posted from my phone
2010/04/14
Reply to invite from @lindagilroy to meet to discuss #debill #deact
I have yet to receive a reply to my open letter to @lindagilroy MP regarding her decision to vote in favour of the Digital Ecconomy bill (now act). I have however recieved the generic email below which I have also responded to. See my reply and the initial email here:
------
I plan to attend on Sunday, although also awaiting an answer to the open letter on the same subject.
I do note that the email below says:
'I know a lot about these other subjects (so my ommision very little about this one) and yet despite that I still felt it appropriate to vote for this bill ignoring the expert advice on its flaws, concerns about the lack of die process and the almost unchallenged views expressed by many other MPs including fellow labour MPs that the bill is fundamentally flawed'
It ignores the fact that the government chose not to give this bill further time for debate despite parliament ending early on many days prior to the calling of the general election.
It also ignores the fact that the Lords also expressed grave concern that such a technical bill required significant further debate and refinement.
The worst kinds of law are those which can not be implemented or which have obvious unwanted side effects and this bill fails on both counts.
It also ignores the fact that the vested interests expressing a need for such a law (lobbying) have demonstrably falsified their case in the limited scrutiny to date and those flawed figures have subsequently continued to be repeated and further exagerated by the government.
So we now have a poorly drafted and worded act, impotent without the further work which should have preceeded agreeing to make it law, based on flawed exagerated justifications lobbied for by an anacronistic industry that pre-dates the digital age and is failing at every opportunity to adapt and benefit from the very digital ecconomy the act purports to try to nurture.
I will look forward to your responses to these points in person on Sunday however.
Sent from my phone, so please forgive brevity and any spelling errors
On 14 Apr 2010, at 15:14, Linda Gilroy wrote:
Thank you for contacting me about Parliamentary scrutiny of the Digital Economy Bill.
I understand your concerns that the bill was rushed through just before the election. The Bill started its way through parliament in the Lords where it did receive extensive scrutiny during its passage and over 700 amendments were debated. Most Bills start in the Commons of course – but highly technical bills are often started in the Lords so that they can be explored through substantial debate before they get to the House of Commons – and with the input of experts who are often present in greater numbers in the Lords. This also happened with the Climate Change Bill and the Marine and Coastal Access Bill. I served with some 16 other MPs on the detailed committee stage of both these Bills where the subject matter is something I am comparatively knowledgeable about.
The debate in the Lords took a lot of the time consuming spade-work out of what we needed to further revise.
The Digital Economy Bill was also considered by a number of Parliamentary Committees before it even got to the Lords.
It has of course now been debated in and passed by the House of Commons. Very strong views were expressed on both sides of the public discussion about unlawful online copyright infringement.
I agree with you that it is undeniable that full Commons scrutiny as well as Lords scrutiny would have been preferable. Unfortunately, the announcement of the General Election meant that all stages of the Commons process were completed during the “wash-up”. This is the process through which the government agrees with the opposition as to how to conclude business before Parliament is dissolved. The “wash up” process requires legislation to be supported by a very broad consensus in the House of Commons. The Commons scrutiny of the Digital Economy Bill concluded in the “wash up” last week with 189 votes in favour of the bill to 47 against.
Votes in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords have reflected a clear view across Parliament that unlawful online copyright infringement is a serious problem affecting our creative industries and individual artists, which the law needs to tackle. This is an issue that businesses in Plymouth, especially in the creative arts, have told me about time and time again over the last ten years. However, Parliament has also recognised the difficulties in tackling unlawful copyright infringements effectively. Much of the debate across both Houses rightly focused upon this.
During the Commons stages of the Bill last week, further amendments were made. As the Act now stands, further regulations will be required before technical measures can be applied in cases of copyright infringements via peer-to-peer file sharing, or before a copyright owner can apply for a court order to block an infringing website. These further amendments tabled in the Commons debates require public consultation and a higher level of parliamentary scrutiny – the so-called super affirmative procedure – before the regulations can be introduced. There will, therefore, be further opportunity for Parliamentary scrutiny (and amendment of the provisions) before any sanctions for these breaches will be agreed or applied. During the Commons debates, Clause 43, which covered orphan licences, was dropped from the Bill.
I absolutely agree with you that the digital economy and the internet play an important and increasing role in the lives and livelihoods of many people in this country, which is why it was important to ensure the passage of the Digital Economy Bill during the ‘wash-up’ procedure. Things are changing so fast that to wait another 6-12 months – if this could be prioritised in a new parliament - just did not seem right.
As you can see from my website (I was one of the first 50 MPs to have one back in 1990s – and use of Facebook and Twitter) I do value this form of communication and try my best to use it!
I am also acutely aware of how important both the Digital Economy and the cultural industries – and how they can come together - are to Plymouth. I work with Alison Seabeck in Devonport to advance the case for Plymouth to get high speed broadband access and a hub connecting to the transatlantic cable together with the siting of a secure centre at Mount Wise. This could really put Plymouth on the Digital economy map of the UK.
Thank you for taking the time and trouble to let me know your concerns on this issue.
Given the importance of this issue I would welcome the chance to talk to you about this. As a number of people have written to me I am holding a special meeting at the T&G offices, New Union House, 2 Harbour Avenue, Sutton Harbour at 2-3pm on Sunday 18 April for people especially concerned about this issue to come and talk to me about this Bill. I hope to meet you in person on Sunday. If you do come please be aware that the nearest parking is at Staples. When you arrive at New Union House you will need to press the bottom buzzer for entrance. It would be helpful if you could give me an indication of whether you plan to attend by emailing votegilroy@hotmail.co.uk
Yours sincerely,
Linda Gilroy
Labour & Cooperative Candidate for Plymouth Sutton & Devonport
Website:www.lindagilroy.org.uk
Twitter: www.twitter.com/lindagilroy
Facebook: www.facebook.com/lindagilroy
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/LindaGilroyPlymouth
Get a new e-mail account with Hotmail – Free. Sign-up now.
------
I plan to attend on Sunday, although also awaiting an answer to the open letter on the same subject.
I do note that the email below says:
'I know a lot about these other subjects (so my ommision very little about this one) and yet despite that I still felt it appropriate to vote for this bill ignoring the expert advice on its flaws, concerns about the lack of die process and the almost unchallenged views expressed by many other MPs including fellow labour MPs that the bill is fundamentally flawed'
It ignores the fact that the government chose not to give this bill further time for debate despite parliament ending early on many days prior to the calling of the general election.
It also ignores the fact that the Lords also expressed grave concern that such a technical bill required significant further debate and refinement.
The worst kinds of law are those which can not be implemented or which have obvious unwanted side effects and this bill fails on both counts.
It also ignores the fact that the vested interests expressing a need for such a law (lobbying) have demonstrably falsified their case in the limited scrutiny to date and those flawed figures have subsequently continued to be repeated and further exagerated by the government.
So we now have a poorly drafted and worded act, impotent without the further work which should have preceeded agreeing to make it law, based on flawed exagerated justifications lobbied for by an anacronistic industry that pre-dates the digital age and is failing at every opportunity to adapt and benefit from the very digital ecconomy the act purports to try to nurture.
I will look forward to your responses to these points in person on Sunday however.
Sent from my phone, so please forgive brevity and any spelling errors
On 14 Apr 2010, at 15:14, Linda Gilroy
Thank you for contacting me about Parliamentary scrutiny of the Digital Economy Bill.
I understand your concerns that the bill was rushed through just before the election. The Bill started its way through parliament in the Lords where it did receive extensive scrutiny during its passage and over 700 amendments were debated. Most Bills start in the Commons of course – but highly technical bills are often started in the Lords so that they can be explored through substantial debate before they get to the House of Commons – and with the input of experts who are often present in greater numbers in the Lords. This also happened with the Climate Change Bill and the Marine and Coastal Access Bill. I served with some 16 other MPs on the detailed committee stage of both these Bills where the subject matter is something I am comparatively knowledgeable about.
The debate in the Lords took a lot of the time consuming spade-work out of what we needed to further revise.
The Digital Economy Bill was also considered by a number of Parliamentary Committees before it even got to the Lords.
It has of course now been debated in and passed by the House of Commons. Very strong views were expressed on both sides of the public discussion about unlawful online copyright infringement.
I agree with you that it is undeniable that full Commons scrutiny as well as Lords scrutiny would have been preferable. Unfortunately, the announcement of the General Election meant that all stages of the Commons process were completed during the “wash-up”. This is the process through which the government agrees with the opposition as to how to conclude business before Parliament is dissolved. The “wash up” process requires legislation to be supported by a very broad consensus in the House of Commons. The Commons scrutiny of the Digital Economy Bill concluded in the “wash up” last week with 189 votes in favour of the bill to 47 against.
Votes in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords have reflected a clear view across Parliament that unlawful online copyright infringement is a serious problem affecting our creative industries and individual artists, which the law needs to tackle. This is an issue that businesses in Plymouth, especially in the creative arts, have told me about time and time again over the last ten years. However, Parliament has also recognised the difficulties in tackling unlawful copyright infringements effectively. Much of the debate across both Houses rightly focused upon this.
During the Commons stages of the Bill last week, further amendments were made. As the Act now stands, further regulations will be required before technical measures can be applied in cases of copyright infringements via peer-to-peer file sharing, or before a copyright owner can apply for a court order to block an infringing website. These further amendments tabled in the Commons debates require public consultation and a higher level of parliamentary scrutiny – the so-called super affirmative procedure – before the regulations can be introduced. There will, therefore, be further opportunity for Parliamentary scrutiny (and amendment of the provisions) before any sanctions for these breaches will be agreed or applied. During the Commons debates, Clause 43, which covered orphan licences, was dropped from the Bill.
I absolutely agree with you that the digital economy and the internet play an important and increasing role in the lives and livelihoods of many people in this country, which is why it was important to ensure the passage of the Digital Economy Bill during the ‘wash-up’ procedure. Things are changing so fast that to wait another 6-12 months – if this could be prioritised in a new parliament - just did not seem right.
As you can see from my website (I was one of the first 50 MPs to have one back in 1990s – and use of Facebook and Twitter) I do value this form of communication and try my best to use it!
I am also acutely aware of how important both the Digital Economy and the cultural industries – and how they can come together - are to Plymouth. I work with Alison Seabeck in Devonport to advance the case for Plymouth to get high speed broadband access and a hub connecting to the transatlantic cable together with the siting of a secure centre at Mount Wise. This could really put Plymouth on the Digital economy map of the UK.
Thank you for taking the time and trouble to let me know your concerns on this issue.
Given the importance of this issue I would welcome the chance to talk to you about this. As a number of people have written to me I am holding a special meeting at the T&G offices, New Union House, 2 Harbour Avenue, Sutton Harbour at 2-3pm on Sunday 18 April for people especially concerned about this issue to come and talk to me about this Bill. I hope to meet you in person on Sunday. If you do come please be aware that the nearest parking is at Staples. When you arrive at New Union House you will need to press the bottom buzzer for entrance. It would be helpful if you could give me an indication of whether you plan to attend by emailing votegilroy@hotmail.co.uk
Yours sincerely,
Linda Gilroy
Labour & Cooperative Candidate for Plymouth Sutton & Devonport
Website:www.lindagilroy.org.uk
Twitter: www.twitter.com/lindagilroy
Facebook: www.facebook.com/lindagilroy
YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/LindaGilroyPlymouth
Get a new e-mail account with Hotmail – Free. Sign-up now.
2010/04/12
VLE / PLE / undead presentation
I hadn't realised this video had been put online until yesterday:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiv8FWg7KMc
From the VLE is undead presentation before Christmas as a revisit to the VLE is dead debate from ALT-C 2009.
Reflecting on my presentation, it was clumsy (someone told me my presentation at ALT-C needed more passion so I tried not to over rehearse my arguments and analogies - but it needed more work), and I think I emphasise the analogy too much without explaining how it relates to the topic. It all seemed obvious to me at the time, but watching it again now I wonder if anyone can follow quite what I meant by the different points.
Anyhow, one lives and learns and I think the point that PLE/PTN are not new practices, just mediated and amplified with technology holds, and that the VLE is about efficiency and ecconomy and that there is a valid place for those aspirations in education facing funding pressures and learners who need their educational journey mediating by 'subject experts' to allow them to progress in a timely way.
Not wishing to re-visit the "is it dead" or VLE v PLE artificial division, but thought I'd link to the video at least for historical reference of my thinking at the time :)
-- Posted from my phone
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiv8FWg7KMc
From the VLE is undead presentation before Christmas as a revisit to the VLE is dead debate from ALT-C 2009.
Reflecting on my presentation, it was clumsy (someone told me my presentation at ALT-C needed more passion so I tried not to over rehearse my arguments and analogies - but it needed more work), and I think I emphasise the analogy too much without explaining how it relates to the topic. It all seemed obvious to me at the time, but watching it again now I wonder if anyone can follow quite what I meant by the different points.
Anyhow, one lives and learns and I think the point that PLE/PTN are not new practices, just mediated and amplified with technology holds, and that the VLE is about efficiency and ecconomy and that there is a valid place for those aspirations in education facing funding pressures and learners who need their educational journey mediating by 'subject experts' to allow them to progress in a timely way.
Not wishing to re-visit the "is it dead" or VLE v PLE artificial division, but thought I'd link to the video at least for historical reference of my thinking at the time :)
-- Posted from my phone
2010/04/08
Open letter to @lindagilroy MP re:#debill
I notice from the list of MPs who voted through the fundamentally technically flawed and ill concieved Digital Ecconomy Bill that you saw fit to support this through it's third reading in the house.
Since you did so, as a constituant concidering my vote in the impending election carefully, I would appreciate your answers to a few pertinant questions.
Firstly, since you supported this bill, can you clarify if you did so because you believe it to be a well formed bill worthy of passing into law, befitting of the long tradition of democracy in this country?
Secondly, if you do not feel this bill to be well formed, did you therefore vote for it simply due to pressure of the whip?
I should clarify that in the first instance, if you believe this to be 'good law' having received due process and diligence (despite advice from proffesional bodies such a the British Computing Society to the contrary) I would see this as evidence of either poor judgement or incompetance.
Secondly, if you feel this is a bad law and still voted for it due to the pressure of the whip, I would see that as evidence of a weak willed MP unable to stand up for what they believe in despite huge evidence and expert advice, and clear evidence of someone unfit or office to represent this constituency.
Certainly, almost every MP who spoke on the bill in the house (with a couple of notable exceptions) made it clear that they felt this bill was flawed and should not be passed but felt unable to oppose it due to all 3 front benches supporting it.
While not unusual in our flawed democratic system, this was exacerbated by pushing this through in washup despite ample opportunity for due process earlier in this parliament which this government declined to go through - something which makes it stink worse than most other similar examples.
While the amendments for a super affirmative are supposed to mitigate passing a fundamentally flawed/counter productive bill, it still means the house (including you) supported passing this as it stands taking the risk that someone will clean up the mess at some later stage. If this were your reason for supporting the bill, it would again appear to me as evidence of being unfit for the responsibilities of such public office.
So, did you vote for this bill through incompetance or lack of backbone? ...or have I missed another alternative which might convince me to change my current intention to return a spoilt ballot as my only remaining option in the coming election?
Yours,
Nick Sharratt
-- Posted from my phone
Since you did so, as a constituant concidering my vote in the impending election carefully, I would appreciate your answers to a few pertinant questions.
Firstly, since you supported this bill, can you clarify if you did so because you believe it to be a well formed bill worthy of passing into law, befitting of the long tradition of democracy in this country?
Secondly, if you do not feel this bill to be well formed, did you therefore vote for it simply due to pressure of the whip?
I should clarify that in the first instance, if you believe this to be 'good law' having received due process and diligence (despite advice from proffesional bodies such a the British Computing Society to the contrary) I would see this as evidence of either poor judgement or incompetance.
Secondly, if you feel this is a bad law and still voted for it due to the pressure of the whip, I would see that as evidence of a weak willed MP unable to stand up for what they believe in despite huge evidence and expert advice, and clear evidence of someone unfit or office to represent this constituency.
Certainly, almost every MP who spoke on the bill in the house (with a couple of notable exceptions) made it clear that they felt this bill was flawed and should not be passed but felt unable to oppose it due to all 3 front benches supporting it.
While not unusual in our flawed democratic system, this was exacerbated by pushing this through in washup despite ample opportunity for due process earlier in this parliament which this government declined to go through - something which makes it stink worse than most other similar examples.
While the amendments for a super affirmative are supposed to mitigate passing a fundamentally flawed/counter productive bill, it still means the house (including you) supported passing this as it stands taking the risk that someone will clean up the mess at some later stage. If this were your reason for supporting the bill, it would again appear to me as evidence of being unfit for the responsibilities of such public office.
So, did you vote for this bill through incompetance or lack of backbone? ...or have I missed another alternative which might convince me to change my current intention to return a spoilt ballot as my only remaining option in the coming election?
Yours,
Nick Sharratt
-- Posted from my phone
Location:Plymouth, UK
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)