Harvested from an old wikispace page that I'm relegating to history:
20.11.2007 - feedback from the making Links Conference -
· Alex Hayes excellent, should have been a keynote speaker. Laurel Papworth also excellent.
13.11.2007 - Protected wiki's I understand. The premise behind private wiki's I will always challenge; cognisant of exceptions due to security. The sustainability of a networked architect is in realising the process of creation with builders web-wide - me.
Dear [edited] help, please ask the *&^% department to unblock the category "wiki".- not just the address below. a My colleagues and I have been using wikis in a Professional Development capacity for all of 2007.[NSW Learnscope] b I am about to construct a whole online site using wiki as the entry point/interface for students. There are several wiki sites/spaces we are using at present - and I do not know all of the addresses. If wikis are blocked- Kiss goodbye to innovation and meeting students needs. - David Grainger
9-11-2007 - As we are not users of Second Life I can only assume that it is functioning correctly. I have created an avator, picked up a torch, found a parrot and walked past a dragon. I then had to come back to reality and do some work - Roxanne Streatfield
29.10.2007 - Some day we will have to start educating again in the world as it actually is. - BrainDump
10.10.2007 - Assessment is a validation as an educator / organisation that we have truly connected with a learner and has less to do with where they scored in relation to others undertaking complex retrievals of knowledge from a rote learnt database. - me
15.10.2007 - What is equal ? What is truth ? It's personal, circumstantial and amongst learners irrelevant or perhaps at best debatable. Assessment only validates and rarely substantiates - me
16.10.2007 - I'm personally using a wiki to retain memory and track history, blogs to compose prose perfectly and podcasting to catch people out and get as many ah's and um's into an otherwise polished and "perfect" VET sector......trying to get some real conversation fillers without the fantales and butchers paper - me
21.10.2007 - Twitter creates myths and destroys lives - me
24.10.2007 - You know who you are. You are the ones who make it make it worthwhile. You are the ones who will make a difference - Robyn Jay.
26.10.2007 - I really [ ] the questions of interruption, but was hoping I did not have to explain what a blog was- a simple web creation tool that is reverse chronologically organized, and used many ways, as diaries, resource bullding, project documentation, portfolios, anything.
Mrs Crossed Arms wanted more. She wants that big giant button you click that says, “Apply this to education… make it Apply it to the Classes I Teach” - Alan Levine
26.10.2007 - Another woman asked me at the end, “I want to know how you can stay on top of all this technology and manage your time.”
This one made me lose my concentration. That was the point of the entire presentation! My message was about giving up this notion of “staying up” or “being expert”, and instead forming, cultivating, using your networks. Alan Levine
The draft answering questions posed of me by Elise Pitt, UOW Media Assistant.
Please find the photo you mentioned at http://www.flickr.com/photos/mobology/8138019955/in/photostream
I have addressed your questions as follows.
1. How do you see wearable technologies being used 5-10 years from now?
In 5 - 10 years time my preliminary findings have identified that we are likely to be wearing one device with a multiplicity of sensors / functions collecting data in a variety of forms and storing or transmitting this data via mobile networks constantly.
I "see" current handheld technologies such as the smartphone becoming a head-worn device in the very near future, as digital glasses that are voice activated, location aware, augmented and network enabled. A device that has body-worn video, audio, motion and sensor features will benefit those who undertaking tasks in workplaces, interacting socially in public places and perhaps intimately connecting humanity as nodes of the "internet-of-things" - as smart people.
2. What are your three biggest concerns with emerging wearable technologies such as Google Glass?
Emergent wearable technologies present challenges for society as concerns for privacy, personal security and well-being are raised by those questioning the benefits, risks or harms that may arise from its use. Balanced and exhaustive research and development that engages key stakeholders in the perceived versus actual outcomes for emergent technology critically informs end users.
My three biggest concerns with location aware digital glasses are in:
A. Rapid prototyping, manufacturing and distribution of digital glass products to end-users that lack rigorous research and exhaustive human subject testing;
B. Policy or law that restricts research projects examining how these technologies can be applied in a variety of scientific, social and creative contexts;
C. The impacts of emergent technologies more broadly on society.
3. How do you think society will change as a result of wearable technologies?
Society has adjusted to wearing time as a watch on the wrist, carrying hand-held smart phones that connect in an instant through an international network and the digitisation of knowledge that has fundamentally shifted how we conduct research and business worldwide.
Wearable digital technologies are likewise becoming less visual interface dependent, less intrusive and increasingly connected seamlessly with other technologies that assist us with day-to-day activities ie. smart pedometer watch that also measures heart rate, body temperature and pulse. My research examines how location aware body worn technologies are having an impact on education and training across a range of contexts, sectors and occupations.
Wearable technologies will increasingly become part of many activities across society, in essence becoming the norm rather than the exception. We are likely to be one device connected to a multitude of service providers eg. virtual medical practitioners
4. Are there any good sides to these technologies?
There are many good sides to technology as there are bad. It is the end-user who has to take responsibility for their actions using technology.
It is the responsibility of the researcher to complement all activities that inform how these emergent technologies can be used and the likely impact that use will have upon society. Ultimately, collectively, all contributors in the supply chain are responsible for how these technologies are used for good and where possible to contribute to ensuring the bad is limited or eliminated.
Emerging wearable technologies facilitate brilliant opportunities for everyone ie. Health and likewise with carefully informed use will then be used for the benefit of humanity as a whole.
5. What policies do you think should be in place to protect users/all citizens?
Policies need to be carefully instrumented, as do laws that govern the use of these technologies where they may have an adverse impact on others.
Digital glasses for instance might infringe on the rights of those not wishing to become the subject in a photo capture or video recording.
Our fundamental rights as law-abiding citizens should be first and foremost in any policy making activity. Emergent technologies that capture, save, broadcast or transmit data that contains others as subject whether proximally or by intent can be intrusive, disruptive and even illegal in many settings.
The user needs to know boundaries as to when and where it's appropriate or indeed permissible for these technologies to be used and increasingly, as these technologies become omnipresent and normalised so do policy and laws governing the use of the technology be accommodated. The ubiquitous trajectory of these emergent technologies is fast changing what is culturally acceptable in many parts of the world and the manner in which networked service suppliers connect with these wearable devices changes our own individual concept of rights as the user irrespective of the location or circumstance.
We are likely to see a rise in cases where emergent technologies cause friction and unrest in society before those technologies become situated in everyday life.
Google Hangout - Augmediated, Augmented & other realities
Moi from Helsinki,
On Sunday (Helsinki time) Vance Stevens from Webheads and I are running a Google Hangout for anyone interested in joining us - http://learning2gether.pbworks.com/w/page/32206114/volunteersneeded#SunMar10noonGMTnbspVeillanceHangoutwithAlexHayesandposse
The GMT is provided so if you need to convert your own local time you can.
The topic you will see is Veillance - the domain with all it's disciplines such as surveillance, sousveillance, dataveillance, uberveillance and so on.
We are sure to also speak of education, engineering, diffusion of innovation, privacy, personal security and a host more emergent themes & technologies.
We think it is pertinent topic given that we are on the brink of Google Glass going live soon, that Vuzix and host of other augmented and audmediated reality hardware is set to become distributed and visible throughout our communities worldwide.
A podcast was recently distributed by IEEE ( http://spectrum.ieee.org/podcast/geek-life/profiles/steve-manns-better-version-of-reality) and featured Professor Steve Mann whom I'm working closely with on this event - http://veillance.me
Have a listen to the podcast. It's is very revealing, insightful and will serve as the base point for our discussion. You will note that the term equiveillance features prominently in this podcast and that is the nub of the discussion I’m hoping this Gallows (Hangout) will realise.
Here’s some further facts on the matter at hand - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equiveillance
You will note that I have invited Professor Steve Mann to join us here in this discussion. I've also invited a number of others who have I either just met virtually, those who I count on as significant others and colleagues who I hold dear in my life.
Looking forward to you joining us.
Everywhere I go In Finland there are signs around stating ' maintain silence' or 'silence is for health'. Very few people speak to each other on public transport.
Cafe's I've been to are silent. No one speaks at the breakfast tables. The mood of the workplace is.....you guessed it. Silent.
What a cultural experience! What a difference.
Anyways, it's been a day of taking my washing down to the basement and paying 2 EURO to get the machine to operate. I've had a hearty breakfast and showered, shaved etc. I dressed which took 20 minutes and then set off to the shops through a snow storm to buy a drink.
I last ten minutes before I had a flurry of snow in my hood. Here are some photos that I managed to snap - http://www.flickr.com/photos/mobology/sets/72157632849520557/
Thinking of my Wife, my children, parents and the multitude of stories to tell when I next sit down to write.
Here are some references I did not end up using in the paper I'm writing titled "the Identity Awareness of Research Data". Rather than ditch them or bury them in bookmarks I thought it might pertinent to share them on.
Big Data | Big Picture
We Must Choose Privacy Or Medical Breakthroughs: Statisticians ID Anonymous Study Participants
JISC - Libraries of the future
Read Explore Equiveillance ( 3/4’s the way down the page)
NMC - Higher Ed. Preview
Data Protection Directive OECD
23 hours and months of preparation and I'm finally here. It was -10 degrees when we arrived at 6:00Am in the morning from Singapore via Frankfurt and Moscow.
Enough time to watch five thrillers back-to-back and get two hours worth of kip.
I got the bus no problems from the airport and then (as predicted) got little more than a cursory glance from the tram driver who motioned for me to get on and for me to discover than he terminated the tram 5 kilometres away from the city centre - in the opposite direction of where I was to go.
So....I set out my lack of Finnish and put my resilience to the test and managed to work out where I needed to drag my bags. I saw some great sights along the way and it was immerse by snow so to speak. Found the Opera, where McDonalds is not and where I need to go back with the Canon and shoot some evening shots.
I've noted that older people get around with walking ski poles as the snow is very deep in places or icy in others. Up to six foot drifts in various spots.
Young people are either body beautiful or heavy smokers. Every thing is 100% dearer that Australia. ie. a coffee is EURO 4.9 and water at EURO 8.00
Everything is silent.....silent. No one speaks on the trains. I've even got a rule on the list of things not to do in Finland in my hotel room that states SILENCE AT BREAKFAST. Another rule is you have exactly ten seconds to close both exit doors (every door set is made up of two doors) otherwise you cop a EU 20 fine.
Triple glaze windows. Frozen dog poo on the sidewalk. Helsinki older apartments remind me of Paris.
I found a great little Cafe around the corner with a Waitress who has 'Rammstein' tattooed across her neck. There is a frozen ice skating ring pond across the road from the hotel.
Here are some photos from my walk today - http://www.flickr.com/photos/mobology/sets/72157632849520557/
Have you ever been to Helsinki? What was your experience?
It's the eve before I head off to Finland.
The kids are asleep and Jane is watching TV. I'm here sweating...more than a little nervous.
I am however resting a great deal easier though knowing that my extreme weather / ski jacket which was immaculately made by Leigh Blackall is over my arm. All of it.
What a work of art. It's exceptionally well designed.
What I love most about it is the consideration that Leigh has made for the movement factor when operating equipment, skiing down a slope, arching your neck or riding a bike.
The whole mechanics of it all feels right. It fits like a glove - literally encompassing your whole headline and button up at the base with enough room to wear a jacket underneath of a thermal beanie.
Fact is that I put it on a midnight here in Canberra when it was about 10 degrees outside and was as warm as toast in as many minutes till I needed to take it off. Given Helsinki is down at -7 this evening with a metre of snow underfoot Peak Oil Company will undergo my first test as of Monday :)
Here's some photos to look at - http://www.flickr.com/photos/mobology/sets/72157632805212747/
I've completed the backbone of the paper that will be submitted soon for the upcoming IEEE SSIT ISATS13 conference in Toronto, Ontario Canada 27-29 June 2013.
In collaboration with Amir Aryani, a four way consideration for the identity of research data was composed using a number of attributed icons/images which paradoxically speaks to the subject matter directly in its own form.
I've uploaded this small dataset to Figshare and also entered that upload to my ORCID account. I'm very impressed with the usability and ease of data curation that both services offer. A long future ahead for both of them.
Here is the guts of the paper I composed over the last two days typing and the previous two months of mulling over things in my head.
Traditionally researchers have been at the mercy of the ‘publish or perish’ yardstick, struggling amidst reference formatting wars, publisher controls on output, unpaid peer reviews, organisational metric value measures and a string of complex data licensing regulations. As the value of data has become more apparent and the manner with which researchers can mobilise that data for publication of it’s own right, the barriers and accolades that were once vested in closed, permission oriented consortium controlled knowledge brokering has collapsed.
New frontiers beckon and models commensurate have emerged from scholarly research activities. The identity awareness of research data lives afresh on the agar of human endeavour, under a new microscope seeking greater levels of transparency.
Researchers working in the domain of the veillances and social computing are faced with an unenviable challenge of dealing with data often beset with ambiguity of ownership, confusion as to what licensing conditions pertain to differing datasets and any number of other data management issues. Contributing to this dilemma may also be the lagging infrastructural capacity and capability of the organisations they work within or, increasingly, without.
In the consideration for the founding forefathers of the Veillances we must acknowledge inclusively the works of Professor Steve Mann with the concept of sousveillance, the seminal works of Professor David Lyons and that of surveillance, the interrogation of the emergent concept of Uberveillance by Dr. M.G & Associate Professor Katina Michael and any number of brilliant academics who have individually or collectively informed the concept of veillances as a entire scholarly domain in the last two decades. Likewise, vast bodies of knowledge have emerged from foundational research in perceptual and wearable computing, ubiquitous computing, networked learning and from the contentious short history of social computing that intersects with giants such as Wikipedia, Facebook, and Twitter et al.
The colossal impact that the internet has had on society, on enabling dynamic, live and instantaneous access to data has perhaps been the single most influential force that researchers have had to reckon with and likewise try harness to their own advantage. This also significantly shifts how and what data is in a scholarly capacity, as now the ‘dynamic’ nature of online data collections permits contribution and collaboration with relative ease over time, just in time and in some cases doing away with the value of static datasets altogether.
The identity awareness of data in the research context has also shifted from a researcher led scholarly ambition matched by an organisational aspiration and perhaps even national initiatives that unify research data infrastructures, to a responsive and international osmosis. Media rich data now lives beyond the expiry date of the researchers activity and into the annals of recyclable time. The realm of spreadsheets has given way to databases and automation of data collation.
Governments worldwide have been quick to jump on the opportunities that open data offers for their citizens, it’s own sovereign ambitions and with that realisation the transparency of research data has been front and foremost in political rhetoric. Research funding opportunities from governments worldwide have transitioned from a competitive yet passive grant receiver orientation to a diverse stakeholder consortium capable of drawing upon accessible data sources and positioning themselves to advantage less-for-longer in a global state of economic downturn.
The concept of ‘open’ data is by no means a new phenomena and many would argue that we are simply regressing to a state of feudal and communal totalitarianism, with oversight from a lesser number of omniscient consortium overlords. The less cynical might be more inclined to assert that the transparency of public funding expenditure and greater access to publicly volunteered data as being to the advantage of society whilst harbouring reserves for that of reuse their own data. The eternal optimist may assert that open data, open conversation and total transparency across interdisciplinary, transdisciplinary and cross-sector research governance makes for a safer world.
Access to public statistical data and any number of examples of open data publication from the scientific community suggests that in a few short years the open data agenda is nothing short of here-to-stay. Examples also abound that point to where access and reuse of research data has contributed significantly to the advancement of humankind in medical sciences, social cohesion and living standards to name but a few,
The manner in which technology has facilitated this shift is perhaps as closely aligned with the veillances as research data is with publication. The state of surveillance, the steady march of embedded technologies in everyday objects such as cars, buildings, phones etc. all point to a desire to know more about our movements, our habits, our obsessions.
The data we are speaking of here is dense in scale, rich in diversity and in multiplicity of format. Images, videos, audio recording and locational data are but a few types with a multitude of proprietary and open format data softwares required to access, transfer, resolve or visualise such data.
Typically researchers working in this domain are frequenting between consortium communication services (eg. gMail) , proprietary softwares (eg. Adobe Photoshop), open softwares (eg. Moodle) and any number of data visualisation tools. The risks of data flows escaping the chain of command and becoming available in the wrong hands is evident and therefore organisations look to lock down data transportation, sharing and reuse as a means to control risk.
The constancy of accessing such services and the known data use of social media services by researchers, organizations and automated services to parse information with ease is surely one of the most questionable data collusion or ‘bleeds’ of all time. Consideration for the manner in which researchers interact and as humans seek to ease information overload to identify and gain access to accounts using automated set-and-forget logins, permitting locational tracking and push-pull mobile applications from GIS services, all point to the responsibilities that researchers need to embody as a matter of their own digital identities. In essence, to take responsibility for and recognise that they are are an identifiable source of data in themselves, a cyborg wearing technology and living all day immersed within it.
A string of commercial smart device solutions and cloud based SAAS services have sprung forth that offer the researcher a haven for data yet substantially pose as risks for the rightful data owner in pass through data retention or indeed outright claims to data ownership by the data service provider. Paradoxically, the visibility of data in social media service solutions has also fundamentally changed how researchers interact in contemporary landscape of passive dataveillance, where the ease by which data can be made accessible to others often contravenes the copyright conditions of the source data, all in the name of ease of access and re-use.
Catch crys of ‘show me the data’ or ‘data as gold’ suggest a growing awareness of the importance of understanding the identity awareness of research data as undeniably first and foremost or at least centre in the scheme of contemporary research activity.The identity awareness of research data positions data at the centre of research activity and not a by-product of that research activity - http://figshare.com/articles/Identity_of_Research_Data_/157165
Emergent technologies in the domain of veillances and social computing have over the last decade added exponentially to the avalanche of data, of metadata and to the pace of upgrading systems to cope with increasingly rich data in a plethora of differing formats. The use of point-of view location enabled wearable video cameras, GPS trackers, covert recording devices, DIY drones, wearable body sensors, surveillance cameras, data loggers, vital signs monitors and a plethora of differing smartphone compatible accessories in research projects has added to the challenges of managing this data flood.
These veillance specific technologies are constantly re-invented transcending entirely what had once been previously unconnected datasources buried in the silos of expert centred lab orientations. Researchers in this domain are challenged by the open data agenda and none more so than in activities that they participate within that underpin national security, military, policing and community safety.
With the availability of fast internet connections, ubiquitous networks and seamless service a geographical centre for research activities is moving from location specific to a mobile, distributed, information communication enhanced, automagically responsive locationless state of action.
With the push for greater financial scrutiny, accountability and open access to government funded project data, researchers are increasingly subject to a range of pressures invariably affecting performance and sustainability of research projects which would have once operated in relative blissfully peace and quiet. Data visibility, data interconnections and data reuse has given rise to a desired position of visibility beyond the confines of a project result, beyond the narrow confines of a peer reviewed paper and well and truly exposed to a range of sources that feed and reposition that data for purposes never envisioned possible to the researcher.
There are both affirmative and negative consequences for this current political and policy oriented position on pushing for data visibility, especially for researchers in the domain of the veillances and related social computing.
The risk of data collusion from surveillance activities paints pictures without physically handling observation by manual actions. A mosaic of social computing interactions once thought not plausible and relegated to science fiction add to this soup of data digestion. The matching, tracking and tracing of data remains a current and discernible future gold mine for both researchers who depend on this exposure or providers who categorically defend their right to drill this gold for commercial purpose.
Affirmatively, yet paradoxically, the identity awareness of research data in this domain poses an interesting dilemma for researchers who are accustomed to traditional data publication as overlay journalling, supplemental support material at most. With the move to data actually BEING the publication, researchers are fast mobilising to gain advantage of accredited data repositories and curation activities that enhance visibility of that registered data. DOI (digital object identifier) assignment to data and persistent identifiers for researchers themselves now orient consumers to electronic portfolios through which researchers pour their hard earned efforts for citations, fast shifting traditional metrics measure to a blended alt metrics driven data consumption count.
A fundamental challenge in this domain is a shift in data provenance to that of open licensed status such as CC BY ( Creative Commons) where the reuse of the data is permitted under attribution conditions. In the near past a confusion or outright preclusion of license type prevented a researcher from exercising any further analysis or related research activity with data, in effect disadvantaging both parties.
Constrained by privacy, personal individual security or proprietary commercial advantage data was once ( and in lots of cases remains) locked down and made inaccessible. A new accord of open access changes this state and in doing so fundamentally re-positions the importance of identity of research data. Of particular interest is the manner in which researchers now must conform to state or country based jurisdictional specific laws and policy that informs how an organisation complies with accountability, reporting and data re-use beyond the expiry date of research projects.
Ethical and social impact factors have also dramatically increased exposure of the personal, identifiable and everyday cross pollination of data.
This is particularly the case in workplace settings where personal handheld, wearable and networked connected technologies blur the boundary between research data, research supported data and data as infrastructure in it’s own right. The inter-relationship that data and infrastructure share particularly where researchers who seek colleague interaction with others is often evident in humanities based research practices where information communication practices betwixt data and infrastructure are at the essence of the core of the research activity.
Considering data now AS infrastructure is perhaps the most contemporary position researchers now find themselves amidst as a litmus state for advantage and sustainability. For instance, if the identity of research data is subject to a range of dataveillance attributes ie. DOIs, then the very release of data into the open information chain shifts the shape of an organisation as the data is consumed, reused, attributed and cross-pollinated for powerful purpose.
Researchers are undeniably positioned positively as the architects of re-buildable futures, where repositories that seek to aggregate their brilliance profit from the traffic and the paywalls they seek to position between consumer and creator. This fundamentally also shifts the power differential for publishers who in a contemporary context are setting up data journals that provide resolvable routes to the data neat, to the very core data and not simple a range of overlays that describe the data for publishable ‘paper’ driven.
In this domain, this intersection of sousveillance, surveillance, data veillance and in essence that of the impending Uberveillance there is a need for researchers to regard themselves AS data - to better understand their own activities that provide risk to those they sought to protect under the conditions of ethical restraint and the statutes of law.
The organisational and institutional response to an open data agenda, their preparedness to embrace an open accord for data at a policy level in governments and eventually how they orchestrate these within a research context is akin to the challenge we face as a society with many other data intensive activities in our communities and nations.
Informed researchers who are consciously aware of the identity of data and who act out of an informed state of identity awareness of research data can better address and make best use of data volunteerism without compromising the subject in the process. This is particularly important when mashups of data evidence information that compromises the integrity of the research project.
Researchers who collect, collate and curate data that is generated as a result of activities that mix and match datasets need to be across the complexities and sensitivities of the provenance of data. Privacy, security, license oriented fair use/reuse, equity, consent, provenance complexity, power/control differentials, the persuasions of government authority, regulatory issues and the sustainability of their own practices and results all play a part in the attributive and contributive facettes of research data .
Foremost researchers in the domain of veillances and social computing need to be consciously aware of the identity awareness of research data as responsive and responsible individuals, as members of a greater international scholarly community that is open itself to critical appraisal and transparency.
The identity awareness of research data within the domains of the veillances and social computing is of human consequence.
At the core, the identity awareness of research data is subject to and effected by global trends, by virtue of providing open access to itself now shaping whole communities, instrumentally starting and stopping wars, freeing up warriors to fight famines, fundamentally shaping a new humanity where researchers are at the forefront of actionable change not simply librarianship without a mantle.
Our networked internationality, our jurisdictionlessness brought about by hybrid service models, our own data volunteerism, always on curriculums, mobile transmissions and mashups that make new business hum are as much the researchers dilemma as they are the public in the scheme of data creation, retention, access and most importantly data re-use.
Today I've posted to the ANZ mLearn group about mobile computing.
I've also created a Google+ group for TalkingVTE to take it out of email land. Last night I worked hard on the prospectus for the IEEE ISATS13 event.
Things are flowing and I'm getting excited about my jacket that leigh is building and the trip to Finland. Testing Graphsearch in Facebook and many other things on the run.
For the last five years I've been working with any number of fellow colleagues who have shown an interest in what it means to capture and transmit the the first person perspective, the point of view or as soon would describe the third-eye context.
I can see great potential for where augmented, augmediated, location enabled and intelligent through flow of information can be used in an educational context. I call that process ....educative arrangement.
The space in which a learner connects with others and shares their experience with those who have the capacity to accredit or imbue further skill development from their own unique perspective. A connected learning experience where the retention of data is parallel to the retention of knowledge.
Meta-view for me ( just even the first minute of the video clip) points at what I envisage that near future to be.
Thinking here of two things from two people.
The concept of 'augmediated' from Steve Mann.
The idea that the future is a meld of drones, augmediated and wearable technology by Matthew Schroyer.
I can see all three coming together nicely nicely and I know it's already underway. How long I wonder till we see commercial applications reaching into an educational context that incorporate all three.
Not long I suspect.
It seems we are ready for lift-off literally. It will be interesting to know whether the data from drones can be uploaded into Streamfolio and shared with ease as Geoff and I have often discussed. Only one way to find out.
I'm pleased this nexus between research and the veillances has brought Matthew into my life.
In two weeks I'm heading to Finland to meet with my co-supervisor Professor Teemu Leinonen.
I'm visiting Aalto University as a Visiting Researcher which is an immense honour and privelege. It will be my first time to Finland.
Teemu and I met back in the 2006 as part of a TALO event - FLNW which still remains as one of the most important networked learning events I've ever participated in. Whilst preparing my paper for ISTAS13 tonight I came across a blog post that I made as part of Learnscope activities speaking to mobile blogging and related activities.