Showing posts with label progress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label progress. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Minneapolis high school students take e-field trip to the operating room

About a year ago I observed that 64% of the schools in this region have connectivity at 100 Mbit/s or greater to the K12HSN -- and in turn the Internet and Internet2. I shared a few thoughts on how this might be used to do some nifty things.



Today I came across a news item from the Internet2 web site, covering a high school in Minneapolis that, using an Internet2 connection, participated in a live knee surgery.

As the surgery progressed before them, the 30 juniors and seniors in John Redelsheimer's class reacted to crystal-clear images of sliced flesh and bone with predictable groans and urrrghs. They asked questions of the surgical staff, such as how long the implant might last, and how a full and partial knee replacement differ.

Students in the Robbinsdale Armstrong High School anatomy and physiology class observed Wednesday as a surgeon in Columbus, Ohio, performed total knee-replacement surgery on an 85-year-old woman. And they didn't even board a bus.

Students in the Robbinsdale district are among a select group for whom technological expertise and resources have aligned to allow them to take an e-field trip -- in this case, to Dr. Joel Politi's operating room. Other classes have been to the International Wolf Center in Ely, Minn., a classroom in Egypt and a village in Mozambique.

The session was sponsored by COSI, a science center in Columbus, Ohio. It was made possible by Web-driven video-conferencing technology via Internet2, a superfast network linking universities, industry and government. The basic technology -- the cameras and microphones -- isn't new, but schools haven't been able to use it fully until recently because most lack that fast, powerful connection.

Link to full article is here.



This is what I am talking about!

Thursday, June 5, 2008

Fix The Incongruency - Consider Blogging for Your Company for Fun & Profit

Today I was perusing a marketing book by Chris Baggott et al. (that I haven't actually read yet in full)...and I came across the below passage in the first chapter. I thought it summed up pretty well one of strong arguments for considering having someone within your organization blogging (among other means of connecting with your customers and other constituents such as newsletters, etc.). Give it a whirl around your brain and send me your comments -- if you have any:

What's really funny to me is the fact that when you talk to organizations about what makes them different (worthy, if you will), this answers always lands somewhere in the top three: our people.

So why do you hide your people behind the facade of a brand or an institution? At the end of the day, people associate themselves with other people that they like. Your constituents want to like you and have a relationship with you.
-jr

IPv6 Hyperbole & Opportunities

A oft touted phrase for IPv6 is something to the effect of "an address for every grain of sand"[1]. I have a problem with this statement. It's one of those statements that is technically true but, in fact, untrue -- when used as the answer to the question which it is implied to be answering.

If IP addresses were simply assigned to devices and backbone routers were made aware of every single one it might be true. It's not. It's important to view IPv6 address space size in the right light because otherwise we can end up in some of the same troubles as the current IPv4 Internet. These troubles include not only overall available IP addresses but also routing of these IP addresses across network operator boundaries. After all, what's an IP address without global reach ability? :-)

The way that IP addressing works, there is a hierarchy. This hierarchy is used to group individual IP addresses into larger IP address blocks (known as "prefixes" and sometimes "subnets"). In the early days of IPv4 that was the Class A, B, and C system. While it was replaced with CIDR, the new system still maintained a hierarchy based on network size -- it was simply less rigid. This is still necessary in an IPv6 world.

The size of the protocol's address space -- and how it is broken up -- is of the utmost importance to routing. One of the greatest ironies of IPv4 address consumption is that multi-homing -- the connection to more than one upstream Internet provider for performance, cost, and reliability reasons -- requires an IP block of a particular size. Anything smaller than that accepted by the community (through rough consensus and subject to stragglers, mavericks, and router capacity improvements) and you can't multi-home.

In the IPv4 world this has resulted in waste of IP addresses -- which are never actually assigned to end-user devices -- so that someone can multi-home. It's also made it more difficult for smaller networks that want redundancy. Even if they end up with sufficient IP space, it is likely from one of their ISPs and not portable. If they were truly bigger (as in, if they actually were going to use all of those IP addresses) they'd be able to bypass their ISPs, getting IP space from one of the geographically appropriate pseudo-NGOs that allocate IP address space to larger IP address consumers.

Why all the fuss? Why not just allow anyone and everyone to inject any size block into the Internet routing tables? Because routers have finite resources. The larger the routing tables the more memory and CPU used for every packet pushed through the router. At some point a line is drawn where it is no longer generally accepted to be economically viable. This is where the generally accepted "smallest prefix we'll accept into our routing tables" policies come from. (generally the smallest acceptable block is an /24 in the present IPv4 world, approximately 254 assignable IP addresses for end-user devices).

One of the still active debates in IPv6 is how multi-homing will be performed in the long run. Will the current IPv4 model work? Or does the current model artificially restrict how many folks would actually multi-home if they could? Does the current system encourage too much address waste -- and is that even still a concern? How rapidly would the routing tables grow if a different approach were taken? How will we handle the additional resource burden of the continued co-existence of both IPv4 _and_ IPv6 routing tables for quite some time? etc

IP address portability is (indirectly) addressed in IPv6. That remains to be seen though. Under this model, smaller sites still won't necessarily have their own permanent globally routable IP address blocks. They'll have plenty of real global IP addresses assigned by their ISP now -- without any fuss -- but those IPs will still be controlled by their ISP (i.e. if they opt to change ISPs they will have to return 'em and get new ones from their new ISP). Switching IP address blocks is made (supposedly) easier though. The idea is that deeper auto-configuration is adopted with something akin to current DHCP on steroids used pretty much across the board along with very tight integration with DNS -- and somehow overcoming DNS caching.

I am not advocating against IPv6. On the contrary, for its successful widespread adoption I think that expectations must be set appropriately. And, any open for debate areas -- which don't have to hold back its adoption necessarily -- need to continue to be widely discussed. The more awareness the less that a new adopter is blindsided -- and thus the happier they'll be with the outcome after they proceed with their adoption efforts. And, more importantly, the faster that some more definite solutions / best practices can be better understood and disseminated.

As always, I welcome comments, including contesting any of my conclusions and assumptions above. Discussion and debate is how nearly all progress is made, whether it is with ones self or with others. :-)

[1] “One of the major advantages of the new Internet protocol (IPv6) is that it overcomes the growth problems of the Internet caused by the current limitations in the number of IP addresses needed for every computer or other device in order to access the Internet. The new protocol allows for a virtually unlimited number of (2^128) addresses – enough to assign an address to every grain of sand on all the world’s beaches.”

--“European Commission hosts inaugural event to celebrate the launch of the world's first all IPv6 research network,” Brussels, 14th January 2004

Monday, April 14, 2008

If Only Our Bookshelves Were Social...

Some number of months back I ran across LibraryThing. It allows you to catalog the books you've read or have on your bookshelf or wish to read all online. The social networking and recommendations aspect comes into play when it comes to connecting with other folks that have the same books in their catalog that you do -- since they may have books in their own catalog that would be of interest to you. Part of the idea is also that you can keep an eye on what your friends are reading, instead of simply forgetting the book they recommended last week. I actually wanted an online catalog for other purposes as well:

  • Knowing what books I've already bought and have in a pile somewhere but just haven't gotten around to reading....so I don't buy it again
  • Being able to let friends browse my catalog and ask to borrow books
  • Tracking what I'm reading so that it can automatically be tracked on my blog for folks that are interested in what I'm reading (I'm usually reading 3-5 books at a time, at the rate of between 2-4 a month or so typically is my best guess).
So I started out poking around at LibraryThing. It has an active community. The good/bad thing is that yesterday I discovered there are two other similar sites. The bad part is that now I'll have to check them out. The good part is that a bit of friendly competition ought to bode well for those of us that like the idea and find benefits to having our personal book collections cataloged on-line.

There seem to be three sites that serve this niche:
-jr

Thursday, April 10, 2008

Focusing In Tight Times....and in Good

Barry VanderKelen, who heads up the San Luis Obispo County Community Foundation, has a column entitled Nonprofit Strategies that appears from time to time in the SLO Tribune. I often catch it on-line when it appears. Today's is entitled Stay Focused in tight times. In it he asks Israel Dominguez, who became the new director of Cuesta College's Small Business Development Center in November, "how does a nonprofit organization navigate tough economic times?"

What I liked was the advice given by Mr. Dominguez is good for non-profit....and for profit enterprises alike. And not only in bad times -- but good ones too.

You may want to read the article yourself (link again) then come back here. Anyhow, I'm not known for lacking in opinions so I had a bit to add which is below:

For directors (and business owners), it shouldn't be a matter of thinking in terms of good times versus bad times but a matter of thinking: Who really are my customers? What do they truly want right now? How might I give it to them? And, critically, how do I communicate to them in a compelling way that is compatible with their current mindset?

Good times just means we get to be a bit more lazy in our planning and implementation of all of the above while still drifting by. :-) True success -- the kind that is sustainable anyway -- takes deliberate analysis of the marketplace. Once you're in that position you stop worrying about the ups and downs of the economy other than as variables to incorporate into your analysis about what needs and desires you should be meeting for your customers and making sure your marketing is appealing to them in the new context.

Ironically, with a bit of creativity and persistence, economic downturns can actually be incorporated into ones product/service development and marketing messages. All changes and cycles present opportunities for the astute director/manager/owner.

"You only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out." -- Warren Buffet

Sunday, February 17, 2008

Improvements at Digium? ....and New AA50 Firmware

Yesterday I noted that Digium pushed out a new firmware release for their small business targeted hardware appliance (the AA50) and it looks like a good sized update. It is dated the 4th in the release notes but the 14th elsewhere so I think one or the other is a typo.

They appear to be syncing it up with their other code bases (Asterisk Business Edition, AsteriskNOW). From what I've seen in the public commits and hints on mailing lists from staff, they've been hitting pretty hard on both of those in the QA department of late.

Digium is clearly working on changing how they manage their code bases and the mixture of their commercial and open source releases, to address different customer/user segments and some of the problems that have come up. There was even a note about a split release change they are going to with AsteriskNOW for the GPL purists. Glad to see some serious re-thinking about releases, meeting the desires of different customers, quality control enhancements, and the public evidence of the aforementioned outside of press releases.

I imagine things will continue to trickle down and we'll see more improvements coming together. I'm sure some will turn out to be good ideas while others head back to the drawing board but that's how most progress works, eh? :)

The additional leverage should improve things across the board no matter where you fall in the Asterisk eco-system. Even if you don't use an Asterisk based telephony solution, their moves impact the others in the marketplace (and visa-versa).

Back to the new AA50 firmware release: It would appear to address IVR and ring group related bugs I encountering early on in the GUI, that I ended up bypassing the GUI to workaround. I haven't tried it yet on the AA50 I have access to. I'll probably give it another couple o' weeks in the wild first since it's a .0.1 rev. That client has some other problems and improvements they want me to attack first anyhow. Below are change log excerpts:

Version 1.1.0.1 - February 4, 2008
* Enable Internationalization settings in the GUI
* Provide the ability to select between kewlstart and loopstart
* g722 codec is available
* WAN Side Provisioning of Polycom phones is enabled
* AA50 has been synchronized to ABE C.1 branch source code
* Ring groups number of seconds field has been added
* Ring group bug using ivr option has been fixed.
* Polycom bug concering use of standard timezone has been fixed
* Blackfin math for meetme conferencing has been implemented
* Adjustable flash hook duration is now available in teh GUI
* Calling rule editing and deleting bug has been fixed.
* Bug concerning setting incoming rule to choose voicemail is fixed.
* DTMF twist settings for Brazil have been added to tone generation
* Call forwarding loops have been prevented so that they do not crash the AA50
* Voicemail attachments are set to WAV format.
* Network setting tabs no longer disappear.
* Added an optional full-wave mode DAA ring detect in the sx00i driver

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Finally Was Time To Hire An Assistant

Well, I finally broke down. I hired Sandy and the fact that I can call her anytime with my speed dial is amazing, though it's still taking some adjustment to get used to not having to do it all by myself. She makes sure I don't forget to do things, reminds me about appointments, looks up information for me, calls ahead to let folks know I'm on my way or running late, and jots down thoughts and ideas that occur to me while I'm out and about away from my computer. Oh, and because she gets along well with others, there are endless possibilities to improve how I work. If this trial continues to be so promising, and thus I decide to keep her around, I just hope I can continue to afford her along with the tools she needs to do her job.

-jr

Thursday, January 3, 2008

Is Risk Aversion Our Greatest, Uhm, Risk?

Are WE Holding Ourselves Back?

(This is a draft of an informal essay I wrote today. Figured this would be a good place to post it and garner some feedback). A brief excerpt:

"Often we're concerned about failure. The great irony about the perception most humans have about taking risks and failing is that it nearly insures that most of us will, in fact, have the greatest failure of all: never seeing our most fruitful ideas turned into reality and achieving our most important goals in life. Our built in risk aversion is really, quite ironically, our greatest risk of all. A wolf in sheep's clothing."

"The truth is that most of us can handle far more “risk” than we currently do. On the other hand, we could do with a lot less of the risks we do chose to take on...."
Most of us are capable of far more than we give ourselves credit for. Fortunately, we are the only ones holding ourselves back.

Usually due to a combination of starting something worthwhile but not finishing it and coming up with a good idea but not doing anything about it (taking action), we stand still or, at best, make very very slow progress. Thus, at best, even if we make some progress towards our goals we still do not end up actually passing the goal line.

Often we're concerned about failure. The great irony about the perception most humans have about taking risks and failing is that it nearly insures that most of us will, in fact, have the greatest failure of all: never seeing our most fruitful ideas turned into reality and achieving our most important goals in life. Our built in risk aversion is really, quite ironically, our greatest risk of all. A wolf in sheep's clothing.

Our perception of the risks of most failures are outlandish. While there are certainly some things that are risky enough they could, say, kill us outright, most failures are far less dramatic. Some types of failures can be quite stressful to be sure. Some may even shorten our lives by a few years (due to the stress, though even a bit of short-term stress can sometimes be worth it if it makes the remaining years that much more satisfying). But nowhere near the percentage we think -- of “risky ideas” that we all come up with in our day to day lives -- are even half as horrifying in impact, if we were to take action and fail, as we might convince ourselves they are.

Our comfort zones hold us back. However nearly all good things that come to us, arise from somewhere outside of our comfort zones. Taking on our first real job. Driving for the first time. Taking an entrance or certification exam for a college program, to teach, or some other program we want to pursue to push our careers forward. Marrying for love. Having our first child. Flying for the first time. Learning to swim. Passing a difficult test that forced us to really learn the subject matter rather than simply memorizing a few key concepts. Learning to take our first step (though most of us will lack firsthand memory on this one). Asking someone attractive (in whatever way you deem important) out on a date or even simply for coffee. Starting a blog and posting our real thoughts, opinions, and ideas out there for the world to yell back that we're wrong. :)

While each of these can be stressful in the moment, that feeling soon subsides (especially with practice and time). Without these stretches, life would be so boring and, well, lifeless. We grow, becoming more comfortable in our new terrain. When viewed with a receptive mind, we even learn a lot from our failures.

Nearly all “firsts” in our lives are outside of our comfort zone. In fact, some of them may even be far more realistically life threatening than the other ideas and opportunities that we chose not to take action on. So much for our built-in perceived versus real risks radars.

When I was starting my most recent consulting business I knew there was a good chance that cash would get a little tight for a while. Since I knew that was a high probability outcome along the way towards my goals, I could plan to address it. I could take some actions to handle the looming issue and I could think through some of the options I'd have, depending on how bad things got when the time came. To me, that wasn't really a risk. I trusted myself and thought my way through it. There are few situations in life where we have absolutely no options. It wasn't that I didn't worry about having money to pay the rent and buy food. It wasn't that it didn't stress me out. It was more that the real risks that scared me more than the others were the things that I might have fail(ed) to anticipate and plan. To a certain extent, the ones entirely (or mostly) outside of my control, were a big deal but, again, it's all about having options. As long as I was confident I'd have options, the number of real risks in my world quickly shrunk and became manageable.

The truth is that most of us can handle far more “risk” than we currently do. On the other hand, we could do with a lot less of the risks we do chose to take on....

Our perceptions that result in us not taking on risks that we should while continuing to do things that we shouldn't are even more humorous when considered in another light. I got my first credit card when I was eighteen. It was an American Express. A Mastercard soon followed. At first, I had the money so it really wasn't a big deal. Then I left my comfy job to try my hand as a pseudo-partner in a friend's business venture. That fizzled out. I had some savings from a well timed stock option sell-out. It didn't take long to burn through that. After all, I'd gotten used to a pretty good salary (even if I hadn't been only eighteen at the time). I temporarily struck out on my own (consulting without any specific plan other than to explore new business opportunities) and then, a short time later, became a partner in another new business venture. Well, my financial situation changed quite a bit over that time period. And, like many early entrepreneurs without a solid win under their belts, my partners and I didn't pay ourselves much since we were in start-up mode. But, hey, I didn't have to change my lifestyle – I still had all those credit cards, right?

Give nearly anyone a few dollars and they'll have no problem finding a way to spend it to get something they need (let's not worry about the distinction between need and want for today). Now combine that with easy access to credit (credit cards and home equity loans are the most common current incarnations). Coupled with the basic desires that we all have to please ourselves, get a bit of instant gratification from time to time, and reward ourselves for a job well done or some ill we suffered that day, and our perceptions of risk go out the door.

Suddenly we're no longer thinking about how we'll afford to pay off that large credit card balance next month, how much extra we'll really have paid for today's little indiscretion due to the compounding interest we'll have paid before the balance is gone months or years down the road, and, worse in my mind, the opportunity cost that slowly at first and incrementally over time builds up until we have convinced ourselves that we “just don't have the money to do whatever we want”.

We want everything now so much that we put ourselves in a permanent position of never actually getting what we want. Irony can hurt, especially when it's wired into the standard operating procedure of our brains. It's a bit like the inverse of “wanting to have our cake and eat it too”. We use perceived risks as excuses not to do the things we really should if we actually want to achieve our goals. And we toss out the real matter-of-fact risks when it comes to acquiring the things we could probably do without for just a bit longer. If only... If only...

“I want it now, the future be damned!” Don't get me wrong. There's a time and a place for this attitude – it can be what gets us through some days. We're all human and I doubt we're supposed to be perfect all the time. Besides it's no fun to be perfect. The problem is recognizing when it has become a habit, a regular occurrence, and something that we keep doing even while making excuses about not doing the things we know we really should. (Sadly it can become a feedback loop unto itself, it almost being worse if we are aware that this is what is going on but don't have the strength left to pull oneself out of it so we feed the indiscretion monster more to get through each day and it gets worse -- so watch out!)

While we can be our own worst enemies, remember that is a good thing as well. It means it's under our control. While it's not easy to fight what is hard wired into our own brains, it can be easier than many other battles we participate in outside of ourselves. It's certainly a more important (and probably much more effective) fight. I challenge you:

  1. What is one really attractive goal you have?
  2. What step, or even steps if you are really on it, have you taken in the last day to get you there?
  3. What about in the last week?
  4. The last month?
  5. The last year?
  6. The last decade?
  7. Don't beat yourself up over the answers to #2-#6. More importantly, what are you going to do TODAY?
  8. Now, to make it a little easier to stay on the ball tomorrow with your new ambition, what is something you can do tomorrow as well?
  9. And the next day?
  10. And the next?
  11. Good work --- keep it up! Momentum has a tendency of building, even from nearly nothing. You'll be there in seemingly no time if you keep it up. But you do have to START somewhere. Get moving. NOW.
-jr

Thursday, December 20, 2007

Food For Thought: What Do You Think of My Idea?

Chris Lyman, the CEO/Janitor of Fonality, made an insightful post on his blog regarding entrepreneurs and aspiring entrepreneurs here. I don't have much to add -- I thought it was good food for thought and wanted to file it somewhere so what better place then on my blog.

I think it's a good idea to fill your thoughts constantly with lots of inputs from all over. Just don't take any one of them too seriously. Consider everything and then decide where you want to go, on your own.

Here's an excerpt from Chris's post:

For 10 years now people have approached me with business ideas, and asked: "What do you think of my idea?"
[...]

And I have always taken their "What do you think of my idea?" very seriously. After all, asking for an opinion on something that you have labored over is difficult - it's a moment of vulnerability as you open yourself up to a potential battery of cerebral criticism and intellectual pugilism. It's not easy ...and I know this.

Thus, I listen to their pitches, I read their business plans, and opine. I try to give thoughtful advice on the "what-ifs" and the "how-tos" and I introspectively incant my "lessons learned."

But, it never sits right with me. And, slowly I have come to hate this question. And, finally I know why.

The entire act of questioning before leaping is fundamentally opposed to the true spirit of entrepreneurialism. Being an entrepreneur is about doing something NEW that has NEVER been done before, or doing something old in a totally NEW way. You just don't build a bad-ass business by being a me-too. In short, you gotta bring the NEW to outdo the OLD and the NEW can never be known because it hasn't happened yet and therefore ANY attempt to discuss the new as if you know what the hell you are talking about is an ego-trip and I don't want a ticket to that ride.

Let me illustrate my own idiocy at predicting the future:

In my last company, I had a Director of Sales named Jon Venverloh. One day, in late 1998, he showed up to work and said he was moving up north to take a sales job at Google. I laughed at him and asked him why the heck he would go to a company with no revenue and no revenue model. Remember this is 1998. He said: "I like Northern California better and I can ride my bike." Believing he was making a lousy career move, I wished him luck. Well, I just googled (hehe) Jon and he is currently listed as an Executive in charge of Federal Sales for Google, Inc.

Go figure. Nobody knows who is going to be the next Google. Least of all me. And the mere fact that you are asking means that you are doubting yourself and doubt is what you CANNOT have as you strive to create the NEW. Don't let the opining and the opinionated slow you down.

-jr

Friday, November 30, 2007

The Modem Free Generation




Wow, how time does fly. We now have, at least in the US and elsewhere, our first generation of Internet users that have no idea what a real modem sounds like. For these folks, this is the closest they'll ever get to one.

While I'm not as old as the photo above by any means, my first modem was an external U.S. Robotics 2400 bps (generously loaned to me by a friend's father whom I later bought a more affordable Gould 1200 bps modem from), so I suppose, in a way, even I was late to the game.

Sure, with Caller ID we still have modems in our phones (at least until end-to-end SIP can do away with all that) and xDSL is still really a glorified analog modem but they are stealthy. Poll a random nine year old on the street with a modem carrier audio sample or ask if they've ever cursed when they forgot and set ATM2 instead of ATM0 or ATM1 and you'll get a blank look (and probably a scream for mommy to come and take them away from the scary crazy guy though a few smart top-of-their-class nine year olds, just starting their introduction classes to CCIE certification of course, might think I'm talking about this which is at least in the right vein).

I've yet to see an xDSL modem that has a speaker (let alone supports the AT command set) and rarely do I hear the caller ID carrier unless I'm on a really cheap phone and pick up the phone fast enough.

Maybe we can bring it back in vogue by customizing our mobile phone ring tone to sound like the good old days. And, demanding that xDSL modem vendors, add speakers. On other hand, there aren't too many of these around anymore either. And, man, were those things slow.

AT
OK
ATZ
OK
ATM0
OK

-jr