In an earlier post, I mentioned that I had initially resisted installing the company approved chat client, until I caved into the badgering of younger coworkers. Today, while working from home, I decided to take the complete plunge and force all of my communications to be initiated via the chat client, by 'unplugging' myself from e-mail. I went so far as to block off my public Outlook calendar with an Out-of-office meeting titled "Working from home – Contact me via the chat tool" and set up a similar Out-of-Office message.
Surprisingly, or not so surprisingly, I completed more work, in a shorter period of time, than I had expected. The chat conversations that I did hold were extremely productive and faster than using traditional e-mail. (I do find it interesting that all of my coworkers have phones, but often times they like to send e-mail/chat requests vs. calling each other.) Furthermore, chat requests that I initiated are displayed as pop-ups on my coworker's desktops which catches their attention faster than an e-mail sitting in their inbox. It is easy to ignore an e-mail whereas it is not so simple to ignore a flashing popup box.
By forcing conversations to be initiated via the chat tool, I ended up using e-mail for its true purpose – electronic mail – and not as a chat-client. Additionally, the chat tool allows for faster back-and-forth and more interactive conversations as compared to what passing e-mail messages can achieve. (Again, my comment about the phone call applies – Why don't people like to use their voice to communicate anymore?) An interesting by-product was that I felt that I was actually engaging in real conversations while chatting - vs. sending e-mails back and forth – and did not feel as disconnected from my coworkers, even though I was offsite (in my home).
Why was the Chat tool installed in the first place?
After reading an article for class, I wonder if the desire to reduce the volume of e-mail was one of the driving purposes for the company to install the chat client. I am sure the cost to send and store an e-mail message is more expensive than the cost to send chat messages back and forth. Another possibility could be that it reduces the need for coworkers to make long distance calls to coworkers in out-of-state offices. (Although given how I have commented on the lack of desire to pick up the phone, I wonder how much money is spent for long distance company wide phone calls.) A third consideration is that the company had banned AOL's IM tool, but most people had found alternative workarounds, such as using Google Chat or other such tools. Perhaps by offering a company supported chatting tool, the company could gain more control over the IM tools that were used on the network.
Regardless of why the tool is available, I have become a complete convert and hope that other coworkers embrace the technology.
Friday, March 13, 2009
Thursday, March 12, 2009
Linking the Virtual and Real in and out of Second Life
I do not enjoy roaming around Second Life since I feel that when I'm in Second Life I become too detected from reality (or the Real Life). However, I have found a wide variety of examples where the lines become blurred between Second Life and Real Life.
The Phone
The Vodafone InsideOut allows users to make phone calls and send text messages to and from Second Life Vodafone InsideOut to Real Life Vodafone InsideOut phones.
Video Streaming
Real life solar eclipses have been broadcasted via streaming video into Second Life enabling Avatars to witness these events within the context of their virtual world.
Linking Virtual E-Commerce to E-Commerce
A new site, hub.eu.com, has claimed to develop "...a groundbreaking on-line community featuring a secure and fully functioning internet shop, tightly integrated into a unique three-dimensional virtual high-street in Second Life" [http://www.prweb.com/releases/2009/02/prweb2172984.htm]. Essentially, it is a virtual mall that front-ends the Internet based websites. Other examples include promotional note cards in Second Life directing the user to a website to purchase the real life version of the product.
Court Cases
Does the current US law apply to Virtual Worlds, such as Second Life? This article discusses how the letters combination "SL" and "SL " are subject to carious types of US trademark laws.
To me, the most interesting linkage is the ability to call and text between the two worlds. None of these cases, though, change my overall excitement about being a part of Second Life. I'll admit, though, that the Lamp Example below is rather interesting and thought provoking. This example provides the ability to still be cognizant of actions occurring in Second Life, even while not physically logged into Second Life. How frightening!
I do wonder if in the future there will be more linkages between Second Life and the Real Life or if these instances will remain few and far between. I suspect though, that US Law will eventually be adjusted to apply to Virtual Reality.
And Finally, The Long Lamp Linking Example
Lamp created in SL and "linked" to a lamp in the home. When the state of one lamp changes (i.e., turned on or off), the other lamp also changes. How it works:
The Avatar touches the virtual lamp object, initiating the "on_touch" event.
The lamp object script emails my home address with the touch event (off or on).
Home email (MS Outlook) recognizes the message sender as from Second Life, then executes the appropriate rule.
The Outlook rule executes an external program (batch file) and passes a variable (off or on).
The Windows batch file calls an executable with a variable that sends the appropriate command to an X10 home automation device on the serial port.
The X10 home automation device emits an RF signal with a digital code [ID, address, code].
A commercial X10 receiver between the real lamp and the wall socket recognizes the digital code and executes the command, causing the lamp to turn off or on.
In the other direction, the X10 devices can be programmed to send an email to the Second Life virtual lamp object, which has code to recognize the event and turn off or on the virtual lamp.
[The entire Lamp section was quoted directly, word-for-word from a PowerPoint Presentation that was not mine.]
The Phone
The Vodafone InsideOut allows users to make phone calls and send text messages to and from Second Life Vodafone InsideOut to Real Life Vodafone InsideOut phones.
Video Streaming
Real life solar eclipses have been broadcasted via streaming video into Second Life enabling Avatars to witness these events within the context of their virtual world.
Linking Virtual E-Commerce to E-Commerce
A new site, hub.eu.com, has claimed to develop "...a groundbreaking on-line community featuring a secure and fully functioning internet shop, tightly integrated into a unique three-dimensional virtual high-street in Second Life" [http://www.prweb.com/releases/2009/02/prweb2172984.htm]. Essentially, it is a virtual mall that front-ends the Internet based websites. Other examples include promotional note cards in Second Life directing the user to a website to purchase the real life version of the product.
Court Cases
Does the current US law apply to Virtual Worlds, such as Second Life? This article discusses how the letters combination "SL" and "SL " are subject to carious types of US trademark laws.
To me, the most interesting linkage is the ability to call and text between the two worlds. None of these cases, though, change my overall excitement about being a part of Second Life. I'll admit, though, that the Lamp Example below is rather interesting and thought provoking. This example provides the ability to still be cognizant of actions occurring in Second Life, even while not physically logged into Second Life. How frightening!
I do wonder if in the future there will be more linkages between Second Life and the Real Life or if these instances will remain few and far between. I suspect though, that US Law will eventually be adjusted to apply to Virtual Reality.
And Finally, The Long Lamp Linking Example
Lamp created in SL and "linked" to a lamp in the home. When the state of one lamp changes (i.e., turned on or off), the other lamp also changes. How it works:
The Avatar touches the virtual lamp object, initiating the "on_touch" event.
The lamp object script emails my home address with the touch event (off or on).
Home email (MS Outlook) recognizes the message sender as from Second Life, then executes the appropriate rule.
The Outlook rule executes an external program (batch file) and passes a variable (off or on).
The Windows batch file calls an executable with a variable that sends the appropriate command to an X10 home automation device on the serial port.
The X10 home automation device emits an RF signal with a digital code [ID, address, code].
A commercial X10 receiver between the real lamp and the wall socket recognizes the digital code and executes the command, causing the lamp to turn off or on.
In the other direction, the X10 devices can be programmed to send an email to the Second Life virtual lamp object, which has code to recognize the event and turn off or on the virtual lamp.
[The entire Lamp section was quoted directly, word-for-word from a PowerPoint Presentation that was not mine.]
Friday, March 6, 2009
Web 2.0 in the workplace
Chat
Over the past few weeks I have been observing how my coworkers are reacting to the availability of Communicator 2007 – a chat client - on our company’s network.
Initially, I resisted installing the application thinking that it would be “just another software program that would suck away my valuable time.” Or, “Why would I want to send chat messages when we have e-mail”? My younger coworkers continued to bug me about installing the application. Finally they told me that they did not use the application to chat, but instead used it to initiate a discussion, and would follow up with a face-to-face meeting. Additionally, a quick chat message arrived at my desk faster than e-mail and thus improves communication speeds. Those explanations made sense, and I have been happily mico-chatting ever since.
As I find coworkers who do not have the tool installed, I have tried to persuade them to install the tool with mixed success. Coworkers who are older than me initially resist the request, with very similar excuses as mine. However, when I explain the power and usefulness of the application, they quickly oblige.
Wiki
Recently I attended a meeting where the corporate Wiki was presented to the audience as an excellent means of communicating information through the company. A more seasoned employee (i.e. older) stood up and said, “What is in it for me? Why should I invest time – that which I do not have in the first place – to enter information into the Wiki?” It was fascinating to see that during the next hour, while the capabilities of the Wiki were exposed, the employee’s opinion changed from disgust, to acceptances, to a willingness to become an active member. This behavior is in stark contrast to the younger employees, who – no surprise – are already using the Wiki and clambering for more collaboration tools.
Both of these experiences have shown me some of the key differences between the younger and older generations that are represented in my company. I think that the older generation initially resists the new technology mainly out of fear or lack of understanding. I think that when suggestions are made to use these new types of technology, if a little education about the topic is also included with the introduction of the tool, initial acceptance rates would be higher.
Over the past few weeks I have been observing how my coworkers are reacting to the availability of Communicator 2007 – a chat client - on our company’s network.
Initially, I resisted installing the application thinking that it would be “just another software program that would suck away my valuable time.” Or, “Why would I want to send chat messages when we have e-mail”? My younger coworkers continued to bug me about installing the application. Finally they told me that they did not use the application to chat, but instead used it to initiate a discussion, and would follow up with a face-to-face meeting. Additionally, a quick chat message arrived at my desk faster than e-mail and thus improves communication speeds. Those explanations made sense, and I have been happily mico-chatting ever since.
As I find coworkers who do not have the tool installed, I have tried to persuade them to install the tool with mixed success. Coworkers who are older than me initially resist the request, with very similar excuses as mine. However, when I explain the power and usefulness of the application, they quickly oblige.
Wiki
Recently I attended a meeting where the corporate Wiki was presented to the audience as an excellent means of communicating information through the company. A more seasoned employee (i.e. older) stood up and said, “What is in it for me? Why should I invest time – that which I do not have in the first place – to enter information into the Wiki?” It was fascinating to see that during the next hour, while the capabilities of the Wiki were exposed, the employee’s opinion changed from disgust, to acceptances, to a willingness to become an active member. This behavior is in stark contrast to the younger employees, who – no surprise – are already using the Wiki and clambering for more collaboration tools.
Both of these experiences have shown me some of the key differences between the younger and older generations that are represented in my company. I think that the older generation initially resists the new technology mainly out of fear or lack of understanding. I think that when suggestions are made to use these new types of technology, if a little education about the topic is also included with the introduction of the tool, initial acceptance rates would be higher.
Presentations
I like the IP presentation since it exposed new side of business to me. I never realized the extent of resources that businesses must invest in order to protect their IP and the types of problems that can surface due to the rise in Web 1.0/2.0 Technologies. The most interesting part of the talk was the discussion surrounding how a cyber squatter was tracked down using publicly available information on the Internet. The story demonstrated, again, how much information is freely available on the Internet, and that the greater population should be knowledgeable that the online world has greatly reduced the ability for people to lead 'private' lifestyles. As a byproduct of the story, I was reminded about www.zillow.com, and I have been heavily using this classic Web 2.0 site to investigate real-estate.
As for the security presentation, I had wished that the presenter had spent more time explaining the true power of the Browser Exploitation Framework (BeEf). This software package truly demonstrates how simple it has now become for any malicious individual to exploit the average web surfer. Not only have traditional businesses moved into the Web 2.0 framework, but malicious individuals have also refocused their attack vectors and tools (BeEF) to take advantage of the Web 2.0 world.
It was also comforting to hear that some of the launch dates for the speaker's websites were delayed due to the security analysis that was preformed prior to the launch. It was unfortunate, though, that the testing was done very late in the development lifecycle, which contributed to the delayed launch. This story reiterates to me how important it is for developers to be taught how to develop secure code, and not to think of security as something that is bolted on at the end of the coding phase.
An alternative approach is to provide the security testing tools to the developers so that they can be empowered to run the tools throughout their development process. This approach can help reduce the number of security related changes that crop up near the end of the development lifecycle.
Both speaker's topics highlighted the importance of the vast quantities of information that is available on the Internet and how it can be used for good and for evil purposes at the same time. The challenge is (1) knowing that the information exists and (2) knowing how to find the information that you need. Both of these challenges can be overcome by networking with the right people – both in the physical and virtual world. My overall take away is that each speaker reinforced the need to develop and to maintain connections with a wide variety of people and online communities/groups that can help me through challenges the physical and virtual world.
As for the security presentation, I had wished that the presenter had spent more time explaining the true power of the Browser Exploitation Framework (BeEf). This software package truly demonstrates how simple it has now become for any malicious individual to exploit the average web surfer. Not only have traditional businesses moved into the Web 2.0 framework, but malicious individuals have also refocused their attack vectors and tools (BeEF) to take advantage of the Web 2.0 world.
It was also comforting to hear that some of the launch dates for the speaker's websites were delayed due to the security analysis that was preformed prior to the launch. It was unfortunate, though, that the testing was done very late in the development lifecycle, which contributed to the delayed launch. This story reiterates to me how important it is for developers to be taught how to develop secure code, and not to think of security as something that is bolted on at the end of the coding phase.
An alternative approach is to provide the security testing tools to the developers so that they can be empowered to run the tools throughout their development process. This approach can help reduce the number of security related changes that crop up near the end of the development lifecycle.
Both speaker's topics highlighted the importance of the vast quantities of information that is available on the Internet and how it can be used for good and for evil purposes at the same time. The challenge is (1) knowing that the information exists and (2) knowing how to find the information that you need. Both of these challenges can be overcome by networking with the right people – both in the physical and virtual world. My overall take away is that each speaker reinforced the need to develop and to maintain connections with a wide variety of people and online communities/groups that can help me through challenges the physical and virtual world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)