Avatar by name

Philipp Lenssen wrote an application for the 24-Hours Application Challenge at Friendfeed that converts a name into an avatar. Depending on how I spell my name and whether or not I include my middle initials, I come up with different avatars.

Avatars for my name created with the String to Avatar Converter

Avatars for my name created with the String to Avatar Converter

They look all very male-centric to me. Was it easier to create male faces? Is the converter geared towards the male internet community?

I guess I won’t use any in a real profile, especially the mean-loooking ones, unless I want to pose as somebody else and hide my true self. :-)

Give plants a blog

Thanks to Alan Levine’s blog post about the blogging plant in Japan I ran across this novelty. As can be read on Pink Tentacle,

Midori-san started blogging about a week ago. So far, the plant’s highly structured posts summarize the day’s weather, temperature and lighting conditions, describe its overall physical condition, tell how much light it received via the user-activated lamp (see below), and explain how much fun the day was. Each post also includes a self-portrait photo and a plant-themed pun (in Japanese), which Midori-san likely did not write. A graph at the top of the sidebar shows the plant’s surface potential in real-time.

Impressive for a plant. Now we will know all about it and can monitor its growth cycle, need for light etc. very closely. I wonder what the inventors come up with in the future. Will the blog send a message to the cell phone of the owner reminding him / her to water it? That’s what I would need in order not to neglect my oxygen producers. :-)

Visitors to a web site have the opportunity to treat the plant to some light as Pink Tentacle points out:

Readers can also treat Midori-san to a dose of fluorescent light either through the website [...]:

To activate a web-controlled fluorescent lamp positioned next to the plant inside the cafe, click the “Give Light to Midori-san”button at the bottom of the widget, enter your name (or a nickname), and click OK. [...]

Once the lamp activated, the widget shows a real-time view of Midori-san under the light.

Judging from the blog content and the numerous “thank yous” below the fold of each post, Midori-san seems to really appreciate every chance it gets to photosynthesize.

This is really nice for the plant. However, when I read this, I was reminded of the movie “Untraceable” in which a killer sets up a web site that is connected to his murder instruments. The more people visit the web site the more quickly is the victim exposed to the lethal poison etc. Unfortunately, there is usually a dark side to a good intention and invention.

Salad Bowl vs. Melting Pot: Old Metaphors Revisited

In preparation for CCK08′s Week 5 (yeah, I did some reading again, finally :-) ), I read Stephen Downes’ transcribed presentation on “Groups vs Networks: The Class Struggle Continues“. He makes compelling distinctions between groups and networks and uses old metaphors that I know from my English and North American Cultural Studies classes.

Groups – groups are defined by their unity. In fact, one of the first things you do in a group is you try to maintain its unity. A group need to be, in some sense, cohesive, united, “e pluribus unum”. Or to keep this politically fair, “The people united will never be defeated,” the “melting pot”, the encouragement to be the same, the encouragement to have the same values, to follow the same vision, to be, in some relevant way, like the others because that’s what the group is. (Downes, 2006, ¶40)

Image by Watchcaddy, June 11, 2008

"Melting pot dinner" by Watchcaddy, June 11, 2008

Networks, on the other hand, are salad bowls:

In Canada, we were all taught, is a salad bowl where each entity, the lettuce, the tomato, the whatever, cucumber, I don’t know what you put in salads. That’s what we put in salads. All of these things maintain their distinctness and their identity and by maintaining their distinctness and identity, they create a whole that is something distinct and different from any individual entity and indeed, something that cannot be created without maintaining that distinctness and identity.

[...] And so there is this idea of the network, there is this idea of distinctness and diversity in an environment where people are encouraged not to be the same, but to be different. (Downes, 2006, ¶46-47)

Sald in metal bowl by mollyali, October 23, 2007

"Salad in metal bowl" by mollyali, October 24, 2007

These two metaphors provide me with a very clear distinction between these two concepts that help to keep them apart. Stephen’s tabular comparison between groups and networks is of additional help to get some characteristics straightened out.

Groups and Networks by Stephen Downes, September 24, 2006

Groups and Networks by Stephen Downes, September 24, 2006

This distinction had me already wondering before when the terms “group” and “network” were used in CCK08. Finally, the week has arrived where these issues will be addressed closely. :-)

Do we have groups in our course or subnetworks?

In presentations and the synchronous sessions, there has been a lot of talk about groups within CCK08. Are they true groups taking Stephen’s characteristics from his eFest presentation into consideration or are they something else? The only argument indicating to “group” is that some aspects of CCK08 are closed at first glance: you must be a member of Facebook, LinkedIn, Twine, Diigo, Google Groups, Second Life etc. to have access to unofficial parts of CCK08 that were created in these services. However, membership in these groups is open to anyone who wants to identify with CCK08. We are free to come, join, contribute, and leave. Some other avenues are entirely open: the course blog, the course wiki, the course Moodle (though you have to sign in when you want to contribute), the Google map, the blog posts, Twitter messages.

The “groups” within CCK08, at least as far as I perceive them, are not coordinated or dominated by one person, but everybody can contribute equally and bring in her/ his points of view. Usually, there is a person who sets up a certain service, e.g. the Facebook group, the Twine etc., but that does not mean that this person dictates the direction of the discussion or the (correct) use during the course. To speak in the salad bowl metaphor: This person just provides the bowl in which all ingredients can mix happily.

Then, is such an arrangement still a group? I had feared that this discussion might have already happened as Week 3 already dealt with network properties. However, searching the Moodle forums, I only came up with one reference for “subnetwork”, but the discussion centers on something else. As I do not have an overview of all blog posts, I may be missing reflections and / or discussions that have been going on there about this topic.

Looking at Stephen’s comparison, I think, we form subnetworks within our CCK08 network and not groups. Thus, do we use the term “group” only in a very wide everyday sense of something like “people gathering together to accomplish something” (leaving out all other aspects like leadership, prescribed values, centralization etc.)?

Who cares about grades?*

@timbuckteeth (aka Steve Wheeler) tweeted his Twitter grade today (and beat me to a blog post that I got to know about via Twitter while writing this one here). It was at 67. In his blog post, Steve brings up examples of edubloggers that score much higher or are not found at all for no explainable reason. Thus, I can happily refer to his work without coming up with my own list. :-)

However, while I was unaware of Steve’s post, I had already run the Twitter Grader on my account (yeah, I know, now it’s not only ego Googling but also ego grading ;-) ), and came up with a 47. That means that I “score higher than 47 percent of the other user profiles that have been graded.” Randomly running another account through the mill, I chose @gsiemens and he got a “0″. Wow. Surely, that must have been a mistake. After re-grading him because he can’t have such a low grade (and because I messed up my first 2 screencasts), he finally had a grade of 97.7. That is more like my perception of his Twitter activity. ;-)

Now I was curious as to the methods used for the grading. The website only gives the following general information:

The Twitter Grade measures the relative power of a Twitter user. It is calculated as a percentile score. [...]

Your grade is calculated using a combination of factors including:

* The number of followers you have
* The power of this network of followers
* The pace of your updates
* The completeness of your profile
* …a few others.

The “a few others” are the bolts that make this interesting. What are these? How do they figure in? What were the selection criteria for the 36,133 ranks? What do these ranks represent? There are 3,134,420 accounts according to TwitDir (stats from today) that only lists public accounts. So how does it work? Or is it just a nice gadget that you try once, look at your rank, be (not so) happy and then never think back to it?

The grader does not return a pretty visualization to look at, but the final grade is already powerful in itself if you take it seriously and try to figure out what your grade actually means for your Twitter network.

I don’t really trust the calculations (which you should never do anyway unless you manipulated them yourself) because the ranking does not stop at 100. @Scobleizer, a high-flyer in terms of followers (34,968), following (20,991) and updates (14,402) got a rank of 100.3! Explain that to me please. ;-)

Scobleizers twitter grade

Scobleizer's twitter grade

On a lighter note and aside from statistics etc.: While you are waiting for the computing teacher to come up with your grade, you are treated to some human phrases instead of the usual “Loading…”.

The human in Twitter Grader (Flash required)

* … when it comes to Twitter?