Monthly Archives: February 2014

The Beginning of the End of the World Wide Web?

Outline map of world overlaid with razor wireI wrote a blog post recently on the fallout of the revelations about the US National Security Agency (NSA) spying last year. One of my concerns at the time was the balkanization of the Internet. Balkanization is the process of drawing national borders around the Internet, much the same as physical borders. We would no longer have the World Wide Web, instead it would be broken up into the Web of Germany, the Web of Japan, the Web of Chile, and so on. This would be done to protect a nation from activity such as spying on another nation. National Internet traffic would stay within country boundaries and a strong national firewall would be constructed for traffic that had to move across the border. I have been reading stories the past week that have confirmed my fears: nations are slowly moving toward just such a model.

Germany

A recent article out of the UK reveals that Germany is floating plans for a European communications network meant to bypass the US and prevent spying by the NSA and the British counterpart, the GCHQ. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is quoted as saying:

“Above all we’ll talk about European providers that offer security to our citizens, so that one shouldn’t have to send e-mails and other information across the Atlantic, rather one could build up a communications network inside Europe.”

The Germans are particularly incensed by revelations last year that the Chancellor’s cell phone was monitored from the US Embassy in Berlin. This is just the beginning of a proposal, but it feels like the beginning of walls being built.

Brazil

According to a recent article in IEEE Spectrum, Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff is pushing legislation: “… to force Internet companies such as Google and Facebook to store local data within the country’s borders. She also wants to build submarine cables that don’t route through the United States, set up domestic Internet exchange points, and create an encrypted national e-mail service.” Now, those are not just switches and routers that would be directed inward but national cables would be off limits, too. In other words, Brazilian traffic could only flow over Brazilian cables.

China

The Great Firewall of China already exists; it restricts Chinese citizens’ access to the full Internet. There are censorship mechanisms in place to ensure that information going in and out of China meets government standards. The same filters are already in place in Russia although not to the same extent. India is also looking for ways to close the borders of the Internet. All of these efforts counter one of the basic premises of the Internet—the fact that it is open and accessible to all.

My Thoughts

I agree with a recent open letter to President Obama from Peter Singer and Ian Wallace of the Brookings Institute. They state in the letter:

“The sooner that we can articulate a clear, robust case for a U.S. vision for the future of the Internet, the better. And that needs to be one that, while acknowledging the natural shift away from U.S. control, makes both the pragmatic and principled arguments for preserving the values that have made the Internet such a successful driver of positive global economic, political and social change.”

The Internet is not US-centric, although history and some countries would suggest otherwise. It must remain an open exchange without borders, without censorship, and without state oversight. The whole metaphor of the “cloud” transcends borders and allows the Internet to operate efficiently and openly. Advancements in networking technology have allowed us to operate across the globe and I believe that it would be a giant step backwards to erect artificial barriers where they don’t belong.

Are you concerned about a splintering of the Internet? Let me know your thoughts.

 

Author Kelly BrownAbout Kelly Brown

Kelly Brown is an IT professional, adjunct faculty for the University of Oregon, and academic director of the UO Applied Information Management Master’s Degree Program. He writes about IT and business topics that keep him up at night.

 

Too Many Coders?

Child using a computer with binary code on the screenI have been reading a number of articles lately lamenting the fact that we do not have enough programmers or coders in America and not enough students are entering and graduating from computer science programs. The Kentucky Senate last week passed a bill that would allow for programming classes to count as foreign language credits in public schools. The bill still needs to pass the Kentucky House to become law. There is also the oft-quoted number from the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) that only 2.4 percent of current bachelor’s degrees are awarded to computer science majors.

The Argument

I think that the argument is overly simplistic and ignores cycles, needs, and capacity. In terms of cycles, there is a reason for fewer computer science majors today. If you look at the historical trends in computer science degrees displayed in this interactive chart, you will see that computer education peaked at 4 percent of all bachelor’s degrees in 1985 and again in 2004. I believe that the introduction and popularity of personal computers in the late 1970s and early 1980s led to the first peak. It takes four years to complete a bachelor’s degree, so the cycles are offset. Similarly, I believe that the second peak was because of the dot com boom of the late 1990s and very early 2000s. In both cases, it was very cool to be in computers and desirable to pursue computer education. Conversely, the troughs occurred in 1995 and 2009. By 1990, computers had become commonplace but we had not yet entered the Internet boom. In 2004–2006, sizable tech companies and Internet companies such as HP, IBM, EDS, and Cisco were laying off large numbers of employees. My belief is that during the layoffs, an education and career in tech did not look very enticing. Computer science degrees have come out of the trough since 2009 and are on the rise again; that may be in part attributed to the boom in mobile computing. Computing is cool again.

Broad-based STEM Education

That being said, I am a huge advocate of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education, and I think all students should be solidly grounded in those disciplines. They can take that education and those skills into a number of vocations and professions. I don’t believe, however, that everyone needs to become a programmer or be proficient in programming, despite the proclamations of Mark Zuckerberg and Barack Obama on Code.org. I laud their efforts to at least introduce coding to all students but it is just one small part of a larger education in technology and science.

There are other emerging fields that are outside the boundaries of traditional computer science. Perhaps it is a matter of semantics, but students should also consider a career in bioinformatics, which is a combination of statistics, computer science, and biology. This is a chance to apply computing and data analysis skills to the task of gene sequencing and other biological research. There are other emerging fields as well, such as robotics and materials science. Work in all of these specialties is going to take a solid background in math, science, technology, and even some programming. They are all exciting areas waiting for those willing to tackle the rigorous work necessary to make a break through discovery.

My Thoughts

These are exciting times to be involved in computing and analytics and there are diversified disciplines looking for those skills. I think the key to the future is a solid applied STEM education that will prepare students for the challenges ahead. The opportunities are broad and other possibilities should not be ignored by focusing only on programming skills or computer science degrees. What do you think? Let me know.

Author Kelly BrownAbout Kelly Brown

Kelly Brown is an IT professional, adjunct faculty for the University of Oregon, and academic director of the UO Applied Information Management Master’s Degree Program. He writes about IT and business topics that keep him up at night.

 

Personal Health Monitoring

Doctor working at the hospital and using a smart phoneA number of years ago, I had an idea for a health monitoring device that would be embedded in your door frame. The idea was that you would go out the door in the morning and, as you passed over the threshold, you would be scanned and your vital statistics would be recorded and sent to you via e-mail. If anything were really amiss, the same e-mail would also go to your physician.

I think I was on to something but my vision has been surpassed by devices currently being developed and coming on to the market. Now, you have constant monitoring and constant feedback. It is no longer a single snapshot like my doorframe idea. In this post I would like to focus on technology that will help you get fit, stay fit, and be healthy.

Imec

Imec is a research firm based in Belgium. They are working on developing and commercializing nanotechnology that can be used in health monitoring. They are developing systems on a chip that will help you track your blood characteristics and transfer that information to an intuitive user interface on your smart phone. If you are concerned with the results, you can then share that information with your physician at the touch of a button. They are expanding their research and products to develop a body area network. This may well be the next evolution of the wide area network (WAN) and the local area network (LAN). Watch a great video showcasing their research.

Moticon

Moticon is a German firm that has developed a product that gathers information about your step, your gait, and your foot temperature via sensors in a shoe insole. The information can then be transferred via Bluetooth to a smartphone for analysis. While this is primarily targeted towards people recovering from a leg injury it can be helpful in monitoring stressors and body alignment for athletes, particularly runners.

Nuubo

Nuubo is a Spanish firm selling a small wearable device that provides a running electro cardiogram to help monitor your heart rhythms and other vitals. The data can be collected and assessed remotely via a smartphone or tablet. This is a great product for cardiac patients being treated off-site for heart conditions such as arrhythmia. It is also a great tool for athletes and trainers so they can understand the implications of peak and sustained performance.

Google Smart Contact Lens

Google is developing a contact lens that would monitor glucose level via tears. Once released as a product, this would be a welcome relief to those with diabetes that now monitor their blood sugar via a pin prick, sometimes multiple times a day. This is a great development and a unique use of technology to ease discomfort to those affected.

Climbax

Climbax is a new product out of the UK that is designed for monitoring performance of rock and ice climbers. These same products have been available for cyclists and runners for years but are new for climbers. The device consists of a pair of bracelets with embedded sensors. The bracelets are sealed to be impervious to water or chalk. When the climb is over, the athletes can then upload their climb to the Climbax website and store and analyze their performance. This will help them to adjust their methods and improve their climbing ability in the future. This product is just launching and is relying on Kickstarter funds to take the company into sustainable manufacturing.

Lumo Lift

Lumo Lift is a product from Lumo BodyTech that monitors your steps, mileage, and calories burned but even more importantly, it monitors your posture and gives you a gentle reminder, via vibration, if you slouch. It is a small, discreet monitor worn against your body via a magnetic clasp on your clothes that connects to a smartphone app. I like the steps and calorie monitoring, but I would hope that you would only need to be reminded about your posture for a limited time until it becomes second nature to stand and sit up straight. This product is just being introduced in a limited run.

My Thoughts

This is a very exciting time in personal health monitoring. Some of the products being introduced seem like technology in search of an application, but overall the new products appear to be thoughtful in the way they address a genuine need. Such products can be used by athletes and concerned consumers, but they can also be used as part of a remote monitoring solution for health care patients. I believe that the proliferation of new devices is due to new and lower cost sensors and also to inexpensive Bluetooth and cloud technologies for storing this new information. Once the data is collected, however, we are still going to need smart analysts and smart application designers who can synthesize the data and make it useable to effect new and healthier behavior.

Author Kelly BrownAbout Kelly Brown

Kelly Brown is an IT professional, adjunct faculty for the University of Oregon, and academic director of the UO Applied Information Management Master’s Degree Program. He writes about IT and business topics that keep him up at night.

Is The Network Really Neutral?

shutterstock_47033419There has been a lot of noise lately about net neutrality in the United States, but I have been wondering: how about neutrality on the rest of our planet? We become focused on our problems, or potential problems, and often forget that we are not the only players in this game. The Internet is not used or owned exclusively by the US but also by the rest of the world, including China and Third World countries. How do they view net neutrality or are we making much ado about nothing?

Definition

This is the best definition that I have found for net neutrality:

“Simply put, net neutrality is a network design paradigm that argues for broadband network providers to be completely detached from what information is sent over their networks. In essence, it argues that no bit of information should be prioritized over another. This principle implies that an information network such as the Internet is most efficient and useful to the public when it is less focused on a particular audience and instead attentive to multiple users.”

Just as the telegraph network of the 1800s and the telephone and electrical networks of the 1900s were and are neutral, the argument is raised that the Internet should follow suit.

What Is Different in 2014?

The term “net neutrality” was coined over ten years ago and is based on the early operating principle of the Internet that the network would be open equally to all. In December 2010, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) tried to codify that accepted policy by creating the “Open Internet Order”. The flaw was that they were using the same playbook developed to regulate telephone companies. Internet providers, however, are classified as “information carriers,” not “communication carriers”. Verizon challenged this order in 2011 and the courts finally threw out the Open Internet Order this month, based on the fact that the FCC did not have jurisdiction to create that order. Suddenly, the term net neutrality is back in vogue and back in tweets.

Is The Rest of the World Open?

I was curious as to whether the rest of the world enjoys open Internet, regulated Internet, or tiered Internet. Tiered Internet is the doomsday scenario when Internet service providers charge customers and content providers a premium for higher bandwidth applications. This is the fear of the absence of regulated open Internet. In researching this question I came across a lot of theories and conjectures at both ends of the spectrum, but not a lot of straight answers. Just as the United States is trying to get a handle on how free the Internet should be, other countries are asking similar questions. The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), which is an arm of the United Nations, held a conference in December 2012 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. At that conference, there was an attempt to float an international telecommunications treaty, but unlike many smaller countries, the US, Canada, and the UK refused to sign the treaty. This was a failed attempt to give more regulatory power over the Internet to the United Nations through the ITU. The next conference will take place in October this year in Busan, South Korea; it is assumed that a similar vote will come up again.

My Thoughts

It is not only the United States that is struggling with how or whether to regulate the Internet, the same scene is being played out on the international stage. The European Union is talking about it, China is talking about it, and South American countries are talking about it as well. They all are struggling to understand how to protect themselves from corporate interests or even from their neighbors, while ensuring that the citizens continue to enjoy unfettered access. My take is that Internet 3.0 will require a sizable investment in infrastructure, and if we want to continue to enjoy increasing access and options, we have to be talking about where those funds will be coming from.

Do you have an opinion on the current net neutrality debate? Let me know.

Author Kelly BrownAbout Kelly Brown

Kelly Brown is an IT professional, adjunct faculty for the University of Oregon, and academic director of the UO Applied Information Management Master’s Degree Program. He writes about IT and business topics that keep him up at night.