What does the Internet Actually Cost?

During our discussion this week, one of the discussions that I found particularly interesting was the idea of contemplating the cost of Internet and what it might mean to us to have a completely free Internet in Canada. Some of the ideas we shared were related to whether or not this would have an impact on the “digital divide” in that more people would have access to information. Others argued that it is quite easy today even in a “paying society” to get access simply by going down to your local library. In many cases what it might come down to is the time and ease of access in that in most homes, should you have all the necessary hardware (which is also an issue in itself), you can access the internet to answer any question you might have at any time 24/7.

So why isn’t it free and what are the costs associated with providing Internet services? Exactly what are we paying for?

Wiki Answers: Why do we have to pay an Internet Provider?

“There are several factors, but the most prominent is to pay for the physical infrastructure. While no one company or government controls the Internet, there are physical cables, which must be buried and maintained. There are also the individual servers, which correspond to individual web sites -- these require electricity, a controlled climate, a brick-and-mortar location and personnel to oversee and maintain. Without knowing the actual breakdown, these are the two major factors involved in paying for access to the Internet.”

So with this, we need to pay our Internet Service Providers (ISP) i.e. Rogers, Bell, Shaw etc. to maintain some sort of physical maintenance of the cables and infrastructure. That would definitely make sense and I would buy in to the model of sharing those costs in return for a service. But the question that I might have is related to the providers that do not own infrastructures. Do they simply “pirate” the connection and take over as a provider at a reduced rate?

The other question that came up in my mind is what our service providers actually provide us and what kind of impact would that have on the content that we see. What’s interesting is that there is a significant debate is Canada right now related to Internet pirating and “traffic shaping” practices. What “traffic shaping” refers to is ISPs using various forms of technology to favour one application, site or program over another.

Google, Amazon, others want CRTC to ban internet interference
Last Updated: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 4:53 PM ET
By Paul Jay, CBC News

“In a submission filed Monday to the Canada Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) in advance of a July probe into the issue of internet traffic management, the Open Internet Coalition said traffic shaping network management "discourages investment in broadband networks, diminishes consumer choice, interferes with users' freedom of expression, and inhibits innovation. If the commission allows Canadian ISPs to apply application specific traffic management practices to legal content or applications, it would be out of step with U.S. telecommunications policy and would disadvantage Canadian consumers and application providers," wrote the Open Internet Coalition.”

What’s interesting is that apparently this has been going on for years under the guise that the ISPs were simply protecting the ISPs from piracy and consumers from “undesirable sites” but basically what happens is that controls are being placed on your internet that are based on the service providers discretion. In theory, your search results will be different based on the provider that you are with and potentially their suppliers sitting in their back pockets.

So back to our earlier discussion on what would happen in a free Internet scenario? Costs have to be recuperated from somewhere to pay for the all-important “infrastructure” that they are supporting. Any guesses on where this would come from? I think we were on to something.

Full Articles
http://www.neoseeker.com/news/9965-google-amazon-and-more-trying-to-ban-canadas-traffic-shaping/
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/02/24/tech-net-neutrality.html

When it's better to just sent a Text....

We have recently been reviewing the social aspects as they relate to the Internet and the process of forming and maintaining social bonds with others. Through our readings we can come to the conclusion that we as a society have no consensus as to whether the Internet hinders or helps these bonds as one can certainly post an argument in either direction.

There are so many though that would argue that the Internet has an adverse effect, increasing depression and neglect of close relationships. What is interesting as mentioned in the Bargh, Mckenna article is that the television, which crept onto the scene as an innocuous form of entertainment, probably had the biggest impact on our social lives.

It changed our culture because instead of going out to meet with our friends, we now stay in and are entertained without really having to socialize with anyone if we don’t feel like it. How often now would you read an article on this subject though? We have accepted the television and now have bigger fish to fry.

I sit on the fence myself in terms of my beliefs on the effects of Internet technologies on close relationships. I do believe that the process has made us a bit “lazy” in our communication, but I am not sold entirely on the notion that these new technologies deteriorate relationships or that the anonymity of it will give people the venue to stand up and be that nasty person they have always wanted to be because they are shielded by medium.

When I think lazy though, I see so many examples of this. I have close friends that use MSN messenger to communicate while they are in the same house at the same time. We are an efficient society now in that MSN is much easier than getting up and walking down the hall.

I often think to myself, why have a detailed conversation with someone when it is more efficient to send a text? This technology means that I can from anywhere in the world, compose, address and send out a message that will provide all of my friends and family with the information that they need to know in less than a minute. If I were to do this by phone, this would take hours.

If you skip the formality of the greetings, the updates on what they have been up to and finally get to the message, it is a lengthy process for a double click society when half the time our phone conversations are based on partially scripted social requirements. We ask everyone how they are but do we really have a dying and intense need to know “how they are?” Sometimes, but sometimes you just need to get information out.

With close relationships I tend to believe there has to be a foundation of a certain level of intimacy that I believe must be created in a face-to-face environment. It comes back to that trust factor in that it has been established to the extent that a text can suffice because the recipient knows that your bonds exist.

I expect though that with the more exposure that we have to social groups and Internet communities that my views will eventually evolve and soon enough, if not happening right now, the bonds will and can be established in this new form.

Did You Know?

You might have seen this already but check it out! Similar concepts as a "Vision of Students" today. Apparently Sony previewed this at one of their last corporate events.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL9Wu2kWwSY

Brain Plasticity

I posted this video because I found this particularity interesting as it relates to the learning process. This idea of "plasticity" of the brain is something really interesting in terms of how we learn and how are brain adapts structurally and finds new ways to accomplish things.

So much of past research has relied on the fundamental belief that we are "hard wired" in terms of what we can learn and re-learn and over the last year or so, we have really started to change our understanding of this concepts and start to not discount what people are capable of!

Check it out!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSu9HGnlMV0&feature=related

There is also a book on this which takes you through several case studies of adults that have made significant recoveries based on re-training the brain.

http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/natureofthings/2008/brainchangesitself/

The Learning Process

This past week I really started to put some thought towards the ideas of Andragogy and the adult learner. What I am finding interesting is the recent shift in thought that Andragogy is a function or description that is entirely limited to adults. I believe that the thinking behind Androgogy over pedagogy is less related to the age and more related to how a person learns and what past experiences they are coming to the table with. When I think of learning, I have always imagined it as the brain being this large filing cabinet full of files and folders of past experiences. When something appears in our life that seems to be new, our brain first looks for the folder of memories that is the most similar. The new experience either challenges an assumption in that particular “file” or forces us to overwrite the file. If no “file” exists, it forces us to create a new folder in which new experiences will constantly challenge the content.

Some of this learning that takes place might be quite conscious while others is probably just a product of being human. I know it probably sounds too simplistic for a much more complex chain of events but it has always worked to help me understand the learning process and be able to apply new concepts to this understanding. Going back to the notion of self directed learning and Andragogy, I believe that when I personally am engaging in self directed learning, I work best with a frame of reference or a “file” that is already created. What I find is that the less I know on a subject, the more direction I need in terms of formal instruction. I find that self directed learning works the best when past experiences are present and it is much easier to just modify the “file”.

Attached are some pretty interesting articles that talk about challenging the notion of Pedagogy in elementary schools. It might be a good time for change in our process of grouping learners together by “adult” and “child”.

http://jalt.org/pansig/PGL1/HTML/Miyake1.htm

http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED417189&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED417189