Posts Tagged ‘accountability’

More Mobile Accountability Software

Friday, June 11th, 2010

We talked about accountability software for those who deal with pornography on mobile devices, and this week there’s been an update with the addition of the X3 Watch’s software for iPhone, iPad, and Android devices.

As an issue within the Body, especially on Sudays, its good to see mobile software be introduced that will assist with those who are undergoing counseling or would like to towards this area.

Unfortunately, this software is usable only on smartphone platforms, and platforms that are more prevalent in areas like the US. With virtual/literal accountably as such as need, it will be interesting to see how these services and programs can be extended to other devices (perhaps a mini-app/widget/daemon/etc.) which would send a log of visited sites via SMS based on the user’s IMEI and SIM.

Until that happens, cultivate a behavior of being open about your browsing habits if this is an issue. And embrace the efforts of groups such as Covenant Eyes and X3 Church and pray with them and others who are beacons of digital deliverance in this area.

 

iPhone 4 and Biblical Reflections

Tuesday, June 8th, 2010

It is a deliberate thing that reflections on the iPhone 4 announcement have taken a while to come together. While there is always some appreciation towards a new device and what it can mean for mobile from a technology-adoption standpoint, its always important to filter thoughts about the implications of mobile appropriately.

To be blunt, there’s nothing drastically new with this iPhone, and at the same time, there are some notables. The most spoken about features will be the battery life (if the iPad is an indication, should be outstanding to all but BlackBerry users) and the very high-resolution screen (at 326 dots-per-inch for a 3.5in screen, its better than anything out with a backlight, and will make paper look bad too). The other features are in or have been within other mobiles for a good amount of time. Apple’s attention to the user experience though will continue to set the iPhone as a (mental) bar for users, developers, and manufacturers alike.

All of this is ok. Yet, doesn’t really say why this reflection piece has taken so long to pen.

The announcement of the high-definition camera should start to change perceptions towards what’s possible from a mobile device. Yes, its not one of those professional grade approaches to recording and disseminating video, but its another call to a paradigm shift. That shift is simply that your IT resources (people, intellectual capacities, and strategies) would be better utilized training people to use this tool for the community’s benefit.

For example, instead of just having one team record a gathering, invite others to do so (use governance and appropriate direction in terms of bounds) and post the compiled footage on your community website. Use the capacities not just on the device, but within your IT teams to create avenues for the technical education programs that school districts are increasingly being asked to cut.

Then there’s the video calling feature – FaceTime. Now, let’s get this out there – this is not new. Its been done in several regions for a long time, and with varying degrees of success. This is of course announced with the Apple touch so there’s got to be something new right? No, not really. The calls are over Wi-Fi only at this point, which means that unless you are on a Wi-Fi train or plane, you will be sitting still in doing one of these calls. Other services such as Fring, Palringo, and Skype have this ability and over cellular connections as well as Wi-Fi. The debates of whether video calling is good or not will go on for sometime, but let’s concentrate on one specific implication of it – accountability.

Moreover, if they brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear [thee, then] take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And he he shall neglect to hear them, tell [it] unto the church; but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.

That’s from Matthew 18:15-17. Notice the loophole that someone could take with video calling instead of an interpersonal interaction?

Its not the tool that’s the issue either, its the behavior (maturity) of the persons involved. If someone has an issue, and chooses not to address it to a person directly, even with being able to see them versus just getting the text/audio of the person, will matters be resolved? That’s not to say that its always possible to resolve life’s situations in-person, but as usual, technology as it is given does speak to ways that we can miss out on the subtle and needed aspects of interpersonal relationships.

The other side of that is that one can use video calling (at least in terms of Apple’s FaceTime) to other Apple iPhone device users to keep in contact with one another over distances, saving on international rates and possibly even as a means to extend missional relationships once the physical presence time is no more.

And so, there are some of the reflections of the new iPhone 4 and what it looks like at this intersection. It’s not the total of opinions, and won’t be the last here or elsewhere. But, in light of what’s possible with a $199-$399 device (after contract) that has a ton of media attention, we shouldn’t just take the marketing terms and call it good. We should take into account the possibilities and accept that just because we can do it, doesn’t make it the best course of action (according to Galatians 6:1-10, this is our opportunity to do things just a bit different).

 

Enabled or Enslaved by Technology

Tuesday, February 16th, 2010

Wish that I could take credit for the title, but this belonged to someone else. And their post on the subject is of the kind of thinking and assessment that we must do often. Here’s a snippet:

The reason is quite simple and something I did not quite realize until my friend pointed it out to me. People are increasingly using technology not out of choice but out of pressure. And there are a lot of people who are simply addicted to it, they need to check their Twitter feed, Facebook profile and mailboxes every few minutes and see what is happening, because it’s the “in thing” and also because of the constant pressure of being available ‘online’.

Read the rest of Enabled or Enslaved by Technology at Aditya Singhvi’s Phones blog.

I’d also like to call attention to my comment as it directs this post towards this blog a bit more appropriately:

…my faith is the filter that I use. Its the discipline towards being a Christian that I use as the main filter for determining the value of the technology, its connective need/want, and the implication. Can’t say that I’m always perfect in my application, but like living the rest of life through a faith-based filter, there’s a lot of walking forward, backward, repenting, and relearning.

Assess, but also use your filter.

 

Copyright, Licensing, and Mobile Bible Ethics

Monday, November 9th, 2009

A topic that has come up with the discussion about Katana for Maemo 5 has been the issue of enabling an open source (and free) Bible reader to read paid (DRM-ed) formats. Its been a sticky issue within the electronic Bible realm for sometime, and I don’t know that the discussion will go away anytime soon, but there are some aspects to this discussion that need to be stated so that all parties have the same starting point to move forward.

What is Copyright?

The first thing is copyright. Copyright is the defined as a:

…form of intellectual property that gives the author of an original work exclusive right for a certain time period in relation to that work, including its publication, distribution and adaptation, after which time the work is said to enter the public domain. Copyright applies to any expressible form of an idea or information that is substantive and discrete and fixed in a medium. Some jurisdictions also recognize “moral rights” of the creator of a work, such as the right to be credited for the work. Copyright is described under the umbrella term intellectual property along with patents and trademarks.

In most respects, this makes simple sense to all. Law designed to allow artists to profit from their work without fear of infringement by someone else. When it comes to mobile Bible software, there are several areas where copyright tends to rear its head:

  • The coding used to transcode and format the Biblical text
  • The Biblical text (per its translators or publishers)
  • The code and user interface of the application that reads the Biblical text
  • The systems used to develop or support the application or publishers’ copyright

In respect to copyright, its a law. And laws are different for different regions. Some regions will limit a copyright for a certain amount of time to the original creator, whereas other areas might not limit it at all except in certain applications.

And while most of this is pretty simple, the idea of ownership throws all of this into several grayer-than-most areas.

Copyright and Licensing

The problem comes in enforcing copyright in a realm like the Internet where the concept of “regions” tends to get lost very quickly. Because something is attainable, the regional law needs to have a non-regional aspect to it if copyright is going to be skillfully applied. This is where the idea of licensing comes into play. Licensing allows the copyright holder to be compensated for their work, but also for the purveyor of the said work to use that item in a way that best fits them.

We see this in respect to music. When you purchase music (in the US), you are purchasing a license for its fair use. And in many cases, this fair use includes you being able to listen to that purchased music on any personal devices that you own.

Electronic Bibles

The same isn’t exactly the case when it comes to electronic Bibles. Because of publishing rights and regional issues relating to literary works, licensing Biblical content for use across several devices or reader applications isn’t something that’s done from company to company.

This is why there are several Bible reader companies, and many of them do Bible readers for several types of software. Their licence to create and dissemenate only covers the material within their applications, not across it.

Where Ethics Comes In

Therein lies the issue of ethics for the mobile/electronic Bible user. Sure, you can purchase a Bible from “Company X,” but you’d only be able to use it within their application. Because of the limited license (to you), to use that material on another device would mean that Company X would need to develop a container for you to read it.

Even if you are enterprising enough to take Company X’s Bible and use it on Company Y’s application, you still have the problem of licensing. Technologically, its not an issue to do that. Ethically it is. You are circumventing the license in order to gain accessibility. That’s breaking the copyright, and therefore putting the law maker in position to execute justice for the copyright holder.

Solutions???

It would seem though that there are no solutions for issues like this. There are too many devices requiring too much custom code, and then so many versions of the Bible with so many owners of those copyrights. Its not an easy thing to make something available to all and then secure it for those who created it and deserve their compensation for time/resources.

But then again that just may be the problem worth fixing. Right now, companies license Bibles from creators/publishers, not individiual users. If users could also – inexpensively – license content, then maybe that license would have provisions for them to select which devices fall under that licensed use.

Bible software companies would then move into doing things to make their reader applications the selling point, promising compatibility with that licensing scheme, and value-adding whatever else would draw people to them.

I don’t really know what a total solution would look like. But, in light of the many, many, people using mobile and other devices for a Bible, its clear that something different needs to be done so that copyright holders are rightfully compensated, but users don’t have so many hoops to go through just to make sure they can use the materials they’ve created.

In the meantime, don’t break a license just because you can. Follow the laws of your land, and work with those groups who are trying to enable change in a legal and God-affirming means. We all win when things are done in good order.

 

Content Independence

Tuesday, June 30th, 2009

With the new version of the Firefox web browser (v3.5) released today, I thought that it would be great to bring back up that topic of content independence. Specifically, when it comes to reading materials (Bibles, commentaries, etc.), are these items independent of a particular browser or reading application?

I don’t know that it is. Sure; there are more powerful and capable devices than ever before. And we can say that there’s more digital content out there than ever before as well. But when it comes to moving that content from one device to another (for example from PC to mobile), a lot of times, we are locked into one method and don’t realize it until we want to move.

I liken it to many of the desktop-grade Bible applications that are out there. All of them have some excellent content available; however, if you want to take that content with you, for many of these you would have to either purchase an entirely different library (software client and content), or manage some complex tasks before it can even be in a complimentary format.

And I don’t want to say it to fault the publishers and developers; truly, they do a great work in building and supporting the breadth of languages, regions, devices, and content available to date. However, I do want to call them to attention – especially in light of the move to users becoming more and more independent of a PC-based computing paradigm.

Content should be just that; content. It shouldn’t be attached to the presentation layer, nor should politics allow one silo to have prominence over another. If we are truly looking to good on teaching people to the ends of the earth, at the very least, content needs to be independent of the former ideas of reader/application.

This might look like Firefox, where mobile browsers take on an ability to utilize extensions which enable more functionality (this done at the developer or publisher level). Or this could simply look like more partnerships between publishers, developers, and users towards making content available, and sharing the load for marketing, management, and support.

Whatever is the solution though, I’m not sure that many Bible publishers and software companies will be able to stand pat as they are now: using dedicated readers, coding for specific browsers only, or limiting themselves to policial divisions in the hope of keeping marketshare. If the goal is to educate to the point of making disciples, then the content needs to be independent so that the accountability (individually and corporately) can take the primary focus of ministry activity.