Are Universities for the Public Good?

It's all about interpretation...

Public used to be such a nice word. It used to be a nice word simply because it’s implication was completely selfish. When people used to say the ‘public good’ they were undoubtedly thinking of an extra £30 on their dole money or a cut on their taxes. People however, like the selfless sycophants that they are, took the nice meaning of public away from us and replaced it with the rather a rather more vulgar expression that encompassed the economy, schools and other such horrifying prospects to give them a misplaced feeling of anti-scrooge morality.

That’s why I am going to revert back to the original meaning when I attempt to solve the rather unimpactingly hypothetical (yes, I did just make up a word) but yet still quite entertaining question of whether universities are for the public good. If you are looking for a cheap answer without endeavouring to read all the undoubtedly long winded strings of big words put together for my own amusement then the answer is: yes they are. Read more »

Pay What You Want (for this post)

Well my time at university is being fruitful for my imagination. So far I have had about three different ideas for businesses and services and each one has got me really excited. I’d thought I should flesh out my latest one and share it with the world.

Personally I’m all for free culture. When I say free culture I mean the ability for producers and consumers to collaborate together and reap the mutual benefits of this collaboration. Mostly it’s the consumer who benefits as they get content for which they are then free to do what they want with. They can give it to their Mum, they can remix it and (most importantly) they can enjoy it without having an obligation to purchase it.

Producers have often had the raw end of the stick where most of them publish just for the love of doing it. I’ll be the first to admit that the possibility of making something for people to enjoy outshines financial incentives (which has often been proven in psychological studies) but that doesn’t mean people can make a living off creating free content. For quite a while people have been trying to capitalise on what they produce while still providing the consumers with the freedoms that Free Software or the Creative Commons offer and non of them have been particularly effective.

The problem lies with why should someone give you money for something you produce or free? The answer I propose is to replicate a traditional commerce system as much as possible. Quite a few people have tried out the “pay what you want” model. The effort was pioneered by musicians such as Radiohead where you would reach a purchase page and you could enter the value you wanted to pay for their album.

In effect the model imposes a non-obligation purchase where people can pay nothing at all but are put off by various elements, such as graphics, that make them feel wrong by not paying.

The Humble Bundle "guilts" people into donating money to the developers.

How can you be sure that people will pay? Simply because it has proven to be effective. The Humble Bundle deal has so far had over 100,000 downloads and has so far raised over $1,000,000. This is a great example of being open while still making money.

Currently I envisage a website that operates like Steam or iTunes but works entirely on the pay what you want model. People who create content can upload it to the site (and perhaps include charity donations in their revenue) and share what they create while creating a “guilt” barrier to earn them revenue. Once purchased, the site will organise and track their purchases and offer download links.

In effect it is a free ecosystem where both the producer and the consumer benefit.

Will draw up more mockups and stuff later. Keep tuned it. :)

[canvas]A New Project[/canvas]

Anybody who would like to regard themselves as well informed on the internet these days has undoubtedly heard of HTML5 being used in context of bringing a more interactive experience to the user. (For those who are itching at using HTML5 as a colloquialism, keep your boots on. I understand your pain and am only using the term for convenience)

Well, I have had an idea for a nice little HTML5/JavaScript project that I think could gain some traction. The video game market at the moment is completely fragmented and very platform isolated. Consumers are often forced into buying multiple consoles if they wish to play a broad amount of games and even then they are locked to the hardware quite dramatically (I am looking at you Microsoft and Sony). With recent innovations in the direction of WebGL and canvas, I think there is a real argument to be made in a browser based video game platform.

Am I being ambitious? Certainly. Am I asking the impossible? Who knows?

The concept, however, I still like. The idea to have a completely integrated social environment written in HTML5 in the browser (like Playstation home and the xBox dashboard) that is then a launching point for games written in HTML5 is very attractive. All you need to play your games or access platform apps is a standards compliant web browser and minimum hardware specs.

Of course, this method will never be a complete replacement for native games. Despite the speed increases in JavaScript engines such as V8 and JaegerMonkey, JavaScript is getting increasingly faster but still not fast enough to beat a natively compiled application. For casual games though it would serve as an admirable platform.

This is a random text blurt out of my idea. I am going to make some concept mock-ups shortly (tomorrow, if I have time).

Have fun!

Don’t Run with Scissors

The Policeman’s Ball