I’ve had time to refine what goes into my bag when I go away to conferences now. Whilst I’ve still a lot to learn r.e. preparation and making sure I’ve got everything with me, here’s what I’m taking to the Scottish Learning Festival today:
(not pictured: headphones, business card holder, Booq laptop bag)
There’s a website I check every morning after a quick scan of my emails and Twitter @’s and DMs. Yep, before I even find out if the world’s still there (via BBC News or, more likely, newsmap.jp on our touchscreen kitchen PC) I head over to Techmeme. If you haven’t seen it before, go and have a look now. We’ll wait for you. 😉
This morning I woke up to find an interesting juxtaposition of stories relating to the Apple iPad. Notwithstanding rumours of a 7-inch iPad in the works (hastily dismissed by John Gruber) the following couple of stories would make it seem like now is the time to get yourself an iPad:
What does this mean in practice? The ability to play almost any kind of media on the iPad, along with the long-awaited (potentially ‘killer app’) fully-fledged Google Docs.
Awesome.
But wait! What about the iPad naysayers? Those who say that it’s not neutral and that it’s only good for two things? My reply: no technology is neutral, nor is the language we use to describe things. There is no purely objective view/standpoint from which to judge anything. And as for the iPad only being good for two things? See above. 😉
A more salient point might be that this is v1 of the iPad. Although it marks almost a paradigm shift in computing, think of the original iPhone in comparison with what came after. Getting an iPad now, only for v2 with a ‘retina display’ and a front-facing camera to be launched after Christmas would be frustrating to say the least…
Creativity refers to the phenomenon whereby something new is created which has some kind of value. What counts as “new” may be in reference to the individual creator, or to the society or domain within which the novelty occurs. What counts as “valuable” is similarly defined in a variety of ways. (Wikipedia)
I’ve noticed increasingly ‘creativity’ being somehow equated with thea use of bright colours. Whilst it’s true that inspirational environments can stimulate people, I doubt sincerely that a lick of paint can transform a space into a ‘creative’ one. This is because of the fallacy of confusing inputs with outputs.
People do this all the time, equating fame, success, good looks, talent, and ultimately creativity with acting a certain way, using a certain thing, or wearing particular items. Given that outputs are usually visible and tangible, this is understandable – but still wrong-headed. Instead of finding out what type of laptop someone uses, the type of pencil they prefer or favourite restaurant, we should be seeking the answers to different questions. Such as:
Try finding out the answers these questions – ask people directly if you have to! Note their positive habits. Merely aping their setup and outputs deals with the latter, but not the all-important inputs. :-p
