It is estimated that getting on for half of all internet
traffic is file sharing. Something like a quarter of a billion users in 2012
used BitTorrent technology (at any one time, this is more than YouTube and Facebook
combined). So has this revolutionary technology, of connection not collection,
also to hit the world of learning?
Disruptive network
The internet is actually a huge distribution network, with a
clever failsafe structure. If one part of the network fails, the rest will get
the data to its destination. This idea was developed as a protective device
against possible nuclear attack. Of course, this structure also allowed file
sharing and peer file sharing software to flourish, with massively disruptive
consequences for the music, movie, TV and newspaper industry.
Digital genie
It was 1999, just as the dot-com bubble burst, when this new
kid appeared on the block – peer-to-peer computing. And it was literally a new kid on the block,
the 19 year old Shawn Fanning, who wrote a piece of file sharing software, for
MP3 music files, in just three months that was to change the media world
forever. It was an immediate success and campus bandwidth was eaten up as fast
as it could be built. The digital genie was out of the bottle and it was an
immediate threat to billion dollar media companies. Free shared music, and
eventually films and other media were now available on the web.
File sharing wasn’t entirely new. A few years earlier Ian
Clarke, a University of Edinburgh research student, has written Freenet, a pure
file exchange system, with no central repository (Napster had a central server
for indexing and identification). The Seti project had been using shared
processing power for some time. Napster, however, captured the headlines and
imagination. It spawned hundreds of imitations. Gnutella released in 2000 was
the first completely decentralised file sharing system, with no central server.
Kazaa used supernodes to increase effectiveness. The BitTorrent protocol,
written by Bram Cohen, was to take file sharing even higher, using a swarm of
hosts to download and upload across networks.
Interestingly P2P services don’t really rely on altruism.
You contribute by simply participating. When you download a file, your files
are exposed for download by others. Consumers become involuntary producers.
This is not new. The telephone, like its predecessor the telegraph, used peer-to-peer
systems. What is new is tha massive increase in productivity file sharing
provides and viral distribution.
P2P and learning
When I saw Kevin Kelly speak about Napster at TechLearn in
the US over ten years ago , we pitched an idea to the organisation responsible
for innovation in Local Authorities, and built a P2P system for authoring and
sharing learning content across the Local Authorities in England and Wales.
Rather than develop a huge repository of content, we wanted to allow people to
freely build and share content, using a Napster-like file sharing approach,
with a central repository, for searching and identification of learning
content. HTML, PowerPoint, PDF and Word files were tagged with mandatory and
optional information and shared. The project ran for some time but was
eventually sold and has gone back to a Moodle-based service run a private
company delivering content to the public sector, who are still loyal to the
principle of shared content. This is what happened in the Napsterisation of
learning. The principle of free, shared content became embedded in the culture
of learning, through Wikipedia and OER.
Democratisation, decentralisation and
disintermediation of learning
Graham Brown
martin argues that Naspster paved the way for Apple’s iPhone and iPad and he’s
right, as it led to disintermediation in the music industry. Does this apply to
the learning industry?
The Napsterisation of learning can be used literally, as the
use of file sharing software to enable learning. In the wider sense it can be
used to describe the democratisation of learning towards learners and away from
reliance on middle-ground institutions, companies and teachers. Millions,
daily, access Wikipedia, Google Scholar and dozens of other sources without the
mediation of teachers or librarians. Decentralisation. away from centralised
institutions, such as schools, colleges, universities, libraries, publishers
and companies, down to actual learners, through web-based services has
certainly occurred and is accelerating. But the real shift would
disintermediation. Cutting out the middlemen, especially over-expensive
institutions. There are signs that this is happening. Peter Thiel’s description
of HE as an over-inflated bubble has taken root. Content providers also have
much to worry about, as their content is easily pirated.
It remains to be seen if the education and training world
will be as deeply challenged and changed as the music or newspaper industry. It
is certainly as vulnerable.
Napsterisation of content
Wikipedia has already Napsterised the encyclopedia business
with a product that’s bigger, better, faster and free. The whole canon of
western literature is largely available free online from sites such as Project
Gutenberg. TED, YouTube and other video services have disintermediated video
companies. Open Education Resources grow in quantity and quality by the day.
Napsterisation of software and courses
Moodle has bitten deeply into the commercial VLE market and
Totara is doing similar things in the corporate market. Why pay top dollar for
an LMS or VLE when you can get one for free. Courses are unlikely to be file
shared but MOOCs certainly promise to reduce the cost with their focus on online
delivery and volume. Skillsoft and other courses are available on pirate sites
if you look around. There is absolutely no doubt that this is rife in Asia and
China.
Napsterisation of eTextbooks
One example of this vulnerability is the rise of eBooks and
eTextbooks, we have already seen signs of Napsterification of textbooks, which
are often too expensive to buy, especially for learners in developing
countries. There is now a large number of file sharing sites that had got round
the DRM and other restrictions that eBook publishers use. This is one of the reasons educational
publishers have been reluctant to enter the eBook market. We may yet see the
Napsterification of learning in this market.
Publishers have learned (maybe not) from the music industry
and come down hard on eBook file sharing sites. Library.nu and ifile.it (based
in Ireland) had distributed hundreds of thousands of eBooks before being shut
down, making millions from advertising and donations. This year (2012)
seventeen publishers across seven countries issued legal action against a rack
of eBook file sharing sites, but as soon as one closes another crop pops up. This
is likely to continue.
Conclusion
The
technology of Napster and BitTorrent file sharing has had some effect on
learning. However, it has had a profound effect on the way media files are
shared and, as a consequence, attitudes and behaviours on the web. It’s specific
technical influence on learning has been confined to e few isolated projects and
lots of eBook file sharing sites, but the Napsterisation of learning in the
conceptual sense, where learners do it for themselves and disintermediate
teachers and institutions has been profound.
1 comment:
Note the distinction between learning and the industry of learning. Disintermediation is a good thing.
Post a Comment