Google Joins Open edX

lpress writes "Google and MIT have both built open source MOOC platforms and offered innovative MOOCs. They have just announced the establishment of mooc.org, a non-profit organization that will provide a platform to develop, host, and research online courses. The devil is, no doubt, in the details, but this combination of MIT's educational expertise and reputation, Google's vast infrastructure, and the lofty goals of both organizations might turn out to be revolutionary." From Google's research weblog: "Google and edX have a shared mission to broaden access to education, and by working together, we can advance towards our goals much faster. In addition, Google, with its breadth of applicable infrastructure and research capabilities, will continue to make contributions to the online education space, the findings of which will be shared directly to the online education community and the Open edX platform." Course Builder will continue to be maintained for the time being, but eventually Google will "provide an upgrade path to Open edX and MOOC.org from Course Builder."

Comments

*sigh*

[gstoddart]

Cynically I'm forced to conclude Google is doing this to get access to the information on all of those students to make even more money from.

Optimistically, I think it's potentially a good idea, but we'll see what they actually do.

Re:*sigh*

[Enderandrew]

More backdoors implied they already created backdoors in the first place. Currently there is no evidence they created any in the first place.

This is what we do know:

1. Google is required by law to hand over data when they get a request, such as through a NSL.
2. Google said their process for handling this request is to FTP data over to the government. The government never gets direct access to any of their systems.
3. Google publishes a transparency report on what government requests they receive.
4. Google is fighting the US government on the NSL process and suing to make that more transparent.
5. When Bush asked for all search data on all users, Google was the only search engine to refuse.
6. Google went so far as to discuss creating off-shore datacenters to place user data outside the reach of the government.
7. They're encrypting data sent from one Google data center to another to make sure the government can't attempt to intercept it in the middle. And they anonymize user data sooner.

This is the only company we've seen actively fight to protect your data from the government. So why are people creating fiction that Google is the one that is evil here, and not the US government?

Re:*sigh*

[stanlyb]

Actually, only "1" is correct. The rest are mostly half-baked truths.

Re:*sigh*

[Enderandrew]

They've documented 2.
3 is right fucking here - http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/
4 is documented in their court battle http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/04/google-fights-nsl/
5 was documented
6 was documented http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/google-wins-floating-data-center-patent/17266
7 was documented http://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-nsa-google-encryption-20130907,0,3652913.story

All are verifiable and you're full of shit.

Re:*sigh*

[fustakrakich]

Surely, you can't be serious! Are we really expected to see a press release as evidence? I say send in a UN inspection team, for appearances, if nothing else.

Re:*sigh*

[steelfood]

Because they're the biggest player on the internet. They're the easiest target. And not to mention there's a fair amount of propoganda put out by the U.S. government itself against Google. It's an attack from all fronts, including the legal one (the streetview debacle). And I wonder how much of that was a government plant whose job was to give the government legal leverage against them. I mean, what idiot engineer would specifically hack the streetview cars to collect open wi-fi data?

That's not to say that we shouldn't hold Google accountable for any actions they do that may be less than ethical. But to point fingers at them for the wrong reasons just weakens any legitimate concerns.

Re:*sigh*

[VortexCortex]

a UN inspection team
^--- I don't mean to be a Grammar Nazi, but come on. Yes, it's just a joke, but you actually had to press more buttons just to mess up "uninspection team".

Re:*sigh*

[HiThere]

I really doubt that the street-view thing was a government plant. I also, however, doubt that Google management planned it. In either case I'd need good evidence. (Not proof, which one can't expect to get in that kind of a situation, and I'll admit that even getting evidence about motivations, and who decided what, is quite iffy.)

MOOC=?

[camperdave]

MOOC stands for massive open online course.

Re:MOOC=?

[VortexCortex]

MOOC - My Other Open is a Course

Best MOOC since '98

[chuckinator]

Google is the best MOOC every since they opened their doors in '98, but you have to brush up on your research skills to appreciate it.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Not true

[stanlyb]

Google's mission is to satisfy it's shareholder, not to educate.
Here i fixed it for you. Please, next time, pay more attention to details.

Re:Not true

[Xest]

Yeah and guess what genius? The shareholders with majority voting control in Google are the same two geeks that founded it and that have a passion for causes like education:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2129234/Google-stock-split-founders-Larry-Page-Sergey-Brin-lifetime-control.html

In Google's case, the shareholders that get to decide how the company works aren't some mystical unknown investment company that controls the company from the shadows but the very two people that founded it.

In response to MS or copying MS

[Ravaldy]

Businesses love getting involved in education because you create a following. MS did in in the 90s and now Google is trying to put their name on education. Wether its a business decision or Google just being "PRO EDUCATION" is something only they know.

I didn't read the proposal in details but it sounds like they are trying to go head to head with Khan Academy.

Re:In response to MS or copying MS

[Xest]

To be fair both Sergey and Larry as well as also Bill Gates (who was still in charge of MS in the 90s) all have a genuine passion for education.

As geeks they share the perception that many other geeks do, that education is the cure to many of the world's ills such as discrimination, poverty, and overpopulation. They're not robots and like you and I they have political opinions and thoughts on the best solution to certain problems.

It's not surprising therefore that all of them would have such a focus on education which feeds through into their company's actions and products because they believe it's a solution to some of the world's greatest political and social problems.

Contrary to popular belief, corporate leaders are capable of doing things for a reason other than profit optimisation. This doesn't mean that they wont also try and monetise said actions but the reason for entering the market in the first place could well be primarily simply the fact that they genuinely believe that education matters.

I work in financial services but contrary to the view of financial services companies caused by the action of the banks some of us firms are actually quite responsible and I get charity days (where I get paid to spend a few work days instead doing charity work for a charity of my choice) each year and we do lots of charity fundraising events simply because our CEO recognises that our company has the spare capacity financially to also give something back whilst still making a profit elsewhere.