Google Fiber is coming to Kansas City, KS

I am pretty excited about the announcement that Google Fiber is coming to Kansas City, Kansas. Here is an update from the blog post announcing the decision:

As part of our overall goal to make the web better for users, last year we announced a new project: to provide a community with Internet access more than 100 times faster than what most Americans have today. The response was overwhelming—nearly 1,100 cities felt the need for speed—and we were thrilled by the enthusiasm we saw across the country for better and faster web connections. Thank you to every community and individual that submitted a response, joined a rally, starred in a YouTube video or otherwise participated. After a careful review, today we’re very happy to announce that we will build our ultra high-speed network in Kansas City, Kansas. We’ve signed a development agreement with the city, and we’ll be working closely with local organizations, businesses and universities to bring a next-generation web experience to the community.

In selecting a city, our goal was to find a location where we could build efficiently, make an impact on the community and develop relationships with local government and community organizations. We’ve found this in Kansas City. We’ll be working closely with local organizations including the Kauffman Foundation, KCNext and the University of Kansas Medical Center to help develop the gigabit applications of the future.

I don’t know what it means for the rest of the metro area, but I assume that this is very good news for the metro area and the state of Kansas.


Rethink Rock vs. Ukrainian Army Ad

I was watching the Al Jazeera Listening Post – Video this week and saw the following as their web video of the week:

I laughed to myself and thought, “What kind of videos are people making these days?”

Then I remembered a clip that I first saw at annual conference:

Is one more effective than the other? Only one of the two videos above has a clear desired outcome and a call to action for the viewer.

What makes an effective video? How can the church produce the best media possible?

iCampus – What type of format?

This is a series of responses to questions about an internet campus from a previous series of posts. Do you have any other questions? Feel free to leave them in the comments and I will try to respond to each one. Thanks!

I received this question from Jim Morrow via Facebook.

What kind of format and approach really excites you? 2nd life? a website w/streaming? something else?

Currently, Clif Guy, is working with developers to prototype an interface for what I think will be a website with streaming. It will likely be similar in experience to one of our physical campuses. We are not currently thinking about utilizing Second Life.

I am most grateful to my mom for suggesting that maybe internet campus worship would feel different than physical campus worship. Until she made that suggestion a couple weeks ago, I had thought primarily of an internet campus experience closely mirroring the experience of a physical campus. It would not have to be and may be more effective in the online community if it did not. Some ideas that I have rolled around in my head since then:

  • A visual prayer time, something like what you get at Wordle.
  • Shorter, more frequent teaching content – no longer than you could upload at YouTube.

Distinguishing the online experience from a physical experience would have pros and cons, but is quite intriguing for me right now

What do you think about my responses? How would you respond to this question?

Would you like to connect with me via Facebook? Use this link

Seeing Gray – Wrap Up (6 of 6)

At the beginning of 2008, we started a conversation around the sermon series Seeing Gray: Faith Morality and Politics in a Black and White World at Resurrection. You can see my video responses to each of the sermon themes at these links:

It has been an experiment in the new use of technology at Resurrection through the Seeing Gray You Tube Channel. I really did not know what to expect when the site was set up. The response was not overwhelming, but I think that it was an important step for the congregation in leveraging technology to build a Christian community where non and nominally religious people are becoming deeply committed Christians.

What did you think of the series overall? What were some of the strengths? What were some of the weaknesses? How about the use of YouTube? Good? Bad? Indifferent?