Father in law was a real estate agent from the 80s until maybe 5 years ago.
The day he retired was the day he absolutely positively suddenly wanted nothing to do with real estate anymore. He loved the career but it was interesting watching him just suddenly be done with it.
He found other hobbies and interests pretty quickly once he took an inventory of how he wanted to spend his time.
My wife is in grad school at a major university and is dealing with this right now the week of midterms for spring quarter.
I totally understand why a university wouldn’t want to bake their own learning portals but just feels like such a single point of risk to use third party solutions for something like this.
Back in my day… all we had was a school email via on-premise services. I guess we registered for classes in a web portal but that’s about it. The idea of online class was entirely foreign at the time. Ain’t nobody hacking a blue book.
It’s wild to me that people in this comment section are suggesting that schools should improve their security by rolling their own platform, which is bound to be filled with security holes, instead of using a popular, maintained, open source option.
To be fair to the idea, though, while this would make individual instances less secure, it would drastically decrease the leverage for the work bad actors put in.
There is a saying in the software security industry that (I'm paraphrasing from rusty memories) a system is secure if the cost of hacking it is higher than the value it protects.
Each system being completely distinct from another means that the cost of hacking the average student goes up by 9000 (from the article, Canvas is used by 9000 schools).
Still not saying that rolling out your own is the preferred solution, but the idea is not as ludicrous as it would seem, and should definitely be entertained and discussed, at least.
Put it another way; the blast radius from any vulnerability is much smaller.
But also, the cost is much, much higher to the institutions, which is the salient point. You're going to spend years developing a system, deploying it, training staff and students, supporting it. I see mentions here of in-house systems being developed much more cheaply and I don't believe it. The economies of scale are at work.
I worked at a university for many years and I can't recall anyone I'd consider to be a competent software architect working for the IT department. Hell, we had students writing major webapps that kinda sorta worked well enough.
Maybe. I still remember the Drupal community sneering at the New York Times when they unveiled their homegrown online news platform bitd. After 15 years of recursively scraping ad-hoc porn sites off of server hard drives when clients dragged their feet on migrating to latest versions I 'm less certain the assumption that homegrown == less secure is as valid as it sounds.
Back before the Laravel folks utterly misguided but weirdly popular attempts at turning PHP into JavaScript gutted the Drupal community (your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer) one of the most common outcomes of a site getting hacked was malware-infested porn sites would be uploaded to the site server. This failure mode wasn't particular to Drupal, it's just what happened when websites got hacked. This was the same period of time when the Drupal project was reporting ~16M active installs, had literally thousands of developers volunteering code to the core development project, a dedicated security team, and an automated test suite that ran around the clock.
Universities used to do this sort of stuff themselves. Then it became a business handled by purchasing rather than needs met by the department themselves.
Because faculty didn’t want to do it anymore. They want it handled by others but also they want oversight and veto power but also they don’t want to be bothered. But it better always work, and if they make a mistake the software is broken because don’t tell them it’s a user error they used to write Fortran.
As a faculty member at a large university…I have a deep respect for the impossible job of university IT departments.
We originally rolled our on LMS decades ago. When we switched to canvas we kept the home brew running for five years past its expiration date because faculty refused to remove their files. Finally each one was manually moved by IT for the recalcitrant old faculty.
It is kind of funny when these LMS tools with 100+ functions are being used for little more than what email, a grades spreadsheet, and maybe a shared drive would do. University might even ask for the final grades in spreadsheet format by the end of the term anyhow, so data goes into the LMS just to come back out again.
Well, whatever the large and small things they do are that aren't bound within I described, no one really articulates what they really are. I mean there's like wiki functionality built in. A whole forum system built in. That isn't necessary for education. It is an extra song and dance we might play just because we can, shoehorning some lesson into having to use the forum system or make some dumb wiki page instead of a good old fashioned essay or in class discussion, which no one had a problem with and still doesn't have a problem with. I remember there being like multiple different ways one could go about copying content from one course to another. And that was sort of indicative of the whole software suite. Just keep adding functionality. Never mind if it is redundant. Pure bloatware. A dozen ways to do the basic thing. No one sits there and cuts features because the incentives are the opposite with this software. If canvas can do 105 things, blackboard wants to show the software purchasers at the school they can do 106 things. Doesn't matter if no one uses 103 of them. Doesn't matter that no one even gets trained in how to use these 105 functions.
I used to work in academia and am now an LMS admin (in private industry). I've interviewed for LMS admin positions at educational institutions and each time I've ended up walking away. The questions I was asked at the last interview revealed what a ridiculously unplanned, spiraling mess their system was and that I would have no agency over it. No, thanks. And it was clear the reason for this was faculty recalcitrance and an inability to tell them no. Each one wanted a special plugin/special way of doing things, causing a giant mess of insecure bloat, and a fair amount of interview questions always amount to 'how do you wheedle faculty into doing things/placate their egos to keep things running?'
I'm not a rockstar candidate either: I'm a disabled, geographically-constrained, self-taught(ish) sort-of techie. The disability means I have substantial holes in my resume/work history, etc. I don't have a CS degree or any kind of formal IT education. If people at my level of knowledge are looking at these jobs and passing because they're not worth it, I can't imagine the actual pool of people who get hired is great.
LMS admins in particular are going to be harder to find/retain because we tend to have options we can jump to that would be less onerous than doing LMS admin for a dumpster fire. I could go straight IT or full Instructional Design, for example.
In private industry, I can tell people to kick rocks if they want to do something that the system doesn't support/is a really bad idea. And if I can't, I'm not held responsible for the consequences.
Tech requirements are the same as they always were. One needs to ask whether they need so many frameworks to host some files on the internet and submit some files and perform spreadsheet calculations. We still used one of those First Age 1990s websites for sort of pre lab quizzes this one class when I was going through it, and it might have looked a little "old" but I mean it did the thing and worked for years and will continue to do the thing and work for years.
You're being deliberately obtuse. Canvas has many many features. Wikis and discussion boards and quizzes (with some anticheat) and groups and the list goes on and on. Furthermore, while it was never the flashiest thing, it did it better than many of its predecessors. Yes, an individual class may not use all of these features, and yes canvas has suffered feature creep even over my time as a student and yes canvas is not doing anything technically challenging, but there is enough of it that each school rolling their own everything would be a drastic waste of everybody's time and money.
Those are the exact features I think are stupid and wastes of time both on the educators trying to bake a lesson into these clumsy interfaces, and also the students who have to use this feature once and only once and never again for this dumb assignment in one class. They merely serve to entrench educators into using the canvas system but they offer no added functionality to education.
Canvas quizzes cannot beat the anticheat of having another screen out of view. Lock down the browser all you want, it is pure security theater.
Best anticheat is still taking the quiz on paper in the classroom. Best way to engage with students is to still speak with them and ask that they might speak up.
I totally understand why a university wouldn’t want to bake their own learning portals
They used to, in the pre-cloud/SaaS era; and they were much simpler and better UX than the slop that they're renting today, because the actual users were not far from the developers.
Counterpoint: I was a PhD student in 2004 and on the universities board* which oversaw the roll-out of the campus management system. It cost > 10m EUR to implement a shitty system with the worst UX and years of stabilizing to make it somewhat work.
The amount of corner cases and performance requirements during rush times (semester start) made it really infeasible for a university to roll their own.
* German universities have this funny system where 51% of such boards are controlled by the professors and the rest is made up of other employees/staff and students. They call it academic participation.
I honestly know I could “optimize” my phone replacement schedule based on resale values of phones etc, but for the last ~15ish years I just replace my iPhone when the battery starts shitting itself (3-5 years each in my experience)
We got one of these for our elementary-aged kids because it took off in our network of families at their school.
It’s so fun watching them talk to their buddies from school, planning play dates, just chitchatting etc. My favorite thing is when they prank call one another, cracks me up.
Maybe the novelty wears off soon but for at least the last month or so they’ve used it every day. It feels like it gives them a bit of autonomy they’re seeking right now at their ages, but in a relatively safe way.
I honestly bet 75% of the time I hear “We are currently experiencing high call volumes” someone answered within a minute or two.
In some sense that has the befit of a “surprise and delight” moment too because the consumer might be prepared to wait longer and then “whoa nice, that wasn’t so long!”
I am so glad this product is failing/failed, and I find myself truly and existentially rooting for the glasses with the cameras to die a similar fate.
I have so many questions about the overarching product vision of Meta and can't help but think they're going to continue to struggle with everything that isn't "serve more relevant ads on Instagram."
Anecdote: my most vivid memory of their "VR vision" is virtual versions of Mark and another exec high-fiving in front of a flooded Puerto Rico. Classy.
At this point Meta has probably the largest collection of illegal videos of underage kids in private situations on the planet. Maybe followed closely by Google with their cams that record everything even if you think they're not. If there was any concern for kids, the FBI should be stopping them right now and taking the executives to jail.
Will we be in the same up in arms once Apple releases their AI Glasses?
How about if their glasses either...
1. Can not take pics or videos but its camera is just for AI vision?
or
2. All pics and videos taken through Apple's smart glasses the pics/vids of anyone not in your network (Apple already automatically list faces & sometimes names in your network under "People & Pets," and has done so for years & they are the privacy company) show as anonymous/randomized faces.
I own two pairs of Meta Glasses since 10/2023 and find them very useful to capture or record my own life experiences only. Tho I share hate for them because Meta makes trashy non-durable smart glasses that quickly become dumb glasses. A software update killed my 1st pair in March 2025 and then my next pair couldn't handle water splashes in June 2025.
I remember people with the Google glasses being called glassholes. The fact that companies are trying again and apparently succeeding tells you just how much
A) they believe in the idea
and / or
B) how much money there is to be made having people wear them.
Smart wearables as a general category of hardware have an awful rate of success, and hardware is much more expensive to get into than software. So, there's got to be a lot of money in the data consumers will be producing.
That's the part that scares me much more so than the random perverts using them in public for unsavory candid photos.
It's sad that the gap between a "glasshole" and meta glasses is just a branded frame. If anything Meta has significantly worse public reputation now than Google during Google Glass time.
> B) how much money there is to be made having people wear them.
Meta have been desperately searching for “the next big walled garden” for like a decade.
The prize is clear: whatever the next big mass-consumer hardware device is with an app store attached will leech hundreds of billions in fees and enjoy absolute control over everyone building on it.
If this really bugs you, get involved in your local politics and get a city ordinance passed banning the use of surreptitious video recording devices including smart glasses. No reason we can’t keep these off the streets.
4chan once tricked a number of people into microwaving their iPhones by claiming it was a new feature for fast charging. This probably isn't too hard if you've got enough friends or fans in on the joke.
Your reaction appears to be ignorant of the real use cases for these. A friend of mine is totally blind, and uses meta glasses. He finds them incredibly useful, as do others.
That's the only way this can be fixed. Socially shaming everyone isn't going to beat facebook. Laws banning them from doing evil things with the data will.
The use case for these glasses are to record everything, everywhere. That it's also helpful for people with vision impairment is a, positive, coincidence.
This makes me more sad than hopeful. Great they get use out of it, but there instead should be a medically approved HIPAA compliant device for this purpose built by scientists in the open for all to enjoy. Instead the disabled are coersed to give up all privacy of themselves and others around them both digitally and physically. And more importantly they have to give up their sovereignty over the means of their enhancement by it being closed off and eventually enshittified for customers yet opened up for exploitation by facebook and their corporate and government customers.
Sadly the disabled have no choice but to accept the status quo, and facbook gets to virtue signal while holding humanity back another cycle by not selling us an open platform that would actually help people at scale not just now but forever.
Where is Robert Scoble, the King of the Glassholes, the AR PR Torpedo, the Patron Taint of Making Everyone Disgusted to Use Google Glass, the Sexually Harassing Victim Blaming Shameless New Venture Plugging Non Apology Apologist, posting nude photos of himself in the shower, when we need him?
Larry Page on Robert Scoble’s Google Glass stunt: ‘I really didn’t appreciate the shower photo’:
>>But his latest defense puts forward an absurd definition of sexual harassment and effectively accuses women of reporting it to fit in with the cool crowd, while claiming he’s writing in “a spirit of healing.” There’s even a tasteless plug for his latest business venture. It’s one of the most disappointing responses we’ve seen to a sexual harassment complaint, which, after the past few weeks, is a fairly remarkable achievement.
The day he retired was the day he absolutely positively suddenly wanted nothing to do with real estate anymore. He loved the career but it was interesting watching him just suddenly be done with it.
He found other hobbies and interests pretty quickly once he took an inventory of how he wanted to spend his time.
reply