This past weekend, the USA mobile and technology community experienced something that doesn’t come around so often – the removable of rights, or as I’d argue, the perceived ability to make a choice towards what you can do with mobiles.

The short end of things is that starting Saturday, any mobile devices that you purchase cannot be unlocked unless the terms of the original sold contact are completed. Or, to quote the CTIA blog:

…That’s all that is happening here: consumers who pay the full price for a phone can take that phone to the carrier (or carriers) of their choice. However, if a carrier subsidized the price of the phone in exchange for the consumer’s agreement to use the phone on that carrier’s network, the consumer can only transfer the phone to a new carrier once the terms of the contract (or the carrier’s unlocking policy) have been satisfied…

Now, to clear up the confusion… because its gotten really long in the mouths of many folks talking about it.

When you purchase a mobile from your carrier, and sign a contract to do so, you are generally paying only a portion of the complete cost of the mobile device. The rest of the cost is spread out over the life of the contract. Yes, you don’t own the mobile when you purchase it on a contract, you lease it.

You have a choice to purchase a mobile outside of this contract-lease method. In this case, you would purchase the mobile, usually from the manufacturer, or another retailer. These mobiles are much more expensive – because the carrier is not subsidizing part of the cost of the device for you. And then after purchasing the device, you will have to find a plan (whether that’s pre or post-paid) that works with your mobile device. Now, you can choose to get on a contract, but generally, and I’m speaking only of USA carriers since this law is only in effect here, you can’t negotiate a contract. Its only with the carrier T-Mobile that you have the case where if you come with your own device that the cost for a contract plan is less than if you purchase both the device and contract from them.

The other aspect of this law happens to take effect when you decide that you want to sell a device. You see, many folks make the choice to sell their device to another company (like Amazon, Gazelle, etc.) before the contract is up, so that they can recoup some funds and then get something new. Thing is, the person purchasing the device would be breaking the law to unlock it so that they can use it. Ouch right? Well, it is for folks that like to purchase and release mobiles often. Essentially, these people would need to buy-out their contracts, then have the device unlocked by the carrier, then sell the device.

Almost makes it crazy to think of purchasing a mobile on contract now doesn’t it?

Look, I get it that it makes it a lot more difficult for some of you who are under a social and economic obligation to have the (near-)latest mobile device to have one. Getting an unlocked device from your carrier, and even opting into extending your contract to do so remains an option, just more expensive to pursue.

If you are someone who travels beyond the shores of the USA, your first intent with a mobile should be to purchase it completely, and then keep your option of carrier open. Does this mean that using Verizon, Sprint, and other CDMA-based carriers decline in option? It does? These mobiles might offer you the best signal here, but unless you are purchasing their global models (models that are locked for VZW/Sprint in the USA but have a GSM radio that is unlocked for outside the States), then yes you are stuck.

You’ve always had a choice though. And this call by CTIA is in part going to make you a smarter consumer of mobile devices. Whether it works best for you or not will take a bit more homework and recommendations.

I think that one of the reasons that wearable technologies find their appeal is that many of us either have the impression, or live the lifestyle, that computing is more work that it needs to be. With these wearable devices, we are able to put a more appropriate level of attention onto the technology, but moreso onto the context of life going on around us. To that end, this idea some kind of balance between tech and life needs to be ironed out, makes wearable computing not just an attractive matter from a psychological perspective, but also from a computing one.

Over at GigaOm, the world-renowned human interface/user experience designer/developer Christian Lindholm (@clindholm) has posted 9 trends to pay attention to concerning wearable technologies:

1. Watches enjoy a renaissance as accessories
2. Functional jewelry as armbands takes off
3. Audio wearables shape luxury electronics
4. Sensors connect our everyday objects
5. Wearables get dressed up
6. Sensor platform wars begin in the bedroom
7. Apps make wearables’ data actionable
8. Sensors in labs reveal our souls
9. Google glass becomes a social transformer

Christian Lindholm is the CEO and co-Founder of Korulab, a wearables company based in Finland; he’s also the inventor of the mobile phone interface made popular on the various Nokia, Samsung, Motorola, and other mobile devices we’ve seen for over a decade (green and red buttons, numeric pad-grid icon navigation, etc.). His exposition on these 9 trends in detail should enter your radar now as mobile has not just become an entrenched matter of behavior and life, but we are into the 3rd (or 4th, depends on where you start from) generation of mobile within consumer spaces.

That said, the idea that wearable computing has a context that’s relevant to the field of mobile ministry is a preemptive one. One of the challenges we see now with mobile technology is the struggle that many have had just wrapping themselves around context-appropriate behaviors. And now we’re proposing that there’s another evolution of computing in progress that will also have a set of behaviors, perspectives, and implications towards ministry endeavors. That’s a lot to take in… and yet it has to be.

Just using the 9 items above, we’ve got several questions in which aspects of ministry have answered, or might have to reframe expectations for how we respond to them:

• When the computer is just as much a fashion accessory as it is a communications and functional one, where do we start the conversation about modesty in dress
• When we talk about wearables now, its mostly about the fitness end of things; how does the traditional perception of the out-of-shape church leader become a voice worth hearing
• Its not just 3rd party companies that will be able to mine the information these devices create, people themselves will be able to mine, mashup, and even go off the grid because of these devices – or the behaviors they will incite. What about connectivity needs to be kept, and what does fellowship become redefined as if I can connect with you over data streams, not just physical presence
• What kinds of social transformations do non-religious artifacts instigate into normative religious traditions (for ex., wearing of a rosary could also be the wearing of a pedometer and communication handset – see Nokia’s Human Form Concept)

Not that we have to have the answers now, but this is the tech that is becoming the new(er) wave. Wearables also gets into things such as cybernetics and cosmetic augmentation, items that were once the realm of science fiction only. Its here now, and whether or not it comes in the next decade is non-essential. What’s clear from Lindholm’s trends is that we should be thinking and working on understanding the spiritual implications of these now. Not when it becomes mainstream… at that point, its too late and now you are just catching up to the slowest runners.