This is my dynamic, frequently updated homepage. This is a NewsLog, also known as a WebLog or Blog.
Everything is evolving, so don't assume too much.
People to watch:
Adina Levin
Andrius Kulikauskas
Britt Blaser
Catherine Austin Fitts
Chris Corrigan
Clay Shirky
Dan Gillmor
Dave Pollard
David Allen
David Weinberger
Dewayne Mikkelson
Dina Mehta
Doc Searls
Elisabet Sahtouris
Elizabeth Lawley
Euan Semple
Florian Brody
Frank Patrick
Gen Kenai
George Dafermos
George Por
Graham Hancock
Greg Elin
Hazel Henderson
Heiner Benking
Inspector Lohman
Jean Houston
Jerry Michalski
Jim McGee
Jim Moore
John Abbe
John Perry Barlow
John Robb
Joi Ito
Jon Husband
Jon Lebkowsky
Jon Udell
Jonathan Peterson
Judith Meskill
Julian Elvé
Julie Solheim
Kevin Marks
Lawrence Lessig
Leif Smith
Letecia Layson
Lilia Efimova
Lisa Rein
Marc Canter
Mark Oeltjenbruns
Mark Pilgrim
Mark Woods
Martin Dugage
Martin Roell
Mary Forest
Matt Mower
Max Sandor
Michael Fagan
Mike Owens
Mikel Maron
Mitch Kapor
Mitch Ratcliffe
Nathalie dArbeloff
Netron
Noam Chomsky
Paul Hughes
Peter Kaminski
Phil Wolff
Philippe Beaudoin
Ray Ozzie
Raymond Powers
Rebecca Blood
Roger Eaton
Roland Tanglao
Ross Mayfield
Scott Lemon
Sebastian Fiedler
Sebastien Paquet
Skip Lancaster
Spike Hall
Steven Johnson
Stuart Henshall
Thomas Burg
Thomas Madsen-Mygdal
Thomas Nicholls
Timothy Wilken
Todd Suomela
Tom Atlee
Tom Munnecke
Tom Tomorrow
Ton Zijlstra
Lionel Bruel
Loic Le Meur
Nancy White
Mark Frazier
Merlin Silk
Robert Paterson
Colby Stuart
Nova Spivack
Dan Brickley
Ariane Kiss
Vanessa Miemis
Bernd Nurnberger
Sites to watch:
FutureHi
Co-intelligence Institute
Global Ideas Bank
Collective Intelligence
YES Magazine
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Free Expression Network
Greater Democracy
Independent Media
Disinfopedia
Disinformation
Friendly Favors
Action without borders
Manufacturing Dissent
Explorers Foundation
Imaginify
WorldChanging
Smart Mobs
ThoughtsOnThinking
Disclosure Project
Forbidden Science
Nanodot
Edge
HeadMap
BoingBoing
MetaFilter
Absara
Rhizome
Escape Velocity
Webcamorama
Do No Harm
Junto
NotThisBody
Openworld
Space Collective
Emergent by Design
Collective Web
French:
Emmanuelle
Manur
Elanceur
Loeil de Mouche
IokanaaN
Blog d'Or
Le Petit Calepin
GeeBlog
Absara
Guillaume Beuvelot
Ming Chau
Serge Levan
Jean Michel Billaut
C'est pas Mécanique
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5e7d7/5e7d7e27f21cbaacde411a56971d76ff65416b6b" alt="Occitan Cross"
I live in Toulouse, France where the time now is:
01:21
Unique Readers:
Primarily
Public Domain
Everything I've written here is dedicated to the
Public Domain.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/209ea/209ead8daec8c241d32e45e71d81800e139ef6e3" alt="Public Domain Dedication"
The quotes from other people's writings, and the pictures used might or might not be copyrighted, but are considered fair use. Thus, overall, this weblog could best be described as being:
Primarily Public Domain. |
Syndication:
 
|
Wednesday, April 7, 2004 | |
|
|
Via Dave Pollard. Edge asked a bunch of smart people for their personal laws. You know along the lines of Murphy's Law, Moore's Law, Metcalfe's Law and that kind of thing. Answers are here. These are some of my favorites:Art Kleiner: Every organization always operates on behalf of the perceived needs and priorities of some core group of key people. This purpose will trump every other organizational loyalty, including those to shareholders, employees, customers, and other constituents.
Stuart Hameroff:The sub-conscious mind is to consciousness what the quantum world is to the classical world.
Sara Lippincott: God is evolving. So if you're an atheist, you'd better hope that the arrow of time only goes in one direction.
Steven Levy: The truth is always more interesting that your preconception of what it might be.
Matt Ridley: Science is the discovery of ignorance. It is not a catalog of facts.
George Lakoff: Frames trump facts. All of our concepts are organized into conceptual structures called "frames" (which may include images and metaphors) and all words are defined relative to those frames. Conventional frames are pretty much fixed in the neural structures of our brains. In order for a fact to be comprehended, it must fit the relevant frames. If the facts contradict the frames, the frames, being fixed in the brain, will be kept and the facts ignored.
Ray Kurzweil: (The Law of Accelerating Returns) Evolution applies positive feedback in that the more capable methods resulting from one stage of evolutionary progress are used to create the next stage. Each epoch of evolution has progressed more rapidly by building on the products of the previous stage.
Frank Tipler: (Tipler's Law of Unilimited Progress) The laws of physics place no limits on progress, be it scientific, economic, cultural, or intellectual. In fact, the laws of physics require the knowledge and wealth possessed by intelligent beings in the universe to increase without limit, this knowledge and wealth becoming literally infinite by the the end of time. Intelligent life forms must inevitably expand out from their planets of origin, and convert the entire universe into a biosphere. If the laws of physics be for us, who can be against us?
W. Daniel Hillis: The representation becomes the reality. Or more precisely: Successful representations of reality become more important than the reality they represent. Examples: Dollars become more important than gold. The brand becomes more important than the company. The painting becomes more important than the landscape. The new medium (which begins as a representation of the old medium) eclipses the old. The prize becomes more important than the achievement. The genes become more important than the organism. OK, I've gotta stop. Read them yourself. It is a good exercise to boil big complicated phenomena down into simple laws and princples, I think. Even if you don't quite agree, you at least find that out faster.
Damn, I gotta think of some good law myself. Except for that "Funch's Law" sounds a little clumsy. [ Patterns | 2004-04-07 14:08 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
Tuesday, April 6, 2004 | |
|
|
There seems to be a lot of change and possibilities in the air right now. I used to think that things happened just to me, and it didn't have anything to do with anybody else, but at some point along the way I realized that they didn't. That I often find myself plugged in in some way, where I can sort of tell what direction things are moving in within the mass consciousness, simply by noticing what's going on for myself. Not all the time. Some periods more than others. But typically I would find that if I shared it with others, I'd run into many others who had similar experiences. And mostly we're talking about a general pattern, where one can't really point to any direct causes. But sometimes things really flow and move and progress. And other times things are stuck, and projects don't really get anywhere.
Recently, I've run into a remarkably increased amount of promising business projects, re-connections with people I've known in the past, and assorted synchronistic coincidences. Suddenly a lot of things are moving, and new possibilities come out of the woodwork. Not that they're necessarily getting finalized, but they're certainly popping up. And that compares to preceeding months where everything was sluggish. Now big things are in the air, and previously forgotten doors suddenly swing open.
And it doesn't seem to have much with what I linearly do, or how much work I put into it. I spent most of the last two weeks in bed, being sick, reading. Didn't seem to make a difference, and hardly anybody noticed.
Then again, maybe it is just me. [ Diary | 2004-04-06 15:59 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
Monday, April 5, 2004 | |
|
|
Peter Coffee has a nice article in eWeek, "Spreadsheets: 25 Years in a Cell", about how our use of certain software tools shape our behavior, and how different tools set us up for different assumptions and different fallacies and different ways of wasting our time.
Some companies have forbidden Powerpoint presentations in meetings. Because often people use a considerable amount of time at making their presentation look really impressive with graphical effects, but the time is often not very productive. It takes them 10 times as long to say the same thing, and it might just make it less clear what they're actually saying. A simple set of bulletpoints is often more clear.
And then there are spreadsheets:"There are two ways that spreadsheets, as we know them, distort our thinking and lead to bad decisions. The first distortion is the use of point values and simple arithmetic instead of probability distributions and statistical measures. So far as I know, there's no off-the-shelf spreadsheet product—certainly none in common use—that provides for input of numbers as uncertain quantities, even though almost all of our decisions rest on forecasts or on speculations.
There are add-on products that incorporate uncertainty into spreadsheets, and many of them are quite good. Products of this kind that I've favorably reviewed over the years include DecisionTools Pro from Palisade and Crystal Ball Professional and CB Predictor from Decisioneering. It's not too hard to appreciate the difference between products that incorporate uncertainty and those that don't: On the one hand, you've got, "We predict a $1 million profit in the first year"; on the other, "The expected Year 1 profit is $1 million, but there's a 30 percent chance of losses for the first two years." These different statements will lead to quite different discussions." We assume that because we can put some numbers in a spreadsheet that they somehow become more real and certain. And since the spreadsheet programs typically have no good way of representing the actual uncertainty, we skip over the subject. And it isn't enough that our tool allows us to represent several different alternative scenarios:"The subjects whose tools invited them to imagine alternative scenarios believed they were doing a better job—even though statistical measures of their results showed no improvement in the actual quality of the forecasts. Those subjects did, however, take longer to perform the task. Isn't that the worst nightmare of those who must justify IT's return on investment—spending extra money on a more time-consuming product that yields absolutely no measurable improvement?" It is a bit of an embarrassing secret that many of our computerized tools simply allow us to waste more time on making it look like we know what we're talking about, covering up the fact that we really don't.
We can get better tools, of course. Tools that better represent uncertainties and that show our assumptions more clearly. That's certainly an avenue to pursue. But we also need to develop our own built-in bullshit detectors, so that we can stay more conscious of the assumptions and fallacies inherent in what we're looking at, no matter how pretty and scientific it looks. [ Technology | 2004-04-05 08:00 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
Via Liz Lawley news of Infocom Bots that let you play the great Zork text adventure games over AIM or iChat. It remembers how far you've gotten for next time you come back. That's great fun of course. And it instantly makes me think about all the things you could possibly do with IM bots. Like, I could have a receptionist that answered for me:"You're in Flemming's entrance hall. Flemming is traveling in Transylvania right now. There's a blog here, and a mailbox, an SMS terminal, and a phone booth. There's a picture on the wall. There's a WIKI path going off to the right. There are three other visitors standing around looking bewildered. What do you want to do?" And you would go: "Look at picture!" or "Open mailbox!" or "Talk to visitors!". Of course, since it probably knows who you are based on the IM handle, it could be more personalized. You know, "Welcome back Jill, you haven't been here for a week", or "Your shared collaborative blog there, with three NEW postings", or, "There are two notes and a picture for you from Flemming".
Really, I could also use an interface like that myself, if it were wired into my own mail and files and databases, etc. So, if I were on the road I'd just access my personal agent's IM, and it would tell me stuff like:"There are five phone messages for you, 52 new mail messages, 157 new postings in your aggregator. Your family went to the movies. It is 25 degrees. There are four computers there. On the wall you see a calendar and an address book." And I'd be able to tell it things like "Search for a file named 'Business Plan' on my computer!" or "Is there any mail from Joe?". And, really, if it can handle that, there wouldn't be such a big step to it doing it based on voice commands. So that I can have a conversation with my own agent. Nothing insurmountable in any of this. Tying various kinds of information together with some Apple scripting or something similar. For that matter, I could already use voice commands on my Mac if I bothered. What's the missing piece? That somebody just ties it all together for me into a killer application? [ Technology | 2004-04-05 16:40 | 0 comments | PermaLink ]
|
|
|
From Roland Piquepaille's Technology Trends. So, you didn't think a bicycle could have square wheels? Well, it all depends on the surface you're riding on.Stan Wagon, a mathematician at Macalester College in St. Paul, Minn., has a bicycle with square wheels. It's a weird contraption, but he can ride it perfectly smoothly. His secret is the shape of the road over which the wheels roll.
A square wheel can roll smoothly, keeping the axle moving in a straight line and at a constant velocity, if it travels over evenly spaced bumps of just the right shape. This special shape is called an inverted catenary.
A catenary is the curve describing a rope or chain hanging loosely between two supports. At first glance, it looks like a parabola. In fact, it corresponds to the graph of a function called the hyperbolic cosine. Turning the curve upside down gives you an inverted catenary -- just like each bump of Wagon's road. OK, so here's an idea: What about wheels that dynamically change shape quickly enough that they always fit whatever road surface you're going over, so that you can always have a smooth ride. And we might become less attached to smooth surfaces. [ Technology | 2004-04-05 16:57 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
Sunday, April 4, 2004 | |
|
|
Via Voice of Humanity, a very inspiring article from Nova Spivack: The Metaweb: The Global Mind Just Got Smarter:One of the many cool things about the Metaweb is that it functions as a vast bottom-up collaborative filtering system. RSS feeds represent perspectives of publishers. Because feed publishers can automatically or manually include content from other feeds they can "republish," annotate and filter content. Every feed is effectively a switch, routing content to and from other feeds. You are my filter. I am your filter.
Entire communities can collaboratively filter information, in a totally bottom-up way. The community as a whole acts to filter and route content in an emergent fashion, without any central coordination. On top of this sites can then provide value-added aggregation and information-refinery services by tracking memes across any number of feeds and then repackaging and redistributing them in virtual feeds for particular topics or interests. And these new feeds are fed right back into the collective mind, becoming raw materials for still other feeds that pick them up.
What we have here is the actual collective consciousness of humanity thinking collective thoughts in real-time, and we get to watch and participate! We are the "neurons" in the collective minds of our organizations, communities, marketplaces. Our postings comprise the memes, the thoughts, in these collective thought processes. Already the Metaweb is thinking thoughts that no individual can comprehend -- they are too big, too distributed, too complex. As the interactions of millions of people, groups and memes evolve we will see increasing layers of intelligence taking place in the Metaweb. Is the web really turning into the global brain waking up and becoming smarter than any of us? Why not? It is probably the best candidate to do so. [ Knowledge | 2004-04-04 10:49 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
Via Get Real, mention of Linda Stone's distinction between multitasking and what she calls "continuous partial attention". Here, from Inc. magazine:Despite her bureaucratic title [Microsoft vice-president of corporate and industry initiatives], Stone is a creative thinker who has coined the term continuous partial attention to describe the way we cope with the barrage of communication coming at us. It's not the same as multitasking, Stone says; that's about trying to accomplish several things at once. With continuous partial attention, we're scanning incoming alerts for the one best thing to seize upon: "How can I tune in in a way that helps me sync up with the most interesting, or important, opportunity?" She says: "It's crucial for CEOs to be intentional about breaking free from continuous partial attention in order to get their bearings. Some of today's business books suggest that speed is the answer to today's business challenges. Pausing to reflect, focus, think a problem through; and then taking steady steps forward in an intentional direction is really the key. OK, so the ideal is not that we work on everything at the same time. We've got to give significant focus to the major thing we're working on at the moment. But at the same time we need to have ways of always being well-informed about anything that is going on that might change our priorities. If you're engaging in a business activity with other people, some of which aren't in the same physical location as you, it simply doesn't work if you hide away, fully engrossed in a project, paying no attention the outside world. Lots of time and effort can be wasted, just because you weren't there to answer a quick question, or because you didn't hear before days later that circumstances had changed. Stowe Boyd of Get Real puts it very well:"The trick may be to filter events so that only those that are material intrude on our reflections and heads-down work. We shouldn't jump up and run in circles every time the wind shakes the leaves, but we cannot afford to become so engrossed in what we are doing that we miss the leopard about to pounce.
There is no absolute here. Those that simply refuse to carry cell phones, or never log in to IM are dangerous to their organizations. If you are a solitary journalist, or a very senior executive, such behavior may be workable: in the former case, no one is harmed by your opting out, and in the latter case you are likely to have staffers who filter the outside world for you. But for the average person, linked in a dense, cascading social network of collaborators who depend on your timely response to critical events, it will prove increasingly difficult -- if not impossible -- to veer away from continuous partial attention. We will have to learn a new balancing act, and it will be strongly canted toward spending more cycles scanning the horizon and fewer looking down at the piecework in our laps." It is a balancing act indeed. We don't get much done if we spend all our time browsing around in "what's going on". You have to focus to get real work done. But you also have to stay plugged in to the channels of information that are relevant to your work.
I mostly work that way. And I notice the disconnect with people I work with in one or another who don't themselves work that way. Some people I can't get hold of for days, to ask a quick, but critical question. And I get it the other way. Sometimes somebody will come and tell me they've been trying to get hold of me for a week, and it is a big crisis. That's invariably people who don't use IM and cellphones, and who don't really get the IM thing, and all they did was maybe to send me an e-mail a week ago, saying IMPORTANT in the subject line, which got munched up by my spam filter, and they're waiting for my answer. And they never realized that they can reach me quickly and easily with IM, and if somehow it has to be this second, my cellphone is always with me. Send it an SMS if you're worried I might be asleep. But don't even think of using those channels to strike up a live smalltalk conversation with me about what I might have been doing the last few months. You can have my PARTIAL attention at any time as long as we're exchanging relevant information, and you realize that I'm probably doing something else right now. [ Organization | 2004-04-04 11:29 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
From japan.com, a story about inventor Kohei Minato and his Japan Magnetic Fan Company. He has apparently come up with a magnetic motor that consumes stunningly little electricity. OK, let's cut to the chase: it uses so little electricity that you can connect up a generator to it and get out more electricity than you put in. I.e. it is an over-unity device.
What typically happens with over-unity devices is either that the inventor is found to be a con artist, who had hidden wires built into the table or something, and who just wanted to scam investors out of money. Or the patent gets bought up by General Motors, and nobody ever hears about it again. Or the inventor suddenly meets his untimely death in a freak boating accident.
The general consensus among people who're interested in that kind of thing, and actually serious about it, is that the only ways of ever getting an invention like that to market would either be to release workable blueprints all over the Internet, or it would be to camouflage it as an ordinary product that simply is unusually efficient. Minato is following he latter approach. Apparently he has sold 40,000 units to be used to drive cooling fans in convenience stores in Japan. So, just energy-efficient motors. Nobody can have a problem with that, right? And if he gets away with that, he can do something a little more bold with it next.
You can find some technical comments on how Minato's device might work from Tom Bearden, one of the gurus of over-unity theory, here, down in the middle of the page. But, warning, this is all impossible according to your highschool physics. If this kind of thing works, the energy will be coming from tapping ubiquitous fields that mainstream science simply doesn't believe in. [ Technology | 2004-04-04 12:07 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
Saturday, April 3, 2004 | |
|
|
I finally got around to installing a spam solution on my server. It took a while because I hadn't really gotten around to researching it, and didn't realize how good they've gotten, and that some of the best solutions are free.
What I installed was MailScanner and SpamAssassin. I had to rework my Sendmail setup a little bit so that it has two queues, one incoming that MailScanner picks up from, and one outgoing that the messages are delivered from to local accounts. MailScanner does some good things on its own in catching suspicious messages of various kinds, including the most obvious spam that includes attachments that nobody would ever send in e-mail. And for spam it calls SpamAssassin, which uses a whole bunch of methods for giving each message a spam score. Including real-time access of databases of messages that have been identified as spam by others very recently. SpamScanner is also wired for connecting up with a full-featured virus scanner, but all of those seem to be commercial, so I'm not going to spring for that just to be nice to my windows mail users who don't have a virus scanner of their own. Besides, I'd guess that that would use more server processor cycles than I'd be happy with.
The short conclusion is that it works remarkably well. Otherwise I was personally counting on the built-in Bayesian spam filter in Eudora, which at first worked wonderfully, but as more and more spammers started including ridiculous amounts of random content, and as they started spelling their keywords in inventive and insane ways, it had stopped working. Meaning that despite catching hundreds of spam messages every day, other hundreds of messages made it through to my mailbox.
Now SpamScanner and SpamAssassin give messages a score, which Eudora uses in its spam assessment. And they also put a flag in the subject line of likely candidates, like [link]. I hadn't really meant to leave that feature on, but since it is almost always correct, it is actualy helpful. It allows me to simply have a last filter in my list of mail filters that throws everything with that flag into my junkmail folder. The result being that only a handful of spam messages make it through to my inbox every day. And those flags will make it easier for other mail users on my server to filter their messages.
So, ahhh, a little breathing room again. I'm less likely to throw real messages away just because the sender used a subject that sounds spam-like, like "Hello Flemming". [ Diary | 2004-04-03 03:08 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
An old friend from highschool wrote to me recently. Actually it took me a moment to place who he was, as I hadn't thought about him for a moment since then. But we were hanging out a bit even if we weren't in the same classes. He was a friendly sort of oddball, who was restoring veteran motorcycles and driving them around, mostly in his front yard.
He had recently been to some kind of anniversary gathering in our old school. I don't know why nobody invites me to those things, other than that they never bother to look on the Internet, but that's another story. Anyway, as he was looking over the list of people there, he realized that most of our schoolmates had the equivalent of Danish .gov addresses. I.e. they were working for the local city, county, government agency of various kinds. Good, solid very boring jobs, close to where they grew up. Paper pushers, planners, looking like their parents.
And my friend here had led a rather different life. Lived in a dozen different countries. The deserts and jungles of South America, being a deepsea fisherman in Alaska, leading construction projects in various exotic places, being a community agriculture activist in South Africa, marrying a girl he met in Cuba. Speaking a whole bunch of languages. Wrote a book about his life.
So, he wrote to me because he found my weblog. The way was interesting enough, as he was looking up "Cede & Co" to see who really owned his company, and he ended up on one of my pages, and recognized my name.
But, to get to the point, he was happy to find that there was at least one other person who had been leading some kind of interesting life. OK, he's obviously ahead of me in terms of exotic places, but it is not a contest, and the point is how one leads one's life. Would it bore you to death to stay in the same stable job for most of your life, doing very ordinary things, getting a good mortgage, and feeling very engaged because you join the parent council on your kids' school? Or is life an adventure, a mystery, a challenge, a journey of transformation? Not that one has to put down half of the western world, but I tend to get along best with people who are on some kind of adventure. [ Diary | 2004-04-03 04:08 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
Ton Zylstra recently commented on how the accepted norms around picture taking have changed. At least in a crowd of techies where everybody has at least one digital camera with them at all times. People no longer seem to mind constant picture taking. They mostly don't stop what they're doing and start posing. Which makes it easier to take good pictures of what is really going on.
Personally I always have a problem when taking pictures. I'm in the middle of some experience, and I'd like to capture it. But the moment I pull out my camera, it is already a different experience and the presense of the camera changes it a bit. Just as much because of my own hangups as based on people's reactions. As, really, a lot of people no longer care. But I somehow never have a photographer identity. Somebody who is a "real" photographer doesn't hesitate in walking up front and sticking a camera in somebody's face, and hanging around a bit to get a good shot. But that is often because they don't consider themselves part of the action, but rather an independent observer who can float around as they wish, and who consider themselves having the right to photograph whatever is there. I'm usually a lot more self-conscious and try not to intrude. And I personally have a hard time being invisible. So often I don't get the pictures that were there to be gotten.
What would appeal to me would be an always-on camera on my body that simply recorded everything I was seeing, and then I could go and pick out the good parts later. So I could then concentrate on my experiences, and I could reference the recordings based on my own peak moments, and go back and find the exact picture that best shows it.
There are all kinds of issues in that, of course. Such as privacy. Is it ok to record people covertly? What if there was a light that showed that recording was taking place? See, it doesn't have to be a secret, but I'd like to get around the akwardness of the picture taking moment. If everything is recorded, both I and others will get used to it and not change our behavior.
There's an article on Hewlett Packard's site about always-on cameras, and the various issues surrounding the idea. The privacy issues again. But they're also trying to address the technical issues of how to find the interesting moments. If you record what you did for 8 hours, chances are that most of it was really boring and not worth keeping. So, can some automated software tool help you pick out the good parts? Personally I don't care about that overly much. I'd be happy with the ability to scan through the recordings really quickly, and to reference them by time. I pretty much know what times were worthwhile, so I just need to be able to find them again, which I can do visually, if I can scan through the day in a couple of minutes.
HP doesn't seem to be planning a product any time soon. But somebody will do it. Within less than five years, I'm sure. A tiny multi-gigabyte harddisk can quite well record video of your whole day. A high quality camera can quite well fit unobtrusively into a pair of glasses. The technical problems aren't hard. And if first a bunch of techheads start having these, and others think it is cool, there's no turning back.
Despite that many people will have hesitations about allowing such things, I think there are many advantages and many side benefits. See Britt Blaser's idea of the Personal Flight Recorder. If lots of people have always-on cameras, continuously recording, crime as we know it will change. It is much harder to hide shadey dealings, much harder to deny what really went on. The key point is that these things will be in the hands of individuals, not some authoritarian government. Of course I'm trying to avoid thinking about scenarios where the FBI forces some backdoor to be built-in, so they can tap anybody's feed as they please. The answer is to put the technology into common use before they get around to demanding such things.
.. Whaddya know, no sooner have I written the above before a couple of synchronistic and very related items show up. So, for more exciting stuff on that, see Britt's recent post on "sousveillance", and Joi Ito's mention of an International Workshop on Inverse Surveillance in Toronto April 12th. Exactly on these kinds of subjects. See this topic list:* Camera phones and pocket organizers with sensors;
* Weblogs ('blogs), Moblogs, Cyborglogs ('glogs);
* Wearable camera phones and personal imaging systems;
* Electric eyeglasses and other computational seeing and memory aids;
* Recording experiences in which you are a participant;
* Portable personal imaging and multimedia;
* Wearable technologies and systems;
* Ethical, legal, and policy issues;
* Privacy and related technosocial issues;
* Democracy and emergent democracy (protesters organizing with SMS camphones);
* Safety and security;
* Technologies of lifelong video capture;
* Personal safety devices and wearable "black box" recorders;
* Research issues in "people looking at people";
* Person-to-person sharing of personal experiences;
* End of gender-specific space (e.g. blind man guided by wife: which restroom?);
* Subjectright: ownership of photograph by subject rather than photographer;
* Reverse copyright: protect information recipient, not just the transmitient;
* Interoperability and open standards;
* Algebraic Projective Geometry from a first-person perspective;
* Object Detection and Recognition from a first-person perspective;
* Computer Vision, egonomotion and way-finding technologies;
* Lifelong Image Capture: data organization; new cinematographic genres;
* New Devices and Technologies for ultra miniature portable cameras;
* Social Issues: fashion, design, acceptability and human factors;
* Electronic News-gathering and Journalism;
* Psychogeography, location-based wearable computing;
* Augmented/Mediated/Diminished Reality;
* Empowering children with inverse surveillance: Constructionist learning, creation of own family album, and prevention of both bullying by peers and abuse by teachers or other officials. And here, from Britt is a comparison of surveillance and "sousveillance". Splendid word.Surveillance | Sousveillance |
---|
Sur-veiller is French for "to watch from above". | Sous-veiller is French for "to watch from below". | God's eye view from above. (Authority watching from on-high.) | Human's eye view. ("Down-to-earth.") | Cameras usually mounted on high poles, up on ceiling, etc. | Cameras down-to-earth (at ground level), e.g. at human eye-level. | Architecture-centered (e.g. cameras usually mounted on or in structures). | Human-centered (e.g. cameras carried or worn by, or on, people). | Recordings of an activity made by authorities, remote security staff, etc. | Recordings of an activity made by a participant in the activity. |
"Inverse surveillance is the imminent device-driven tsunami whereby we commoners take back our commons. We will be using our always-on videophones to capture the passing scene. The result will be that our blanket, overlapping and corroborating public record captured by our high-res private devices will overwhelm the spotty, lo-res record of incidents captured by so-called public surveillance devices." Yeah, let's turn it all around. I love it. There's nowhere to hide from the people. [ Technology | 2004-04-03 05:27 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
Wednesday, March 31, 2004 | |
|
|
I'm one of the contributors to FutureHi. Took me a while to get around to posting anything, but since Paul is out of town this week, I finally got started.
I actually find it difficult to post to several different blogs. One reason I wouldn't think of dividing my own blog up into several, with different themes, is that I have trouble switching around, or deciding what goes where. What I really like about the blog format is that you just can post whatever's on your mind. And it probably turns out afterwards to have some interweaving common theme, but I'd rather not have to sort that out in advance. You know, I've always been horrible about writing anything on command. If somebody asks me for an article on a certain subject, and with a deadline of publishing - that just never works for me. Whereas if I can just write whatever presents itself to me, without worrying about what it is about, and where it fits, and only minimally worrying about the inteded audience - then my writing flows really easily. Writing for another blog is not quite as bad, but it still takes me a considerable amount of energy to switch my mindset a bit. Even though FutureHi is already very compatible with stuff I'd write about anyway. Just need to pay more attention to the graphics.
Oh, another difficulty is that it uses Movable Type. Which I suppose is fine as far as blogging software goes. And it has lots of plugins one can use to add functionality. But as it is now, I'm seriously missing some of the features of my own NewsLog program, particularly in turns of graphics. It is standard in my program that you can upload pictures to go with an article. Alternatively you can also grab a picture from a URL, which is probably what one does most often. The pictures get stored automatically in a separate directory for that article, so filenames will not collide. And you can resize them easily while uploading. You can choose their position in various ways. And then the HTML for the pictures is created automatically. The default Movable Type does none of that, other than allowing you to upload files from your disk to a common directory. For me these are really essential features. [ Diary | 2004-03-31 02:42 | 0 comments | PermaLink ]
|
|
|
The concept of "The Singularity" is all the buzz amongst certain types of futurists. Mostly it fits in with transhumanist thinking. It is based on the observation that a lot of technological trends are accelerating, even faster and faster. And there are a number of them that in and of themselves have the potential for deeply transforming our collective lives. Take nano-technology, which ultimately might allow us complete control over physical matter, so that we can build any physical object we might desire, at essentially zero cost. Take artificial intelligence. What happens if a computer becomes smarter than you are? What happens if computers are a million times smarter than any of us? What would they do that we wouldn't even be able to comprehend? Or, take genetic engineering. What happens if we're able to understand and design genetics freely? If we can make bodies or new life forms with whatever attributes we want.
The Singularity is both a potentially wonderful, but also terribly scary idea. The "point" of the Singularity is essentially when all of these trends go out of control. They move beyond our event horizon, and we can no longer follow along in any linear manner. Technological change is instant. And what if the machines decide we are no longer relevant?
Now, if one is well versed in other metaphysical models than the materialist transhumanist ones, there are some striking similaries to find. The Singularity is potentially like a technological ascension. It is like the Rapture. Many adherents will even deal with it in a rather religious way, even if they would deny any such thing.
However, the connection I particularly wanted to call attention to is with the model of "dimensions" or "densities", which is found in various mystical traditions, and which is common in new age thinking and often occurs in channeling. If we de-mystify it a little bit, it is simply a chart of how things change when they accelerate, and what stages the world is likely to go through as the frequency of everything is increasing. The story is usually told in a person-centered way. I.e. the focus is on how the world changes for people. But, as a corrollary, how the world actually changes. And the model shows some of the potentially dangerous pitfalls in an accelerating world, as well as the necessary answers. And it gives some hope that this sort of meta-patterns have built-in safeguards that means that vastly increased power has to somewhat go hand in hand with mental development.
Just notice for a moment that a number of the technologies that are envisioned simply couldn't be released into the world today. The world would be destroyed very quickly, mostly because there would be some wackos who would push the wrong button. Imagine if the plans for a do-it-yourself hydrogen bomb were available on the Internet, and anybody who could use a screwdriver could build one out of $50 worth of parts from Home Depot. It would be a matter of days before some crazy guy would decide that it is a cool idea to nuke your city, just to see what would happen. Nano-tech can be like that too. One big mistake with self-replicating nano-machines and you turn the whole world into grey goo. Humanity at large is obviously not of a mental state to be able to handle that kind of power and responsibility.
OK, so now let's talk about the 3rd, 4th and 5th dimension. Calling it "dimension" is maybe confusing, as we're not necessarily talking about dimensions in the geometrical sense, even though that might be a sub-part of it. Think "Buckaroo Banzai in the 8th Dimension". It is more like a place or a world or a level where the rules are different. More down-to-earth, the world doesn't necessarily go anywhere - it is simply that the rules change, as things move at a faster click. Instead of "dimensions", some people say "density". I'm not sure that makes it better, except for that it implies that more stuff is packed into the same space as we count up in the numbers.
So, humanity starts off in the 3rd dimension. Which is the world as we know it, or rather, as we knew it. The best way I heard of making sense of it is that this is the way that you get things to happen in 3D:
spirit -> thought -> emotion -> effort-> manifestation
I suppose you could replace "spirit" with something else if you don't believe in spirituality. "The sub-conscious" could fit somewhat, although not exactly. Regardless, the idea is that an urge or inspiration to make something happen forms at a deep, or high, non-verbal level. Then it gets formed into a thought. Then one gets into the right mood for doing it. Then one actually works on carrying it out. For some amount of time. And finally one gets the result. That might potentially have taken years.
For example, you might get the inspiration to make it big in the vacuum cleaner business. You then form the thought. I.e. you think about it, and you get clear on what your plan is. "Selling vacuum cleaners door-to-door - there's a huge market there!". And then you get excited about it. That's the emotion part. And it might include stubbornness, and various other kinds of emotions that support this project. Then you start working on it. You maybe start yourself, selling vacuum cleaners door-to-door. You have failures and successes, and you learn. Maybe in a couple of years you're really good at it, and you make enough money to hire another person and have a bit of inventory. And over 20 years, maybe you built an empire, from hard work and dedication and 16 hour days. And you have 10,000 people working for you, and you can buy a yacht. And there's your manifestation: making it big in vacuum cleaners.
Duh, you might say. Or your parents might say. That's just how things are done. Work hard, and get a good education, get a solid job, and work hard some more, and maybe you'll make it to something someday. But it takes time.
So, to contrast it, let's move on to 4D, the 4th dimension, or 4th density. Here the sequence that leads to manifestation looks like this:
spirit -> thought -> emotion -> manifestation
You'll notice right away that we took out the part about effort, hard work, and long time. So, the way it works there is:
An inspiration appears, to make something happen. You formulate the thought of what that is. And then, if you can get into the right mood about it - if you can feel it, taste it, smell it, and you're excited about it, and certain about it - what you're asking for might just happen rather quickly.
So, here we're talking about a world where things move faster and where everybody's exposed to a lot of information. Now, what something looks and feels like suddenly is more important than how many years it took to make it. If you look the part, you can have the role. Doesn't really matter you didn't go to acting school. If a new product or idea or person is exciting enough, inspiring enough, and makes us feel enough - they might spread like wildfire into the public mind, and make a lot of money. This is where a one year old company of hackers doing software might buy out a venerable fortune 500 company that produces really substantial products and has existed for 100 years. Doesn't really matter any longer.
From a personal perspective, the trick is that if you really feel it, in a positive way, you can have it. If you obviously feel right about it, there will be someone you can go see who can get you what you want, like tomorrow. But one of the pitfalls is that you need to agree with yourself. It is not necessarily enough to act excited about your "bright" idea. It is more important that you're in alignment, in congruence with yourself than that the idea is really bright. It is more important that your emotions are real. So, your hidden negative emotions will come up and bite your ass. If you're not really sincere, people are more likely to notice, and it is much less likely you get where you want to go.
OK, on to 5D, the 5th dimension. What happens there is:
spirit -> thought -> manifestation
So, we cut out the emotion part. No longer necessary to get into the right mood, and broadcast the right vibes before you get things to happen. You just need to form the thought clearly enough, and, bing, there it is.
Well, that's kind of like the holodeck in Star Trek. "Computer! Give me ..." And, indeed, maybe technology is a way it will manifest.
One way or another, it means that the brakes have been removed. It doesn't take work to make things happen. It doesn't even take sincerity and dedication. You just have to form the thought.
You might realize, with the way most human minds work today, that it could quickly be a complete nightmare. Like, think about the humorous situation you have seen on film, where somebody's granted 3 wishes, and they screw them up, by lack of control over their thoughts or emotions. "I wish that hotdog was stuck on your nose", "I wish I was the pope". And you usually have to use the last wish to put everything back to normal, after which you're sort of relieved that you can't just go around wishing for things anymore.
So, imagine that you could. It suddenly becomes absolutely vital and essential that your thoughts are clear, and in alignment with what you really want. And that you don't let stray negative emotions suddenly decide what you think. One "I wish he was dead" can have fatal consequences that can't be undone.
This is where you again might imagine that anybody could build a nuclear bomb. "Computer! Give me a 50Megaton nuclear warhead!" ... and there it is in the matter compiler in your kitchen.
That would never ever work unless all humans are sane on a totally different level than today. Humankind would have to evolve and mature, mentally and emotionally, for that kind of world to be possible.
Even if we're not talking nuclear bombs, most humans of today would go insane rather quickly if whatever they were thinking or asking for continously would happen to them more-or-less instantly. You'd be bouncing against the walls, trying to undo the misplaced wish you did five minutes ago.
We could go on the same way to 6D:
spirit -> manifestation
which in more materialistic terms would mean that the whole contents of your sub-conscious will just be manifested, without you particularly having to voice it. That would be wall-to-wall nightmare. Or it will be nirvana and paradise. The cold drink appears before you realize you could use one. If your sub-conscious mind is very mature, or we could say, if you're aligned with yourself on all levels, it would be marvelous. If you aren't, it would be even worse than 5D. Think about a nano-tech matter compiler/VR/Holodeck thing mapped directly into your brain and into your sub-conscious. The slightest under-the-surface hint of something would immediately be manifested in front of you. Uaaarrrgh.
7D would be that you no longer need the manifestation even. Pure spirit. Or, if you want to look at it materialistically, it could be if you had uploaded yourself to a computer, and you were perfectly happy with simulated experiences, rather than "real" ones. And anything you might ever want is instantly available to you. All at the same time, if you want. You can be anybody you want. So maybe you move on to a different kind of meta-perspective that no longer seeks human kinds of experiences.
As to where we are now .... A lot of people think that humanity has moved from 3D into 4D. I.e. it is no longer a world where hard work and time invested is the most likely thing to pay off. More important what things look and feel like. Media exposure is more important than the facts. What you radiate is more important than what experience you've actually had.
And, one way or another, one of the next steps will be what is described as the 5D. We can easily lay out how it will happen with technology alone. But it is much more than that. It is a total change in how the world works. And it requires some substantial evolutionary changes in humanity to be able to deal with it without short-circuiting and self-destructing.
Luckily there's a bit of an inherent training program built-into accelerating change. You'll have to continuously run a little faster, and there will continously be more stuff to deal with, in terms of information, thoughts, emotions, ideas, people. The only way of surviving and staying sane is to somehow keep up with it, processing it along the way, which means that you evolve, and you become much better at handling the faster action. You might not notice, and you might think you're way behind, but if we compare what you deal with every day with what people were required to deal with in their lives every day 20 years ago, there's just no comparison. You're vastly more able to deal with fast-moving complexity than you've been before. And that will keep going. Some people will crack along the way, but if you make it, you'll someday take for granted that we can all comfortably deal with capabilities that would have frightened us out of our skulls before.
And, somehow, it is all not happening faster than we can (barely) keep up. It is probably because the change is generated collectively by us, ourselves, here, and there are some feedback loops in place. So things tend to not happen before we're somewhat ready for them. We might not think we're ready for them, but there's something in our collective super- or sub-conscious evolutionary mind pattern that's smarter than any of us. [ Patterns | 2004-03-31 03:05 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
Tuesday, March 30, 2004 | |
|
|
Looking at FunHi, I don't even get what it is. I must be getting old. The Wired article explains it better. Or at least they talk about the more interesting feature: the ability to give others virtual gifts that cost real money. So, first of all, FunHi is an online community and hangout place. It is social networking software. It seems to target people around 20 who like to talk like gangstas all the time.
There is a gift store, which allows people to buy gifts for people they like. Which mostly means that guys will try to attract the attention of the girls who've uploaded the most enjoyable bikini pictures. The gifts are simply a small GIF file with a picture of something. Like flowers or a private jet. The gifts start at 1 cent. And there's nothing wrong with the gifts that cost 1 or 5 cents. But, somehow, the social dynamic of showing a list of who gave what gifts to what person, and them being listed in reverse price order, means that some people will be very motivated to buy the expensive gifts. Like the $14.99 jet plane or the $30 credit card. Remember, they're just GIF pictures. You don't even download them. And, remember, you pay for them with a real credit card.
Now, why didn't I think of that? I must be too honest. [ Culture | 2004-03-30 18:25 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
Weblogsinc.com has a contest to come up with the perfect elevator pitch for corporate weblogging. You know, you're an enthusiastic weblogger yourself, and you think your company would draw great benefits from developing a weblogging culture, and now you're incidentally alone with the CEO for a minute while going up the elevator. What exactly would you say now that you have his full attention?
Judith Meskill is organizing the contest. I'm one of the judges, so I won't be submitting anything myself. But if you have an interest in corporate blogging, and you think you know how to present your case, go and fill in your submission.
You can find some tips about elevator pitches here or here. Some very good advice, if you ever have anything to present to anybody. [ Information | 2004-03-30 21:30 | 0 comments | PermaLink ]
|
|
Sunday, March 28, 2004 | |
|
|
So, NASA was successful with their X-43A supersonic test flight, reaching Mach 7. Which is good news for the scramjet technology, and opens the door to cheaper, less resource-intensive space vehicles.
But, hey, what about the Aurora black project? A strange triangular craft has apparently been making regular trips from Nevada to Scotland and back for a number of years. At Mach 6. Which ought to indicate that it was beyond the experimental stage. And it was funded with a number of billions of dollars, hidden away in the budgets. What's up with that? Who's that reserved for? [ News | 2004-03-28 15:34 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
Saturday, March 27, 2004 | |
|
|
The Pay it forward site was created by Catherine Ryan Hyde, author of "Pay it forward". I haven't read it, but I saw the movie, which was fabulous. And of course both open the door for a movement and a site where people can share their stories. In brief, the idea is that you pay "forward" (as opposed to paying "back") spontaneous acts of kindness you've received. I.e. instead of doing something in return for somebody who did something unexpected and helpful for you, you will do the same for a stranger you run into later. Like random acts of kindness. Here are a couple of stories:Lela: "When I was 15 years old,I was on a bus to my dads,who lived 2200 miles away.I had no money and was getting pretty hungry. A lady on the bus asked me if I was hungry and I admitted I had not eaten for two days. She proceeded to feed me at every meal stop. At the end of her journey,she gave me $5 and told me.."always remember this time,if you see someone in need..help when you can". I am now pushing 60 and have never forgotten her or her words. I have never passed someone who was in need without helping them if I was able to do so. I have tried to instill this in my family as well and we are ALL ..great believers in paying it forward."
Sarah: "I noticed that there aren't any stories about kids in college doing this movement. Recently, at Southwestern College in Winfield Kansas, our Mind/Body/Universe class watched the movie Pay it Foward. The class has about 50 students in it and the teacher, Julie Conrade, decided to make Paying it Forward an assignment. We split up into about 10 groups and were instructed to find some way to Pay it Foward to our community and then present our projects to the class a month later. Some of the things the groups did included: visiting nursing homes, helping a working family renovate their house, helping a man who had a stroke clean his house because his wife was getting treatment for leukimia out of state, and recycling thousands of bottles and cans. I am in the class and noticed that all of the students took the assignment seriously and got a lot out of the experience!" And they're not all sweet and cuddly:Geoff: "I was living in Buffalo, New York, last year, in a section of town that everyone called the ghetto. I was 21 years old, and every day I had to walk for half an hour through the worst streets just to get to work. I usually got stares for being one of the few white guys you'd see on the street. It made me really nervous, despite the fact that I'm 6'2 and a weightlifter. I've always been a pacifist, and haven't been in a fight since 9th grade. One day, I was heading down Bailey Avenue, and five black teenagers started following me, yelling insults and laughing at me. I was trying to ignore them, but they started circling around me while I walked. I told them to leave me alone, which only got them more riled up. Finally, one shoved me, and another one grabbed my backpack. Right as I was about to get a really bad beating, one of the guys gets clocked in the head with a soup can, and falls over. We all looked, and an old black man was standing at the back of his store about twenty feet away, holding another can. The teens started swearing at him, and he yelled for them to go away, and that he'd called the police. One of the teens started coming towards him, and gets the other can right in the face. The other three looked like they were going to rush him, but he reached behind the door and pulled out a *big* shotgun. He didn't even have to point it at them. They ran for it, practically dragging the first teen that got knocked over with them.
The man came over and checked to be sure I was okay. His name was George, and I waited with him until the police arrived to file a report and give descriptions. In private, George told me that his church, which was going to be closed for lack of funds, had recently received an anonymous donation for $5000 that had "pay it forward" written on the envelope. All the members had decided to do their own PIF's, and I was really glad to have been one of his." [ Inspiration | 2004-03-27 05:00 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
Japanese youth culture and alternative fashions are always fascinating. Here's one I hadn't heard about before:data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3e0b9/3e0b99e6c8194f0376035ddb4780143589bc0657" alt="" An Elegant Gothic Lolita, EGL or Gothic Lolita for short, is a Japanese teen or young adult who dresses in amazingly elaborate Gothic looking babydoll costumes. On the weekends these women walk the streets of Tokyo and Osaka and fill Yoyogi Park and Harajuku neighborhood where they pose for tourist’s pictures and sit around looking pretty. They are beautiful, glamorous, doll-like manifestations of their favorite Visual Rock stars.
This subculture’s physical look began around the fall of 1999 as a sort of French Maid meets Alice in Wonderland style and has expanded gradually to encompass many nuances in a Victorian Gothic look. That was from Morbid Outlook. [ Culture | 2004-03-27 05:22 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
Just heard somebody mention "toothing" in an IRC chat in relation to a conference, and I really had no clue what they meant. But then I just notice that Judith Meskill has a nice introduction on The Social Software Weblog. Ah... I'm shocked! ;-)There’s the Toothing Blog — A blog all about Toothing - finding partners for sex using bluetooth mobile phones. And then there’s the Toothing FAQ — which encourages the utilization of public places and safe sex practices. There’s even a Toothing Forum to discuss location, location, location. And now there is a story today in Wired News — Brits Going at It Tooth and Nail. Daniel Terdiman starts out with “The Brits sure are randy.” Anyone watch Coupling?
So… Is this Social Software? If one factors in the exhibitionist aspect of these Toothing encounters, the experience does have the potential to take on a ‘group’ perspective. Oh, wait a sec, the Brits have already done that with Dogging. And to think, all thanks to the wireless technology — Bluetooth. Well, yeah, that's social software alright. I just still don't get how it can be practical. Bluetooth reaches about 10 meters if you're lucky. About one car in a train. And you'd have to sit and manually message one person at a time. Of course it would make sense if it were automatic, and your phone would alert you only when it had found a person of appropriate gender who for some inscrutable reason would be happy to meet you in the bathroom. Shouldn't be that hard to make.
Anyway, there could be many other legitimate uses of being able to chat with people close by through your phones. Here's a short intro to Bluechat, as that phenomenon is called, when done over bluetooth. In a meeting, in a conference, at school. [ Culture | 2004-03-27 06:11 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
Friday, March 26, 2004 | |
|
|
Noam Chomsky has a blog now, called "Turning the Tide". And, as always, he speaks hard-hitting words about things he knows well about. Here's one sample:What can we do about it? Just about everything.
The IMF is hardly more than a branch of the Treasury Department. Economist Jagdish Bhagwati, no radical, refers to the IMF- Treasury-Wall St complex that is a core part of de facto world government. The Treasury Department is part of the US government. If we had anything remotely resembling a democratic culture, actions of the government would be under the control of citizens, which would mean that citizens have to at the very least know something about them. And beyond that, we would have mechanisms to engage in political action. And in a more democratic society the third component, Wall St., would not exist in anything remotely like its present form, and what would exist would be under popular democratic control.
But any of this requires constructing the basis for democratic participation, which has been very badly eroded in the US, creating what's often called a "democratic deficit" when we refer to others -- in our own case, a huge democratic deficit.
People in the more civilized sectors of the world (what we call "the third world," or the "developing countries") often burst out laughing when they witness an election in which the choices are two men from very wealthy families with plenty of clout in the very narrow political system, who went to the same elite university and even joined the same secret society to be socialized into the manners and attitudes of the rulers, and who are able to participate in the election because they have massive funding from highly concentrated sectors of unaccountable power that cast over society the shadow called "politics," as John Dewey put it.
But it's up to us whether we want to tolerate this, and if we could begin to approach the level of democracy of, say, Brazil, we could do quite a lot about IMF conditionalities. And it doesn't happen by just showing up once every four years to participate in an "election". [ Politics | 2004-03-26 10:31 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
According to New Scientist, a Southern California engineer, Behrokh Khoshnevis, has been working on a robot that can "print" houses. There are devices that are quite a bit like inkjet printers, but which output 3D models in plastic by building them from the bottom up, layer by layer, by spraying out little globs of plastic. This would be the same kind of idea, but it would be a bigger machine, and it might use a kind of concrete. They haven't actually worked out the perfect material yet, and he's collaborating with a company in Germany to find it. However, ironically, it seems that adobe, a traditional mix of mud and straw, could be quite suitable for this process. Wouldn't that be something.
The process is called "Contour Crafting". Other, more detailed, articles are here and here. [ Technology | 2004-03-26 14:39 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
|
Richard Clarke, former counter-terrorism chief in the U.S. is putting some stuff forward to the current 9-11 commission which is pretty devastating to the Bush administration. There's another story that doesn't get so many headlines. Sibel Edmonds was a Farsi and Turkish translator who worked for the FBI from Sept. 20, 2001 to March 2002. Government Executive magazine has this to say:Edmonds said she was hired to retranslate material that was collected prior to Sept. 11 to determine if anything was missed in the translations that related to the plot. In her review, Edmonds said the documents clearly showed that the Sept. 11 hijackers were in the country and plotting to use airplanes as missiles. The documents also included information relating to their financial activities. Edmonds said she could not comment in detail because she has been under a Justice Department gag order since October 2002. Edmonds has testified before the Sept. 11 commission, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Senate Select Intelligence Committee. Seems she was basically bribed and then threatened to not talk about it. From tomflocco.com:FBI translator, Sibel Edmonds, was offered a substantial raise and a full time job in order to not go public that she had been asked by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to retranslate and adjust the translations of [terrorist] subject intercepts that had been received before September 11, 2001 by the FBI and CIA. Or, in her own words:"Attorney General John Ashcroft told me 'he was invoking State Secret Privilege and National Security' when I told the FBI I wanted to go public with what I had translated from the pre 9-11 intercepts." [...]
"I appeared once on CBS 60 Minutes but I have been silenced by Mr. Ashcroft, the FBI follows me, and I was threatened with jail in 2002 if I went public" Doesn't look good.
BoingBoing postings here and here. [ Politics | 2004-03-26 16:17 | | PermaLink ] More >
|
|
<< Newer stories Page: 1 ... 38 39 40 41 42 ... 97 Older stories >> |
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/2fde9/2fde964aabcb8361043c899569d4a46c1bf56a32" alt="yin yang hat"
This is a collage of things that catch my eye, things that need to be said, and stuff I really care about
TRUTH BEAUTY FREEDOM LOVE TECHNOLOGY
|
Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
|
|