logo Ming the Mechanic
An old rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open, free and exciting is waking up.

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:
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Co-intelligence Institute
Free Expression Network
Collective Intelligence
Action without borders
Manufacturing Dissent
Explorers Foundation
Disclosure Project
ThoughtsOnThinking
Forbidden Science
Emergent by Design
Greater Democracy
Global Ideas Bank
Independent Media
Space Collective
Friendly Favors
Escape Velocity
Disinformation
Collective Web
WorldChanging
YES Magazine
Disinfopedia
NotThisBody
MetaFilter
Webcamorama
BoingBoing
Smart Mobs
Do No Harm
Imaginify
FutureHi
Openworld
Nanodot
HeadMap
Rhizome
Absara
Edge
Junto

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

IRC: #FrenchChat

A Quote I like:


I live in Toulouse, France where the time now is:
01:33

Click for Toulouse, France Forecast

Other sites around 43.592N 1.4119W


Contacting Me
I get many hundreds of e-mail messages per day and my inbox is becoming increasingly useless to me. So, if you write to me, don't count on an answer unless we know each other really well, or your communication is short and clear. Oh, I'm very friendly and approachable, but I don't have hours enough in my day to read everything.
ffunch -at- worldtrans.org

FOAF icon

If you want your own
NewsLog like this,
or you want a
profile for
leaving comments,
join the
New Civilization
Network


Unique Readers:
graph

Recent Visitors came from:
gravatar.com
www.theknot.com
genericviagranpz.com
viagraprofessionalnvz.com
www.google.com
order-simvastatin.over-blog.
osrosuvastatin5mg.aircus.com
nofaxpaydaynpz.com
hdstreams.ru
streamsport.org

Primarily
Public Domain


Everything I've written here is dedicated to the
Public Domain.
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:

RSS icon [Valid RSS]


Monday, October 27, 2003day link 

 Stand still and look until you really see
picture Roland quotes Dave Pollard who's writing about how to trick your left brain (anylytical, iconic) into getting out of the way so that you actually can see what you see in front of you, and allow your creativity to flow. Good stuff there, including this from Dave Pollard:
"Here are some exercises that I've found can help left-brainers to 'really see':
  • Move in close, so you divert attention from individual objects and start to see instead colour, texture, shape, shadow, reflection, pattern
  • Find an unusual perspective from which to look -- get down on the ground and look up, look at something through trees, through a microscope, or by candlelight, anything that will let you see things differently from usual
  • Look at things under unusual conditions -- in the fog, at night, right after a heavy rain, just at dawn or dusk
  • Stimulate your other right-brain senses -- get your nose up close to things, listen to birds, or insects, or train whistles, or music, walk in your bare feet
  • Walk or bicycle without a pre-determined destination, direction or time limit
  • Study something -- birds at your bird-feeder, time-lapse of a flower over the course of a day or a week, a spider-web, how moving or dimming the lights in a room changes its character, how a bottle looks different when viewed from different angles
In the book Easy Travel to Other Planets, Ted Mooney describes a future world where people are so bombarded with meaningless information, abstract facts that don't really matter, that they become psychologically paralyzed, unable to focus on anything, and succumb to what Mooney calls 'information sickness'. In some ways we are already there. The trappings of our society and culture have already separated us from, and deadened us to, most of what is real in this world, and surrounded us instead with artifice -- bland, manipulative, numbing 'entertainment', office and home lighting (and air conditioning, and jobs) that are artificial, news that shows wars as light-shows instead of people dead and dying, cars that insulate us from any exposure to real people or real weather."
Great stuff. Yes, a lot of us are hiding from most of what is real, just condensing it into symbols, then thinking the symbols are real, and drowning ourselves in too many symbols that we think we must do something about. Where we often might be better off by just slowing down and perceiving what actually is here.
[ | 2003-10-27 10:30 | 0 comments | PermaLink ]


Wednesday, October 22, 2003day link 

 Manufacturing Reality
We seem to form our picture of reality based on a pattern matching algorithm. It doesn't really matter if you consider that a function of neurology or as a deeper metaphysical principle, the result it about the same.

If "enough" pieces of a reality are assembled and they are recognizable and familiar to us, we assume that the remaining details are probably also in place and that we're dealing with a "real" reality.

It is perfectly possible to fool people into accepting a scenario as reality that really isn't, if you put enough familiar elements into place. Most candid camera episodes are built on that kind of principle. An environment is set up so that it looks like you've been hired for a new job, and there's a real office and other employees and everything. And then a surprise element is thrown in, like the arrival of a stripping telegram, or the need to handle some impossible problem, like your desk falling apart. And the "employee" accepts it as real, because everything else looked right.

Or how about experiments that were done where a comedian managed to get up in front of a medical convention and give a speech in complete giberish without anybody noticing. Because he looked right, and sounded right, and even though the attendees where highly educated M.D.s they were also used to not having to understand all the details of what everybody was saying, and they were used to displaying a certain respect towards their peers. The Emperor's New Clothes. We're all trying to act normal, unwilling to admit we don't understand everything.

Conversely, we can also create an invisible reality, if it is constructed of elements that are so unfamiliar and unexpected that we just can't see it. A stage magician is usually quite adept at that. You don't see what he's really doing because you're not attuned to the patterns he's using.

It is said that when Captain Cook's ship first approached the island of Tahiti in the South Pacific, the inhabitants could literally not see it coming. Even when Cook and his crew got out and pointed out their ship to the Tahitians, and explained how they arrived, the natives couldn't see the ship at first. Because it was totally unfamiliar and they didn't have any belief that included the possibility that somebody could arrive from the ocean in a large sailing vessel.

In our modern society we tend to walk around believing that we're very rational and observant and we've got a pretty good grip on what is reality. Science tends to create that picture. But yet, science, however useful it is, is just a systematic way of agreeing on what a certain reality is, and how to get predictable results with it, and it tends to stay within the boundaries of those codified agreements, often ignoring anything that doesn't fit. Science only very cautiously and gradually will expand that area.

If you master these principles, and you have sufficient resources at your disposal, it is entirely possible to both create fake realities that large numbers of people will accept as the truth, as well as to create realities that are invisible to the general population.

Think for example of a black project that has access to sufficiently advanced principles and technologies that have been kept out of the public knowledge, out of scientific text books, and out out of the educational system. Say, teleportation or time travel. You don't even have to worry much about leaks, because they will pretty much be self-healing. If somebody puts out a story about secret time travel experiments, it is very easy to ridicule them, and you don't even have to do it yourself, as there will be plenty of respectable scientists and good citizens who'll stand up and say that it of course is impossible and complete nonsense. Somebody could even write a book with all the details and you could pick it up in the UFO section of your local bookstore, but it wouldn't sink into the public awareness as anything real.

You can keep very big things very secret if you just make sure that enough of the components and participants are far enough removed from what is normal and expected, and the facts are generally so hard to get to, and so hard to piece together, that the whole thing becomes invisible to most people.

Single secrets hidden by known people can fairly easily be discovered. But complex secrets, put together from many individually incredible elements, those are much harder to bring to the light.

Conversely, you can make fake stories appear very real and accepted if you just make sure that you provide enough components of normal reality. Like, pictures, sound, stories, information, and lots of it, and repetitive delivery of it. And that the people presenting it look like the right kind of people to do so. Reporters, scientists, government officials, etc.

I'm not really even talking about conspiracy theory particularly. A bigger view than that. Conspiracies are usually imagined as something the known and accepted players are doing when you aren't looking. Like, does George Bush and Tom Brokaw and Kenneth Lay and everybody else you see on the news have secret meetings where they plan out how they'll fool everybody? Well, maybe they do, but that's probably not where it is really at. Whatever specific things they do will quite likely come to light sooner or later and would be too hard to hide. What matters is not what they did, but what reality we end up accepting, and which realities we'll ignore. The real secret stuff would probably be going on in places you don't even know to look at, and would be done by people you've never heard of. And the people you are looking at on the news are quite likely thinking they're just doing the best they can with what's available to them. Because they probably live in a manufactured reality as well.
[ | 2003-10-22 05:15 | 5 comments | PermaLink ]  More >


Tuesday, October 21, 2003day link 

 Perceptual Creativity Tricks
picture If you're trying deliberately to think creatively, to come up with new ideas, having a set of stimulating tricks can help. It is quite possible to stimulate lateral thinking in fairly mechanical ways. Lateral thinking is where, instead of following the usual step-by-step logical paths of thinking, you sort of jump to the side and come up with something entirely unexpected. Ed de Bono is one of the champions of lateral thinking.

An effective and well-known way of provoking lateral thinking is to introduce a random element. For example, while closing your eyes, open up a dictionary and point somewhere on the page, and see what word it is. And then pretend that it has something to do with your problem at hand, and try to figure out how. And some percentage of the time, you'll actually come up with surprisingly good ideas. If you have no problem or idea to start with, you can pick up two words by that method, and then pretend that they relate to each other, and sometime you might actually invent something new.

Arthur Koestler talked about "bisociation" which is the theory that new ideas arise from the combination of two previously separate ideas. I.e. you combine some things in a way that hadn't been imagined before, and to your surprise you realize they actually fit, and a new idea, or a new invention, might come from it. One can practice this simply by taking random words, items or subjects, and exploring what happens if they're combined.

If you do have an idea or problem or invention you're exploring, which looks promising, or which presents an obstacle, there are many things one can do with it to look for creative ways of making it work. Supposedly victorian engineers would work designs for new machines through a checklist of ways it could me done differently, mechanically speaking, and new, better ways might emerge. Some of the same tricks can be applied to most new ideas, even if they aren't exactly about a mechanical invention.

Magnify it; Reduce it.
Reverse it; Spin it; Re-orientate it.
Turn it inside out.
Heat it up; Cool it down.
Move it forward; Roll it backward.
Raise it; Lower it.
Move it left; Move it right.
Project it; Inject it.
Squeeze it; Expand it.
Replicate it; Decimate it; Weed it out.
Make it portable; Make it importable.
Speed it up; Slow it down.
Age it; Rejuvenate it.
Transpose to the past or the future.
Change from analog to digital.
Implement it in hardware or software.
Be it; Do it; Have it.
Take it apart; Put it together
Make it heavier, lighter.
Centralize it; De-centralize it.
Grow it; Design it
Focus on it; Make it peripheral.
Explode it; Implode it.
Wear it, live in it, sit on it, transport it, eat it.
Color it, add sound, touch it.
Take on its identity, what does it feel like, what does it want to do?
Split it in complementary parts, or put it together with its counterparts.
If this exists, what else would exist?
Make it transparent, clear, fuzzy, opaque.
Energize it; Tap its energy.
Make it 1-, 2-, 3-, or 4-dimensional.
Make it have two states (on/off), or have infinite grades.
Put in water, underground, in the air, or in space.
Pressurize it; put it in vacuum.
Make it weightless; increase the gravity.

In other words, play with the new idea or the problem at hand. Stretch it, bend it, turn it upside down, inside out, in any way you can think of. And you might realize that what didn't work on a large scale might work on a small scale, and what didn't work one way might work the opposite way.

Also, when you play with actual perceptions, you're making things more real. Purely abstract ideas have less chance of materializing than if you can actually see them, feel them, hear them, smell them, taste them.

See an old article by Keith Hudson that inspired this article here.
[ | 2003-10-21 05:33 | 7 comments | PermaLink ]  More >

 Window on the World
picture From Ananova via SmartMobs:
A window between cities that allows people hundreds or even thousands of miles apart to meet and talk could make its debut in Britain next year.

Tholos, named after a type of circular ancient Greek temple, consists of a large round screen nearly 10ft high and 23ft wide.

Its designers hope to see one of the first two in the world become a new tourist attraction in the centre of London.

The London Tholos would be linked to an identical one in Vienna. Through them, people in both cities will be able to see and hear each other in real time.

The cylindrical structure contains technology that simultaneously transmits and receives high definition live moving images.

People standing in front of London's Tholos would see a wrap-around picture of the scene in Vienna. At the same time, a similar London image is displayed in the Austrian capital.

Citizens in both countries would be able to face each other and talk via an array of directional microphones and loudspeakers, which keep conversations private.

Effectively, it is like meeting up in the town square - except that you might be on different continents.
Very, very cool. Let's get one in Baghdad and Tel Aviv and Addis Ababa and every city in the world. Only annoying part is that it is financed by advertising. So, 13% of the time you'll apparently have your conversation interrupted by ads. But I guess one could get used to that.
[ | 2003-10-21 09:54 | 1 comment | PermaLink ]  More >


Monday, October 20, 2003day link 

 World Kit
picture Mikel Maron is doing very cool things with world maps. First he made World as a Blog which is a Flash animation that shows web log postings in real time, popping up on the world map, at the location of the poster. And now he's taken it further and put together World Kit, which makes it possible to do the same thing with just about any data that has geographical coordinates, by interfacing with the Flash app though XML. I can't to play with that. If I just had more hours in the day.
[ | 2003-10-20 05:11 | 1 comment | PermaLink ]  More >

 Weblog Interfaces
Weblog APIs (Application Program Interfaces) can allow you to operate a weblog program through a different program. For example, you can post articles from another program, with an interface you like better, without having to change your primary weblog software. Or you might post entries directly from a weblog aggregator. Or programmers can think of new ways of tying things together that previously weren't.

Probably the first example was the LiveJournal Client/Server API. And then there was the Blogger API, and more recently the MetaWeblog API. And now I was just reading about the new Atom API.

I haven't gotten around to using any of them for my NewsLog program that this weblog is running in. When last I was looking into it, when the Blogger API was the main thing around, I just couldn't figure out how to squeeze my functionality into its too limited paradigm. Next time I feel like giving it a shot, I think MetaWeblog and Atom looks like what I ought to concentrate on.
[ | 2003-10-20 05:29 | 0 comments | PermaLink ]

 Corporate liability terminator
picture It rather bores me to talk about the politics of a state I don't even live in any more, but certain things just need to be kept in the light. Like, I'm sure most of the California voters didn't know about Arnold Schwarzenegger's relation to Enron. Specifically the meeting he had with the former Enron top brass in 2001, and the stack of internal Enron memos outlining the plan to get him elected as governor in California so that he could make sure the energy companies wouldn't have to be held responsible for any of the billions they ripped the taxpayers off of. So Arnold would be the man who would cancel the lawsuits that would otherwise ask for $9 billions of profits to be paid back. And, well until now that was just another conspiracy story. But that happened to be one of the very first things he's now done as governor, asking for those lawsuits to be settled out of court. And that puts it in an entirely different light. And he's now working on removing the law that even made those suits possible in the first place. Read more for example here. Well, if it was just a matter of an actor being elected to political office, and he was just going to use good common sense, I'd say go for it. He seems like a nice enough guy, and his Austrian terminator accent and colorful past would be a source of many good laughs. But this seems unfortunately more like just another corrupt politician, bought off in advance by criminal corporate interests.
[ | 2003-10-20 10:02 | 2 comments | PermaLink ]  More >

 Accidental Authority
By the magic of google ranking I've somewhat unfairly become a leading authority on a bunch of strange subjects. Like "ebay scams", "computer troubles", "ganguro girls", "euros dollars & oil" and "nestle corporation". Oh, many other things too, but those are some that lead lots of people here to certain articles in my weblog. And sometimes I think that is surversively enjoyable. I mean, that my brief mention of a couple of skeletons in Nestle's corporate closet will actually show as well as Nestle's own websites is absolutely delightful. But I think there probably are better places for people to go to talk about ebay scams and their various computer troubles than my personal accounts of the same. But I feel a bit of responsibility, and am wondering whether I should go and place some more comprehensive information and links on those pages that people seem to be flocking to.
[ | 2003-10-20 10:30 | 1 comment | PermaLink ]  More >


Friday, October 17, 2003day link 

 Slow Light
picture Researchers have shown than they can slow down light to a stand still, and even store its properties in atoms and then reconstitute the light later. And now other researchers have found that they can manufacture crystal that either slow down or speed up light.

It all reminds me of a science fiction story I read once where somebody had manufactured "slow glass". It would take something like 20 years for light to pass through a pane of glass like that. So, you would buy glass panes that had been standing around on the African savannah or in the Himalayas or something for years, and put them as windows in your house. And then, for years, you could look out at exotic wildlife walking about outside or breathtaking mountain views.
[ | 2003-10-17 10:55 | 6 comments | PermaLink ]  More >

 Leaders on the Web
David Weinberger writes about the question about why it is so hard to find any leaders on the net. It is easy to name plenty of examples of leaders in the 'real' world. But on the web, we seem to be at a loss of giving good examples. Sure, some well-known names who invented one thing or the other, but leaders?
"The answer to the first question — why are there no leaders on the Web? — has everything to do with the Web's architecture...

The single factor perhaps most important for the success of the Web is precisely the fact that we don't need permission to participate, to create a Web site, to post a page. The Web is a permission-free zone. In this it mirrors the Internet that will move anyone's bits from one point to any other point without needing to get permission first and without having to consult a central routing authority to find out how to do it.

[...]So, what lessons do we learn about leadership on the Web? That the people we pay attention to are the ones who speak not at us and not to us but with us. We listen to them carefully because they are so interesting, so wise, and even so funny. We learn that leadership isn't a quality that necessarily spreads across all areas and topics: the person who is worth listening to about, say, technology may be just another jerk when it comes to raising children. And we learn the lesson that is most troubling to marketers, businesses and real-world leaders of all sorts: We learn that we, talking together, are smarter, wiser, and more interesting than any single leader could ever hope to be."
Hm, so in the big conversation of the web, a leader is somebody we particularly pay attention to, somebody who's worth listening to? I suppose so. So, leadership is when somebody cares about a particular matter, and others recognize it and pay attention. And cooperate, I suppose, if there's a shared activity that is suggested.
[ | 2003-10-17 12:04 | 6 comments | PermaLink ]  More >


Thursday, October 16, 2003day link 

 Friends, Identity and Security
Robert Cringely has thought about better ways of proving one's identity, so people don't steal your stuff. Exerpts from the article:
"Knowing a Social Security number and a mother's maiden name is pretty much all it takes to loot a U.S. bank account, often without even knowing the number of that account. Yet the real question ought not to be, "Does this person know the right identifying information?" but, "Is this person really who they say they are?" ...

"What works against us is that we have a million years of societal and biological evolution based on the concept of small tribal groups, yet only a few centuries of urban life and less than two centuries of mass transit. One characteristic of tribes is that the members know each other. So when the lady at the bank recognizes you -- really recognizes you -- it decreases to almost zero percent the likelihood that somebody can come in the bank claiming to be you and steal all your money. This isn't some clever security design, but an artifact of tribal life. You don't resent the lady at the bank for knowing you. You are flattered that she does. You don't fear that because she knows you that you are more likely to be a crime victim. Just the opposite -- we feel safer because we are known. ...

"My system is based on a registry of friends because we all participate in virtual tribes that are geographically dispersed. Every person who wants to have credit, to make a big purchase, or to board a 747 has to have a list of 10 friends -- people who can vouch for their identity and know how to test it if needed. That takes us out of the realm of the mother's maiden name, replacing it with, "What was the nickname I called you in the fourth grade?"

I am Bob, and these are my 10 friends.

They don't even have to be friends -- just people who know you. You don't have to tell them they are on your list and you can change your list as often as you like.

Imagine an aerial view of this network of friends. It is so large it could only be analyzed by a big honking computer, but there is a great deal to be learned from that analysis. People could disappear and be noticed, perhaps to be found. Deadbeat dads could be tracked, as could sexual predators. Epidemics would ripple across the surface of the model, perhaps leading to targeted anticipatory preventive care, saving lives. Guys who buy enough fertilizer to blow up a Federal office building would stand out.

Now before you can say the words "Big Brother," remember that YOU choose your list of friends so they can be people from work, from school, from the tennis club, but perhaps not from your Communist cell or from your swingers club. You can keep private what you want to keep private because the big picture is what matters here.

The system would be tied together by phone, e-mail, and Internet messaging. Ultimately, it would come to function like a much larger version of eBay's feedback system which would result in subtle pressure toward more civil behavior -- something we don't have in any practical sense today.

Maybe this system wouldn't work. You tell me. But I know that what we have right now isn't working, and I am not sure it can be made to work. The only answer that makes sense to me is to hearken back to a simpler time when these crimes just didn't' happen. And it is only through clever application of technology that this can be done.
But when we try to scale this inherent security up to urban, regional, national, and international levels, it doesn't work. We either have to accept less security or impose an artificial system intended to emulate that lady at the bank. This emulation is at the heart of every security system everywhere, yet we don't think of it in these terms."
OK, he hasn't thought it all the way through, but he's got a big point.

And, as Britt and Doc note, it sounds a whole lot like what Xpertweb is addressing.

Really, most crime in the world can exist only because we're largely all strangers to each other, and we rely for security on numbers, keys, passwords, and similar abstract tokens, and on symbolic barriers, such as closed doors and windows. We rely on disjointed pieces of *data*, and on flimsy walls around things that need protection, instead of relying on people and the relations between them. We need to somehow bring back the security system of a tribe, while retaining the mobility of the modern world, and without inheriting the limiting social norms of a tribe. In a modern city burglars could come and empty one's appartment, even though the neighbors that one doesn't know are only a few meters away. In an oldfashioned tribe in a village, the burglars would not even have gotten past the city limits. Or everybody would know who they are.
[ | 2003-10-16 17:46 | 3 comments | PermaLink ]  More >


Wednesday, October 15, 2003day link 

 Attention
Some days ago Doc Searls quoted Esther Dyson blogging at Bloggercon:
"The first magic of blogging, of course, is that everyone can self-publish. Everyone has a voice. The tools makes that possible.

But the next magic, much harder to achieve, is that everyone wants to be listened to...

[...] In the blogosphere, there's no shortage of airtime, but there's still a shortage of attention."
In earlier times, unless you were the village idiot, you'd expect that when you spoke to people, they'd stand still, pay attention, listen, and respond. But in the Internet age you'll have to get used to the fact that there's no guarantee that people will pay attention to you. I've seen quite a few people be shocked when they realized that. "But, but.. what I'm saying is really IMPORTANT. And I'm talking really LOUD." There's just not enough attention to go around. Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with what you're saying, necessarily.

But we do need tools to expand our attention. I.e. be able pay attention to more things without going crazy. If I lift up into the air over the earth, many details will go out of focus, but I'll end up with a beautiful picture of a whole round earth with land and sea and clouds. My picture of the earth becomes more whole and simple by seeing more at the same time. But in our information world, if I try to see more at the same time, I'll just get information overload and go nuts. There's no inherently good reason for that, other than that we're addicted to disjointed information that doesn't fit together when we scale up.
[ | 2003-10-15 16:00 | 0 comments | PermaLink ]

 Mirror Worlds
picture Steven Johnson had an interesting article in Discover in May: "Imagine if SimCity wasn't just a game". In part he's talking about David Gelernter's vision of mirror worlds. Computer simulations of the real world.
"Mirror worlds were not supposed to be an escape from reality; they were supposed to reflect reality. A modern-day city generates plumes of data the way 19th-century industrial towns generated smoke. There are block-by-block crime statistics, test scores for every student in every school, traffic reports updated by the second, demographic profiles by zip code, and so on. All of those numbers exist somewhere in cyberspace, but finding them is next to impossible. Gelernter envisioned a centralized repository for all this data, a virtual reconstruction of a space that would showcase everything going on in reality. Gelernter's simulated worlds were going to be mirrors. By comparison, the simulations we have now are fantasy islands.

In a true mirror world, data would be mapped onto recognizable shapes from real life. For instance, to find information on a local hospital, you would locate the building on a computerized map and click on it with an "inspector" tool. Within seconds, the big-picture data about the facility would come into focus: number of patients and doctors, annual budget, how many patients died in operating rooms last year, and more. If you were looking for more specific information—say you were considering giving birth at the hospital—you could zoom in to the obstetrics department, where you would see data on such subjects as successful births, premature babies, and stillborns. Information about how the hospital connects to the wider city—what Gelernter calls topsight—could be had by zooming out."
That's what I want too. Most computerized information is too damn scattered about and isn't visualized as what it really is.

More and more impressive simulated fantasy worlds are created through computers, mostly in the form of games. But what about all the data I really need access to in life, and which actually would make a substantial difference in the quality of my choices. That's what I'd most want good simulations of. Not only for affairs in my own life, but I want to get a more clear picture of what is going on in the world. What is really happening in terms of economy and environment and culture? News tends to just give a dumbed-down soundbite summary of selected parts. I want to see for myself.

Here in Gelernter's own words:
"My life, like your life, is a series of events in time, with a past, present, and future," Gelernter says, sitting in a conference room in the New Haven offices of Mirror Worlds Inc., the software company he cofounded. "And that's the way my software ought to look. The mirror worlds approach to organizing information is based on reality, as opposed to an engineer's or a computer scientist's fantasy. I don't want my personal life to be stored in an arbitrary UNIX file tree; I want it to be life-shaped—the shape of the way I live it." He gestures out the window, to the stately spires and ivy-covered buildings of the Yale campus. "I want information on New Haven to be New Haven-shaped, not in 10,000 separate databases."
Right on. Life size. Life shaped. The metaphor of a desktop with notes and files serves badly in giving a good picture of my world. My real-life desktop doesn't do that, so why should it if it is on my computer screen. No, it needs to have at least the scope of the full physical environment. And after that I'd like to go beyond that and have more dimensions than what we walk around in. But life-size data would be a good start.
[ | 2003-10-15 16:00 | 3 comments | PermaLink ]  More >


Monday, October 6, 2003day link 

 Seeing change
picture
Another pattern.

In contexts where a person or group is behaving in a certain fashion, which they potentially should be able to control:

Deliberate change can only happen when you can distinguish what you previously have been doing.

Said a different way, you need to be able to see something a bit at a distance before you really can notice it, and articulate it, and then change your mind about it, and choose a different path.

You can't change something you are BEING

You can only change it after you, at least for a moment, step back and perceive it from a meta-perspective. You dissociate from the state of being.

Whether you can talk about the subject matter or not is part of the equation. If you don't have language to talk about a certain kind of situation, you're not very likely to be able to decide to change it. If you have words for it, or if you have a mental model for it, a mental abstraction for it, then you can make a decision about it.

And, to change into a different mental model, a different paradigm, one needs to be able to perceive that paradigm. One needs to be able to examine it, and say something about it. So, there are a lot of possibilities that aren't really available, just because they are so far removed from one's normal frame of reference that one just can't see it.

You can only change into a new state if you can perceive it as a possibility

Of course I'm only talking about conscious, deliberate change here. One can change other ways too. External circumstances might suddenly hit you in ways you didn't expect. Evolution might happen without your conscious involvement.

(Gee, I could use a drawing pad. Drawing with a mouse sucks)
[ | 2003-10-06 14:29 | 7 comments | PermaLink ]  More >

 Successful propaganda
According to this press release a series of polls carried out between January and September in the U.S. shows the correspondence between the prevalence of certain key misunderstandings about the Iraq war and the news source people primarily used. People were asked if they believed that evidence of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda has been found, whether weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, and whether world public opinion favored the US going to war with Iraq. The correct answer to all three is NO. But here's the result of the polls:
One or more misconceptions:
FOX – 80%
CBS - 71%
ABC - 61%
NBC - 55%
CNN – 55%
Print Sources – 47%
NPR/PBS – 23%

None of the three misconceptions:
NPR/PBS – 77%
Print Sources – 53%
CNN – 45%
NBC – 45%
ABC – 39%
CBS – 30%
FOX – 20%
It shouldn't be any great news to thinking people who've watched Fox News that they're leading the pack in mis-information. But it is great to have it measured. And it paints a rather dismal picture. Government propaganda is 80% effective in the leading network. I'd bet that's much better percentages than any communist or fascist country has ever achieved.
[ | 2003-10-06 15:06 | 4 comments | PermaLink ]  More >

 Dude, where's my country
picture Ha, I just love Michael Moore saying it as it is. Guardian UK via zendancer. Read the whole thing. Some good questions to George W. Bush, which he ought to answer. Excerpts from Moore's new book, "Dude, where's my country". Good stuff like:
4. Why did you allow a private Saudi jet to fly around the US in the days after September 11 and pick up members of the Bin Laden family and fly them out of the country without a proper investigation by the FBI?

Private jets, under the supervision of the Saudi government - and with your approval - were allowed to fly around the skies of America, when travelling by air was forbidden, and pick up 24 members of the Bin Laden family and take them first to a "secret assembly point in Texas". They then flew to Washington DC, and then on to Boston. Finally, on September 18, they were all flown to Paris, out of the reach of any US officials. They never went through any serious interrogation. This is mind-boggling. Might it have been possible that at least one of the 24 Bin Ladens would have possibly known something?

While thousands were stranded and could not fly, if you could prove you were a close relative of the biggest mass murderer in US history, you got a free trip to gay Paree!

Why, Mr Bush, was this allowed to happen?
Yes, why indeed?
[ | 2003-10-06 16:45 | 6 comments | PermaLink ]  More >


Friday, October 3, 2003day link 

 Know when to do something
picture I'm trying to practice noticing patterns, and writing them down. Here's one.

In circumstances involving multiple humans, where one of the people has a level of influence or authority, and where there is a certain identifiable desirable activity that the other one or more people need to engage in, one of the simple sets of rules that the authority person can operate by are:

If things are happening, don't change anything

If things are not happening, change something.


That is not always as self-evident as it sounds, so it can be useful to spell it out.

It says to not mess with processes that are already doing the right thing. Despite that they might not be doing it the way you had in mind. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And it says that if you aren't getting the desired result, you shouldn't just sit and wait, you need to do something, or change something, so that a different process takes place.

I know this principle from my work as a counselor. There's a certain something that needs to take place with the client who comes in and sits in the other chair. They need to change for the better, they need to become more resourceful, they need to be more able to overcome their problems, they need to be happier, and look positively towards the future, etc. And there are certain components or steps that usually are part of that. They need to be willing to sit still long enough. They need to be able to be a little introspective and actually examine themselves and their thoughts and reactions. They need to be able to come to some realizations. And willing to change their mind and do things in a new way. It is my job as the counselor to make sure they're doing these things. If they already are, I don't have much to do. If they don't, I have to come up with a way of getting them back there. If the client sits down and keeps talking about the weather and last night's TV, then things aren't happening, and I need to come up with a way of switching us into a different track. But if they come in, sit down, and right away start getting into some deep and productive self-examination, which they then come out of with a big realization and a new more useful pattern in life, and a better outlook on the future - hats off to them, and I don't have to change anything. Makes sense?

Or think about a strategy for entertaining a small child, while you're busy with other activities. If she's sitting down happily occupied with something that isn't dangerous to her, great, leave her alone. She's already entertained, so no need to change anything. But if she's suddenly bored and getting in your way, ok, it is time to change things. Which might mean to introduce something new and different. Hey, here's another toy, or, wow, you can draw with these pencils, or how about we go into the other room, or try to tie your shoe laces. Every good mother knows these things of course. It doesn't help to keep saying "don't bother me!" Get creative and bring in another factor that will make the child get interested, entertaining herself. After which you can happily leave her alone for a while. Keep some extra surprises in your bag for the next time the child gets bored, and you can do your job fairly easily.

Said a different way:

Don't keep doing things that aren't working. (even if you think they're the 'right' things to do)

Keep doing things that ARE working. (even if they weren't supposed to be working that way)


Duh! What gets in the way is usually fixed ideas about how things are 'supposed' to be done, and a failure to recognize whether the desirable outcome actually is or isn't taking place.

Here's another way:

If you aren't getting the desired result, DO something, anything.

If you ARE getting the desired result, do nothing. Relax and enjoy it.


and of course, all of this requires that you:

Know what is the desired outcome in the circumstances you're in.

[ | 2003-10-03 14:52 | 12 comments | PermaLink ]  More >


Thursday, October 2, 2003day link 

 Computers and Employment
Andy Oram wonders "Can computers help reverse falling employment?".
"The gigantic combine of capitalism has always obsessively pursued efficiency, and computers make the pursuit almost child play. Capitalism has succeeded in sowing a cornucopia of innovation up and down society. But capitalism is atrocious at distributing the fruits of innovation. Each labor-saving device means the idling of thousands of people, wasting their years of experience, rigorous training, and practical insights.

People who work with computers remain fixated on efficiency. Every week I hear the debates over whether businesses should use Linux or Windows, the commentators always wrangling over which systems will save the most money. I find this battle increasingly tiresome. I'm more interested in finding the systems that will put more people to work."
Well, the intention is good enough. Capitalism is quite likely to lead to a very small percentage of the population owning most of the very automated production facilities, and a very large percentage of the population being unemployed, because their work isn't really needed. So, isn't there something we can do with software and computers that can change things?

Oram's main idea seems to be essentially to think of some good things that need doing, and invite large numbers of open source programmers to work on them. I wish the economy worked that way. But it doesn't. In communism it sort of does, but the problem there is that individual creativity isn't particularly nurtured or rewarded. So that in itself wouldn't particularly be economically feasible without some kind of revolution. But as to this question that he proposes for systems people to keep in mind ...
"What can I do to bring average people back into the process of wealth creation?"
That's a different matter. If we can think more about how to get more people involved in creating wealth, which obviously involves being directly involved in how one makes a profit - that can make a difference.
[ | 2003-10-02 14:07 | 2 comments | PermaLink ]  More >

 Open Courseware
MIT has made a wealth of educational materials freely available over the Internet. Lecture notes, syllabi, and exams to provide a 'free and open educational resource for faculty, students, and self-learners around the world'.
"With the publication of 500 courses, MIT is delivering on the promise of OpenCourseWare that we made in 2001. We are thrilled that educators, students, and self-learners from all parts of the globe tell us that MIT OCW is having an impact on education and learning. We hope that in sharing MIT’s course materials, and our experience thus far with MIT OCW, we will inspire other institutions to openly share their course materials, creating a worldwide web of knowledge that will benefit mankind." - Charles M. Vest, President of MIT
Bravo! There's no good reason why all serious educational materials shouldn't be freely available.
[ | 2003-10-02 14:53 | 3 comments | PermaLink ]  More >

 Our stuff arrived
Finally the stuff we shipped from Los Angeles arrived. We had pretty much gotten used to being without it, and we weren't really missing it much. And, besides, we had thrown away or given away large amounts of stuff, so the items being shipped were clothes, books, and computers, and very little else.

So now our otherwise pleasantly empty house is full of boxes, and suddenly seems much smaller. And we didn't even ship furniture. But 8 cubic meters of miscellaneous essentials. Like our blankets, sweaters, my favorite books, household files, etc. And I can now sit and look at a big screen, and I can print.

A few pieces of advice for others who might need to send their things by ship to another country:

- Don't believe any precise estimates of when it ships or when it arrives, or for that matter, where it arrives. I did. The ship leaves every Friday, and it takes 29 days to get to the destination. Yeah, sure. I timed it exactly so it would arrive 3 weeks after us, so we had 2 weeks to find a place, and our boxes would arrive the week after. But it took 3 weeks before they even put it on a ship, because of some kind of problem supposedly outside their control. And then the ship went to somewhere in England, rather than to Marseille, close to us in France. And it took them two weeks to get it through customs. And another two weeks before they managed to get a truck to drive it down here. About 80 days total.

- Don't believe any claim of how one company is in control of the whole journey. I picked the freight forwarding company where they were most friendly, and where they gave me an "all-inclusive" price, door-to-door, and they gave very affirming answers to everything. Their price was higher than several of the other companies, which however left most things up in the air, including the charges at the other end, and were very careless about telling me what exactly would happen. But, as it turned out, my company hadn't told me everything either. They handed our shipment to some other company who arranged the actual ship journey, and which apparently rewrote the travel plans along the way and sent it to England, where they handed our packages to another company, which handled the import and customs, and then gave it to a company that actually delivered it. That makes 4 companies, each with a mind of their own. And, well, our things were indeed finally brought to our door. It wasn't entirely all inclusive, as the import company presented me with a $100 bill for a customs inspection. And when I brought this and the various delays to the attention of the L.A. freight forwarder, that's when they suddenly started presenting me with the full picture of serial uncertainty.
[ | 2003-10-02 15:35 | 6 comments | PermaLink ]  More >



<< Newer stories  Page: 1 ... 51 52 53 54 55 ... 97   Older stories >>
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



Barthas castle. Halloween party for Americans in Toulouse.

Previous stories
2010-06-27
  • Be afraid, be very afraid

  • 2010-06-22
  • Inventory

  • 2010-06-19
  • Conversations

  • 2009-11-01
  • Seven questions that keep physicists up at night

  • 2009-10-29
  • Convergent or Divergent

  • 2009-10-28
  • Then a miracle occurs

  • 2009-10-27
  • Compassion Exercise

  • 2009-10-26
  • The power of appreciation

  • 2009-10-25
  • Opinions, perceptions and intuition

  • 2009-10-16
  • Magic reality

  • 2009-10-15
  • Abstraction

  • 2009-10-14
  • Feeling the world

  • 2009-07-27
  • Reboot 11 / The Art of Not-Doing

  • 2009-06-16
  • Baseline technology

  • 2009-06-15
  • Immaculate Telegraphy

  • 2009-06-11
  • Blogging/Microbloggi.. and work

  • 2009-06-07
  • The Giant in Nantes

  • 2009-06-05
  • Writing

  • 2008-10-14
  • Where are the podcars?
  • Money and the Crisis of Civilization

  • 2008-07-11
  • Freedom and Complexity

  • 2008-07-06
  • Laws of social networks

  • 2008-07-05
  • Self-Organized Criticality

  • 2008-06-29
  • Complicated and Complex

  • 2008-06-20
  • Peer material production

  • 2008-05-16
  • The Universe as God

  • 2008-05-14
  • Kriss Hammond wants to change my financial status

  • 2008-05-08
  • Why Denmark is the world's happiest country

  • 2008-05-07
  • Why Pigs Don’t Have Wings

  • 2008-05-06
  • Why can't we stick to our goals?

  • 2008-02-27
  • Secrets of the park

  • 2008-02-24
  • My Dad

  • 2008-02-23
  • Web 1, 2, 3 and 4

  • 2008-02-22
  • Blogging or Logging
  • God talks about Richard Dawkins
  • Illusion

  • 2008-02-21
  • Open social networks
  • A Samurai’s Creed

  • 2008-02-20
  • The universe as a virtual reality
  • Experiencing

  • More ..

    Categories
  • Articles (8)
  • Culture (197)
  • Diary (298)
  • Dreams (7)
  • Energy (7)
  • History (26)
  • Information (179)
  • Inspiration (172)
  • Knowledge (130)
  • Nature (25)
  • NCN (22)
  • News (79)
  • Opinions (15)
  • Organization (159)
  • Patterns (118)
  • Politics (171)
  • Processing (6)
  • Programming (50)
  • Projects (18)
  • Science (73)
  • Stories (9)
  • Technology (116)
  • Thoughts (52)


  • Recent Comments:
    2017-04-08
  • معلوماتي: dad

  • 2017-04-01
  • rocko hunter: sdfghj

  • 2017-03-23
  • dinesh: Results and bahubali collections.

  • 2017-03-22
  • word cookies game: word cookies game

  • 2017-03-17
  • SHAIK SARKAR ALI: Peyton List

  • 2017-03-08
  • Dr. Philip Leonard: thnku for this ost

  • 2017-03-03
  • QWERTYUI: QAWERTYUI

  • 2017-02-19
  • Oscars 2017: Oscars 2017 Live

  • 2017-02-18
  • Oscar Winners: 2017 oscar winners

  • 2017-02-16
  • IPL 2017: IPL 2017
  • conference alerts: conference alerts

  • 2017-02-12
  • Obat Pelangsing: obat pelangsing
  • Obat Hammer Of Thor: Obat Hammer Of Thor
  • alat sex semarang: alat sex semarang

  • 2017-02-07
  • Arvind: Very Nice

  • More ..


    Recent Weeks
    02: 1/6-1/12
    01: 12/30-1/5
    52: 12/23-12/29
    51: 12/16-12/22
    50: 12/9-12/15
    49: 12/2-12/8
    48: 11/25-12/1
    47: 11/18-11/24
    46: 11/11-11/17
    45: 11/4-11/10
    44: 10/28-11/3
    43: 10/21-10/27
    42: 10/14-10/20
    41: 10/7-10/13
    40: 9/30-10/6
    39: 9/23-9/29

    MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
    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 29 30 31

    Search for:

    [Advanced Search]
    [All Articles]


    worldtrans logo

    holoworld logo

    tp logo


    ncn logo



    logo

    This site created with
    OrgSpace NewsLog

    version 1.87