Science/Tech

You are currently browsing the archive for the Science/Tech category.

“They Will Help Fuel An International Market In Reproductive Technology”

February 16, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

Generations into the future, no one will understand why we grew so livid when athletes used PEDs because everyone will be using them–as well as next-level methods of enhancement. The Financial Times has an article full of predictions from a trio of economists about life in 2114. An astute passage from Stanford’s Alvin Roth on the subject of human progress:

“The biggest trend of future history is that the world economy will keep growing and becoming more connected. Material prosperity will increase and healthy longevity will rise. While greater prosperity will not eliminate competition, it will give people more choices about whether and how hard to compete. Many will opt for a slower track, spending more time accumulating youthful experiences. Retirement will be a longer part of life and new forms of retirement will emerge.

For those who wish to compete, there will be technological developments to help them. Some of these, such as performance-enhancing drugs, are becoming available today but are widely regarded as repugnant. That repugnance seems likely to fade.

While we may continue to cancel sporting victories won with the help of drugs, we are unlikely to resist cancer cures or software or theorems produced with the assistance of drugs that aid concentration, memory or intelligence. Safe performance-en­hancing drugs may come to be seen as akin to good nutrition. Drugs may not be optional in future competitive careers. When assistant professors of economics in 2114 fall behind their expected production of an article per week, their department chair may suggest they increase their dosage of creativity-enhancing or attention-focusing drugs to increase their chance of tenure. And some drugs – memory enhancers, say – may be seen not as performance enhancers but as cures for things we did not previously think of as diseases.

Similar to the way drugs will allow us to improve our own performance, increased understanding of foetal development will allow parents to select or manipulate some of the genetic endowment of their children. Some of these options will remain repugnant even as they become more widely available, while others may come to be seen as part of careful child rearing. To the extent that these technologies are subject to legal limitations in some places but not others, they will help fuel an international market in reproductive technology. We already see the beginnings of such a market, as access to fertility treatments, and markets for eggs, sperm and surrogate wombs are more available in the US and India than in many places, drawing ‘fertility tourists.'”

Tags:

“It’s All So Brand New That There’s Nothing To Go By Yet”

February 14, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Videos | Permalink

Steve Ditlea, who wrote the 1981 Inc report about Apple Computers banishing typewriters from its offices, published a piece in the same publication the following year about the birth of the software industry. One of the players he mentions was Gary Kildall, a star-crossed software pioneer who was elbowed aside by Microsoft and died young after some sort of mysterious injury suffered in a biker bar in Monterrey. An excerpt from Ditlea’s article, when Kildall and others were trying to code the future:

“In 1976, Bill Gates, then 20, and Paul Allen, 23, were running a company they had started the year before in Gates’s college dorm in Boston. That same year, Gary Kildall, 34 was starting a company in his backyard toolshed in California. Tony Gold, 30, was still a credit officer at a New York City bank. Dan Fylstra, 25, was starting at the Harvard Business School. Dan Bricklin, 25, was getting ready to apply to business schools in Massachusetts, and Bob Frankston, 27, was working as a computer programmer near Boston.

All seven of these people started and now run companies that produce and/or publish software for personal computers. All five of their companies — whose combined revenues just missed $50 million in 1981 — are doubling or tripling in size each year. All of these entrepreneurs are, or soon will be, millionaires. All are likely to be the leaders of the personal-computer software industry — quoted during economic crisis, looked up to by future business-school students.

The five companies they founded have created a new industry from scratch. And now they’ve been joined by as many as 1,000 more companies offering for sale some 5,000 software programs. The pressures to stay on top in the industry are intense. Some of the biggest companies in the country have turned their attention to micro software in recent months. Professional investors are scrambling to pour millions of dollars of venture capital into the leading companies. And the independents — only a dozen or so had sales of more than $1 million in 1981 — are straining to stay out in front.

‘It’s a tremendous business to be part of,’ says Mike Belling, 32, who bought the three-month-old Stoneware Inc. in June 1980 with his partner, Kenneth Klein, 42. ‘But it has its pitfalls, like cars used to. It’s all so brand new that there’s nothing to go by yet. There’s no history to tell you how many copies of a program to produce, for instance.’

Five years ago, the micro-software industry didn’t exist.”•

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

“Until Quite Recently Rapid Communication, Information Acquisition, And Knowledge Sharing…Were Essentially Limited To The Planet’s Elite”

February 14, 2014 in Books, Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

I agree with Douglas Hofstadter that today’s AI isn’t true AI because it can’t really think, but the machines we have (and are soon to have) possess an amazing utility. Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee, authors of The Second Machine Age, believe as most do, that the near-term Computer Age will be rocky, but they’re more sanguine about long-term prospects. They see the Google Glass as half full. An excerpt from their new Atlantic piece:

“Today, people with connected smartphones or tablets anywhere in the world have access to many (if not most) of the same communication resources and information that we do while sitting in our offices at MIT. They can search the Web and browse Wikipedia. They can follow online courses, some of them taught by the best in the academic world. They can share their insights on blogs, Facebook, Twitter, and many other services, most of which are free. They can even conduct sophisticated data analyses using cloud resources such as Amazon Web Services and R, an open source application for statistics.13 In short, they can be full contributors in the work of innovation and knowledge creation, taking advantage of what Autodesk CEO Carl Bass calls ‘infinite computing.’

Until quite recently rapid communication, information acquisition, and knowledge sharing, especially over long distances, were essentially limited to the planet’s elite. Now they’re much more democratic and egalitarian, and getting more so all the time. The journalist A. J. Liebling famously remarked that, ‘Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one.’ It is no exaggeration to say that billions of people will soon have a printing press, reference library, school, and computer all at their fingertips.

We believe that this development will boost human progress. We can’t predict exactly what new insights, products, and solutions will arrive in the coming years, but we are fully confident that they’ll be impressive. The second machine age will be characterized by countless instances of machine intelligence and billions of interconnected brains working together to better understand and improve our world. It will make mockery out of all that came before.”

Tags: , ,

“Amazon Has Successfully Fostered The Idea That A Book Is A Thing Of Minimal Value”

February 14, 2014 in Books, Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

I think the culture is much fuller, not narrower, in this wired and connected time. The “barbarians” have finally stormed the gates, and the whole system has been decentralized. That’s a good thing. But I suppose it depends on how you define “culture.” In “Cheap Words,” George Packer’s latest New Yorker piece, he looks at the battle between Amazon and publishers over the value of books and the nature of their distribution. Toward the end, the writer makes this more macro point:

“This conversation, though important, takes place in the shallows and misses the deeper currents that, in the digital age, are pushing American culture under the control of ever fewer and more powerful corporations.”

I don’t agree with that because I’m defining “culture” differently than Packer, but the writer makes a lot of excellent points on the micro level about the great book battle, because being able to get books cheaply now is wonderful but could have future implications. An excerpt:

“Lately, digital titles have levelled off at about thirty per cent of book sales. Whatever the temporary fluctuations in publishers’ profits, the long-term outlook is discouraging. This is partly because Americans don’t read as many books as they used to—they are too busy doing other things with their devices—but also because of the relentless downward pressure on prices that Amazon enforces. The digital market is awash with millions of barely edited titles, most of it dreck, while readers are being conditioned to think that books are worth as little as a sandwich. ‘Amazon has successfully fostered the idea that a book is a thing of minimal value,’ [Dennis] Johnson said. ‘It’s a widget.’

There are two ways to think about this. Amazon believes that its approach encourages ever more people to tell their stories to ever more people, and turns writers into entrepreneurs; the price per unit might be cheap, but the higher number of units sold, and the accompanying royalties, will make authors wealthier. Jane Friedman, of Open Road, is unfazed by the prospect that Amazon might destroy the old model of publishing. ‘They are practicing the American Dream—competition is good!’ she told me. Publishers, meanwhile, ‘have been banks for authors. Advances have been very high.’ In Friedman’s view, selling digital books at low prices will democratize reading: ‘What do you want as an author—to sell books to as few people as possible for as much as possible, or for as little as possible to as many readers as possible?’

The answer seems self-evident, but there is a more skeptical view. Several editors, agents, and authors told me that the money for serious fiction and nonfiction has eroded dramatically in recent years; advances on mid-list titles—books that are expected to sell modestly but whose quality gives them a strong chance of enduring—have declined by a quarter. These are the kinds of book that particularly benefit from the attention of editors and marketers, and that attract gifted people to publishing, despite the pitiful salaries. Without sufficient advances, many writers will not be able to undertake long, difficult, risky projects. Those who do so anyway will have to expend a lot of effort mastering the art of blowing their own horn. ‘Writing is being outsourced, because the only people who can afford to write books make money elsewhere—academics, rich people, celebrities,’ Colin Robinson, a veteran publisher, said. ‘The real talent, the people who are writers because they happen to be really good at writing—they aren’t going to be able to afford to do it.'”

Tags: , ,

“The Result Is What One Executive Calls ‘The Most Computerized Company In The World'”

February 13, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies, Videos | Permalink

From a 1981 Inc. article by Steve Ditlea that covered Apple Computers’ decision to disappear the typewriter from its desks and make space for the “office of the future”:

“Apple Computer Inc. practices what it preaches. Without fanfare, the firm has inaugurated the workplace of the future by putting its personal computers on most of its employees’ desks. The company almost eliminated typewriters, abolished the job title of secretary, and instituted a more efficient and pleasant work environment.

In a memo circulated last year, then-president Mike Scott ushered in a new age in office procedures. ‘EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY!! NO MORE TYPEWRITERS ARE TO BE PURCHASED, LEASED, etc., etc. Apple is an innovative company. We must believe and lead in all areas. If word processing is so neat, then let’s all use it! Goal: by 1-1-81, NO typewriters at Apple… We believe the typewriter is obsolete. Let’s prove it inside before we try and convince our customers.’

Combined with conventional data processing run on a Digital Equipment Corp. minicomputer system, the result is what one executive calls ‘the most computerized company in the world,’ a revolutionary development even by the high-tech standards of California’s Santa Clara County (a.k.a. Silicon Valley).

There are now no more than 20 typewriters left in the 2,200 employee firm. Instead of typewriters, the several hundred employees involved in composing or disseminating letters, memos, documents, or reports use a typewritersized Apple II with built-in keyboard, a pair of add-on disk drives, a video monitor, and Apple Writer, the company’s own disk-stored word processing software. Word processing has gained a foothold in many businesses, but never before has a firm so completely done away with typewriters by executive fiat. …

The Apple way is best exemplified by chairman of the board and co-founder Steve Jobs, a dark-haired 26-year-old, who in grey workshirt and slacks this particular morning could easily be mistaken for a maintenance worker. Instead he’s the holder of the largest single block of Apple stock, some 7.5 million shares worth about $163 million at recent market prices.

When Steve Jobs speaks, it is with the ‘gee-whiz’ enthusiasm of someone who sees the future and is making sure it works. He explains the decision to put an Apple computer on every desk as part of an overall desire to institute a more humane workplace. ‘Not only do our area associates have the freedom to do more rewarding, enriching tasks, they have the chance to get involved in solving problems that can ultimately affect the success of the entire company.’

As for worker fears that office automation may lead to greater unemployment, he insists the opposite is true, with personal computers opening up jobs for Apple employees.”

______________________________________________

In 1967, Walter Cronkite imagined the remote office of the future:

Tags: , ,

“You Can Really Predict Things, You Can Really Engineer Things”

February 13, 2014 in Books, Politics, Science/Tech, Urban Studies, Videos | Permalink

Economist editors discuss how Big Data is changing human modeling, how it can be used to predict–even direct–group behavior, with MIT’s Alex Pentland, author of the new book, Social Physics. Watch six-minute video here.

Tags:

“Artificial Intelligence Is A Slippery Term”

February 13, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech | Permalink

Douglas Hofstadter, cognitive scientist and author of Gödel, Escher, Bach, explains why Watson and Siri aren’t true AI and why the field lost its way decades ago, in a Q&A conducted by William Herkewitz at Popular Mechanics, which has a terribly designed website. The opening:

“Question:

You’ve said in the past that IBM’s Jeopardy-playing computer, Watson, isn’t deserving of the term artificial intelligence. Why?

Douglas Hofstadter:

Well, artificial intelligence is a slippery term. It could refer to just getting machines to do things that seem intelligent on the surface, such as playing chess well or translating from one language to another on a superficial level—things that are impressive if you don’t look at the details. In that sense, we’ve already created what some people call artificial intelligence. But if you mean a machine that has real intelligence, that is thinking—that’s inaccurate. Watson is basically a text search algorithm connected to a database just like Google search. It doesn’t understand what it’s reading. In fact, read is the wrong word. It’s not reading anything because it’s not comprehending anything. Watson is finding text without having a clue as to what the text means. In that sense, there’s no intelligence there. It’s clever, it’s impressive, but it’s absolutely vacuous.

Question:

Do you think we’ll start seeing diminishing returns from a Watson-like approach to AI?

Douglas Hofstadter:

I can’t really predict that. But what I can say is that I’ve monitored Google Translate—which uses a similar approach—for many years. Google Translate is developing and it’s making progress because the developers are inventing new, clever ways of milking the quickness of computers and the vastness of its database. But it’s not making progress at all in the sense of understanding your text, and you can still see it falling flat on its face a lot of the time. And I know it’ll never produce polished [translated] text, because real translating involves understanding what is being said and then reproducing the ideas that you just heard in a different language. Translation has to do with ideas, it doesn’t have to do with words, and Google Translate is about words triggering other words.

Question:

So why are AI researchers so focused on building programs and computers that don’t do anything like thinking?

Douglas Hofstadter:

They’re not studying the mind and they’re not trying to find out the principles of intelligence, so research may not be the right word for what drives people in the field that today is called artificial intelligence. They’re doing product development.

I might say though, that 30 to 40 years ago, when the field was really young, artificial intelligence wasn’t about making money, and the people in the field weren’t driven by developing products. It was about understanding how the mind works and trying to get computers to do things that the mind can do. The mind is very fluid and flexible, so how do you get a rigid machine to do very fluid things? That’s a beautiful paradox and very exciting, philosophically.”

Tags: ,

“There’s No One Alive I Can’t Beat”

February 12, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Sports | Permalink

Garry Kasparov is the John Henry of the Computer Age, “dying” on behalf of us all in a race against a machine despite his utter confidence in the efficacy of humankind. But even before computers were in the room, Bobby Fischer was likewise defeated by a machine, and it was him, the string of code he possessed off by just a little, just enough. He could make plans, but he didn’t plan on a ghost in the machine. There was only one person Fischer couldn’t beat, and it was himself. The opening of Ralph Ginzburg’s 1962 Harper’s article, “Portrait of a Genius As a Young Chess Master“:

“RUSSIA’S traditional hold on World Championships in chess is about to be challenged by the United States in the person of an eighteen-year-old boy from Brooklyn named Bobby Fischer. Bobby has been United States Chess Champion for four years. He won the title at the age of fourteen, the youngest player ever to do so. He has since successfully defended his title three times and has won virtually every major chess title in the country.

In an international tournament at Bled, Yugoslavia, last summer, he astonished the chess world by defeating Russia’s Mikhail Tal in his only game against this former World Champion. The present World Champion, Mikhail Botvinnik, did not participate in the tournament. Fischer is aching to play Botvinnik. ‘I know that I deserve to be World Champion and I know I can beat Botvinnik,’ he has said. ‘There’s no one alive I can’t beat.’

Fischer may have his chance early in 1963 when the triennial chess World Championship will be played. He will first have to win two preliminary international tournaments, the Inter-Zonal and the Candidates, in 1962. Many of America’s leading chess authorities agree with Lisa Lane, the twenty-four-year-old Women’s Chess Champion of the United States. ‘I’m sure that Bobby can beat Botvinnik,’ she has said. ‘There’s never before been a chess player with such a thorough knowledge of the intricacies of the game and such an absolutely indomitable will to win. I think Bobby is the greatest player that ever lived.’

John W. Collins columnist for Chess Life and Chess Review and one of the country’s most highly respected chess annotators, has written: ‘Bobby is the finest chess player this Country ever produced. His memory for the moves, his brilliance in dreaming up combinations, and his fierce determination to win are uncanny. Not only will I predict his triumph over Botvinnik but I’ll go further and say that he’ll probably be the greatest chess player that ever lived.'”

Tags: , ,

“A Software Program (An AI) Can — Will — Be Believably Human And Lovable”

February 12, 2014 in Excerpts, Film, Science/Tech | Permalink

The opening of Ray Kurzweil’s compelling review of the Oscar-nominated Her, a near-future film he sees as nearer than most do:

“Her, written, directed and produced by Spike Jonze, presents a nuanced love story between a man and his operating system.

Although there are caveats I could (and will) mention about the details of the OS and how the lovers interact, the movie compellingly presents the core idea that a software program (an AI) can — will — be believably human and lovable.

This is a breakthrough concept in cinematic futurism in the way that The Matrix presented a realistic vision that virtual reality will ultimately be as real as, well, real reality.

Jonze started his feature-motion-picture career directing Being John Malkovich, which also presents a realistic vision of a future technology — one that is now close at hand: being able to experience reality through the eyes and ears of someone else.

With emerging eye-mounted displays that project images onto the wearer’s retinas and also look out at the world, we will indeed soon be able to do exactly that. When we send nanobots into the brain — a circa-2030s scenario by my timeline — we will be able to do this with all of the senses, and even intercept other people’s emotional responses.”

Tags: ,

“Its Short-Term Effects Could Be Devastating For American Workers”

February 12, 2014 in Excerpts, Politics, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

After a steep decline in manufacturing, the U.S, has an opportunity to drive the future of the sector. But there’s a catch: You and I may not be necessary. The rapid growth of robotics in America may largely close factories to human hands. We’ll be richer in the aggregate, but those riches will not be distributed very much to workers. Good in the long run but not so much now. From Amar Toor at Verge:

“Some see automated manufacturing as a potential boon for the US economy, a way to lure companies back to American soil with the promise of higher productivity and lower labor costs. But others fear that the push could displace the last vestiges of middle-class American manufacturing workers at a time of high unemployment and soaring inequality.

‘The pace and scale of this encroachment into human skills is relatively recent and has profound economic implications,’ MIT economists Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee wrote in their 2011 book Race Against the Machine. In the book, the authors argue that technology has destroyed more American jobs at a faster pace than it’s created new ones, leading to higher unemployment and stagnant median incomes despite higher productivity levels. Although they conclude on an optimistic note, arguing that technological change will yield benefits in the long run, Brynjolfsson and McAfee say its short-term effects could be devastating for American workers.”

Tags: , ,

“The Igman Ski Jumps Sat In Ruins, But The Base Was Full Of Campers Playing Football”

February 12, 2014 in Excerpts, Politics, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

When happens to the tent when the circus leaves town, especially if it’s the greatest show on Earth? The Olympics are a mixed blessing locally because they promise massive infrastructure improvements in only a few years, but they also can indebt a host city, displace citizens and cause environmental damage. And the march of history (e.g., war) can quickly undo any of the good, make something grotesque from it. Jon Pack and Gary Hustwit of the Olympic City Project photograph hosts years after the Games are over to see what the event has wrought. A couple of exchanges from an Ask Me Anything they just did at Reddit.

______________________

“Question:

In your opinion, are the Olympics have a positive or negative long-term effects on the cities hosting it?

Jon Pack and Gary Hustwit:

That a complex question, because it really depends on your point of view. Barcelona’s 1992 Olympics is held up as having a positive effect on the city, since they were able to redevelop the waterfront area and turn the beach into a huge tourist draw. They were also able to do 30 years of planned infrastructure improvements in 5 years, using the Games as the impetus. But there are many citizens who were displaced by the new development there, or complain that the improvements are really just for the sake of tourism, their rents are higher now, etc.

Every city/country has their own reasons for hosting the Olympics, some just want to prove they can do it, that they’re a global city. For some it’s a public relations move (how many of us had heard of Sochi before this year? In the project, we’ve tried not to express an opinion one way or the other, if it’s positive or negative, but try to give a feel for what these cities are like now, a few years or decades after the Games.

______________________

Question:

I’ve been to the Sarajevo site, which is pretty disturbing; tons of the open spaces were used for graves during the war in the 90s, and everything else is practically falling apart.

Which city, in your opinion, has done the best job of reusing and refurbishing former olympic sites?

Jon Pack:

Yes, Sarajevo is an especially sad case. It’s impossible to separate the Games’ legacy from the war. Most of the Olympic structures were destroyed or damaged significantly. But I found the people to be amazingly resilient; almost everyone would tell me a harrowing story of that time and then follow it up with a dark joke. When I was there in the summer, I found most of the sites being used in some way. The bobsleigh track had some picnickers, skaterboarders and tourists around, for instance. The Igman ski jumps sat in ruins, but the base was full of campers playing football. It seems like they may not have the money to rebuild the sites, but they’re making the best of it.

Gary Hustwit:

There are plenty of interesting re-uses of Olympic sites in different cities, I don’t think I could say any one city has done it all well. But we’ve seen some bizarre ones. Lake Placid couldn’t get federal funding to build athlete housing for the ’80 Winter Games, but the government would fund a new prison. So they built a prison, housed the athletes and officials in it, and after the Games were over the prisoners moved in. It’s still a working prison today.”

Tags: ,

“Over Half Of All Hitmen Got Less Than $9K For Their Services”

February 11, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

I know lots of folks in the New York media world, so there’s at least a half-dozen people I’d like to punch right in the face. But for those of you looking to up the ante, there’s a bargain to be had. From “How Much Does a Hitman Cost?” at Priceonomics:

“In 2003 researchers at the Australian Institute of Criminology dug through a decade’s-worth of old newspaper records, undercover police operations, and homicide databases to study the price and motivations of hiring a hitman.

According to this study, the average payment to a hired killer was about $15K (converted to US dollars) and over half of all hitmen got less than $9K for their services.”

“The Idea Of Gene Therapy Is At Last Looking As If It May Become Science Fact”

February 11, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech | Permalink

Genes introduced into the body via virus or other means to repair other damaged genes is now a reality in some cases. How quickly can the field progress? Will there be a boom period of exponential growth? When will such methods be able to treat simple aging rather than mutations? I think we’ll be waiting awhile. The opening of a new Economist article:

“IT SOUNDS like science fiction, and for years it seemed as though it was just that: fiction. But the idea of gene therapy—introducing copies of healthy genes into people who lack them, to treat disease—is at last looking as if it may become science fact.

The field got off to a bad start, with the widely reported death of an American liver patient in 1999. In 2003 some French children who were being treated with it for an immune-system problem called SCID developed leukaemia. Since then, though, things have improved. Indeed one procedure, for lipoprotein lipase deficiency (which causes high levels of blood fats, with all the problems those can bring), has been approved, in Europe, for clinical use.

The most recent success, announced last month in the Lancet, was of an experimental treatment for choroideremia, a type of blindness. This is caused by mutation of the gene for a protein called REP1. Without REP1, the eye’s light receptors degenerate. Robert MacLaren of Oxford University used a virus to deliver working versions of the REP1 gene to the most light-sensitive part of the retina. Five of the six participants in the trial duly experienced an improvement in their sensitivity to light. Two were so improved that they could read more letters than previously on a standard eye chart.”

“The Oji-Cree Eagerly Embraced These New Tools”

February 11, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech | Permalink

At the New Yorker blog, Timothy Wu challenges Kevin Kelly’s premise that “technology wants what life wants” by detailing the difficulties of the traditional Oji-Cree people, who have been tethered to tech for only fifty years. It’s an interesting analysis of the nature of technological and biological forces, but I’m more on the side of Kelly in believing that technology ultimately possesses an evolutionary nature. While biology leads us to improve and adapt in the big picture, there’s an awful lot of collateral damage along the way. Technology is likely the same and shouldn’t be judged by a different standard. An excerpt:

“The Oji-Cree have been in contact with European settlers for centuries, but it was only in the nineteen-sixties, when trucks began making the trip north, that newer technologies like the internal combustion engine and electricity really began to reach the area. The Oji-Cree eagerly embraced these new tools. In our lingo, we might say that they went through a rapid evolution, advancing through hundreds of years of technology in just a few decades.

The good news is that, nowadays, the Oji-Cree no longer face the threat of winter starvation, which regularly killed people in earlier times. They can more easily import and store the food they need, and they enjoy pleasures like sweets and alcohol. Life has become more comfortable. The constant labor of canoeing or snowshoeing has been eliminated by outboard engines and snowmobiles. Television made it north in the nineteen-eighties, and it has proved enormously popular.

But, in the main, the Oji-Cree story is not a happy one. Since the arrival of new technologies, the population has suffered a massive increase in morbid obesity, heart disease, and Type 2 diabetes. Social problems are rampant: idleness, alcoholism, drug addiction, and suicide have reached some of the highest levels on earth. Diabetes, in particular, has become so common (affecting forty per cent of the population) that researchers think that many children, after exposure in the womb, are born with an increased predisposition to the disease. Childhood obesity is widespread, and ten-year-olds sometimes appear middle-aged. Recently, the Chief of a small Oji-Cree community estimated that half of his adult population was addicted to OxyContin or other painkillers.

Technology is not the only cause of these changes, but scientists have made clear that it is a driving factor.“

Tags: ,

Old Print Article: “Illiterate Man Becomes A Doctor When Hypnotized,” New York Times (1910)

February 10, 2014 in Old Print Articles, Photography, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

“They said he told wonderful truths while he was asleep.”

Edgar Cayce read widely and it served him well. Unschooled beyond ninth grade but an autodidact, the Kentucky man used medical knowledge he’d gleaned from books and psychic mumbo jumbo to convince some in the medical U.S. establishment a century ago that he possessed healing powers. In fact, he made it “safe” for those with no formal medical training to treat the sick, giving birth to holistic medicine in America. In an article in the October 9, 1910 New York Times, he was a young man being taken seriously as a medical savant. The opening:

“The medical fraternity of the country is taking a lively interest in the strange power said to be possessed by Edgar Cayce of Hopkinsville, Ky., to diagnose difficult diseases while in a semi-conscious state, though he has not the slightest knowledge of medicine when not in this condition.

During a visit to California last Summer Dr. W. H. Ketchum, who was attending a meeting of the National Society of Homeopathic Physicians had occasion to mention the young man’s case and I was invited to discuss it at a banquet attended by about thirty-five of the doctors of the Greek letter fraternity given at Pasadena.

Dr. Ketchum made a speech of considerable length, giving an explanation of the strange psychic powers manifested by Cayce during the last four years during which time he has been more or less under his observation. This talk created such widespread interest among the 700 doctors present that one of the leading Boston medical men who heard his speech invited Dr. Ketchum to prepare a paper as a part of the programme of the September meeting of the American Society of Clinical Research. Dr. Ketchum sent the paper, but did not go to Boston. The paper was read by Henry E. Harpower, M.D., of Chicago, a contributor to the Journal of the American Medical Association, published in Chicago. Its presentation created a sensation, and almost before Dr. Ketchum knew that the paper had been given to the press he was deluged with letters and telegrams inquiring about the strange case. …

Dr. Ketchum wishes it distinctly understood that his presentation is purely ethical, and that he attempts no explanation of what must be classed as a mysterious mental phenomena.

Dr. Ketchum is not the only physician who has had opportunity to observe the workings of Mr. Cayce’s subconscious mind. For nearly ten years and strange power has been known to local physicians of all the recognized schools. An explanation of the case is best understood from Dr. Ketchum’s description in his paper read in Boston a few days ago, which follows:

‘About four years ago I made the acquaintance of a young man 28 years old, who had the reputation of being a ‘freak.’ They said he told wonderful truths while he was asleep. I, being interested, immediately began to investigate, and as I was ‘from Missouri,’ I had to be shown.

‘And truly, when it comes to anything psychical, every layman is a disbeliever from the start, and most of our chosen professions will not accept anything of a psychic nature, hypnotism, mesmerism, or what not, unless vouched for by some M.D. away up in the professions and one whose orthodox standing is questioned.

‘By suggestion he becomes unconscious to pain of any sort, and, strange to say, his best work is done when he is seemingly ‘dead to the world.’

‘My subject simply lies down and folds his arms, and by auto-suggestion goes to sleep. While in this sleep, which to all intents and purposes is a natural sleep, his objective mind is completely inactive and only his subjective is working.

‘I next give him the name of my subject and the exact location of the same, and in a few minutes he begins to talk as clearly and distinctly as any one. He usually goes into minute detail in diagnosing a case, and especially if it is a very serious case.

His language is usually of the best, and his psychologic terms and description of the nervous anatomy would do credit to any professor of nervous anatomy, and there is no faltering in his speech and all his statements are clear and concise. He handles the most complex ‘jaw breakers’ with as much ease as any Boston physician, which to me is quite wonderful, in view of the fact that while in his normal state he is an illiterate man, especially along the line of medicine, surgery, or pharmacy, of which he knows nothing.'”

Tags: , ,

“Can You Describe Your New Role At Microsoft?”

February 10, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech | Permalink

Bill Gates’ As Me Anythings are always among the best, with wide-ranging and intelligent discussion. A few exchanges from the most recent one at Reddit.

_________________________

Question:

Hey Bill, have you made any plans to artificially prolong your life? Honest.

Bill Gates:

No I don’t. Other people think about that but I wouldn’t want to extend my last few years unless that is happening for most people.

_________________________

Question:

I’d just like to know, what is something you enjoy doing that you think no one would expect from you?

Bill Gates:

Playing Bridge is a pretty old fashioned thing in a way that I really like. I was watching my daughter ride horses this weekend and that is also a bit old fashioned but fun. I do the dishes every night – other people volunteer but I like the way I do it.

_________________________

Question:

If you were a current computer science student what area would you start studying heavily?

If you feel like expanding on that, why do you think this area deserves the attention and how do you see it changing the technology game in the next 10 years?

Bill Gates:

The ultimate is computers that learn. So called deep learning which started at Microsoft and is now being used by many researchers looks like a real advance that may finally learn. It has already made a big difference in video and audio recognition – more progress in the last 3 years than ever before.

_________________________

Question:

Hey Bill, if you didn’t go into computers and later found Microsoft, what do you think you would be doing?

Bill Gates:

I considered law and math. My Dad was a lawyer. I think though I would have ended up in physics if I didn’t end up in computer science.

_________________________

Question:

Any luck with the condom-design competition?

Bill Gates:

This is a sensitive topic. The idea was that men don’t like the current design so perhaps something they would be more open to would allow for less HIV transmission. We still haven’t gotten the results. One grantee is using carbon nanotubes to reduce the thickness.

"This is a sensitive topic."

“This is a sensitive topic.”

_________________________

Question:

Any advice on how entrepreneurs of today and tomorrow should go about balancing business and philanthropy… or do they have to succeed first in order to give later?

Bill Gates:

Just creating an innovative company is a huge contribution to the world. During my 20’s and 30’s that was all I focused on. Ideally people can start to mix in some philanthropy like Mark Zuckerberg has early in his career. I have enjoyed talking to some of the Valley entrepreneurs about this and I am impressed and how early they are thinking about giving back – much earlier than I did.

_________________________

Question:

Can you describe your new role at Microsoft?

Bill Gates:

I am excited about how the cloud and new devices can help us communicate and collaborate in new ways. The OS won’t just be on one device and the information won’t just be files – it will be your history including being able to review memories of things like kids growing up. I was thrilled Satya [Nadella] asked me to pitch in to make sure Microsoft is ambitious with its innovation. Even in Office there is a lot more than can be done.

_________________________

Question:

How do you feel about the NSA and its oversight of computer usage?

Bill Gates:

This is a complex issue. Privacy will be increasingly important as cameras and GPS sensors are gathering information to try and be helpful. We need to have trust in the way information is protected and gathered. There is a role for the government to try and stop crime and terrorism but it will have to be more open. I do think terrorism with biological or nuclear weapons is something we want to minimize the chance of.•

 

Tags:

“It Doesn’t Make Much Sense To Do It At The Genetic Level At This Point”

February 9, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Sports | Permalink

Rustam Muhamedov of Uzbekistan’s Institute of Bioorganic Chemistry has announced that his country will begin genetic testing of children to determine their athletic potential. It’s something that could potentially work at some point in the future, but it presently seems a pipe dream. In an article by Ron Synovitz and Zamira Eshanova in the Atlantic, SI’s David Epstein casts doubt on the project:

“David Epstein, a sports science journalist and author of the best-selling book The Sports Gene, explains that genes are important in terms of athletic achievement and development. But he doubts Muhamedov’s claims that genetic tests can accurately identify future world-champion athletes.

‘Actually, it doesn’t make much sense to do it at the genetic level at this point. What they are trying to do is learn about someone’s physiology. If you want to learn about someone’s physiology, you should test their physiology instead of the genes,’ Epstein says.

‘We have no clue what most genes do. So if you make a decision based on a small number of genes, which presumably is what is going to happen, you’re sort of trying to decide what a puzzle looks like when you’ve only got one of the pieces, or two of the pieces, and you don’t have the other hundred or thousand pieces,’ he adds.”

Tags: , , ,

“An Apple II Transmits Sounds To The Dolphins”

February 9, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech | Permalink

More than 20 years after John C. Lilly wrote in LIfe about interspecies communications with dolphins, there were two Omni articles about his work in this area. By the 1980s, computers had entered the discussion. 

_________________________

From Owen Davies’ 1983 article “Talking Computer for Dolphins“:

Want to talk to dolphins? The best way may be to talk to a computer first, according to the Human/Dolphin Foundation, in Redwood City, California.

Dr. John Lilly first tried to teach a few dolphins English in the mid-1970s. But Lilly soon found that while the animals were smart, they had trouble under- standing human speech, which uses only a fraction of the enormously wide range of frequencies that dolphins hear. And, although the dolphins tried to speak English, they were physiologically capable of producing only high-pitched, incomprehensible squawks.

Lilly’s answer was to get a computer to translate each species’ speech into sound patterns the other could deal with. In 1977, after three years of work, the foundation developed a computer system capable of translating human words typed on a keyboard into high-frequency sound patterns that dolphins seem to understand; it also analyzed the dolphin sounds and displayed a rough interpretation of them on a computer screen for people to read.

According to physicist John Kert, now working as the foundation’s director, the system is being used to teach dolphins Joe and Rosie simple tasks like jumping, bowing, and recognizing objects on command. The animals have also followed more complex instructions, Kert reports: They can, for instance, swim through a channel to touch a ball with a flipper.

The researchers work with a vocabulary of 30 words, but they soon plan to go up to 128.•

_________________________

 

From “John Lilly: Altered States,” a 1983 interview by Judith Hooper:

John C. Lilly:

We’re using a computer system to transmit sounds underwater to the dolphins. A computer is electrical energy oscillating at particular frequencies, which can vary. and we use a transducer to convert the electrical waveforms into acoustical energy. You could translate the waveforms into any kind of sound you like: human speech, dolphin-like clicks, whatever.

OMNI::

Do you type something out on the computer keyboard and have it transmitted to the dolphins as sound in their frequency range? And do they communicate back to the computer?

John C. Lilly:

Yes, but we actually use two computers. An Apple II transmits sounds to the dolphins, via a transducer, from a keyboard operated by humans. Then there is another computer, made by Digital Equipment Corporation, that listens to the dolphins. A hydrophone, or underwater microphone, picks up any sounds the dolphins make, feeds them into a frequency analyzer, a sonic spectrum analyzer, and then into the computer. So the computer has an ear and a voice, and the dolphin has an ear and a voice. The system also displays visual information to the dolphins.

On the human side it’s rather ponderous, because we have to punch keys and see letters on a screen. People have tried to make dolphins punch keys, but I don’t think dolphins should have to punch keys. They don’t have these little fingers that we have. So we’d prefer to develop a sonic code as the basis of a dolphin computer language. If a group of dolphins can work with a computer that feeds back to them what they just said — names of objects and so forth — and if we can be the intercessors between them and the computer, I think we can eventually communicate.

OMNI:

How long will it take to break through the interspecies communication barrier?

John C. Lilly:

About five years. I think it may take about a year for the dolphins to learn the code, and then, in about five years we’ll have a human/dolphin dictionary. However, we need some very expensive equipment to deal with dolphins’ underwater sonar. Since dolphins ‘see’ with sound in three dimensions — in stereo — you have to make your words ‘stereophonic words.’

OMNI:

You’ve said that dolphins also use ‘sonar beams’ to look at the internal state of one another’s body, or that of a human being, and that they can even gauge another’s emotional state that way. How does that work?

John C. Lilly:

They have a very high-frequency sonar that they can use to inspect something and look at its internal structure. Say you’re immersed in water and a sound wave hits your body. If there’s any gas in your body, it reflects back an incredible amount of sound. To the dolphin it would appear as a bright spot in the acoustic picture.

OMNI:

Can we ever really tune in to the dolphin’s “stereophonic” world view, or is it perhaps too alien to ours?

John C. Lilly:

I want to. I just did a very primitive experiment — -a Saturday afternoon-type experiment — at Marine World I was floating in an isolation tank and had an underwater loudspeaker close to my head and an air microphone just above me. Both were connected through an amplifier to the dolphin tank so that they could hear me and I could hear them. I started playing with sound — whistling and clicking and making other noises that dolphins like. Suddenly I felt as if a lightning bolt had hit me on the head. We have all this on tape, and it’s just incredible. It was a dolphin whistle that went ssssshhheeeeeooooo in a falling frequency from about nine thousand to three thousand hertz in my hearing range. It started at the top of my head, expanding as the frequency dropped, and showing me the inside of my skull, and went right down through my body. The dolphin gave me a three-dimensional feeling of the inside of my skull, describing my body by a single sound!

I want to know what the dolphin experiences. I want to go back and repeat the experiment in stereo, instead of with a single loudspeaker. Since I’m not equipped like a dolphin, I’ve got to use an isolation tank, electronics, and all this nonsense to pretend I’m a dolphin.•

Tags: , ,

“Sir James Dyson Has Outlined His Vision For A New Era Of Household Android Robots”

February 9, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies, Videos | Permalink

The problem with robots understanding us is that they’re going to figure out what complete assholes we are. That will suck. Vacuum magnate James Dyson is promising a new wave of silicon servants that will see to our household needs. From Adam Withnall at the Independent:

“The British entrepreneur Sir James Dyson has outlined his vision for a new era of household android robots that will be able to clean the windows, guard property – and, presumably, vacuum the carpet.

This week the inventor will announce the creation of a new £5 million robotics centre at Imperial College London, and he says a technological revolution is coming that will soon see every home in Britain filled with ‘robots that understand the world around them.’

His team of British-based engineers are locked in a race to build the first multi-purpose household android with scientists in Japan, where researchers at Waseda University have already unveiled the Twendy-One robot that can obey voice commands, cook and provide nursing care.”

_______________________

Press demo of the Twendy-One:

Tags: ,

“It Is My Firm Conviction That Within The Next Decade Or Two Human Beings Will Establish Vocal Communication With Another Species”

February 9, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

Speaking of our relation to the planet’s other creatures: We have a tendency, even the best of us, to judge our fellow species by how much they’re like us, how much we can make them seem like us. That’s because it flatters us, makes us think we’re the form to be imitated. The opening of a 1961 Life essay about interspecies communication by Dr. John C. Lilly, who would later also be known for his experimentation with LSD and isolation tanks:

“It is my firm conviction that within the next decade or two human beings will establish vocal communication with another species. That species might possibly be from another wold; it could also be from this one. Wherever it comes from, it will be highly intelligent, perhaps even intellectual. 

For several years my colleagues and I have been particularly interested in trying to find out whether or not there is a way to conduct such interspecies dialogues with dolphins. Of all the animals on earth, excepting man, only whales (in whose family dolphins are a member) and elephants have brains big enough to offer any possibility of high-level mental activity. And dolphins, even when they are newly captured, show a unique and positive consideration for humans which makes them most desirable subjects for complex experiments. My research with dolphins has left me with the belief that they do, in effect, talk with one another through the use of sounds, that they may have intelligence of a high order and that they might possibly be taught to understand and react to sounds made by man. It would help, of course, to understand what the dolphins are saying to each other. Some of the sounds can be picked up directly by the human ear when the dolphin rises for air. These sounds vary from loud clicks to creakings, whistles, squawks, quacks and blats. But not all dolphin sounds are immediately audible. Many of them are emitted at such a high frequency that we cannot hear them without special acoustical equipment, and it may very well be that the most meaningful patterns of their ‘speech’ occur at these levels. 

By wiring the dolphins’ tanks and taking down their sounds on tape recordings, I have been able to take part in some fascinating eavesdropping. Creaking noises occur most often underwater at nighttime or when the water is murky. Two dolphins in a tank together frequently make buzzing and whistling sounds back and forth at each other. The conversation between a male and female dolphin in physical contact is often very elaborate, an exchange of barks and squawks. 

If two dolphins are separated in nearby tanks, a dialogue takes place that is eerily like two children whispering back and forth between their rooms. First one will whistle. Then the other will whistle back. Once contact is made the conversation settles down to a regular exchange. The exchange can be made up of slow and steady clicks, or of whistles or of both together. 

Even more interesting is the fact that dolphins seem to try to imitate human sounds they hear and sometimes produce primitive and peculiar copies.”

Tags:

“Some Scientists Have Concluded That There Simply Is No Profound Difference Between Us And Other Species”

February 9, 2014 in Books, Excerpts, Science/Tech | Permalink

In reviewing a trio of new books for the Financial Times, philosopher Stephen Cave ponders what it is that sets humanity apart. I would say it’s the ability to create and use complex tools, because we certainly suck at swimming and flying and running when compared to other species. We need all the help we can get. The opening:

“You might think that we humans are special: no other species has, for example, landed on the moon, or invented the iPad. But then, I personally haven’t done those things either. So if such achievements are what makes us human then I must be relegated to the beasts, except in so far as I can catch a little reflected glory from true humans such as Neil Armstrong or Steve Jobs.

Fortunately, there are other, more inclusive, ideas around about what makes us human. Not long ago, most people (in the west) were happy with the account found in the Bible: we are made in the image of God – end of argument. But the theory of evolution tells a different story, one in which humans slowly emerged as a twig on the tree of life. The problem with this explanation is that it is much more difficult to say exactly what makes us so different from all the other twigs.

Indeed, in the light of new research into animal intelligence, some scientists have concluded that there simply is no profound difference between us and other species.”

 

Tags:

“I Think We Haven’t Yet Had The Revelation That Will Really Set People Off”

February 9, 2014 in Excerpts, Politics, Science/Tech | Permalink

I guess I’m remarkably jaded because from the minute the Patriot Act became law, I assumed there would be large-scale surveillance by our government. What’s more, most Americans probably wanted it and likely still do.

Wikipedia’s Jimmy Wales commenting on NSA surveillance in an interview with Carole Cadwalladr in the Guardian:

“Carole Cadwalladr:

You’ve spoken out publicly about the NSA revelations, but how surprised were you when that first headline hit? Or did you suspect something like that was going on?

Jimmy Wales:

I was surprised by the scale, by some of the revelations. I was surprised – as Google was – that they were tapping into lines inside, between the data centres of Google. That’s pretty amazing. And hacking Angela Merkel’s phone – that was a surprise. But I think we haven’t yet had the revelation that will really set people off.

Carole Cadwalladr:

You’ve said that you’re going to start encrypting communications on Wikipedia as a result…

Jimmy Wales:

We have done. It’s not completely finished yet but the only thing that GCHQ, hopefully, can see is that you’re looking at Wikipedia. They can’t see which article you’re reading. It’s not the government’s business to know what everybody is reading.”

Tags: ,

“The Main Article In The Spring Issue Deals With Space Colonies”

February 7, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech | Permalink

A 1979 CoEvolution with an R. Crumb cover.

A 1979 CoEvolution with an R. Crumb cover.

The earlier post about Ken Kesey mentioned Stewart Brand’s 1974-84 periodical, The CoEvolution Quarterly. The Spring 1976 issue, which focused, much to Lewis Mumford’s consternation, on space colonies, was written up in the Harvard Crimson. An excerpt:

“THE MAIN ARTICLE in the Spring issue deals with space colonies. It runs 48 pages, featuring 76 famous people or friends of Stewart Brand (guiding light of The Catalog and editor of The Quarterly) writing on what they think about the possibilities of building cities in space. The article includes not only such popular scientists as Carl Sagan, Lewis Mumford, and Buckminister Fuller, but also Richard Brautigan and poet Gary Snyder.

It seems rather pointless and maybe just a little silly to discuss cities in space when New York is in such a predicament, and to Brand’s credit, he publishes viewpoints radically dissimilar from his own, which is that these cities can’t come soon enough. Mumford states that, ‘I regard space colonies as another pathological manifestation of the culture that has spent all its resources expanding the nuclear means of exterminating the human race. Such proposals are only technological disguises for infantile fantasies.'”

Tags: , ,

“The Gas Appears To Have Been Used In Past Olympics”

February 7, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Sports | Permalink

Athletes have always cheated and always will, and the more we try to pretend that isn’t true, the more we guide policy marked by hypocrisy. We shouldn’t pretend that some athletes are pure and others aren’t. Especially since the testing is so uneven: Only about half the 2012 Olympians were actually tested, and some possess genetics that allow them to dope at will with impunity. Most of the area is gray, not black and white. 

From an Economist article about competitors who try to gain competitive advantage by inhaling xenon:

“Athletes are allowed to live or train at altitude, or sleep in a low-oxygen tent, in order to stimulate red-cell production. If xenon treatment is merely replicating low-oxygen environments by replacing oxygen with xenon, then its use to enhance athletic performance is permissible.

The use of xenon by athletes certainly has government blessing. A document produced in 2010 by the State Research Institute of the Ministry of Defence sets out guidelines for the administration of the gas to athletes. It advises using it before competitions to correct listlessness and sleep disruption, and afterwards to improve physical recovery. The recommended dose is a 50:50 mixture of xenon and oxygen, inhaled for a few minutes, ideally before going to bed. The gas’s action, the manual states, continues for 48-72 hours, so repeating every few days is a good idea. And for last-minute jitters, a quick hit an hour before the starting gun can help.

The benefits, the manual suggests, include increasing heart and lung capacity, preventing muscle fatigue, boosting testosterone and improving an athlete’s mood. Similar benefits have been noted in papers in Russian scientific journals, and in conference presentations describing tests of xenon on mountain climbers, paddlers, soldiers and pilots.

And the gas appears to have been used in past Olympics.”

“Machine Washing Is Like Trying To Clean Your Clothes By Giving It A Bath”

February 7, 2014 in Excerpts, Science/Tech, Urban Studies | Permalink

Where does the washing machine rank in the pantheon of revolutionary inventions? After the wheel and printing press, sure, but it holds a prominent place. The machines have improved over decades, but the fundamentals have remained stubbornly the same. In our lifetimes, I would wager that the soaking-and-circulating tub method will fall into obsolescence. From Tuan C. Nguyen at the Smithsonian blog:

“The electric washing machines are right up there with automobiles and personal computers. With the press of a button, a load of laundry that had once taken in excess of four hours to clean was reduced to a 40-minute automated process. Some economists have even credited the time-saving appliance with precipitating the rise of women in the workforce during the 1950s, as homemakers were suddenly freed up to take up other pursuits.

But for all its necessary convenience, the conventional washing machine has remained, to this day, a resource-intensive technology that requires as much as 55 gallons of water per load and electricity to heat the water. Nor is it even the most efficient method for removing stains. ‘Machine washing is like trying to clean your clothes by giving it a bath,’ explains Jonathon Benjamin, a longtime industry executive and head of Xeros Cleaning’s North American operations. ‘Not all the dirt gets washed away as some of it just gets moved around in all that water.’  

Since 2010, the UK-based startup has been introducing into several markets a radical, nearly-waterless machine that allegedly leaves clothes cleaner while using 72 percent less water, cutting energy costs by as much as 47 percent. The Xeros cleaning system, found at select athletic clubs, drop-off cleaners and Hyatt hotels, does this by swapping out water for tiny plastic beads specially-engineered to absorb dirt directly—and therefore more effectively—from fabric.”

Tags:

« Older entries § Newer entries »