Science/Tech

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

There are fewer postcards and hand-written notes today, but I don’t think anyone would argue against the idea that more people in the world are writing more in the Internet Age than at any moment in history. What we’re writing is largely bullshit, sure, but not all of it is. It’s really the full flowering of democracy, like it or not. From Walter Isaacson’s New York Times review of Clive Thompson’s glass-half-full tech book, Smarter Than You Think:

“Thompson also celebrates the fact that digital tools and networks are allowing us to share ideas with others as never before. It’s easy (and not altogether incorrect) to denigrate much of the blathering that occurs each day in blogs and tweets. But that misses a more significant phenomenon: the type of people who 50 years ago were likely to be sitting immobile in front of television sets all evening are now expressing their ideas, tailoring them for public consumption and getting feedback. This change is a cause for derision among intellectual sophisticates partly because they (we) have not noticed what a social transformation it represents. ‘Before the Internet came along, most people rarely wrote anything at all for pleasure or intellectual satisfaction after graduating from high school or college,’ Thompson notes. ‘This is something that’s particularly hard to grasp for professionals whose jobs require incessant writing, like academics, journalists, lawyers or marketers. For them, the act of writing and hashing out your ideas seems commonplace. But until the late 1990s, this simply wasn’t true of the average nonliterary person.'”

Tags: ,

A paragraph from Margaret Atwood’s New York Review of Books’ review of Dave Eggers’ The Circle about the malignant undercurrent of technotopia:

“Some will call The Circle a ‘dystopia,’ but there’s no sadistic slave-whipping tyranny on view in this imaginary America: indeed, much energy is expended on world betterment by its earnest denizens. Plagues are not raging, nor is the planet blowing up or even warming noticeably. Instead we are in the green and pleasant land of a satirical utopia for our times, where recycling and organics abound, people keep saying how much they like each another, and the brave new world of virtual sharing and caring breeds monsters.”

Tags: ,

There’s a Warholian triumph in Norway called “Slow TV,” which is sort of a long-form staring contest, except that viewers spend eight or so hours staring at real-time knitting contests and train trips. Rights have been purchased by American producers, though no one knows yet if this antidote to instant gratification will translate. From Nancy Tartaglione at Deadline.com:

“Knit one, purl … eight-plus hours of live stitching? That’s what’s happening tonight on Norwegian public broadcaster NRK2 as folks around the country gather in viewing parties. The show is part of a phenomenon known as Slow TV which has increasingly captivated Norway. The overall gist of the concept, to which LMNO Productions recently acquired U.S. rights, is a hybrid of unhurried documentary coupled with hours and hours of continuous coverage provided by fixed cameras trained on a subject or an event. Prior to tonight, those have included a 7.5-hour train journey, a 134-hour coastal cruise, a stack of firewood and salmon. Tonight, NRK2 will turn its lens on National Knitting Evening. Four hours of discussion on the popular pastime will kick off at 8 PM local, before a sheep gets trotted out at midnight to be sheared and its wool spun into yarn.”

_____________________________

Colbert celebrates Slow TV:

Tags:

Because Bill Gates has only done three million interviews thus far in his life, the Financial Times’ headline writers thought they should label the paper’s new dialogue with him as “exclusive.” The crux of the discussion is an interesting one: Is it more important to give poor people access to the Internet or give them malaria medicine. If you have malaria, it’s a pretty easy choice. But I do think providing information where there is little empowers people. Sure, food, water and medicine first, but then let’s share the Internet. From Richard Waters “exclusive”:

“There is no getting round the fact, however, that Gates often sounds at odds with the new generation of billionaire technocrats. He was the first to imagine that computing could seep into everyday life, with the Microsoft mission to put a PC on every desk and in every home. But while others talk up the world-changing power of the internet, he is under no illusions that it will do much to improve the lives of the world’s poorest.

‘Innovation is a good thing. The human condition – put aside bioterrorism and a few footnotes – is improving because of innovation,’ he says. But while ­’technology’s amazing, it doesn’t get down to the people most in need in anything near the timeframe we should want it to.’

It was an argument he says he made to Thomas Friedman as The New York Times columnist was writing his 2005 book, The World is Flat, a work that came to define the almost end-of-history optimism that accompanied the entry of China and India into the global labour markets, a transition aided by the internet revolution. ‘Fine, go to those Bangalore Infosys centres, but just for the hell of it go three miles aside and go look at the guy living with no toilet, no running water,’ Gates says now. ‘The world is not flat and PCs are not, in the hierarchy of human needs, in the first five rungs.’ “

Tags: ,

mmmmm

In a world of centralized media, critics were given too much importance. In a time of algorithms, they’ve been reduced. No one waits for the “emperor” to offer a thumbs up or down anymore; the spectators do it themselves. Even TV critics, who’ve rode to new prominence thanks to a wave of popular shows and binge-watching Americans gripping tablets and smartphones, have very little real impact. From a New York Times discussion about literary criticism and Twitter by Adam Kirsch and Anna Holmes, a passage by the former:

“At first glance, it seems that critics, in particular, should relish a tool like Twitter. Criticism is a kind of argument, and Twitter is excellent for arguing back and forth in public. Criticism is also a kind of reportage, and Twitter is an ideal way of breaking news. With many major events, from presidential debates to the Oscars, it is more informative and entertaining to follow them in real time on Twitter than it is to actually watch them. For all these reasons, journalists have been especially avid users of Twitter.

Critics, however, have been surprisingly reluctant to embrace the tweet. Many of the most prominent are not on Twitter at all. Those who are tend to use their feeds for updates on their daily lives, or to share links, or at most to recommend articles or books — that is, they use Twitter in the way everyone else does. What is hard to find on Twitter is any real practice of criticism, anything that resembles the sort of discourse that takes place in an essay or a review.

This absence, like the dog that didn’t bark in Sherlock Holmes, may be an important clue to the true nature of criticism. Never in history has it been easier than it is today to register one’s approval or disapproval of anything. The emblem of our age is the thumbs-up of the ‘like’ button. If criticism is nothing more than a drawn-out version of a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down, there’s no reason it shouldn’t be made obsolete by the retweet or the five-star Amazon review. Cut to the chase, the Internet demands, of critics and everyone else: Should we buy this thing or not?

Tags: ,

In time, we’ll all be enhanced–and not just our bodies. It won’t be cheating but improvement. Necessary even, for survival. From Anders Sandberg’s new Practical Ethics post about Transhumanism and performance enhancement:

“If we were to make a choice behind a veil of ignorance between a world where there was more talent to go around and a world with less talent, it seems that the reasonable choice is to choose the world of talent. We would probably also want to choose a world where talent was more equally distributed than one where it was less equal. But even the less talented people in a talented but unequal world could benefit from the greater prosperity and creativity.

In practice talent needs plenty of help to develop: without support and good teachers innate potential is unlikely to matter. So the ability to help kids develop their potential (and help them overcome their less able sides) is important for actualizing that talent. Without it none of the above worlds would be preferable. But figuring out how to cultivate and stimulate kids is hard. Hence, any information that could help do this better would be welcome.

So my basic stance is that if genetic information could personalize education well, go for it!

But… I am less convinced than the geneticists that we can actually do it, at least in the near future.”

Tags:

The opening of an NBC News update on Elon Musk’s Hyperloop, which identifies the team leaders and timeline for the project:

Prototypes of Elon Musk’s high-speed ‘Hyperloop’ transit will be ready by 2015, according to the group taking over development of the project. That’s just two years after Musk first described his idea to transport humans between cities in pods accelerated to near-supersonic speeds.

A newly created company, ‘Hyperloop Transportation Technologies,’ will lead the charge, its team leaders announced Thursday. They also published a project timeline for the next two years

Piloting the ship are Marco Villa, an ex-SpaceX man, and Patricia Galloway, who has served as CEO of a management consulting firm, presided over the American Society of Civil Engineers,and sat a term on the National Science Board under President George W. Bush. They are backed by JumpStarterFund, sort of a Kickstarter for startups, based in California.  

While the leadership of the company has been appointed in August 2013, the ranks have yet to be filled out. More than 160 aspiring Hyperloopers have turned in applications from the U.S., Europe, and Asia. They will receive stock options for contributing part-time or full-time work.”

Tags: ,

The opening paragraph of an Economist article about research which aims to reduce the price of solar cells from manageable to microscopic:

“SOLAR cells were once a bespoke product, reserved for satellites and military use. In 1977 a watt of solar generating capacity cost $77. That has now come down to about 80 cents, and solar power is beginning to compete with the more expensive sort of conventionally generated electricity. If the price came down further, though, solar might really hit the big time—and that is the hope of Henry Snaith, of Oxford University, and his colleagues. As he described recently in Science, Dr Snaith plans to replace silicon, the material used to make most solar cells, with a substance called a perovskite. This, he believes, could cut the cost of a watt of solar generating capacity by three-quarters.”

Tags:

From a Foreign Affairs interview that Gideon Rose conducted with roboticist Sebastian Thrun, a passage about the subject’s triumph in a 2005 driverless-car competition in the Mojave Desert:

Question:

Why did your project end up working so well?

Sebastian Thrun:

Many of the people who participated in the race had a strong hardware focus, so a lot of teams ended up building their own robots. Our calculus was that this was not about the strength of the robot or the design of the chassis. Humans could drive those trails perfectly; it was not complicated off-road terrain. It was really just desert trails. So we decided it was purely a matter of artificial intelligence. All we had to do was put a computer inside the car, give it the appropriate eyes and ears, and make it smart.

In trying to make it smart, we found that driving is really governed not by two or three rules but by tens of thousands of rules. There are so many different contingencies. We had a day when birds were sitting on the road and flew up as our vehicle approached. And we learned that to a robot eye, a bird looks exactly the same as a rock. So we had to make the machine smart enough to distinguish birds from rocks.

In the end, we started relying on what we call machine learning, or big data. That is, instead of trying to program all these rules by hand, we taught our robot the same way we would teach a human driver. We would go into the desert, and I would drive, and the robot would watch me and try to emulate the behaviors involved. Or we would let the robot drive, and it would make a mistake, and we would go back to the data and explain to the robot why this was a mistake and give the robot a chance to adjust.

Question:

So you developed a robot that could learn?

Sebastian Thrun:

Yes. Our robot was learning. It was learning before the race, and it was learning in the race.”

Tags: ,

While normally you wouldn’t link candy and colonoscopies, an NPR story by Shankar Vendatam does just that in trying to explain the mystery of happiness. In a nod to Daniel Kahneman’s classic study about the painful medical procedure, researchers used Halloween candy to prove that satisfaction isn’t dependent just on quantity but also on order of experience. An excerpt:

“What makes trick-or-treaters happy is candy. And more candy is better, right?

Well, it turns out that might not actually be the case. A few years ago researchers did a study on Halloween night where some trick-or-treaters were given a candy bar, and others were given the candy bar and a piece of bubble gum.

Now, in any rational universe, you would imagine that the kids who got the candy bar and the bubble gum would be happier than the kids who got just the candy bar. George Wolford, a psychologist at Dartmouth College, and his fellow researchers, Amy Doe and Alexander Rupert, found something quite different.

‘Those children that got both the full-sized candy bar and the bubble gum second, rated how delighted they were to get these treats lower than those people that got the candy bar only,’ Wolford says.”

Tags: , , , ,

Wristify is a watch-like tool from MIT that can moderate body temperature, reducing dependence on air conditioners and the huge amounts of electricity they consume. From Kyle Vanhemert at Wired:

“Wristify, as they call their device, is a thermoelectric bracelet that regulates the temperature of the person wearing it by subjecting their skin to alternating pulses of hot or cold, depending on what’s needed. The prototype recently won first place at this year’s MADMEC, an annual competition put on by the school’s Materials Science and Engineering program, netting the group a $10,000 prize, which they’ll use to continue its development. It’s a promising start to a clever approach that could help alleviate a serious energy crisis. But as Sam Shames, the MIT senior who helped invent the technology, explains, the team was motivated by a more prosaic problem: keeping everyone happy in a room where no one can agree where to set the thermostat.

 

Tags:

When he wrote about the coming computer revolution of the 1970s at the outset of the decade in Of a Fire on the Moon, Norman Mailer couldn’t have known that the dropouts and the rebels would be leading the charge. An excerpt of his somewhat nightmarish view of our technological future, some parts of which came true and some still in the offing:

“Now they asked him what he thought of the Seventies. He did not know. He thought of the Seventies and a blank like the windowless walls of the computer city came over his vision. When he conducted interviews with himself on the subject it was not a despair he felt, or fear–it was anesthesia. He had no intimations of what was to come, and that was conceivably worse than any sentiment of dread, for a sense of the future, no matter how melancholy, was preferable to none–it spoke of some sense of the continuation in the projects of one’s life. He was adrift. If he tried to conceive of a likely perspective in the decade before him, he saw not one structure to society but two: if the social world did not break down into revolutions and counterrevolutions, into police and military rules of order with sabotage, guerrilla war and enclaves of resistance, if none of this occurred, then there certainly would be a society of reason, but its reason would be the logic of the computer. In that society, legally accepted drugs would become necessary for accelerated cerebration, there would be inchings toward nuclear installation, a monotony of architectures, a pollution of nature which would arouse technologies of decontamination odious as deodorants, and transplanted hearts monitored like spaceships–the patients might be obliged to live in a compound reminiscent of a Mission Control Center where technicians could monitor on consoles the beatings of a thousand transplanted hearts. But in the society of computer-logic, the atmosphere would obviously be plastic, air-conditioned, sealed in bubble-domes below the smog, a prelude to living on space stations. People would die in such societies like fish expiring on a vinyl floor. So of course there would be another society, an irrational society of dropouts, the saintly, the mad, the militant and the young. There the art of the absurd would reign in defiance against the computer.”

Tags:

Phil Plait at Slate pointing out the similarities and differences of our planet and Kepler-78b, the “another Earth” exoplanet discovered via space telescope:

“Kepler-78b, it turns out, has a mass of 1.7 times that of the Earth. That may sound like a lot, but remember, Kepler-78b is bigger, too. When you do the math, you find that its density is almost exactly the same as Earth’s!

This means Kepler-78b is most likely made of roughly the same stuff as Earth, and in roughly the same proportion. It may very well have a dense iron core and a lighter rocky mantle just as Earth does.

That’s amazing.

However, the resemblance ends there. With a daytime temperature in the thousands of degrees, the surface of the planet is almost certainly molten rock, so it’s not exactly a vacation spot. But it does show that the Earth is not a one-off planet; the Universe is quite capable of making Earth-sized planets that have the same physical characteristics as well.”

Tags:

Google believes its driverless cars are already safer than human drivers. Even if that’s currently too ambitious a statement, it’s really only a matter of time. From Tom Simonite at the Technology Review:

“Data gathered from Google’s self-driving Prius and Lexus cars shows that they are safer and smoother when steering themselves than when a human takes the wheel, according to the leader of Google’s autonomous-car project.

Chris Urmson made those claims today at a robotics conference in Santa Clara, California. He presented results from two studies of data from the hundreds of thousands of miles Google’s vehicles have logged on public roads in California and Nevada.

One of those analyses showed that when a human was behind the wheel, Google’s cars accelerated and braked significantly more sharply than they did when piloting themselves. Another showed that the cars’ software was much better at maintaining a safe distance from the vehicle ahead than the human drivers were.

‘We’re spending less time in near-collision states,’ said Urmson. ‘Our car is driving more smoothly and more safely than our trained professional drivers.'”

Tags: ,

A news company as massive as the New York Times encompasses all things, all ideas–it contains multitudes, to paraphrase Walt Whitman. So, the paper of record could look silly in 1985 publishing a piece that predicted laptops would never really catch on but look brilliant three years earlier pretty much laying out the next several decades of our ever-increasingly digitized world, the triumphs and the fears. From “Study Says Technology Could Transform Society,” an article by Robert Reinhold in the June 14, 1982 edition:

WASHINGTON— A report commissioned by the National Science Foundation and made public today speculates that by the end of this century electronic information technology will have transformed American home, business, manufacturing, school, family and political life.

The report suggests that one-way and two-way home information systems, called teletext and videotex, will penetrate deeply into daily life, with an effect on society as profound as those of the automobile and commercial television earlier in this century.

It conjured a vision, at once appealing and threatening, of a style of life defined and controlled by videotex terminals throughout the house.

As a consequence, the report envisioned this kind of American home by the year 1998: ‘Family life is not limited to meals, weekend outings, and once a-year vacations. Instead of being the glue that holds things together so that family members can do all those other things they’re expected to do – like work, school, and community gatherings -the family is the unit that does those other things, and the home is the place where they get done. Like the term ‘cottage industry,’ this view might seem to reflect a previous era when family trades were passed down from generation to generation, and children apprenticed to their parents. In the ‘electronic cottage,’ however, one electronic ‘tool kit’ can support many information production trades.’

The report warned that the new technology would raise difficult issues of privacy and control that will have to be addressed soon to ‘maximize its benefits and minimize its threats to society.'”

Tags:

In 1979, Joan Didion wrote for an essay for the New York Review of Books about a trio of Woody Allen films–Manhattan, Annie Hall and Interiors–commenting that the filmmaker’s adult characters had taken on the qualities of adolescents, becoming consumed with their place in the world–charting their loves and losses–listing their faves and likes, as if writing in a school yearbook in the air. And this, of course, was long before social networks gave us the tools to completely realize such a thing–to become a global village that’s connected if not mature. The opening:

“Self-absorption is general, as is self-doubt. In the large coastal cities of the United States this summer many people wanted to be dressed in ‘real linen,’ cut by Calvin Klein to wrinkle, which implies real money. In the large coastal cities of the United States this summer many people wanted to be served the perfect vegetable terrine. It was a summer in which only have-nots wanted a cigarette or a vodka-and-tonic or a charcoal-broiled steak. It was a summer in which the more hopeful members of the society wanted roller skates, and stood in line to see Woody Allen’s Manhattan, a picture in which, toward the end, the Woody Allen character makes a list of reasons to stay alive. ‘Groucho Marx’ is one reason, and ‘Willie Mays’ is another. The second movement of Mozart’s ‘Jupiter’ Symphony. Louis Armstrong’s ‘Potato Head Blues.’ Flaubert’s A Sentimental Education. This list is modishly eclectic, a trace wry, definitely OK with real linen; and notable, as raisons d’être go, in that every experience it evokes is essentially passive. This list of Woody Allen’s is the ultimate consumer report, and the extent to which it has been quoted approvingly suggests a new class in America, a subworld of people rigid with apprehension that they will die wearing the wrong sneaker, naming the wrong symphony, preferring Madame Bovary

What is arresting about these recent ‘serious’ pictures of Woody Allen’s, about Annie Hall and Interiors as well as Manhattan, is not the way they work as pictures but the way they work with audiences. The people who go to see these pictures, who analyze them and write about them and argue the deeper implications in their texts and subtexts, seem to agree that the world onscreen pretty much mirrors the world as they know it. This is interesting, and rather astonishing, since the peculiar and hermetic self-regard in Annie Hall andInteriors and Manhattan would seem nothing with which large numbers of people would want to identify. The characters in these pictures are, at best, trying. They are morose. They have bad manners. They seem to take long walks and go to smart restaurants only to ask one another hard questions. ‘Are you serious about Tracy?’ the Michael Murphy character asks the Woody Allen character in Manhattan. ‘Are you still hung up on Yale?’ the Woody Allen character asks the Diane Keaton character. ‘I think I’m still in love with Yale,’ she confesses several scenes later. ‘You are?’ he counters, ‘or you think you are?’ All of the characters in Woody Allen pictures not only ask these questions but actually answer them, on camera, and then, usually in another restaurant, listen raptly to third-party analyses of their own questions and answers.

‘How come you guys got divorced?’ they ask each other with real interest, and, on a more rhetorical level, ‘why are you so hostile,’ and ‘why can’t you just once in a while consider my needs.’ (‘I’m sick of your needs’ is the way Diane Keaton answers this question in Interiors, one of the few lucid moments in the picture.)What does she say, these people ask incessantly, what does she say and what does he say and, finally, inevitably, ‘what does your analyst say.’ These people have, on certain subjects, extraordinary attention spans. When Natalie Gittelson of The New York Times Magazine recently asked Woody Allen how his own analysis was going after twenty-two years, he answered this way: ‘It’s very slow…but an hour a day, talking about your emotions, hopes, angers, disappointments, with someone who’s trained to evaluate this material—over a period of years, you’re bound to get more in touch with feelings than someone who makes no effort.’

Well, yes and (apparently) no. Over a period of twenty-two years ‘you’re bound’ only to get older, barring nasty surprises. This notion of oneself as a kind of continuing career—something to work at, work on, ‘make an effort’ for and subject to an hour a day of emotional Nautilus training, all in the interests not of attaining grace but of improving one’s ‘relationships’—is fairly recent in the world, at least in the world not inhabited entirely by adolescents. In fact the paradigm for the action in these recent Woody Allen movies is high school. The characters in Manhattan and Annie Hall and Interiors are, with one exception, presented as adults, as sentient men and women in the most productive years of their lives, but their concerns and conversations are those of clever children, ‘class brains,’ acting out a yearbook fantasy of adult life.”

Tags: ,

You can hardly blame the town elders in Los Altos for designating Steve Jobs’ childhood home an historic resource. There’s tourism money in the short-term future. But for how many decades will Jobs be recalled and revered? Edwin Land was once just as big an icon. From Jason Green at the Mercury News:

“Steve Jobs built the first 100 Apple 1 computers at the Crist Drive home with help from Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak and Patricia Jobs. The first 50 were sold to Paul Terrell’s Byte Shop in Mountain View for $500 each, according to the evaluation. The rest were assembled for their friends in the Homebrew Computer Club.

‘I’d get yelled at if I bent a prong,’ Patricia Jobs told The Daily News in an interview last month.

The original computers are now worth tens of thousands of dollars. One sold for $213,000 at an auction in 2010.

The home is also where Jobs courted some of his first investors, including Chuck Peddle of Commodore Computer and Don Valentine of Sequoia Capital, according to the evaluation.

The first partnership for Apple Computer Co. was signed on April 1, 1976, and nine months later the company was established and operations moved to nearby Cupertino.

‘These significant events took place at the subject property,’ Commissioner Sapna Marfatia wrote in the evaluation.”

Tags: , ,

The opening ofConfessions of a Drone Warrior,” Matthew Power’s GQ article about Brandon Bryant, one of the first recruits into the new world of push-button war, a fighter pilot who never had to board the plane, and one who could barely see the carnage in the corner of a screen:

“From the darkness of a box in the Nevada desert, he watched as three men trudged down a dirt road in Afghanistan. The box was kept cold—precisely sixty-eight degrees—and the only light inside came from the glow of monitors. The air smelled spectrally of stale sweat and cigarette smoke. On his console, the image showed the midwinter landscape of eastern Afghanistan’s Kunar Province—a palette of browns and grays, fields cut to stubble, dark forests climbing the rocky foothills of the Hindu Kush. He zoomed the camera in on the suspected insurgents, each dressed in traditional shalwar kameez, long shirts and baggy pants. He knew nothing else about them: not their names, not their thoughts, not the thousand mundane and profound details of their lives.

He was told that they were carrying rifles on their shoulders, but for all he knew, they were shepherd’s staffs. Still, the directive from somewhere above, a mysterious chain of command that led straight to his headset, was clear: confirmed weapons. He switched from the visible spectrum—the muted grays and browns of ‘day-TV’—to the sharp contrast of infrared, and the insurgents’ heat signatures stood out ghostly white against the cool black earth. A safety observer loomed behind him to make sure the ‘weapon release’ was by the book. A long verbal checklist, his targeting laser locked on the two men walking in front. A countdown—three…two…one…—then the flat delivery of the phrase ‘missile off the rail.’ Seventy-five hundred miles away, a Hellfire flared to life, detached from its mount, and reached supersonic speed in seconds. 

It was quiet in the dark, cold box in the desert, except for the low hum of machines.

He kept the targeting laser trained on the two lead men and stared so intently that each individual pixel stood out, a glowing pointillist dot abstracted from the image it was meant to form. Time became almost ductile, the seconds stretched and slowed in a strange electronic limbo. As he watched the men walk, the one who had fallen behind seemed to hear something and broke into a run to catch up with the other two. Then, bright and silent as a camera flash, the screen lit up with white flame. 

Airman First Class Brandon Bryant stared at the scene, unblinking in the white-hot clarity of infrared. He recalls it even now, years later, burned into his memory like a photo negative: ‘The smoke clears, and there’s pieces of the two guys around the crater. And there’s this guy over here, and he’s missing his right leg above his knee. He’s holding it, and he’s rolling around, and the blood is squirting out of his leg, and it’s hitting the ground, and it’s hot. His blood is hot. But when it hits the ground, it starts to cool off; the pool cools fast. It took him a long time to die. I just watched him. I watched him become the same color as the ground he was lying on.’ “

Tags: ,

Some want to go off the grid, and architect/scavenger Michael Reynolds is there to help, with his “Earthships,’ fully self-sustaining, green homes in New Mexico that look like they were built on the wrong side of an apocalypse. Yet they have a great deal of charm, in addition to being beyond the reach of civilization. From an interview with Reynolds by Roc Morin at Vice:

Vice:

How do Earthships change the lives of their inhabitants?

Michael Reynolds:

When you get in a situation where all of your utilities come directly to you from the sun, wind, and rain, it empowers you. So what if the economy crashes? So what if the politics don’t work out? People are still in charge of their lives. The biggest change that happens is that people become less dependent on the powers that be and more secure in their own being.

 Vice:

Is that what you had in mind in the early 70s when you first started?

Michael Reynolds:

No. I didn’t have a master plan. I just followed my nose, responding to one thing and then another. I wanted to make the buildings out of things we throw away rather than cutting down trees. Then I wanted to harvest my own water because water’s getting to be an issue all over the planet. I wanted to make my own power so I wouldn’t be vulnerable to power outages and reinforce the need for nuclear power plants. Then I started seeing that sewage was not being treated right anywhere on the planet, so I wanted to be responsible for my own. And I didn’t like the food that I purchased, even in health food stores. It’s still grown for money and has dyes and all kinds of chemicals in it, so I wanted to do my own food. One thing led to another, and now I live an absolutely independent, decentralized method of living.

 Vice:

Do you have a sense of why we make buildings the way we do? Why are straight lines the standard across the Western world?

Michael Reynolds:

The idea started out from the ease of producing hard-edged materials and shipping them. Every building you see is a square box. But look at nature—a wasp nest or a beaver dam. It feels a lot better on your mind to be in a soft organic building than it does to be in a hard-edged, industrial-type building.”

Tags:

Movies want to escape the theaters and everyone, in one way or another, is a star now. Watching films on iPhones might seem to make Nora Desmond an even greater prophet, but if the pictures have gotten even smaller, they’re everywhere today, being captured by cameras you can barely see–some that you can’t see at all. We still like to watch, but it’s not enough–we want to be seen, we want to be in the movie. We’ve finally stormed the gates. Now what?

From an Economist article about the new wave of big-budget haunted houses in the U.S.:

“In order to get the most boo for their buck, haunters use the latest technology. Where there is competition—there are at least half a dozen haunts in New York City alone—the standards are high. Hollywood special effects and animatronic ghouls are common. But warm-blooded labour, mostly in the form of actors, is often the biggest cost.

A web of regulations, fire- and crowd-related, can make life hellish for potential fearmongers. The (enormous) haunt of Frau Mueller was given a boost when regulators laid a competitor to rest. The frau herself was nearly sent to an early grave—the haunt was approved a day before opening, and only after a path was cut down the middle for safety.

Even if they are not all grim reapers of profit, haunters have a passion for their work. Steve Kopelman, who produces haunts across the country, wanted to make movies when he was younger. Now, he says, people are going to haunted houses to be in the movie. Indeed, Hollywood is getting in on the act. Mr Kopelman is co-producing a haunt near Los Angeles with Rob Zombie, a director of scary films.”

About a dozen years ago, I wrote a piece online in which I predicted that eventually all films would have a “pan release,” that they would be available the day they open on all screens–theaters, TV, computers. It didn’t make sense to me to limit it. Why not reach for every distribution channel? I can tell you every person I spoke to who read that article told me that I was wrong and that it would never, ever happen, that the economics would not allow it. But Netflix is trying to disrupt Hollywood in just that way right now. From Peter Kafka at All Things D:

During the company’s earnings call last week, content boss Ted Sarandos said the company was interested in breaking into movies, and that investors should ‘keep [their] mind wide open to what those films would be and what they would look like.’

This weekend, Sarandos got more explicit. In a speech hosted by Film Independent, the nonprofit behind the indie film Spirit Awards, Sarandos said Netflix could start delivering new movies to its subscribers by doing the same thing it has done with its original TV shows, and becoming a first-run distributor.

‘What we’re trying to do for TV, the model should extend pretty nicely to movies. Meaning, why not premiere movies on Netflix, the same day they’re opening in theaters? And not little movies — there’s a lot of ways, and lot of people to do that [already]. Why not big movies? Why not follow the consumers’ desire to watch things when they want?’

Good logic. And hard to imagine how that will work.

But presumably that’s Sarandos’s point — Netflix wants to show that it can do it, at least once, and put pressure on the rest of Hollywood to change.”

Tags:

If you want to complain about having to help foot the bill for other people’s health insurance in a universal system, you probably should not be overweight or a smoker or sedentary or involved in any other risky behaviors. Otherwise other people who are healthier will be helping to subsidize the care you will need. Likewise, those who don’t drive help pay the way for those who do, pitching in for infrastructure they don’t use. A collective is never completely even in every way, but it’s how we get things done. It’s the greater good.

But technology is making it easier for us to assess individual cost. A company called True Mileage enables states to install a box in every automobile that measures mileage. Those who drive the most will be taxed the highest. The opening of a Los Angeles Times story by Evan Halper about Washington State enacting such a plan:

Washington — As America’s road planners struggle to find the cash to mend a crumbling highway system, many are beginning to see a solution in a little black box that fits neatly by the dashboard of your car.

The devices, which track every mile a motorist drives and transmit that information to bureaucrats, are at the center of a controversial attempt in Washington and state planning offices to overhaul the outdated system for funding America’s major roads.

The usually dull arena of highway planning has suddenly spawned intense debate and colorful alliances. Libertarians have joined environmental groups in lobbying to allow government to use the little boxes to keep track of the miles you drive, and possibly where you drive them — then use the information to draw up a tax bill.

The tea party is aghast. The American Civil Liberties Unionis deeply concerned, too, raising a variety of privacy issues.

And while Congress can’t agree on whether to proceed, several states are not waiting. They are exploring how, over the next decade, they can move to a system in which drivers pay per mile of road they roll over. Thousands of motorists have already taken the black boxes, some of which have GPS monitoring, for a test drive.”

Tags:

As going off the grid gets increasingly difficult, it becomes a more cherished dream. One family, Dan and Sheila and son, who took the plunge seven years ago, just did an Ask Me Anything at Reddit about the reality of such a commitment. A few exchanges follow.

_________________________

Question:

What made you go off-grid?

Answer:

We are from Back East and our goal was always to go off the grid, away from highly populated areas, and “live the good life”. We worked our butts of for 20 years to get here.

_________________________

Question:

What was the hardest adjustment in moving away from civilization?

Answer:

Planning food for months at a time. We can’t just go shopping any time we want, since the closest grocery store (notice I didn’t say “supermarket”) is 50 miles away.

_________________________

Question:

How “off the governmental” grid are you. How do you go about paying taxes, federal, etc.

Do you keep up with your state issued ID? Things of that nature?

Answer:

We pay our property taxes and all other taxes that we are required to do.

This being Catron County, the local government is quite non-invasive. This was once the getaway of Geronimo and his band, and Butch Cassidy and his gang, and there really isn’t much required other than “live and live,” or what we call here “the fence policy”. That is, what you do on your side of the fence is your business.

_________________________

Question:

You mention that you don’t have a car, and I was wondering what the benefit of this is other than a gesture. It seems to me that having a car provides an important option in a crisis, even if you don’t use it frivolously.

Answer:

One of the local ranchers here has lots of horses, they are always in the area, we only need to take a halter and a saddle over to one of them and we have a ride. Not having a vehicle is not the best way to go but it is what we needed to do to make this possible.

_________________________

Question:

Medical emergencies aside, how would you deal with chronic illness out there?

Answer:

This is a real concern for me as I consider moving forward – I have Crohn’s Disease, and I’m in remission which means it’s not a crisis, but I still do need to take a lot of medicine daily, and follow up with doctors/ blood work with some regularity. Would your lifestyle be able to accommodate something like this? I realize getting Crohn’s is unlikely, but as you guys get older, it’s not unreasonable to expect some problems may arise.

When we moved here I weighed 300lbs, I now weigh around 175lbs, I can say this the life will get you in shape of kill you. Around this time of day I cut wood with my son who is 22yo, I’m 60. We cut wood with a two man saw 72″ type and this will get you in shape quick.. When I first started using it I thought I would die, now in all honesty I must say that I love using it. Looking at the 8 cords of wood hand cut by myself and my son is very rewarding. I understand about cronic diseases my brother has Crohn’s disease also. But for my self my only cronic problem is a knee replacement when I was in the army over 40 years ago….. it slows me down a bit but I refuse to let it be a hindrance.

_________________________

Question:

How “off the grid” can you be if you’ve got a website?

Answer:

Very, the nearest power line is over 20 miles away, no phone cell or LL and a very quiet place to be….. we have solar and use satellite internet.•

Brad Templeton, who is a consultant to Google on its development of driverless cars thinks that thought-experiment the Trolley Problem being applied to robocars has more value as a philosophical exercise than in practical application. While these ethical quandaries certainly do exist, computer-aided driving will be much safer and the net result will be far fewer accidents and fatalities. From his post:

“Often this is mapped into the robocar world by considering a car which is forced to run over somebody, and has to choose who to run over. Choices suggested include deciding between:

  • One person and two
  • A child and an adult
  • A person and a dog
  • A person without right-of-way vs others who have it
  • A deer vs. adding risk by swerving around it into the oncoming lane
  • The occupant or owner of the car vs. a bystander on the street
  • The destruction of an empty car vs. injury to a person who should not be on the road, but is.

I don’t want to pretend that this isn’t an interesting moral area, and it will indeed affect the law, liability and public perception. And at some point, programmers will evaluate these scenarios in their efforts. What I reject is the suggestion that this is high on the list of important issues and questions. I think it’s high on the list of questions that are interesting for philosophical debate, but that’s not the same as reality.

In reality, such choices are extremely rare. How often have you had to make such a decision, or heard of somebody making one? Ideal handling of such situations is difficult to decide, but there are many other issues to decide as well.

Secondly, in the rare situations where a human encounters such a moral dilemma, that person does not sit there and have an inner philosophical dialog on which is the most moral choice. Rather, they will go with a quick gut reaction, which is based on their character and their past thinking on such situations.”

Tags:

Google is chiefly interested in accurately answering your requests because your questions have monetary potential, with predictive powers labeling you someone who likely is (or likely to become) a vegan or a yoga enthusiast, or, perhaps, a criminal. And so much the better if Big Data can figure this out before your first salad or downward dog or burglary. You aren’t just what you do but what the algorithms say you are likely to do. So, now, questions are treated like answers. From Sue Halpern in the New York Review of Books:

“The social Web celebrated, rewarded, routinized, and normalized this kind of living out loud, all the while anesthetizing many of its participants. Although they likely knew that these disclosures were funding the new information economy, they didn’t especially care. As John Naughton points out in his sleek history From Gutenberg to Zuckerberg: What You Really Need to Know About the Internet:

Everything you do in cyberspace leaves a trail, including the ‘clickstream’ that represents the list of websites you have visited, and anyone who has access to that trail will get to know an awful lot about you. They’ll have a pretty good idea, for example, of who your friends are, what your interests are (including your political views if you express them through online activity), what you like doing online, what you download, read, buy and sell.

In other words, you are not only what you eat, you are what you are thinking about eating, and where you’ve eaten, and what you think about what you ate, and who you ate it with, and what you did after dinner and before dinner and if you’ll go back to that restaurant or use that recipe again and if you are dieting and considering buying a Wi-Fi bathroom scale or getting bariatric surgery—and you are all these things not only to yourself but to any number of other people, including neighbors, colleagues, friends, marketers, and National Security Agency contractors, to name just a few.”

 

Tags: ,

« Older entries § Newer entries »