Science/Tech

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

There are enough real monsters in the world, but we invent more, projecting our fears and loathing onto others, hoping to destroy these feelings, to be rid of them. And this act of projection itself often leads to monstrous results. In the 1800s, the bloody coughs of tuberculosis so frightened people that a parasitic creature was roused from his daytime slumber. From Abigail Tucker’s Smithsonian articleThe Great New England Vampire Panic,” a passage about a New Hampshire family that succumbed to the dreaded illness one member after another:

“People dreaded the disease without understanding it. Though Robert Koch had identified the tuberculosis bac­terium in 1882, news of the discovery did not penetrate rural areas for some time, and even if it had, drug treatments wouldn’t become available until the 1940s. The year Lena died, one physician blamed tuberculosis on ‘drunkenness, and want among the poor.’ Nineteenth-century cures included drinking brown sugar dissolved in water and frequent horseback riding. ‘If they were being honest,’ Bell says, ‘the medical establishment would have said, ‘There’s nothing we can do, and it’s in the hands of God.’’

The Brown family, living on the eastern edge of town, probably on a modest homestead of 30 or 40 stony acres, began to succumb to the disease in December 1882. Lena’s mother, Mary Eliza, was the first. Lena’s sister, Mary Olive, a 20-year-old dressmaker, died the next year. A tender obituary from a local newspaper hints at what she endured: ‘The last few hours she lived was of great suffering, yet her faith was firm and she was ready for the change.’ The whole town turned out for her funeral, and sang ‘One Sweetly Solemn Thought,’ a hymn that Mary Olive herself had selected.

"The neighbors asked to exhume the bodies, in order to check for fresh blood in their hearts.”

“The neighbors asked to exhume the bodies, in order to check for fresh blood in their hearts.”

Within a few years, Lena’s brother Edwin—a store clerk whom one newspaper columnist described as ‘a big, husky young man’—sickened too, and left for Colorado Springs hoping that the climate would improve his health.

Lena, who was just a child when her mother and sister died, didn’t fall ill until nearly a decade after they were buried. Her tuberculosis was the ‘galloping’ kind, which meant that she might have been infected but remained asymptomatic for years, only to fade fast after showing the first signs of the disease. A doctor attended her in ‘her last illness,’ a newspaper said, and ‘informed her father that further medical aid was useless.’ Her January 1892 obituary was much terser than her sister’s: ‘Miss Lena Brown, who has been suffering from consumption, died Sunday morning.’

As Lena was on her deathbed, her brother was, after a brief remission, taking a turn for the worse. Edwin had returned to Exeter from the Colorado resorts ‘in a dying condition,’ according to one account. ‘If the good wishes and prayers of his many friends could be realized, friend Eddie would speedily be restored to perfect health,’ another newspaper wrote.

But some neighbors, likely fearful for their own health, weren’t content with prayers. Several approached George Brown, the children’s father, and offered an alternative take on the recent tragedies: Perhaps an unseen diabolical force was preying on his family. It could be that one of the three Brown women wasn’t dead after all, instead secretly feasting ‘on the living tissue and blood of Edwin,’ as the Providence Journal later summarized. If the offending corpse—the Journal uses the term ‘vampire’ in some stories but the locals seemed not to—was discovered and destroyed, then Edwin would recover. The neighbors asked to exhume the bodies, in order to check for fresh blood in their hearts.”

Tags:

ec

For eight years during the 1960s, a Mylar ball nicknamed Echo floated in the stratosphere, becoming the first working satellite in space. This 1960 film tells the tale of its initial communication relay.

The Browser has an excellent Five Books Interview with psychology professor Susan Gelman on the topic of essentialism, or the way we categorize people and things we encounter based on biases we believe to be facts. One of Gelman’s choices is William March’s novel, The Bad Seed, which allows her to address the idea of so-called inherited evil. An excerpt:

Question:

Let’s go on to The Bad Seed, a 1954 thriller about a little girl who turns out to be a serial killer.

Susan Gelman:

I love this book. I have to confess that in high school I had the lead in a play that we put on of The Bad Seed. I was the evil girl. So I’ve been thinking about this one for a long time. It’s really essentialism personified. What makes it essentialism is that this girl, who outwardly seems very sweet and innocent, in actuality is bad to the core. So there’s this appearance/reality distinction that is a big piece of essentialism. Also, the reason that she’s evil is that she was born that way – it was passed down from her grandmother. Her grandmother was a serial killer who got executed. The serial killer’s daughter was a very young child at the time. She was adopted and didn’t even remember any of this in more than the vaguest way. She was a perfectly fine person: The evil skipped a generation, and it was her own daughter who turned out to be this bad seed. The idea is that your moral character can be in-born. This little girl was raised in a wonderful environment, but that had no effect. That the evil is passed down from generation to generation is a very essentialist idea. It was actually controversial. If you read some reviews when the book came out, some of the reviewers really objected to that aspect.

Question:

What’s your view?

Susan Gelman:

As far as I understand it, there is no evidence that criminality is passed down through the genes. It’s a fiction, but it’s one that resonates with people. This is not supposed to be a work of science fiction. It works well for the plot of the book: The mother feels guilty for passing this along to her daughter. In some ways she feels her daughter is not at fault, because she doesn’t know any better. This is just the way she was born. What’s interesting to me is that that’s considered a plausible underlying theme that a reader can perfectly well accept. It’s a nice illustration of the common-sense aspect of essentialism.”

Tags: ,

From Miguel Helft’s new Fortune interview with Google CEO Larry Page, an exchange about self-driving cars:

“Fortune:

When you’re thinking about the next bet you’re going to make, how do you pick?

Larry Page:

That’s something we’ve been thinking about a lot. Unfortunately, there’s not a perfect science to that. Partly I feel that Google is in uncharted territory in the sense that I don’t think there’s an example from history I can take and say: “Why don’t we just do that?” We’re at a pretty big scale. We’re doing a lot of different things. We want to be a different kind of company. We’d like to have more of a social component in what we do. We like people to be happy with the products they’re using. We like our employees to be happy about working here.

Sorry, back to your main question: Choosing what to do. We want to do things that will motivate the most amazing people in the world to want to work on them. You look at self-driving cars. You know a lot of people die, and there’s a lot of wasted labor. The better transportation you have, the more choice in jobs. And that’s social good. That’s probably an economic good. I like it when we’re picking problems like that: big things where technology can have a really big impact. And we’re pretty sure we can do it. And whatever the technology investment we need to do that, it’s not going to be that huge compared to the payoff.

Fortune:

What else would change [in a world with self-driving cars]? Would we not have streetlights? Would the cities be different? Do you have a vision for what could happen?

Larry Page:

It’s very hard to predict entirely. I think that, you know, one of the issues we face here is parking. I’m getting quotes [for] the cost for us to build a parking lot structure [of] $40,000 per space. It’s all concrete and steel. Do you really want to use all your concrete and steel to build parking lots? It seems pretty stupid. If we have automated cars, or even if we have some fraction of automated cars, we’ll save hundreds of millions of dollars on parking, just at Google. When you think about your experience, the car can drop you at the front door to the building you work at and then it goes and parks itself. Whenever you need it, your phone notices that you’re walking out of the building, and your car’s there immediately by the time you get downstairs.”

Tags: ,

Concept automotive tires that will be available, perhaps, in the future.

dws

Technologists are planning to explore whether our universe is merely a simulation created by a futuristic supercomputer, which raises the question: Are supercomputers in the future out of their fucking minds? In America, Dancing with the Stars, which features bad dancing and no stars, is the number one television show. Fuck you, future, and fuck you, too, supercomputers. From Matthew Finnegan at TechEye:

“US scientists are attempting to find out whether all of humanity is currently living a Matrix-style computer simulation being run on supercomputers of the future.

According to researchers at the University of Washington, there are tests that could be done to begin to work out whether we are in fact real, or merely a simulation created by a futuristic android on its lunch break.

Currently, computer simulations are decades away from creating even a primitive working model of the universe. In fact, scientists are able to accurately model only a 100 trillionth of a metre, with work to create a model of a full human being still out of reach.

By looking for underlying patterns, physicists believe that it may be possible to work out if we are existing in a computer created universe, created many years in the future.  Looking at constraints imposed on simulations by limited resources could show signs that we are mere bit-part players in a Matrix-style film plot.”

Tags:

There have been articles since 2008 reporting that Volvo is manufacturing a driverless, crash-proof car. Significantly, the planned date for the vehicle to reach the market has never been kicked up the road from 2020, so either the automaker is continually fooling itself or production is still on target. More about the so-called “no-death cars” from Ray Massey at the Daily Mail:

Car giant Volvo is developing ‘no death’ cars that drive themselves and are impossible to crash – ready for launch in showrooms within eight years.

The computerised vehicles will  be fitted with high-tech sensors and will ‘refuse to be steered’ into other objects.

Volvo says they will be  on sale to customers by 2020, but that some of the life-saving technology will be incorporated into its vehicles even earlier – from 2014 – it says.

Volvo’s head of government affairs Anders Eugensson said: ‘Our vision is that no one is killed or injured in a new Volvo by 2020.’

It is part of the race by leading car manufacturers including Volvo, Ford Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Vauxhall and even Google to build fully automomous ‘Robo-cars’ that can drive themselves – like the one which actor Will Smith drove in the sci-fi movie ‘I, Robot.’

The biggest hurdle is not the technology which is largely developed – but public acceptance of it and and issues of who would be liable if a crashproof car did actually crash: the driver or the manufacturer?

Volvo’s Mr Eugensson said;’We have tested prototypes on thousands of miles of test drives on public roads in Spain and on the company’s test track in western Sweden.

‘The car of the future will be like the farmer’s horse.’

‘The farmer can steer the horse and carriage but if he falls asleep the horse will refuse to walk into a tree or off a cliff.’”

Tags: ,

From DARPA, a release about a foam that essentially freezes severe internal injuries so that trauma victims can be moved safely to hospitals: “DARPA launched its Wound Stasis System program in 2010 in the hopes of finding a technological solution that could mitigate damage from internal hemorrhaging. The program sought to identify a biological mechanism that could discriminate between wounded and healthy tissue, and bind to the wounded tissue. As the program evolved, an even better solution emerged: Wound Stasis performer Arsenal Medical, Inc. developed a foam-based product that can control hemorrhaging in a patient’s intact abdominal cavity for at least one hour, based on swine injury model data. The foam is designed to be administered on the battlefield by a combat medic, and is easily removable by doctors during surgical intervention at an appropriate facility, as demonstrated in testing.”

From an article at RT about the National Intelligence Council’s just-released predictions for life in 2030, none of which seem very far-fetched:

“No matter who is calling the shots, though, the NIC seems to think that a generation down the line will be a damn exciting time to be a human being. ‘People may choose to enhance their physical selves as they do with cosmetic surgery today’ in 2030, they predict, at which point the replacement-limb technology is expected by the panel to be prevalent.

‘Future retinal eye implants could enable night vision, and neuro-enhancements could provide superior memory recall or speed of thought,’ the report adds. ‘Brain-machine interfaces could provide ‘superhuman’ abilities, enhancing strength and speed, as well as providing functions not previously available.'”

From Eric Limer at Gizmodo, a report about just-patented futuristic handcuffs that can administer shocks or sedatives (holy crap!):

“The recent patent application from Scottsdale Inventions LLC shows what seems to be a pretty well developed prototype of handcuffs that will shock the wearer into submission. The patent also allows for a blinking light or auditory warning that triggers as the shock is prepared, presumably to warn the wearer to CALM DOWN. The shocks could come for any number of reasons—too much movement, movement outside a radius, or under order of the cuff’s owner—and the cuffs would also contain EKG/ECG sensors to keep from shocking detainees a little too silly (i.e. to death).

That’s not even where it ends though, because there’s additional language describing how the cuffs could actually administer a substance ‘to achieve any desired result’ via needles or gas. It could be anything from medication to sedatives to irritants, to who knows what else.”

Tags:

Blake Masters’ blog has ideas about and notes from Peter Thiel’s recent Stanford address, “The Future of Legal Technology.” From an exchange during the audience Q&A, which points out, among other things, that we can sometimes mistake error for genius:

Question: 

What is your take on building machines that work just like the human brain?

Peter Thiel: 

If you could model the human brain perfectly, you can probably build a machine version of it. There are all sorts of questions about whether this is possible.

The alternative path, especially in the short term, is smart but not AI-smart computers, like chess computers. We didn’t model the human brain to create these systems. They crunch moves. They play differently and better than humans. But they use the same processes. So most AI that we’ll see, at least first, is likely to be soft AI that’s decidedly non-human.

Question: 

But chess computers aren’t even soft AI, right? They are all programmed. If we could just have enough time to crunch the moves and look at the code, we’d know what/s going on, right? So their moves are perfectly predictable. 

Peter Thiel: 

Theoretically, chess computers are predictable. In practice, they aren’t. Arguably it’s the same with humans. We’re all made of atoms. Per quantum mechanics and physics, all our behavior is theoretically predictable. That doesn’t mean you could ever really do it. 

Question: 

There’s the anecdote of Kasparov resigning when Deep Blue made a bizarre move that he fatalistically interpreted as a sign that the computer had worked dozens of moves ahead. In reality the move was caused by a bug. 

Peter Thiel: 

Well… I know Kasparov pretty well. There are a lot of things that he’d say happened there…” (Thanks Browser.)

Tags: , ,

Marty Reisman, the Lower East Side kid who became one of the greatest table-tennis players in the world, just passed away. He was a John Henry of sorts in his arena, battling technology that he felt threatened the game, from new-fangled paddles to robot players. From Harold Evans’ fun remembrance of Resiman at the Daily Beast:

“The turning point in table-tennis history was in Bombay in 1952. Reisman was the favorite to win from a field crowded with stars. It was not to be. They were massacred, baffled by an indifferent player on the Japanese team, Hiroji Satoh. He came equipped with a destructive technology: resilient foam rubber he’d glued to his racket. It was like the silencer on a pistol, and it was as lethal. The sponge imparted unreadable spins. Gone was the distinctive kerplock-kerplock conversation of the ball being struck and returned by rackets surfaced with thin pimpled rubber. Gone were the classic long rallies that were such fun for basement players and that thrilled thousands of spectators in the tournament finals. The sponge players who followed Satoh are fine athletes, but the games they play have been generally unwatchable. Serve and smash became the competitive norm and, save for the Olympics, mass audiences vanished.

The Reisman kid refused to adopt sponge. ‘It made table tennis a game based on fraud, deception, deceit.’ He was convinced that the universal appeal of the game—the world’s most popular—was in simplicity, in strokes and tactics, not in technology and trickery. He tested his faith by challenging the new champion Satoh to a return match in Osaka, pitting his hardbat against sponge. Before an astounded crowd, he beat Satoh fair and square.”

••••••••••

Reisman as a 19-year-old hotshot in 1949 at Wembley Stadium:

Tags: ,

DARPA’s “autonomous precision payload emplacement system,” or “that thing that puts stuff where you want it to be put.” Your days are numbered pizza delivery guy.

Oliver Sacks recently sat for an interview with Tim Adams at the Guardian to discuss his new book, Hallucinations. One exchange concerning a shift toward rationalism in the last 200 years, although we continue to create mundane ways to distance ourselves from facts:

Guardian:

It seems that such visual disorders at certain points in history have been more ‘believable’ and also, therefore, more commonly noted?

Oliver Sacks:

Yes, in other places and at other times, hallucinations were far more acceptable. Up to about 1800, people were allowed to have visions or to hear voices. They were seen to have some external spiritual reality; they were ghosts or angels or demons. The word hallucination only really became a pejorative at the end of the 18th or early 19th century. We still associate it with madness. But how those who hallucinate understand what they see also changes. We are more likely to see UFOs and aliens when people in earlier times would see angels.”

Tags: ,

I suppose the best argument for a war on drugs is that using narcotics is thought to lower IQ and if enough people in a society make themselves less intelligent, it puts that society at a disadvantage in the global marketplace. But here’s the problem with the prohibition of drugs: It doesn’t work. Not at all. Criminalizing something that consenting adults want to do just serves to enable a black market. And if people don’t have access to street drugs, they’ll abuse Oxycodone and the like. The war on drugs is not going to stop usage so we should stop the war on drugs. At Tom Dispatch, Lewis Lapham recalls his sole encounter with acid:

“So too in the 1960s, the prudent becoming of an American involved perilous transmigrations, psychic, spiritual, and political. By no means certain who I was at the age of 24, I was prepared to make adjustments, but my one experiment with psychedelics in 1959 was a rub that promptly gave me pause.

Employed at the time as a reporter at the San Francisco Examiner, I was assigned to go with the poet Allen Ginsberg to the Stanford Research Institute there to take a trip on LSD. Social scientists opening the doors of perception at the behest of Aldous Huxley wished to compare the flight patterns of a Bohemian artist and a bourgeois philistine, and they had asked the paper’s literary editor to furnish one of each. We were placed in adjacent soundproofed rooms, both of us under the observation of men in white coats equipped with clipboards, the idea being that we would relay messages from the higher consciousness to the air-traffic controllers on the ground.

Liftoff was a blue pill taken on an empty stomach at 9 a.m., the trajectory a bell curve plotted over a distance of seven hours. By way of traveling companions we had been encouraged to bring music, in those days on vinyl LPs, of whatever kind moved us while on earth to register emotions approaching the sublime.

Together with Johann Sebastian Bach and the Modern Jazz Quartet, I attained what I’d been informed would be cruising altitude at noon. I neglected to bring a willing suspension of disbelief, and because I stubbornly resisted the sales pitch for the drug — if you, O Wizard, can work wonders, prove to me the where and when and how and why — I encountered heavy turbulence. Images inchoate and nonsensical, my arms and legs seemingly elongated and embalmed in grease, the sense of utter isolation while being gnawed by rats.

To the men in white I had nothing to report, not one word on either the going up and out or the coming back and down. I never learned what Ginsberg had to say. Whatever it was, I wasn’t interested, and I left the building before he had returned from what by then I knew to be a dead-end sleep.”

Tags: ,

I mentioned Jon Gertner’s Bell Lab history, The Idea Factory, a couple of times recently. For me, the most interesting parts are the passages about Information Theory mastermind Claude Shannon. As the author points out, Shannon’s co-workers were often years ahead of the curve in their work, but Shannon himself was working decades in the future. In addition to knowing what the world would look like generations in advance, Shannon, a wisp of a man, was deeply eccentric and fond of games and parlor tricks. He designed the first computer chess program and the initial computerized mouse that “learned” more every time it went through a maze. (Like this, but 60 years ago.) His wife, Betty, was always challenged when choosing a Christmas present for him because what do you get for the man who has everything–in his head? An excerpt from Gertner’s book, which recalls how the scientist turned Bell Labs into a fucking clown car:

“One year, Betty gave him a unicycle as a gift. Shannon quickly began riding; then he began building his own unicycles, challenging himself to see how small he could make one that could still be ridden. One evening after dinner at home in Morristown, Claude began to spontaneously juggle three balls, and his efforts soon won him some encouragement from the kids in the apartment complex. There was no reason, as far as Shannon could see, why he shouldn’t pursue his two new interests, unicycling and juggling, at Bell Labs, too. Nor was there any reason not to pursue them simultaneously. When he was in the office, Shannon would take a break from work to ride his unicycle up and down the long hallways, usually at night when the building wasn’t so busy. He would nod to passerby, unless he was juggling as he rode. Then he would be lost in concentration. When he got a pogo stick, he would go up and down the hall on that, too.

Here, then, was a picture of Claude Shannon, circa 1955, a man–slender, agile, handsome, abstracted–who rarely showed up on time for work, who often played chess or fiddled with amusing machines all day; who frequently went down the halls juggling or pogoing, and who didn’t seem to care, really, what anyone thought of him or his pursuits. He did what was interesting. He was categorized, still, as a scientist. But it seemed obvious that he had the temperament and sensibility of an artist.”

Tags: , ,

Merv Griffin in 1965 interviewing Capt. Mitsuo Fuchida, the architect of the furious attack on Pearl Harbor 24 years earlier. Fuchida converted to Christianity at the end of WWII–which, when you think about it, was pretty good timing–and lived and worked as an evangelist in the United States.

Tags: ,

You’re not allowed to shoot buffalo from speeding trains anymore, but you can see the Eiffel Tower from the window even if you’re traveling through the American Midwest. That’s thanks to augmented reality. It doesn’t look genuine enough to me yet, but still! From Andrew Liszewski at Gizmodo: “The AR system, called ‘Touch the Train Window,’ is composed of a Kinect with GPS hardware, an iPhone, custom software, and a projector to overlay images on the window. Every time a passenger taps the window a new element is added, which is perfectly tracked into the passing scenery. It’s also a great way to get the most travel for your buck, letting you pass the Eiffel Tower, the Colosseum in Rome, even Stonehenge, as you roll through the boring wheat fields of the American mid-west.”

Tags:

As dearly as I wish that people would be far more rational when making decisions, I find it disquieting that philosophy is considered dead in some scientific circles. And I say this as a gigantic atheist–one of the biggest atheists ever. Empiricism is a wonderful, vital thing, but I think philosophy is more important than ever in our Information Age. I know weak-minded philosophy can be damaging but so can science unfettered from ethics. I believe every great scientist has been fortified by philosophy (and every great philosopher by science). From “The Folly of Scientism,” Austin L. Hughes’ New Atlantis essay on the topic:

Modern science is often described as having emerged from philosophy; many of the early modern scientists were engaged in what they called ‘natural philosophy.’ Later, philosophy came to be seen as an activity distinct from but integral to natural science, with each addressing separate but complementary questions — supporting, correcting, and supplying knowledge to one another. But the status of philosophy has fallen quite a bit in recent times. Central to scientism is the grabbing of nearly the entire territory of what were once considered questions that properly belong to philosophy. Scientism takes science to be not only better than philosophy at answering such questions, but the only means of answering them. For most of those who dabble in scientism, this shift is unacknowledged, and may not even be recognized. But for others, it is explicit. [Peter] Atkins, for example, is scathing in his dismissal of the entire field: ‘I consider it to be a defensible proposition that no philosopher has helped to elucidate nature; philosophy is but the refinement of hindrance.’

Is scientism defensible? Is it really true that natural science provides a satisfying and reasonably complete account of everything we see, experience, and seek to understand — of every phenomenon in the universe? And is it true that science is more capable, even singularly capable, of answering the questions that once were addressed by philosophy? This subject is too large to tackle all at once. But by looking briefly at the modern understandings of science and philosophy on which scientism rests, and examining a few case studies of the attempt to supplant philosophy entirely with science, we might get a sense of how the reach of scientism exceeds its grasp.”

Tags: ,

Vacuums needn’t look as good nor function as well as James Dyson makes them, but for decades he’s been creating dust-busting appliances that rival Apple’s greatest designs. He probably won’t stop, even if you ask him nicely. From Shoshana Berger’s new Wired Q&A with the inventor:

Wired: 

Now that Dyson is a sprawling, multinational corporation, how do you keep the spirit of innovation alive?

James Dyson: 

We try to make the corporation like the garage. We don’t have technicians; our engineers and scientists actually go and build their own prototypes and test the rigs themselves. And the reason we do that—and I don’t force people to do that, by the way, they want to do it—is that when you’re building the prototype, you start to really understand how it’s made and what it might do and where its weaknesses might be. If you merely hand a drawing to somebody and say, ‘Would you make this, please?’ and in two weeks he comes back with it and you hand it to someone else who does the test, you’re not experiencing it. You’re not understanding it. You’re not feeling it. Our engineers and scientists love doing that.

Wired: 

Do they ever fail?

James Dyson: 

Absolutely. It’s when something fails that you learn. If it doesn’t fail, you don’t learn anything. You haven’t made any progress. Everything I do is a mistake. It fails. For the past 42 years—I’ve had a life of it.”

Tags: ,

Phone phreak turned Apple genius Steve Wozniak visits Merv Griffin in 1984.

Tags: ,

Cities, wonderful though they are, can be scary and confusing, but they’re better imperfect than being completely smart and quantified, argues Richard Sennett in the Guardian. He would rather live in Rio’s welter than in Songdo’s planned perfection. An excerpt:

“The debate about good engineering has changed now because digital technology has shifted the technological focus to information processing; this can occur in handheld computers linked to ‘clouds,’ or in command-and-control centres. The danger now is that this information-rich city may do nothing to help people think for themselves or communicate well with one another.

Imagine that you are a master planner facing a blank computer screen and that you can design a city from scratch, free to incorporate every bit of high technology into your design. You might come up with Masdar, in the United Arab Emirates, or Songdo, in South Korea. These are two versions of the stupefying smart city: Masdar the more famous, or infamous; Songdo the more fascinating in a perverse way.

Masdar is a half-built city rising out of the desert, whose planning – overseen by the master architect Norman Foster – comprehensively lays out the activities of the city, the technology monitoring and regulating the function from a central command centre. The city is conceived in ‘Fordist‘ terms – that is, each activity has an appropriate place and time. Urbanites become consumers of choices laid out for them by prior calculations of where to shop, or to get a doctor, most efficiently. There’s no stimulation through trial and error; people learn their city passively. ‘User-friendly’ in Masdar means choosing menu options rather than creating the menu.”

Tags:

I trust almost no one for basic competence in day-to-day life, but I don’t worry much about dying a fiery death when I’m on an airplane. I readily put myself in the hands of the crew, even though they’re probably a bunch of horny wiseasses judging us harshly. Let someone else be responsible of my continued breathing for awhile; I’m exhausted from the task. But writer A.L. Kennedy is, like many people, terrified of flying. From her new Aeon essay on the topic:

“I am not superstitious. Magical thinking is an open well of nonsense into which we fall at our peril, it leaves us prey to charlatans and all that is self-defeating about human psychology. I use tapping and listening to music to induce positive states as a kind of self-hypnosis, I don’t believe I’m performing magic… I don’t believe in magic… Yet as soon I get within sight of an airport I know that reality is, in some ghastly way, porous or sensitive at great heights. Some deep, irrational urging, some remnant of young hominids’ anxieties around over-tall trees, tells me that nature itself is able to feel my thoughts at any altitude from which a fall would prove fatal. The higher I get, the more clearly my conscious mind’s emanations will invite attention. It will lean close, like a startled mother bending in over a baby she suddenly realizes is not a baby, but merely a baby-shaped monster swapped for her beloved by evil elves and likely to bite her at night if she doesn’t throw the appalling thing clear out of a window right now. To be precise, the more I fill with fears, the more the universe will attend to and believe my fears, thus making them real. And down will come baby, cradle and all.”

Tags:

“I believe there are lasers in the jungle somewhere,” a poet of despair once cautioned, but just as surprising are the tethered flying bots that can spy on you indefinitely in the suburbs. From Endgadget: “A new venture from an iRobot co-founder called CyPhy Works has borne fruit in the form of two flying drones dedicated to surveillance duty. The first, called Ease, is a mere foot in diameter by 16-inches tall and can fly safely in tight spaces or through open windows or doors, thanks to its petite size and ducted rotors. It packs a pair of HD cameras along with a thermal imager and can stay aloft permanently, in theory, thanks to a microfilament tether attached to a ground station — which also makes it impervious to weather, tracking and interception at the same time, according to CyPhy. The second drone, an insect-like quadrotor called Parc, is designed for higher flying missions thanks to its larger size and maximum 1,000-foot altitude.”

What has been gained in access to information and communication during the Digital Age more than makes up for anything lost. But there have been losses. Process helps determine outcome, and the speed of digital removes significant time from effort. And precision means there are fewer errors and accidents, those things that birth genius. If method is faster, is the result naturally speeded up as well? From Richard Brody’s 2000 New Yorker profile of Jean-Luc Godard:

I began by asking him about his most recently released feature film, For Ever Mozart, from 1996, a bitter fantasy about art and mourning. In it, three young French people with lofty ideas but idle hands take off for Sarajevo to put on a play and are killed in Bosnia by paramilitary thugs. One of the victims is the daughter of an old French director who has been stalled in his work; in his grief, he finds the will to create.

Typically, Godard was not satisfied with the film. ‘It wasn’t very good,’ he said. ‘The actors aren’t good enough, and things remained too theoretical.’ Godard’s complaint about his movie led to a complaint about young actors today: that even unknowns, inundated with media hype, comport themselves like stars and are ‘less available’ to direction: ‘They think they know what to do, by the fact that they’ve been chosen. They have no doubt. Doubt no longer exists today. With digital, doubt no longer exists.’

This abrupt switch from the sociological to the technological is typical of Godard’s conversation: his sentences, like his films, are always soaring into abstractions, or breaking off, pivoting on an instant of silence to change direction. ‘With digital, there is no past,’ he continued. ‘I’m reluctant to edit on these new so-called ‘virtual’ machines, these digital things, because, as far as I’m concerned, there’s no past. In other words, if you want to see the previous shot, O.K., you do this’—he tapped the table like a button—’and you see it at once. It doesn’t take any time to get there, the time to unspool in reverse, the time to go backward. You’re there right away. So there’s an entire time that no longer exists, that has been suppressed. And that’s why films are much more mediocre, because time no longer exists.'”

Tags: ,

« Older entries § Newer entries »