Science/Tech

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

Life takes so much from us, sometimes a great deal all at once but usually through a series of small, excruciating thefts. Eventually, everything’s gone. Some people–they would be heroes if they were making decisions rather than acting compulsively–resist. An excerpt from an Ask Me Anything thread on Reddit, in which someone who assists hoarders accepts questions:

IaMa home assistant for compulsive hoarders AMA (self.IAmA)

submitted  ago by imwhiteontheinside

I cant tell you names or anything to specify the people I work/worked with, but other than that, ask away, 

[–]yawnoc 2 points  ago

What does it take to make you squirm? What was the worst house you’ve ever seen? 

[–]imwhiteontheinside[S] 1 point  ago

It takes a lot to make me squirm and surprisingly most of the homes I have go e into haven’t been “dirty” they have a TREMENDOUS amount of things in them but most things like food and perishables are thrown away.

One house I helped with actually didn’t throw away anything and that was definitely the worst. She had used feminine napkins in bags. I never got to ask her why she kept those she was already incredibly embarrassed about everything else.

Of course with all these homes most people know they have a problem and just feel overwhelmed to do anyhing about it but this woman definitely had something else going on. 

[–]sunnyfunny 2 points  ago

what is your feeling when doing your job?

[–]imwhiteontheinside[S] 1 point  ago

Most of the time I actually feel very frustrated. And so do the people I work with. Mainly because it takes hrs, weeks, years, to actually make a visual difference. We don’t just through stuff out I have to help them make the decision of gettin rid of their stuff and help them work through the loss of their stuff.

[–]crumb_buckets 3 points  ago

What’s the most interesting collection you have come across? 

[–]imwhiteontheinside[S] 2 points  ago

One woman was very very involved in arts and crafts so she would save everything she possibly could that he believed she could make a piece out of. So her house contained a lot of nick nacks she found and the art she built out of that

I really loved working with her because she knew where she found absolutely everything! She must have had millions of little things but knew about all of it.

[–]dizzystuff-folks 2 points  ago

Are there specific causes behind someone beginning to hoard?

[–]imwhiteontheinside[S] 2 points  ago

I have not done scientific research or anything but some people think its a form of OCD.

Regarding the people I have met, Every single one has lost a significant person in their life and that caused them to get worse and eventually need help.

Most already have hoarding tendencies but then have a loss and start to try and fill the void with stuff.”

Your computer and phone can be hacked, but what about your heart? If coders can get inside our equipment and more equipment is inside our bodies and brains, why can’t we be invaded on a more personal level? We can. And what about when self-driving cars and the Internet of Things reach critical mass? Could terrorists–or bored teenagers–program us all to turn left when there is no left turn to be made? Can they make our tools become weapons? Of course. From Medical Daily:

“An increasing number of patients are being fitted with medical implants like pacemakers and insulin pumps that are vulnerable to cyber-attacks, according to security researchers.

Expert Barnaby Jack, a researcher at security firm McAfee, discovered that the wireless links used in heart-regulating pacemakers, insulin-delivering pumps and cardiac rhythm-monitoring defibrillators that are used for interrogating and updating these devices left them opening exposed to hackers looking to gain remote control.

Jack told BBC that in just two weeks he found a way to scan for and compromise insulin pumps that communicate wirelessly.  After overriding the pump’s safeguard, a hacker can threaten the lives of patients on the device by either turning off the device or by commanding wireless implants to deliver a hazardous dose of medicine to the patient.

‘We can influence any pump within a 300ft range,’ Jack told the BBC. ‘We can make that pump dispense its entire 300 unit reservoir of insulin and we can do that without requiring its ID number.'”

Tags:

A 1980 news report introducing the computerized synthesizer, the Fairlight CMI, which was used righteously by those experimenters Herbie Hancock and Peter Gabriel, among others. Not just going electric, but going digital. 

"Radicalism should abandon the mode of activism, and adopt a passive mode." (Image by Mary Ellen Mark.)

There may be a system better than regulated capitalism, but what is it? The marketplace can be a beast, but how else can we share wealth, both of information and materially? The system is corrupting and we must resist it to some extent even as we participate in it, but other alternatives are far worse. From Malcolm Harris’s writings on The State about anti-capitalist scholar Franco Berardi, who advocates the dubious strategy of resistance through lethargy:

“Of the anti-capitalist scholars and intellectuals who prescribe a political program, Franco Berardi might have the most counter-intuitive ideas. In his many articles, books, and lectures, Berardi pushes a curious line against a mind-warping market culture. During the current period of youth-led urban unrest, Berardi has consistently preached a resistance strategy that emulates the process of aging. While capital says go faster, make more, consume more, his call for ‘senilization’ says slow down, work less, consume less. Berardi wants a detox from capitalism’s psyche-damaging relations, and it’s not just a metaphor. Put down the Adderall, roll a joint. Relax.

In a new formulation he calls ‘post-futurism,’ Berardi poses the Futurist fetishization of muscular youth against ‘the force of exhaustion, of facing the inevitable with grace, discovering the sensuous slowness of those who do not expect any more from life than wisdom.’ We have enough things, he writes; what we really want is more time in which to flourish. In his heterodoxy, Berardi has broken one of the cardinal rules of Marxism: revolution as the necessary mode of social transformation. ‘Radicalism,’ he writes, ‘should abandon the mode of activism, and adopt a passive mode.’ Fewer marches, more mahjong.”

Tags: ,

It is no longer Chinatown, Jake, so you needn’t forget it. But still you often do.

There was a time in America of Manchurian Candidates, Warren Commissions and Parallax Views, when the facts were tantalizingly, frustratingly beyond our reach. What schemes were being hatched beneath the surface, what cabal was making secret plans? These people had more information than we did, access we could only dream of. They always seemed one step ahead. Even if we learned what deal was, that knowledge would soon retreat into a welter of confusion. The innocence would end and then begin again. The status quo would be restored.

But technology changed all that. Or was supposed to. Now there’s a diffuse media and data trails. Things have never been clearer.

And, yet. What if everything is transparent, what if it is all laid out for us to see and little changes? It doesn’t matter if we have access to the facts if we refuse the facts, if we choose to live inside a narrative. It doesn’t matter if we have unlimited channels if we only accept the ones that congratulate our prejudices. What if knowing isn’t enough? What if the problem all along hasn’t been a lack of information but a lack of some other kind?•

Our every effort today is, in fact, recorded, collated and analyzed. Optimized, in some ways. But the process started long ago, with those attentive algorithms. Our cards were being punched but so were our tickets.

The Remington-Rand Univac at your service, 1952:

The good news: You can get a lot of bang for your buck these days, really wonderful amenities you could never have afforded in the past. The bad news: It would be really helpful if you were dead. In Raymond Carver terms: Can you please be dead, please? From Greg Beato’s new Reason article, “Better Off Dead: The Cheap, Exciting Afterlife Of Modern Mortal Remains“:

“But if the intervening 50 years have taught us anything, it’s that 1963’s corpses were woefully underserved. Sure, the ‘1 percent’ of that era could afford stunning crypts and mausoleums that were far more lavish and better appointed than the homes most of us spend our lives in. For everyone else, however, death was a homogenizing force more ruthless than any communist regime. Everyone who died got an overpriced casket, an awful post-mortem makeover, and a bland grave marker immortalizing them in the same conventionally abstract fashion as everyone else who had died that century.

Now, we’ve got caskets that look like beer cans, headstones shaped like teddy bears, companies that will provision your loved ones with white doves to release graveside. Major League Baseball teams, many colleges, and the rock band KISS, among others, license their logos for use on caskets.

As the number of afterlife options expands, prices are dropping. For years only licensed funeral directors could sell caskets, a practice that kept prices artificially high. According to a 1988 FTC study, the average price of a casket in 1981 was $1,010, or $2,513 in 2011 dollars. In 1984, however, Congress passed the Funeral Rule, which in part requires that funeral homes accept a casket purchased from a third-party provider without charging any additional fees.” (Thanks Browser.)

Tags:

Mike Wallace was as good a TV interviewer as there ever was, though some of his work was done for shock value. His passive-aggressive 1979 takedown of Ayatollah Khomeini was one for the ages, but the To Catch a Predator-level of network trash that sprang from his ambush journalism is also part of his legacy. To his credit, Wallace knew he had crossed a line with the candid camera tricks and retreated into what he did best, which was looking into the eyes of other human beings, some of whom had titanic egos, and asking that question.

A legendary non-60 Minutes interview was his exchange with Ray Bradbury the night men landed on the moon:

One of Wallace’s failures was his sanctimonius dismissal of David Frost in 1977, just before the broadcast of the latter’s damning Nixon interviews, an example of checkbook journalism that paid off handsomely:

Tags: , ,

Photographer and locomotion pioneer Eadweard Muybridge, who miraculously made still photographs dance and gallop, was born on April 9th 182 years ago. He’s celebrated by a Google Doodle.

From Thom Andersen’s 1975 documentary, Eadweard Muybridge, Zoopraxographer:

 

In 1874, Muybridge shot and killed his wife’s lover, Harry Larkyns, in a crime of passion. He was acquitted and his wife succumbed to a stroke soon thereafter. The baby born of the extramarital affair was raised in an orphanage. From Stanford Magazine: “THE OPERATIC EPISODE began on October 17, 1874, when Muybridge discovered his wife’s adultery. In 1872, he had married a 21-year-old divorcée named Flora Stone. When she bore a son in the spring of 1874, Muybridge believed that the child, Floredo Helios Muybridge, was his own–until he came across letters exchanged between Flora and a drama critic named Harry Larkyns. The most damning evidence was a photo of Floredo enclosed with one of the letters: Flora had captioned it ‘Little Harry.’

Convinced he’d been cuckolded, Muybridge collapsed, wept and wailed, according to a nurse who was present. That night, he tracked Larkyns to a house near Calistoga and shot him through the heart.

At his murder trial in 1875, the jury rejected an insanity plea but accepted the defense of justifiable homicide, finding Muybridge not guilty of murder. After the acquittal, Muybridge sailed for Central America and spent the next year in ‘working exile.’

Tags: , ,

China has swiped all sorts of intellectual property during its fierce, fascinating and frightening vault into the future, but can it copy an entire Austrian town brick for brick? That’s the plan. Stealing is terrible, right? But is China any different than you and I, downloaders and freeloaders, except that its dreams are writ large? Information may not want to be free, but people want it to be. From “Xeroxed Village” in Spiegel:

“Residents of the Austrian mountain town of Hallstatt, population 800, are scandalized. A Chinese firm has plans to replicate the village — including its famous lake — in the southern Chinese province of Guangdong, Austrian media reported this week.

Architects secretly set their sights on the picturesque town in recent months, said Mayor Alexander Scheutz on Wednesday. ‘The people are not very amused that this has happened behind their backs,’ he told German news agency DPA.

The leader of the lakeside town in the picturesque Salzkammergut region heard about the plans coincidentally in May through an Austrian economic delegation in Hong Kong where the Chinese real estate company responsible inquired about arranging a partnership between the two cities.

But a few days ago Scheutz discovered what he called an ‘indiscretion’ — the plans for the Chinese version of Hallstatt were apparently far more advanced than he’d been led to believe. ‘I’m stunned, but not outraged,’ the mayor said. He has since alerted both UNESCO and national authorities.

‘Spying’ by Chinese architects would not have been conspicuous in Hallstatt, where there are up to 800,000 visitors each year who ‘photograph everything and everyone,’ Scheutz told Austrian news agency APA.”

••••••••••

The Hallstatt Bonehouse:

From a new Wall Street Journal analysis by Julia Angwin and Jeremy Singer-Vine of the data-devouring properties of apps, which are often free and almost always come with a cost:

“Not so long ago, there was a familiar product called software. It was sold in stores, in shrink-wrapped boxes. When you bought it, all that you gave away was your credit card number or a stack of bills.

Now there are ‘apps’—stylish, discrete chunks of software that live online or in your smartphone. To ‘buy’ an app, all you have to do is click a button. Sometimes they cost a few dollars, but many apps are free, at least in monetary terms. You often pay in another way. Apps are gateways, and when you buy an app, there is a strong chance that you are supplying its developers with one of the most coveted commodities in today’s economy: personal data.

Some of the most widely used apps on Facebook—the games, quizzes and sharing services that define the social-networking site and give it such appeal—are gathering volumes of personal information.

A Wall Street Journal examination of 100 of the most popular Facebook apps found that some seek the email addresses, current location and sexual preference, among other details, not only of app users but also of their Facebook friends.”

Tags: ,

E.O. Wilson, who goes to picnics just for the ants, has an article in Newsweek which examines how humans are similar to tribal insects in regards to social networking. An excerpt:

“The drive to join is deeply ingrained, a result of a complicated evolution that has led our species to a condition that biologists call eusociality. ‘Eu-,’ of course, is a prefix meaning pleasant or good: euphony is something that sounds wonderful; eugenics is the attempt to improve the gene pool. And the eusocial group contains multiple generations whose members perform altruistic acts, sometimes against their own personal interests, to benefit their group. Eusociality is an outgrowth of a new way of understanding evolution, which blends traditionally popular individual selection (based on individuals competing against each other) with group selection (based on competition among groups). Individual selection tends to favor selfish behavior. Group selection favors altruistic behavior and is responsible for the origin of the most advanced level of social behavior, that attained by ants, bees, termites—and humans.”

••••••••••

Atom Ant intro, 1965:

Tags:

Nam June Paik’s satellite installation, Good Morning, Mr. Orwell, broadcast live in 1984, appropriately. It was an early, artsy step in the direction of people the world over sharing images as well as a riposte to George Orwell.

Tags:

Hollywood and Highland, 1908.

Los Angeles isn’t a city–it’s a region. It has no center so it can’t be fixed or ruined. But different pieces of L.A. can become their own laboratories, experimenting, pushing forward. Hollywood, that glitzy, seamy dream factory, is being reimagined as a green, urban paradise in this age of post-peak oil, though not everyone’s happy about it. The opening of Adam Nagourney’s New York Times report:

“Hollywood, once a sketchy neighborhood in a spiral of petty crime and decay, has been well on its way over the past 10 years to becoming a bustling tourist destination and nightlife district. But now it is on the verge of another transformation: to a decidedly un-Californian urban enclave pierced by skyscrapers, clustered around public transportation and animated pedestrian street life.

A far-reaching rezoning plan that would turn parts of Hollywood into a mini-city — with residential and commercial towers rising on streets like Vine, Hollywood and Sunset — has won the support of key Los Angeles officials. And it has set off a storm of opposition from residents fearful that it would destroy the rakish small-town charm of their community with soaring anodyne buildings that block views of the Hollywood Hills (and its iconic sign) and overwhelm streets with traffic.”

••••••••••

“I’d like to dream / My troubles all away / On a bed of California stars”:

Tags:

The opening of “The Relativity of Wrong,” Isaac Asimov’s 1989 Skeptical Inquirer essay:

“I RECEIVED a letter the other day. It was handwritten in crabbed penmanship so that it was very difficult to read. Nevertheless, I tried to make it out just in case it might prove to be important. In the first sentence, the writer told me he was majoring in English literature, but felt he needed to teach me science. (I sighed a bit, for I knew very few English Lit majors who are equipped to teach me science, but I am very aware of the vast state of my ignorance and I am prepared to learn as much as I can from anyone, so I read on.)

It seemed that in one of my innumerable essays, I had expressed a certain gladness at living in a century in which we finally got the basis of the universe straight.

I didn’t go into detail in the matter, but what I meant was that we now know the basic rules governing the universe, together with the gravitational interrelationships of its gross components, as shown in the theory of relativity worked out between 1905 and 1916. We also know the basic rules governing the subatomic particles and their interrelationships, since these are very neatly described by the quantum theory worked out between 1900 and 1930. What’s more, we have found that the galaxies and clusters of galaxies are the basic units of the physical universe, as discovered between 1920 and 1930.

These are all twentieth-century discoveries, you see.

The young specialist in English Lit, having quoted me, went on to lecture me severely on the fact that in every century people have thought they understood the universe at last, and in every century they were proved to be wrong. It follows that the one thing we can say about our modern ‘knowledge’ is that it is wrong. The young man then quoted with approval what Socrates had said on learning that the Delphic oracle had proclaimed him the wisest man in Greece. ‘If I am the wisest man,’ said Socrates, ‘it is because I alone know that I know nothing.’ the implication was that I was very foolish because I was under the impression I knew a great deal.

My answer to him was, ‘John, when people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together.’

The basic trouble, you see, is that people think that ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ are absolute; that everything that isn’t perfectly and completely right is totally and equally wrong.

However, I don’t think that’s so.”

Tags:

Kevin Kelly has pointed out that we never really throw away tools or technologies, even when their betters come along. We still use them for utility but also for contrast to what has become the norm. They are an aged parent more beloved for what they did for us than what they can now do. Oddly the nostalgia is passed along to generations that were never nurtured by them. The wheelchair still gets pushed.

Tags: ,

From “Darwin’s Devices,” John Long’s piece at Slate about evolutionary robotics, the use of futuristic tools to teach us about the past:

“My fellow researchers and I are using them to harness evolution, putting it to work as an automatic, hands-off process to go where no robot has gone before: the ancient past of animals and the unknown future of human technology.

Making robots that can evolve solves a serious problem that has long vexed biologists: Dead fossils tell no tales. While fossils inform us about evolutionary patterns, they don’t tell us about life’s processes, like the dynamics of physiology, behavior, and the ‘struggle for existence’ that Darwin recognized as the basis of the evolutionary game of life. We can reconstruct and re-enact those missing processes using biorobots, a special class of physically embodied and fully autonomous machines designed to mimic living and behaving animals.

At first blush, this field, called evolutionary biorobotics, seems to present a Zen koan: How does one use evolution to study evolution?”

Tags:

I never realized the timeline of the reemergence of dinosaur studies in academia until reading this passage from paleontologist Paul Barrett at the Browser:

“It’s really only from the 70s onwards that we start to get this change in view and only from the 80s that we had a crystallisation of this view that dinosaurs were very exciting animals. For most of the 20th century dinosaurs were viewed as a dead end – an evolutionary dead end that was kind of interesting because they were big and odd-looking, but that never really went anywhere. It was the recognition in the 70s that dinosaurs and birds were closely related, and that dinosaurs were more like birds than like other reptiles, that suddenly led to a new burst of interest in them and new research programmes. If you spoke to a student in the 1940s or 50s they would just view dinosaurs as curiosities, but these days they’re viewed as an integral part of a greater knowledge of how animals are related to each other and how animal behaviour has changed through time, not just as a side-show oddity.”

Tags:

"A nearly bankrupt Finnish company called Rovio hit upon a similarly perfect fusion of game and device: Angry Birds."

The New York Times Magazine is deservedly getting a lot of play for the Asteroids-like video game it’s embedded in the online version of its featureJust One More Game…but Sam Anderson’s article is excellent, gimmicks or not. It looks from every angle at our obsession with seemingly dumbed-down, repetitive, low-fi digital time-killers in the age of the iPhone. From Anderson’s article, an excerpt about the back-story of two relentless compulsions, Tetris and Angry Birds:

“Tetris was invented exactly when and where you would expect — in a Soviet computer lab in 1984 — and its game play reflects this origin. The enemy in Tetris is not some identifiable villain (Donkey Kong, Mike Tyson, Carmen Sandiego) but a faceless, ceaseless, reasonless force that threatens constantly to overwhelm you, a churning production of blocks against which your only defense is a repetitive, meaningless sorting. It is bureaucracy in pure form, busywork with no aim or end, impossible to avoid or escape. And the game’s final insult is that it annihilates free will. Despite its obvious futility, somehow we can’t make ourselves stop rotating blocks. Tetris, like all the stupid games it spawned, forces us to choose to punish ourselves.

In 2009, 25 years after the invention of Tetris, a nearly bankrupt Finnish company called Rovio hit upon a similarly perfect fusion of game and device: Angry Birds. The game involves launching peevish birds at green pigs hiding inside flimsy structures. Its basic mechanism — using your index finger to pull back a slingshot, over and over and over and over and over and over and over — was the perfect use of the new technology of the touch screen: simple enough to lure a suddenly immense new market of casual gamers, satisfying enough to hook them.

Within months, Angry Birds became the most popular game on the iPhone, then spread across every other available platform. Today it has been downloaded, in its various forms, more than 700 million times.”

••••••••••

Tetris, the music:

Tags:

Ben Ehrenreich, a brilliant guy who is consumed by death, looked at the end of print in an electric age in his great 2011 essay, “The Death of the Book,” at the Los Angeles Review of Books. An excerpt:

“In 1962, Marshall McLuhan had published an almost spookily prescient book titled The Gutenberg Galaxy. It was, among other things, an extended critique of the culture of print. Technology shapes our consciousness, McLuhan argued, and the development of the printed book in the mid-fifteenth century had inaugurated a reorientation of human experience towards the visual, the regimented, the uniform and instrumental. Language, which had once been a wild, uncontainable affair between the oral and aural (think whisper, shout, and song, the playful market-square dynamism of dialect and argot) was silenced, flattened, squeezed into lines evenly arrayed across the rectilinear space between the margins. Spellings were standardized, vernaculars frozen into national languages policed by strict academies. Print, for McLuhan, was the driver behind all that we now recognize as modern. Through it nationalisms arose, and other horrors: capitalism, individualism, alienation. Time itself was emptied out—reduced, like the words on each page, to a linear sequence of homogeneous moments. Print had stolen something. Books had shrunk us. They had ‘denuded’ conscious life. ‘All experience is segmented and must be processed sequentially,’ McLuhan mourned. ‘Rich experience eludes the wretched mesh or sieve of our attention.’

An end was in sight. We had already entered a ‘new electric age’ characterized by interdependence rather than segmentation. ‘The world has become a computer,’ McLuhan wrote, ‘an electronic brain, exactly as in an infantile piece of science fiction.’ The Internet was still a Cold-War fantasy, but for McLuhan print’s corpse was already growing cold. (He dated the collapse of the Gutenberg Galaxy to 1905 and Einstein’s early work on relativity.) This was not necessarily cause for optimism. McLuhan coined the phrase ‘global village’ to describe the hyper-networked world that was already taking shape. He had no illusions, though, about the nobility of village life. Our newly TV-, telephone-, and radio-enwebbed multiverse could just as easily be ruled by ‘panic terrors … befitting a world of tribal drums’ as by any bright pastoral harmony. And so it was and is.”

In 1967, when Jacques Derrida took up the theme of ‘the end of the book’ in Of Grammatology, McLuhan’s ideas were still sufficiently in the air that the philosopher could refer to ‘this death of the civilization of the book of which so much is said’ without need for further explanation. But the ‘civilization of the book,’ for Derrida, meant more than the era of moveable type. It preceded Gutenberg, and even the medieval rationalists who wrote of ‘the book of nature’ and via that metaphor understood the material world as revelation analogous to scripture. The book for Derrida stood in for an entire metaphysics that reached back through all of Western thought: a conception of existence as a text that could be deciphered, a text with a stable meaning lodged somewhere outside of language. ‘The idea of the book is the idea of a totality,’ he wrote. ‘It is the encyclopedic protection of theology and of logocentrism against the disruption of writing, against its aphoristic energy and … against difference in general.’ Those, in case you couldn’t tell, are fighting words.”

••••••••••

Dylan goes electric, Newport, 1965:

Tags: ,

From “A Little Device Trying to Read Your Thoughts,” David Ewing Duncan’s New York Times article about Stephen Hawking adopting the iBrain:

“Already surrounded by machines that allow him, painstakingly, to communicate, the physicist Stephen Hawking last summer donned what looked like a rakish black headband that held a feather-light device the size of a small matchbox.

Called the iBrain, this simple-looking contraption is part of an experiment that aims to allow Dr. Hawking — long paralyzed by amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig’s disease — to communicate by merely thinking.

The iBrain is part of a new generation of portable neural devices and algorithms intended to monitor and diagnose conditions like sleep apnea, depression and autism. Invented by a team led by Philip Low, a 32-year-old neuroscientist who is chief executive of NeuroVigil, a company based in San Diego, the iBrain is gaining attention as a possible alternative to expensive sleep labs that use rubber and plastic caps riddled with dozens of electrodes and usually require a patient to stay overnight.

‘The iBrain can collect data in real time in a person’s own bed, or when they’re watching TV, or doing just about anything,’ Dr. Low said.”

••••••••••

Main title music by Philip Glass for Errol Morris’ 1991 Hawking film:

Tags: , , , ,

Heart surgery from NYU Medical Center was broadcast on live TV in 1958. 

In the post about Olivetti, I mentioned the Austrian-born design genius Ettore Sottsass, who passed away in 2007. Here’s a piece from his best-known essay, “When I Was a Very Small Boy“:

“Now that I’m old they let me design electronic machines and other machines in iron, with flashing phosphorescent lights and sounds and no one knows whether they are cynical or ironical: now they only let me design furniture that ought to be sold, furniture they say, that is useful to society, they say, and other things that are sold ‘at low prices’ they say, and in this way they can sell more of them, for society they say, and now I design things of this kind. Now they pay me to design them. Not much, but they pay me. Now they look for me and wait for models from me, as they say, ideas and solutions which end up heaven knows where.

Now everything seems to have changed. The things I do (by myself or with my companions) seem to have changed and the way they are done also seems to have changed because, goodbye bright blue Planet, goodbye melodious seasons, goodbye stones, dust, leaves, ponds, and dragon flies, goodbye boiling-hot days, dead dogs by the roadside, shadows in the wood like prehistoric dragons, goodbye Planet, by now I feel as if I do the things I do sitting in a bunker of damp artificial light and conditioned air, sitting at this white laminate table, sitting in this silver plastic chair, captain of a spaceship traveling at thousands of miles an hour, squashed against this seat — immobile in the sky.

By now I have to think of things from an artificial space, with neither place nor time; a space only of words, phone-calls, meetings, timetables, politics, waiting, failures. By now I’m a professional acrobat, actor and tightrope walker, for an audience that I invent, that I describe to myself, a remote audience with whom I have no contact, stifled echoes of whose talking, clapping and disapproval reach me, whose wars, catastrophes, famines, suicides, escapes, poverty or anxious restings along crowded beaches or inside smoky stadiums I read about in papers; how can I know who are the ones expecting something from me?

I would like to break this strange mechanism I’ve been driven into.”

Tags:

Short doc about the Olivetti company, which gave us the first desktop personal computer in 1964, the Programma 101, and brought a liberating modern design sense to all sorts of information systems. How could we be terrified of something that looked so cool?

The Valentine typewriter, designed in 1969 for Olivetti by Ettore Sottsass, is one of the best commercial designs ever. It was marketed as a typewriter you would use outside of the office. Information tools could be personal, portable and non-institutional.

Tags: , ,

From Culture and Value, Ludwig Wittgenstein on technology:

The truly apocalyptic view of the world is that things do not repeat themselves. It is not e.g. absurd to believe that the scientific & technological age is the beginning of the end for humanity, that the idea of Great Progress is a bedazzlement, along with the idea that the truth will ultimately be known; that there is nothing good or desirable about scientific knowledge & that humanity, in seeking it, is falling into a trap. It is by no means clear that this is not how things are.•

___________________________

Karl Johnson as the philosopher in Derek Jarman’s 1993 biopic:

Tags: , ,

« Older entries § Newer entries »