Urban Studies

You are currently browsing the archive for the Urban Studies category.

"Yes, you know what I'm talking about."

“Yes, you know what I’m talking about.”

I Need to make Holiday cash and then Some – $25000 (bklyn, manhatten)

If you have a way for me to either earn cash or make cash weather it be something you can not do your self and need help with or need a stranger to do, or any other way for there are tons of people out there with good tips who know where the golden goose hides their eggs weather it be in cash or product.

if your in need of cash for the holidays as i am email me back and lets talk. if it’s doable your cut in as full partner.

yes, you know what i’m talking about.

Get back to me. i’m discreet, a man of my word, and please no james bond type shit. lets be realisitic. the right info can be a nice pay day for you and me alike.

christmas will be here in 2 weeks. please get back to me if you have a way for me to make cash–the more the better.

happy holidays.

"Happy holidays."

“Happy holidays.”

I remember when listening to a smart Grantland podcast Bill Simmons did with the excellent documentarian Alex Gibney, that the guest pointed out that even if every racer in the Tour de France was using performance-enhancing drugs, that they would all still be guilty. I’m not sure I agree, at least not always.

People who drank during Prohibition may have been technically guilty of a crime, but it was the law that was in error, and there was no way to imprison everyone who was sneaking a drink. The law was impractical because it was antithetical to human nature. It enforced a norm that wasn’t normal.

I think something like that is also true about the age of surveillance. If everyone is spying–individuals, corporations and governments–it will become difficult to fault anyone. And if millions upon millions of people are caught in behavior that is outside the norm–not anything illegal, just embarrassing–maybe the norms are changed. If everyone is guilty, no one is guilty.

But I think the concern that surveillance is going to make humans automatons won’t bear out. It certainly hasn’t so far.

Glenn Greenwald believes that governments can be transparent while individuals can have privacy. While I wish was that was the case, I seriously doubt that scenario occurs. From Edward Moyer’s Cnet interview with Greenwald:

Question:

Both you and Julian Assange have said it’s crucial for governments to be transparent and for individuals to have privacy. Talk about your views on privacy — how it’s important not just politically but also in terms of creativity and self-exploration.

Glenn Greenwald:

You know, I think it’s interesting because a lot of times people have difficulty understanding why privacy’s important…and so what I try to do is look at human behavior, and what I find, I think, is that the quest for privacy is very pervasive. We do all kinds of things to ensure that we can have a realm in which we can engage in conduct without other people’s judgmental eyes being cast upon us.

And if you look at how tyrannies have used surveillance in the past, they don’t use surveillance in support of their tyranny in the sense that every single person is being watched at all times, because that just logistically hasn’t been able to be done. Even now it can’t be done — I mean, the government can collect everybody’s e-mails and calls, but they don’t have the resources to monitor them all. But what’s important about a surveillance state is that it creates the recognition that your behavior is susceptible to being watched at any time. What that does is radically alter your behavior, because if we can act without other people watching us, we can test all kinds of boundaries, we can explore all kinds of creativity, we can transgress pretty much every limit that we want because nobody’s going to know that we’re doing it. That’s why privacy is so vital to human freedom.

But if we know we’re being watched all the time, then we’re going to engage in behavior that is acceptable to other people, meaning we’re going to conform to orthodoxies and norms. And that’s the real menace of a ubiquitous surveillance state: It breeds conformity; it breeds a kind of obedient citizenry, on both a societal and an individual level. That’s why tyrannies love surveillance, but it’s also why surveillance literally erodes a huge part of what it means to be a free individual.”

Tags: ,

Kevin Kelly’s AMAs on Reddit are always among the best: smart questions and smart answers. Here are a few exchanges from his latest one:

______________________

Question:

It seems you’ve been all over the world. I assume you’re already living in your favorite place to live. But if you couldn’t live there, what would be your second choice?

Kevin Kelly:

Singapore. I am half Asian now and Singapore is one of the few cities in Asia I could imagine living in. It’s vibrant, but still works, and it is far greener than you’d think. It’s not Disneyland with the death penalty.

______________________

Question:

Can you paraphrase your argument against The Singularity?

Kevin Kelly:

In short: Timing. Longer: it will happen but only be visible in retrospect. During the time, it will just seem like incremental change.

______________________

Question:

It seems like you spend a fair bit of time thinking about the future, probably just in general as well. Where’s your day-to-day “thinking time” look like? Do you have a time scheduled during the day to stop writing/beekeeping/whatever and just think? Do you focus on a particular problem or idea to think about or just let your mind run wild? Considering your quantified self connection, have you found any useful tips for finding your most creative moments?

Kevin Kelly:

I block out lots of time to 1) Read (books) 2) Think in silence 3) Sketch and doodle 4) Go for walks.

______________________

Question:

My question is, how do you see automation of the workforce transitioning to post-scarcity(if at all)?

Kevin Kelly:

Automation of work will create new scarcities while filling the world with plentitude in other ways. New scarcities will be such things as human attention, human relations, silence, errors, questions.

______________________

Question:

In a tweet, you once suggested that content we have today, say on Facebook and Twitter, will be gone in 25 or 50 years. Are you confident these companies will not be around and/or transition? Also, are you able to provide brief, clear, simple vision of how laypersons might expect to reliably store data in next 25 years? Thanks for consideration.

Kevin Kelly:

It is very unlikely that ANY company at its peak today will be around in 50 years. They just don’t have long lifespans.

______________________

Question:

Have you read The Circle? If so, what did you think of it?

Kevin Kelly:

I think The Circle is both brilliant and profound. I think the book will take its place alongside 1984 and Brave New World. It doesn’t have much chance of happening, but it is a cautionary tale to keep us honest.

______________________

Question:

What do you think contributed most to your success?

Kevin Kelly:

No TV.•

Tags: ,

NASA has created a life-size robot that will protect you unless you say something that hurts its feeling in which case it will eat you. From Rich McCormick at the Verge: “NASA has created a robot for DARPA’s upcoming Robotics Challenge Trials. The Valkyrie is a 6-foot-2-inch humanoid machine with detachable arms, sonar sensors, mounted cameras, and a glowing Tony Stark-esque circle in the middle of its chest. The space agency says it’s mobile and dexterous enough to enter disaster zones to provide search and rescue functions.”

Tags:

I understand that Jay Leno, the make-believe working-class hero, is just a buffoon with a talk show and that nothing he says to a dwindling late-night television audience really matters. He practices some sort of moral equivalency even when none is deserved because he wants to appeal to the widest viewership possible. He panders. But it is a little infuriating that he continually refers to Obamacare as something that Americans “don’t want.” You know, because the uninsured would rather get sick and die. So much neater that way. Real closure.

There are millions of citizens in this country who want Obamacare. Actually, they desperately need it. Their lives and the lives of their children depend on it.

A deserved shot or even a cheap shot against the President is fair game. But a wealthy person taking a cheap shot against poor, working poor and moderate-income Americans in the service of pandering isn’t.•

Tags: ,

I’m going to be doing the “Great 2013 Nonfiction Pieces Online For Free” list either late tonight or more likely tomorrow. Here are the year-end lists from the last two years.

___________________

Great 2012 Nonfiction Pieces Online For Free

 

A bunch of my favorite articles from 2012. (A couple of pieces from December 2011 are included since I do these lists before the absolute end of the year.) All ungated and free.

  • Pedestrian Mania” (Brian Phillips, Grantland): Beautiful piece about world-famous 1870s long-distance walking champion Edward Payson Weston, subject of the book, A Man in a Hurry.
  • Brains Plus Brawn” (Daniel Lieberman, Edge) Incredibly fun article about endurance, which points out, among many other things, that as quick as Usain Bolt may seem, your average sheep or goat can run twice as fast.
  • A New Birth of Reason” (Susan Jacoby, The American Scholar): Great essay about Robert Ingersoll, the largely forgotten secularist who was a major force in 19th-century America, taken from the writer’s forthcoming book, The Great Agnostic.
  • Prospects of a Keynesian Utopia,” (John Quiggin, Aeon): Will a roboticized society with 15-hour workweeks be a dream come true–or something else?
  • One’s a Crowd” (Eric Kleinberg, The New York Times): Great Op-Ed piece about the increasing number of people living alone.
  • How the U.S. Lost Out on iPhone Work” (Charles Duhigg and Keith Bradsher, The New York Times): A deep and penetrating explanation of the complicated forces at play in job outsourcing.
  • The Power of Habit“ (Charles Duhigg, Slate): An excerpt from the author’s bestseller of the same name which explains how Pepsodent became omnipresent.
  • We’re Underestimating the Risk of Extinction” (Ross Andersen, The Atlantic): I didn’t necessarily agree with the premise (or conclusions) of this interview with philosopher Nick Bostrom, but I enjoyed its intelligence immensely.
  • Hustling the Cloud” (Steven Boone, Capital New York): Wonderful piece about a bleary-eyed, middle-of-the-night search for free Wi-Fi–and anything else that would seem to make sense–in a time of dire economic straits.
  • Craig Venter’s Bugs Might Save the World” (Wil S. Hylton, The New York Times Magazine): Fascinating examination of the titular biologist, who wants to make breathing bots that will cure the world’s ills.
  • The Machine and the Ghost” (Christine Rosen, The New Republic): The author riffs on how the rise of smart, quantified gizmos and cities necessitates a new “morality of things.”

_________________________

Great 2011 Nonfiction Pieces Online For Free

A bunch of great articles from this year that made me rethink assertions, informed me or entertained me. All available for free.

  • Getting Bin Laden” (Nicholas Schmidle, New Yorker): The best long-form journalism of the new century. Perfect writing and editing. Will be read with equal fascination 50 years from now.
  • The Movie Set That Ate Itself,” (Michael Idov, GQ): Intrepid reporter with a deadpan sensibility ventures onto the most insane movie set ever.
  • Better, Faster. Stronger“ (Rebecca Mead, New Yorker): Wicked portrait of a Silicon Valley self-help guru. Reading this piece is a good way to learn how to write profiles.
  • ‘”The Elusive Big Idea” (Neal Gabler, New York Times): I don’t agree with most of the assertions of this essay, but it’s deeply intelligent and provocative.
  • Douglas Rushkoff” (Peggy Nelson, HiLowbrow.com): Deep and probing interview with the media ecologist.
  • Who Invented The Seven-Game Series?“ (Michael Weinreb, Grantland): Reporter asks simple question others gloss over, finds interesting historical and analytical info.
  • Zell to L.A. Times: Drop Dead” (Laurie Winer, L.A. Review of Books): Great writing about Sam Zell and the painful decline of the Los Angeles Times.
  • Show the Monster” (Daniel Zalewski, The New Yorker): Brilliant Guillermo del Toro portrait for fans of film or great writing.
  • The Man Who Inspired Jobs” (Christopher Bonanos, The New York Times): Polaroid founder Edwin H. Land was oddly omitted from Steve Jobs’ obits, but this lucid, insightful essay remedied that oversight. Better yet: Bonanos is apparently working on a book about Polaroid.
  • All the Angry People“ (George Packer, The New Yorker): The most revealing reporting yet about the genesis and meaning of Occupy Wall Street.

From the June 16, 1909 New York Times:

St. Petersburg--Dispatches from Perm, European Russia, say the local police have begun an investigation into the ‘Sect of the Crimson God,’ the members of which are accused of human sacrifices and various other horrible practices. Repeated disappearances of people in the region where members of the sect dwell drew suspicion to the organization, which worships a red wooden idol colored, according to the statements of the country people, with human blood. The police have located a secret grave containing the mutilated body of a man supposed to have been sacrificed, and they expect to find others.

The Ural region, of which Perm is the centre, is a breeding ground for many fanatical cults. It is a meeting place for the Pagan tribes of Asia, as well as persons who flee from Russia on account of religious persecution. These refugees have lived for centuries in the dense forests of the district, and their beliefs have developed along the most fanatical lines.”

James Baldwin, in 1963, examining the N-word to explain that bigotry has just as much to do with projection as power. Essentially, what you hate is what you are.

Tags:

The flip side of the surveillance state is the Darknet–an online space where anything goes–which speaks directly to my contention that greater control and greater anarchy will be increasingly at war in the Digital Age. I wouldn’t even know how to get onto the Darknet if I wanted to and neither would most of you. But a lot of people are there, many innocuously and some to do all manner of harm. The opening paragraph of “Darknet: A Short History,” a Foreign Policy piece by Ty McCormick:

“Beyond the prying eyes of Google and Bing exists a vast cyberfrontier — by some estimates hundreds of times larger than the World Wide Web. This so-called “deepweb” is often more humdrum than sinister, littered with banal data and derelict URLs, but it is also home to an anything-goes commercial underworld, called the ‘darknet,’ that will make your stomach turn. It’s a place where drugs and weapons are openly traded, where terrorists link up, and where assassins bid on contract killings. In recent years, the darknet has found itself in government cross-hairs, with the FBI and National Security Agency (NSA) cracking down on drug merchants and pornographers. Despite a series of high-profile busts, however, this lawless realm continues to hum along, deep beneath the everyday web. “

Tags:

The colorful 19th-century Gravesend clan known as the Moreys loved horses, especially with salad and a baked potato. From an article in the January 13, 1895 Brooklyn Daily Eagle:

“The eccentricities of the Morey family, which for the past ten years have kept the town of Gravesend guessing what was to come next, have given the place another shock of such an entirely different nature from any of the former performances that even the old residents shake their heads and declare themselves beaten. A complaint was made at the police headquarters yesterday that a horse belonging to the Moreys had died and was lying in the yard. An officer was sent over and upon entering the yard found, to his amazement, that the horse had been partially skinned and cut up. When he arrived on the spot, Lena Morey, the 16 year old daughter of Elizabeth Morey, was just finishing the work of skinning the dead horse. Portions of the carcass–the best parts–had been cut out and placed in a tub, awaiting the process of pickling, which would keep it for the future use of the family, while the portions considered poor for eating were being fed to the dogs and the pigs owned by the family.

Mrs. Morey told the policeman that she had a right to do as she pleased with her own, that there was a great deal worse meat eaten every day than horse meat and that she did not propose to starve while she could get anything as good. As to the hide, she said she proposed to make strong leather bags of it.

In spite of her vehement protests and threats, the officer seized upon all of the carcass in sight, as well as the hide, and all was sent to Barren Island for cremation, while the board of health was notified.”

I AM SELLING MY 2 KIDNEY STONES I PASSED LAST YEAR – $500 (NEW YORK)

I HAD 2 KIDNEY STONES THAT I PASSED LAST YEAR.

THIS IS FOR PEOPLE WHO COLLECT STRANGE THINGS.

I HAVE HOSPITAL PAPER WORK ON THEM, THEY ARE AUTHENTIC WITH PAPER WORK.

From “How to End Global Income Inequality,” Charles Kenny’s Businessweek article that tries to figure out how we got this way and how we can get better:

“In order to close the gap between the global rich and poor, policymakers need to understand how the rich got that way in the first place. Over the last 20 years, there isn’t much evidence that the countries home to the top of global income distribution started saving so much more (PDF) or working so much harder. The vast majority of the global rich got their outsized portion of increases in planetary consumption because they started off rich in 1990. Many were helped along the way by reduced tax rates and—thanks to globalization—more opportunities to make money off investments in rapidly growing developing countries. It is great that this investment is occurring—without it the world’s poor would be poorer. But the distribution of benefits from that investment isn’t an act of God. It’s a decision of man— and it can be changed.”

Tags:

Just one more post about delivery drones, and then I promise I’ll stop for awhile. The opening of Alvin Powell’s Harvard Gazette interview with engineering professor Robert Wood, who sees not technical obstacles to such delivery systems but bureaucratic and legal ones:

Harvard Gazette:

Amazon’s Jeff Bezos said he’s serious about using flying robots to deliver packages, saying that the technology is almost there — within four or five years — and that Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] regulations might permit it by 2015. What was your reaction when you heard this?

Robert Wood:

The technology is actually quite close. My first reaction is that the technology is much closer than overcoming the FAA and liability barriers. Of course they will need to refine the vehicle and controller designs to first ensure safety and, second, to verify efficiency and efficacy of this method.

Harvard Gazette:

How realistic is the scenario of using flying robotic drones to deliver packages? I’m sure it seems completely ‘out there’ for most of the public. Is it?

Robert Wood:

I think technically this is quite reasonable. In a laboratory setting, moving an object from one position to another using a flying vehicle is something that has been demonstrated. When you start to move this out of a lab setting, there are tremendous challenges, including weather, turbulence when moving around buildings or objects, dynamic objects in the environment such as people or cars, and imprecise or unreliable sensor information. But the robotics community is working on solutions to all of these topics — [like] the ‘self-driving car’ — so I suspect the answers are not far off.”

Tags: ,

Amazon’s delivery drones may just be hoopla for now, but other companies have similar designs. Question: Since these drones will be working in dense, urban areas, and those are mostly filled with apartment buildings, how exactly would that unfold? Would the drone auto-text the recipient when nearing the address so that person could come down to the door and collect the package? I would assume. From Nick Bilton at the New York Times:

“Even the serious technophiles like Mr. Bezos say delivery drones and their ilk are still years away. Many ordinary people probably think the idea sounds dangerous, maybe even a little creepy, given that these drones will have cameras. So far, the Federal Aviation Administration has resisted the idea. Swarms of computer-guided octocopters? As if the F.A.A. doesn’t have enough to do.

But given the explosive growth of e-commerce, some experts say the shipping business is in for big changes. United Parcel Service, which traces its history to 1907, delivers more than four billion packages and documents a year. It operates a fleet of more than 95,000 vehicles and 500 aircraft. The ubiquitous Brown is a $55 billion-plus-a-year business. And, like Amazon, U.P.S. is reportedly looking into drones. So is Google. More and more e-commerce companies are making a point of delivering things quickly the old-fashioned way — with humans.

Some of the dreamers in the technology industry are dreaming even bigger. It won’t be just drones, they insist. Robots and autonomous vehicles — think Google’s driverless car — could also disrupt the delivery business.”

Tags:

There are a million reasons why Detroit, that shining star, fell to the ground, but only one person charged with rescuing it–and he’s not an elected official. Bankruptcy lawyer Kevyn D. Orr must put the Motor City on the road to solvency in under a rear, all the while brushing away charges that he’s a puppet, even a traitor to his race. From Monica Davey and Bill Vlasic in the New York Times:

“The assignment is enormous, a peculiar mix of duties, some stated and others not, for a man who by all accounts had been leading a comfortable life as a bankruptcy lawyer. His new job? Urban planner, numbers cruncher, city spokesman, negotiator, politician, good cop, bad cop.

The job could not be more politically fraught. Mr. Orr’s harshest critics call him a ‘dictator’ (his authority trumps that of the city’s elected leaders), an ‘Uncle Tom’ (he is black and was sent to run this mostly black city by a white governor) and a ‘pension killer’ (he has said the city can no longer afford the pensions it promised retirees). But Mr. Orr, who was a partner at the law firm Jones Day until his wife and a mentor helped talk him into taking the Detroit job, seems unfazed by the storm around him. He is full of smiles and quips, coolly pressing on.

‘If we don’t do something to address the unfunded liability that we have, the 700,000 residents — some of them schoolchildren, some of them sort of skinny, dorky kids like I was, who got beaten up every day at the bus stop by the toughs, who have to walk home in the dark — don’t they deserve better services?’ said Mr. Orr, who grew up in Florida and visited Detroit as a youth.”

Tags: , ,

We treat each other like crap and what we do to animals is an atrocity. So why would we play nice with robots? Maybe because social robots can be programmed to simulate love and display signifiers that force us to feel empathy. But a starving child, or unarmed people with a gun pointed at them can do the same, and they aren’t always granted mercy. So perhaps machines will require a bill of rights, especially if they are embedded with biological material that can turn vandalism into killing. The opening of “Is It Okay to Torture or Murder a Robot?” a great article by Richard Fisher of the BBC:

“Kate Darling likes to ask you to do terrible things to cute robots. At a workshop she organised this year, Darling asked people to play with a Pleo robot, a child’s toy dinosaur. The soft green Pleo has trusting eyes and affectionate movements. When you take one out of the box, it acts like a helpless newborn puppy – it can’t walk and you have to teach it about the world.

Yet after an hour allowing people to tickle and cuddle these loveable dinosaurs, Darling turned executioner. She gave the participants knives, hatchets and other weapons, and ordered them to torture and dismember their toys. What happened next ‘was much more dramatic than we ever anticipated,’ she says.

For Darling, a researcher at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, our reaction to robot cruelty is important because a new wave of machines is forcing us to reconsider our relationship with them.”

Tags: ,

From the September 19, 1898 Brooklyn Daily Eagle:

Uniontown, Pa.–A christening last night at Banning, a mining settlement near here, ended in a free for all fight, in which knives, pistols and clubs were used. One man was killed and five others were injured. The participants in the melee fled and the police are after them.”

Speaking of the dangers of income inequality and decentralized power, Morgan Brennan of Forbes looks at billionaire bunkers, the high-tech homes of America’s super-rich who feel the need to amp up security, just in case. The fear, of course, is that your average American won’t be satisfied with bread and Kardashians forever. The opening:

“Al Corbi’s residence in the Hollywood Hills has the requisite white walls covered in artwork and picture windows offering breathtaking views of downtown Los Angeles, but it has more in common with NSA headquarters than with the other contemporary homes on the block. The Corbi family doesn’t need keys (thanks to biometric recognition software), doesn’t fear earthquakes (thanks to steel-reinforced concrete caissons that burrow 30 feet into the private hilltop) and sleeps easily inside a 2,500-square-foot home within a home: a ballistics-proof panic suite that Corbi refers to as a ‘safe core.’

Paranoid? Perhaps. But also increasingly commonplace. Futuristic security technologies–many developed for the military but sounding as though they came straight from James Bond’s Q–have made their way into the home, available to deep-pocketed owners whose peace of mind comes from knowing that their sensors can detect and adjust for, say, a person lurking in the bushes a half-mile away.

 ‘If you saw this stuff in a movie you would think it is all made up,’ says Corbi, whose fortress-like abode doubles as the demonstration house for his firm, Strategically Armored & Fortified Environments (SAFE).”

It’s no small irony that the one who most staunchly fought the surveillance state is now the most spied-on, observed person in the world. Edward Snowden is like the rest of us, but writ very, very large. He’s a test case. How does constant observation change us, even if we’re not paying attention to it on the conscious level? From Janet Reitman’s new Rolling Stone article about Snowden and Greenwald:

“[Jesselyn] Radack nevertheless insists that Snowden is not being controlled by the Russian intelligence service, the FSB, nor has he become a Russian spy. “Russia treats its spies much better than leaving them trapped in the Sheremetyevo transit zone for over a month,” Radack recalled Snowden darkly joking to her.

Perhaps though, just because he’s not a spy, says Andrei Soldatov, one of Russia’s leading investigative journalists, doesn’t mean he’s free. ‘It is quite clear that Snowden is being protected by the FSB,’ says Soldatov, co-author of The New Nobility: The Restoration of Russia’s Security State and the Enduring Legacy of the KGB (2010). What this means is that every facet of Snowden’s communications, and his life, is likely being monitored, if invisibly, by the Russian security services. ‘The mansion where he met those whistle-blowers? Rented on behalf of the government. All of the safe houses, apartments and dachas where we’ve traditionally kept defectors are owned by the Russian security services. No one has been able to figure out where he works, if he actually has this job. The FSB would never let him do anything where they couldn’t monitor his communications.’ Even if Snowden were to decide he wanted to go to the U.S. Embassy and turn himself in, ‘it would be difficult for him to find a completely uncontrolled way of communicating with the Americans,’ Soldatov says.

Soldatov believes that Snowden might underestimate how closely he’s being watched, suggesting somewhat of a Truman Show-like existence. ‘To what degree has he been turned into a different person?’ he says. ‘Snowden is not a trained intelligence agent. But those who are can tell you, if you live in a controlled environment, you cease to be truly independent-minded because everyone and everything around you is also controlled. It doesn’t matter if you have your laptop.'”

Tags: , , ,

“This desperate criminal was notoriously vain, and fancied himself a hero.”

French serial killer Joseph Vacher didn’t deny his atrocities–he just refused culpability for them, assigning blame to God. He was no doubt brain damaged from one or other mishaps in his life and had almost a Leibnizian optimism for his brutal crimes. From an article in the January 1, 1899 New York Times at the time of his execution:

Paris–Joseph Vacher, the French ‘Jack the Ripper,’ was guillotined at Bourg-en-Bresse, capital of the Department of Ain, this morning. He protested his innocence and simulated insanity to the last. Vacher, who was twenty-nine years of age, was condemned in October at the Ain Assizes.

______

The crimes of Joseph Vacher have surpassed in number and atrocity those of the Whitechapel murderer known as ‘Jack-the-Ripper.’ His homicidal mania first broke out seriously in 1894. He claimed, after his arrest, that as every action has an object, and as his motive neither theft nor vengeance, his irresponsibility was established He one day told a Magistrate that he considered himself a scourge sent by Providence to afflict humanity. It was claimed in his defense that when a youth he was bitten by a mad dog, and that the village herbalist gave him some medicine, after drinking which he became strange, irritable and brutal, whereas he had previously been quiet and inoffensive. It also appears from these statements that from that time he developed a passion for human blood. It was also shown that Vacher had been confined in an asylum for the insane, and that a love affair once caused him to attempt self-destruction by shooting.

Referring to his crimes, Vacher is quoted as saying, ‘My victims never suffered, for while I throttled them with one hand I simply took their lives with a sharp instrument in the other.’ I am an Anarchist, and I am opposed to society, no matter what the form of government may be.’

This desperate criminal was notoriously vain, and fancied himself a hero. He refused to speak about his crimes except on two conditions. One was that the full story of his murders be published in the leading French papers, and the other was that he should be tried separately for each crime in the district where it was committed. 

The exact number of Vacher’s victims will never be known, but, it is said that twenty-three murders had been brought home to him in October last, and the number was added to as time went on. In fact, it is doubtful whether the murderer himself knew the real number of his victims. Many persons whom he attacked narrowly escaped being killed.

Born near Lyons, Vacher served his military term in a regiment of Zouaves, and showed himself to be a good soldier, so much so that he was made a non-commissioned officer, although there were complaints against him of being brutally severe to recruits. It was shortly after he left the service that he attempted to kill himself. The bullet was never abstracted from his skull, and, according to reports the wound produced recurrent fits of insanity, and caused him to be confined in an insane asylum at Dole. The physicians, however, released him because they were afraid of an outcry in the press against the arbitrary confinement of a citizen, although the physicians were well aware that he was not in a condition to be at large.

Since that time and until his arrest Vacher appears to have wandered through the country districts of France, leaving a trail of blood behind him. He was undetected and unsuspected until, by mere accident, he was caught almost redhanded near Lyons at the beginning of October.

One of the remarkable features of this extraordinary case was the clever manner in which Vacher succeeded in shifting suspicion from himself. About two years ago he murdered a shepherd boy on a country road a few miles from Lyons, hacked the body almost into pieces, and then continued on his way. The murder was discovered within a few minutes afterward, and search for the murderer was promptly instituted in all directions, with a result that a gendarme, mounted on a bicycle, overtook Vacher, and called upon him to produce his identification papers, whereupon Vacher quietly handed over to the police officer his discharge as a non-commissioned officer from a regiment of zouaves. 

‘Why, this is my old regiment!’ exclaimed the gendarme. ‘I am hunting for a man who has just cut a boy’s throat. Have you seen any suspicious character?’

‘Oh, yes,’ answered the murderer serenely. ‘I saw a man running across the fields to the north, about a mile back from here.’

‘Thank you!’ cried the gendarme. ‘I’ll be after him,’ The gendarme then hurried off after the imaginary murderer, and the real culprit stole away from the scene of the crime.

By lucky chances, some of Vacher’s would-be victims escaped him. For instance, a boy, thirteen years of age, named Rodier, was herding cows near Clermont Ferrand one day in October a year ago, when he saw an ugly-looking, grinning tramp approach him, carrying a big bag on his back and a heavy stick in his hand. The boy was alarmed and as the stranger came nearer Rodier ran away. The same afternoon Vacher attacked three other women in the same manner, and they all escaped him as Mme. Marchand did.

The most prominent victim of Vacher was the Marquis of Villeplaine, who was killed while walking in his park in the southwestern part of France, not far from the Spanish frontier. Vacher crept up behind him, felled him with a heavy stick, and then cut his throat. The murderer carried off the coat of the Marquis, and the pocketbook containing some bank notes. He then sought refuge in Spain.”

 

Tags:

From a Carter Phipps post at Priceonomics which asserts that in a world of disappearing paper, authors will have to make their living from opportunities other than book sales:

What the book industry lacks in economic might, however, it makes up in intellectual mindshare. When it comes to culture, the book industry punches way above its weight. Just think how many major movies, culture-changing ideas, global trends, historically significant movements, and unforgettable characters were born in the pages of a book. Five hundred years after Gutenberg’s breakthrough changed the world, books are still, we might say, the intellectual unit of culture. They remain a critical medium through which ideas and memes propagate across our cultural landscape, and we all have a stake in how well that medium is functioning. 

Without question, the digital revolution has already changed the face of the book industry. Amazon’s rise, Border’s bankruptcy, the decline of the independent bookstore, the rise of ebooks–creative destruction is a force many in publishing are intimately familiar with.  

‘Call me a pessimist, call me Ishmael, but I think that book publishing is about to slide into the sea,’ wrote popular humorist and writer Garrison Keillor in the New York Times. ‘If you want to write a book, you just write it, send it to Lulu.com or BookSurge at Amazon or PubIt or ExLibris and you’ve got yourself an e-book. No problem. And that is the future of publishing: 18 million authors in America, each with an average of 14 readers, eight of whom are blood relatives. Average annual earnings: $1.75.’

Authors may not be quite as bad off as Keillor humorously projected. It says something about how fast the industry is changing that in the three years since those words were written, BookSurge has become Amazon’s CreateSpace and PubIt was effectively shut down. But just how are authors adapting and surviving amidst the technological changes that are revolutionizing the media landscape? Are they making money in today’s publishing industry?”

Tags:

Trying to force all chaos into order through top-down planning and engineering is a mistake, especially when talking about urban renewal or smart cities. From Anthony Townsend in the Economist:

“Rather than design and build a smart city like a mainframe, what if we built it like the web?

More than a century ago, debates over urbanisation during the Industrial Age asked this same question. In contrast to the precise technocratic order of Howard’s Utopia, Patrick Geddes, a Scottish biologist, promoted ‘conservative surgery’ to heal cities. Growth and decay were natural processes—but just as man had tamed the land, the avid gardener believed, we could cultivate the city. Geddes’s bottom-up view of urban revitalisation presaged today’s zeal for crowdsourcing. He didn’t think it would work without the full participation of every citizen.

Geddes’s vision is alive and well in the smart city movement. Yesterday’s grandiose blueprints and their tech-industry contractors are yielding to a bustling planet of 500,000 municipalities, which are home to millions of start-ups, NGOs and civic hackers. In the style of combinatorial innovation that, according to Google’s chief economist, Hal Varian, drives the creation of value on the internet, participants in these civic laboratories are patching together bits of open-source code, government data and consumer hardware to craft bespoke solutions to local problems. Websites like Barcelona-based CityMart, a kind of Amazon for smart-city solutions, show that these efforts are creating software and strategies that can be traded globally.

The case for more participation in building the smart city goes beyond innovation. Bubble-era smart-city launches are over; post-stimulus austerity in cities throughout the world has turned mayors from profligate spenders to penny pinchers. Currently, financing large-scale smart-city efforts with risk-filled, messy public-private partnerships is the only viable strategy. But new schemes for crowdfunding civic improvements will increase citizens’ ability to finance their own designs by passing the hat.”

Tags: ,

"Google wasn't much help."

“Google wasn’t much help.”

What is wrong with me? (33/f) 

I’ve been wetting my bed lately. Has anyone been through this? Google wasn’t much help.

Cars can’t think and feel like horses can, but that’s okay. No deep understanding is necessary to make them superior at labor. But what about in intimacy? The opening paragraph of a post at the Philosopher’s Beard about that potential moment (hopefully in the distant future) when the term computer dating takes on a new meaning:

“The robots are coming. Even if they don’t actually think, they will behave enough like they do to take over most of the cognitive labour humans do, just as fossil-fuel powered machines displaced human muscle power in the 19th and 20th centuries. I’ve written elsewhere about the kind of changes this new industrial revolution implies for our political and moral economy if we are to master its utopian possibilities and head off its dystopian threats. But robots won’t merely be set to work out in the world; they will also move into our homes. This will have consequences for human intimacy as we now know it. Robots will not only be able to do our household chores, but care work, performing the labours of love without ever loving. I foresee two distinct tendencies. First, because robots will allow us to economise on love, inter-human intimacy may become attenuated as we have less need of each other. Second, because robots will perform care better than we can, robots may become objectively more attractive than humans as intimate companions.

Brief and interesting history from a post at Priceonomics about the invention of childbirth-easing forceps in the 16th century, and the skullduggery employed by William Chamberlen, the surgeon behind the innovation, to maximize his profits:

“In the Chamberlen family’s day, members of the Catholic church and midwives helped women through the dangerous process of childbirth. The tools used were crude. If they used any tools at all, they used crochets and hooks in gruesome operations to remove the corpses of dead infants from their mothers, along with nooses of string. The primary goal of what passed for obstetric medicine was to keep the mother alive — preserving the health and life of an infant was beyond the available level of technology and knowledge. 

At the height of the European civil wars following the Protestant Reformation, a family of French Huguenots (followers of John Calvin, the theologian and former lawyer) developed a contraption that, in skilled hands, could deliver newborns, even in the case of an obstructed birth: forceps. 

William Chamberlen, originally an apothecary and barber-surgeon, fled France as the Bourbon monarchy began to impose regulations banning the employment of Protestants in the professions, which eventually culminated in the forced exile of the Huguenots to Protestant countries throughout Europe. He took his family to England — where he would soon invent his marvelous device, and his descendants would eventually serve kings and queens as trusted surgeons.

When a difficult birth presented itself to the Chamberlens, they would take the utmost care to obscure their methods. They ushered out the expectant mother’s family and either applied a blindfold to the woman in labor or extracted the infant under a heavy sheet. Few were permitted to know the secret of forceps, and none saw the designs for the devices that they used. Their reputation for results eventually preceded them. The original device was made of iron, with the tongs likely covered by leather. By family tradition, the Chamberlens would carry the tools in an ornate box, inlaid with gold.

The family used secrecy to reap substantial profits from their invention. “

Tags: ,

« Older entries § Newer entries »