Fool Me Once Shame on shame on You Fool Me  You Can t Get Fooled Again
« Apr 2007 | Main Page | June 2007 »
The arrangement bears a remarkable resemblance to the multi-touch display Jeff Han demonstrated at TED in 2006, but it's unclear just how much (if anything) he had to do with the Microsoft product. Surface does include some nifty features that Han'due south vertical-mounted screens couldn't do, such as recognizing when a digital devices has been put onto the table and reacting accordingly -- downloading pictures from cameras, opening upwardly a jukebox app for a MP3 player, etc.. I was impressed by the gestural controls for these features (such as "tossing" a file towards a device to upload it); a primal aspect of a usable kinesthetic interface has to exist a subtle sense of physics, so that "objects" (virtual though they may exist) accept a perceived mass and momentum.
Okay, not bad tech, undoubtedly terrifically expensive for the foreseeable future, merely if information technology'southward at all functional -- and my approximate is that it volition exist -- it'due south probably a progenitor of a device we'll accept in our homes by the middle of the next decade, and will find in cereal boxes not too much longer after that.
What struck me while watching the demos and reading the breathless write-up in Popular Mechanics (of all places) was that the multi-touch display system is probably the apotheosis of the ii-dimensional interface model. It comes the closest to treating virtual objects as having 3D infinite and weight without compromising the utility of more traditional flat documents and menus. Users aren't limited by a single bespeak of contact with the brandish (e.grand., a mouse arrow), breaking a ironclad law dating from the earliest days of computers. In the end, a mouse pointer and a text insert cursor are making the aforementioned merits: here is the sole indicate of interaction with the machine. Multi-touch interfaces (whether Microsoft'south Surface, Apple'southward iPhone, or whatsoever) toss aside that cardinal rule.
The appeal of Surface (etc.) for computing tasks, however, will exist express in many commonplace arenas. Multi-touch isn't going to brand spreadsheets, blogging or surfing the web any simpler or more powerful. It volition take some utility in photo and video editing, although here the question of whether greasy fingers volition prove a regular problem rears its head. No, the real market for multi-touch on is in the world of the Metaverse, especially in the Augmented Reality and Mirror Worlds versions.
(The concluding version of the Metaverse Roadmap Overview will finally exist out in the next couple of weeks, if not sooner, btw.)
The core logic of both Mirror Worlds and Augmented Reality is the intertwining of concrete reality and virtual space, in large measure to take advantage of an information substrate to spatial relationships. This substrate relies heavily upon arable sensors, mobile devices and a willingness of citizens to tag/comment/place their environments. The Augmented Reality form emphasizes the in situ availability of the information substrate, while the Mirror Worlds form emphasizes the analytic and topsight power. In each case, the result is a flow of information about places, people, objects and context, i which relies on both history and dynamic interconnections. This may well be the quantum technology that makes it possible to control information flows.
Both of these manifestations of the Metaverse could readily take advantage of an interface organization that allowed circuitous kinetic and gestural controls, with Mirror Worlds working best with a massive table/wall screen, and Augmented Reality working best with a mitt-held device -- or maybe just the hand. 1 of Jeff Han's insights while developing his multi-touch organisation was that homo kinesthetic senses demand something to button against to piece of work right. "Tapping" something virtual in mid-air may await cool in the movies, but runs against how our bodies have evolved. Our muscles and minds wait something to be there, offering physical resistance, when nosotros touch something. Rather than digital buttons floating in mid-air (or a total reliance on a so-chosen "conversational interface"), mobile systems will most certainly accept either a portable tablet or (in my view the eventual winner) a way to utilize one mitt cartoon on another to mimic a stylus and tablet. The parallel here is to the touchpad establish on virtually laptops: imagine using like gestures and motions, but on your other mitt instead of on a slice of plastic.
There are some obvious downfalls to this interaction model -- from the aforementioned greasy fingers to the ergonomics of head and arm positions in extended apply -- but my guess is that the number of innovative applications of the interface (most of which haven't even been imagined) will outweigh any initial physical clumsiness.
I've been traveling this long weekend, attending the wedding of our adept friends Taylor and Jeremiah. I served as the wedding photographer (I've been doing photography for years, as a squeamish non-textual hobby).
Normally I post nigh ideas and futures, but information technology is my web log. I thought Taylor looked and then beautiful in this picture, I had to share it. Congratulations, y'all ii!
Wednesday, May 23, 2007. Call up that date. Information technology'south the mean solar day the Earth became an urban planet.
Working with United nations estimates that predict the world will be 51.3 percent urban by 2010, the researchers [demographers from North Carolina Land University and the University of Georgia] projected the May 23, 2007, transition day based on the average daily rural and urban population increases from 2005 to 2010. On that day, a predicted global urban population of iii,303,992,253 will exceed that of 3,303,866,404 rural people.
For the first time in history, more than people alive in cities than in rural areas. This is, in many ways, the single most important indicator of whether we'll survive this century. Here'due south why:
Urban centers support people more efficiently than do small towns, villages, and the countryside. This isn't just true environmentally or economically; information technology's arguably as well the case when it comes to the kind of intellectual ferment that drives innovation. New ideas are the sparks coming from the friction between minds -- and y'all get a lot more friction in the city. Urban growth, over fourth dimension, makes us all stronger.
Cities require complex support systems, even so. Circuitous infrastructure offers plenty of opportunities for failure, whether via natural disasters or human causation. Isolated failures will happen, and not pose a systemic threat. Only repeated -- or un-repaired -- system failures would inevitably drive people out of the cities, by choice or by necessity.
As long as the overall proportion of urban dwellers to rural denizens continues to grow, nosotros can reasonably conclude that human civilization is doing a decent job of maintaining its overall system integrity. If that pattern reverses -- if we start to come across the proportion of urban to rural edge dorsum towards rural dominance -- it'southward time to look for signs that civilization's systems are collapsing.
Click on information technology for the original. Information technology's a picture of a "subterranean void" on Mars, taken by the HiRISE ultra-loftier-resolution camera on the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. The resolution on that photo is 25 centimeters per pixel; the void shown is about 100 meters across.
This is one of seven holes in Mars; all seven are along the flank of Arsia Mons, the southernmost of the Tharsis volcanos. Presumably they're cavern entrances, but -- and so far -- even the HiRISE camera can't see anything in in that location. Mars has a dusty atmosphere; if these were shallow depressions or cave openings, scattered light would be visible in enhanced images. Simply absolutely zip is visible. At the very least, that means they're actually, really deep.
What'due south specially exciting about these caves is that they may exist the all-time places to find extant life on Mars. According to USGS scientists (PDF):
Subterranean void spaces may exist the only natural structures on Mars capable of protecting life from a range of significant environmental hazards. With an atmospheric density less than i% of the Earth's and practically no magnetic field, the Martian surface is essentially unprotected from micro-meteoroid bombardment, solar flares, UV radiation and high-free energy particles from space.
Thermal imaging of the voids show that they maintain a relatively abiding temperature, remaining relatively warm in the cold Martian night.
Who's up for a bit of spelunking?
I'thou posting this entry via my new Nokia n800 interwebtube tablet (tubelet?). As much every bit I've long been fascinated past mobile devices, most tend to exist amend-suited to information consumption than creation. The n800 is the first one I've tried that makes posting to OtF at least a reasonable option.
What makes this device particularly appealing is that information technology uses Linux as its Os, not Windows Mobile. Information technology volition exist my first everyday Linux box.
I'k entering this post via the touch screen keyboard. Information technology's not perfect, simply it's far ameliorate for text creation than a phone'south number pad. I wouldn't want to write a novel this fashion, but the occasional blog post won't exist as well bad. When I get a bluetooth keyboard to go with it, I'll exist gear up.
What is it missing? A decent camera, for ane thing. The little pop-out camera is cute, but very depression rez. I'd besides similar to come across it be able to sync with my laptop, pulling over bookmarks and contacts automatically.
Notwithstanding, I'm looking forward to seeing what I'll be able to practise with this.
• Lucky to be Alive: All of us are. Lucky to be live, I mean. It turns out that, about 13,000 years agone, humankind came very close to extinction, courtesy of a 2km-3km comet smacking into the Globe.
A grouping of US scientists [...] report that they have found a layer of microscopic diamonds at 26 different sites in Europe, Canada and America. These are the remains of a giant carbon-rich comet that crashed in pieces on our planet 12,900 years agone, they say. The huge pressures and heat triggered by the fragments crashing to Globe turned the comet's carbon into diamond dust. 'The shock waves and the heat would take been tremendous,' said West. 'It would have fix fire to animals' fur and to the wearable worn by men and women. The searing oestrus would have as well set fire to the grasslands of the northern hemisphere. Smashing grazing animals like the mammoth that had survived the original blast would later have died in their thousands from starvation. Only animals, including humans, that had a wide range of nutrient would have survived the aftermath.'
This discovery manages to explain several roughly simultaneous but previously difficult-to-connect events, including the "Younger Dryas" mini ice historic period, megafaunal mass extinctions, and the utter elimination of the showtime wave of Homo sapiens migrants into North America. Details of the discovery will be presented this week at the American Geophysical Wedlock meeting in Acapulco. (Session I, Session 2, and Session Iii abstracts.) More details at New Scientist.
• Artifice 1: Remaking Nature: Nature presents the arguments around geoengineering in the May 9 edition, offering what looks to me to be a reasonably even-handed exam of a diversity of potential re-terraforming projects. The "we don't know enough to do annihilation" position is well-represented, every bit is the "we may be forced to practice it, so we should exercise it right" view. I was specially pleased to see the explicit argument that, should geoengineering be required, it should exist done "as advisedly and as reversibly as y'all can." A good argument is fabricated for my personal view, that more than enquiry into geoengineering is especially important in social club to know what not to do:
[In reference to Roger Angel's massively multi-mirror sunblock idea:] Ralph Cicerone, a climate scientist and president of the US National Academy of Sciences, singles the paper out for praise for the painstakingly careful way it was done. "He went dorsum to it again and again," Cicerone says. "In its standard of elegance and completeness it was exemplary." For him and many others, such academic excellence is the principal point of publishing research on geoengineering. For these researchers, the aim is not to discover feasible solutions but to do skillful scientific discipline that provides a standard against which to gauge the less skillful, or flatly foolish, schemes that might otherwise accrete around the thought. Cicerone points to quack schemes for ozone replacement in the 1980s every bit the sort of thing that needs to be forestalled: dorsum so, he says, "poor ideas got every bit far every bit they did considering of [the community's] silence."
Say it with me: if climate disaster hits faster and harder than anticipated, desperate people will try desperate measures, including geoengineering. We demand to be able to identify the choices that won't simply make things worse.
• Artifice 2: Robo-Brothers in Artillery: Joel Garreau has a terrific piece in the Washington Mail service called "Bots on The Ground," discussing the growing utilize of robots (remote-controlled and semi-democratic) in the U.South. military. The slice is worth reading for the opening chestnut alone, which underscores just how powerful emotional relationships with machines can be.
Without using the term, Garreau makes it clear that these technologies are equally much a course of emotional augmentation equally they are ability augmentation. The animate devices become extensions of the self, even every bit they accept on at least the superficial advent of independence. This is new territory for technologists, but in many respects it'due south a long-standing element of our civilization. In the past, though, we just chosen them "pets." Will we be able to retrieve of robots in the same way?
My true cat is sleeping on the desk side by side to my keyboard as I write this. As I look at her, I find myself unsure of whether I'd be able to take the same emotional bond with something artificial. Volition this be the real 21st century generational dividing line?
• Join an Institute for the Time to come Project: The following was sent to me by my colleagues at the Institute for the Future, and they agreed to let me repost.
The Constitute for the Future (IFTF) is an independent nonprofit research grouping. We work with organizations of all kinds to help them make better, more informed decisions near the hereafter. We provide the foresight to create insights that lead to action. We bring a combination of tools, methodologies, and a deep agreement of emerging trends and discontinuities to our piece of work with companies, foundations, and authorities agencies.
We are currently recruiting for a new enquiry report chosen "Boomers in the Next twenty Years". For the purposes of this study, people who were born between 1946 and 1964 qualify as Boomers, and you exercise non demand to identify as a Babe Boomer to participate. The study is about how you lot will respond to the changes and challenges in the adjacent 20 years. Nosotros want to know most your experiences and the decisions you are making and foresee making in the areas of health, finance, work, family unit and customs.
Participation would include a response to this survey, followed by a cursory telephone interview and a 2 hour interview in your dwelling to be scheduled between June and August, 2007. Not all people who complete this survey volition be selected for farther interviews. Participants who complete of all phases of the projection volition be given a stipend of $100, paid by American Express gift card.
We are peculiarly interested in interviewing people who live within 100 miles of urban center centre of these cities:
Denver, Colorado
San Francisco, California
Austin, Texas
Seattle, Washington
Miami, Florida
Louisville, Kentucky
Minneapolis St. Paul, Minnesota
New York, New York
Take our cursory Recruitment Survey to become involved, or forward this bulletin on to people you know who may be interested in participating. Thank you for your time!
If you accept any questions about participating in the project, delight straight them to mlueck@iftf.org.
(This post written in the departure lounge for my return flight from London to San Francisco, about 2am Pacific Time, and posted upon my arrival home.)
Security specialist Bruce Schneier uses a item term to refer to the practices that are highly visible simply ultimately of little value: "security theater." I of the canonical examples of security theater is the requirement that one remove 1'south shoes at the airport, or more recently, the 3 ounce limitation on liquids carried on-board a plane. These are demands that have piffling practical effect, but -- in large measure by inconveniencing travelers -- they requite the appearance of doing something almost aircraft security.
Today, merely most fifteen minutes agone, I saw the normal level of security theater taken to new heights.
In the past, my flights to London accept been on British Airways; this fourth dimension, for a diverseness of reasons, I gave Virgin Atlantic a try. The SFO to LHR leg was generally pleasant, at least equally pleasant as trans-Atlantic flights can be (i.e., I was constantly feeling guilty about the carbon footprint of my flying). The security theater in San Francisco was perfunctory and reasonably efficient.
Heathrow proved to be a different story. For whatever reason, the initial x-ray screening went more slowly than at SFO; moreover, the inevitable shoe-removal was actually a second line & screening, rather than simply part of the initial pass-through. Information technology turns out that this wasn't the cease of it, however. Upon arrival at the divergence gate, I discovered that Virgin has put together yet some other security screening, requiring me to:
• Allow the screener to poke through my carry-on purse. Given what later on transpired with the laptop, I was surprised that he didn't seem particularly interested in my unusual-appearing camera or multiple mobile phones (the woman being grilled next to me spent much of her time struggling to remove the bombardment from her lone mobile).
• Open and drink from the bottle of soda I had purchased from the vendor around the corner from the gate (and well-inside the difference expanse).
• Remove my shoes again, so that the screener could... well, all he did was lift each kick. I'chiliad not sure what that told him, other than I have reasonably lightweight boots.
• Open up upwards my laptop screen then that he could run his fingers across the keyboard. He didn't care whether the laptop was on or off, or whether it worked -- but that the keys moved.
• He then told me to remove the battery. I told him no, that I needed to shut the car downwards commencement so that I didn't lose data. I felt perversely tickled that the laptop seemed to take three times longer than usual to shut downwardly. Once the laptop had finally close downwardly, and I had removed the battery, all he did was look into the battery slot for well-nigh a 2nd, if fifty-fifty that long. "All clear."
When I said that this all seemed rather absurd, given that I'd just gone through a screening a short while before, he sniffed that this was being done because I was flying to the United States, and that required actress precautions. I asked if British Airways was doing this, too, and he said that he hoped so -- but when I said that they weren't when I flew just a few weeks earlier, he simply shrugged.
This wasn't done to me every bit a special random (or lone-male) screening. Every rider on the 747 received this treatment. Given the screener'southward replies, I take no reason to believe that this was a but-added layer of security in response to a new threat.
Okay, I sympathise that, on the g scale of things, this is at worst an inconvenience. But in many ways, information technology's the perfect illustration of but how brain-dead the current security model has go. This is all about going through ritualized motions without any bodily utility. It's cargo-cult security.
And that makes it dangerous. To the extent that flyers -- citizens -- believe that this kind of time-consuming and vaguely humiliating inspection (the crotch-grabbing pat-downwards really should have a safeword) actually makes the flight safer, they're less-likely to pay attention to their surroundings. Someone who decides to do something evil on the flying has a greater chance of being successful, simply because passengers are fabricated to think that the security theater actually made a difference.
The combined self-interest, awareness and reason of the public is our greatest source of defense against the unthinkable. This is truthful whether we're talking nearly human-caused or natural disasters. Annihilation that mutes these defenses without offer compensating benefits works to our ultimate detriment.
The 2nd podcast emerging from the conversation session with RU Sirius terminal week is at present available.
RU Sirius Evidence #109 (Weekend Edition): Why Big War is Becoming Obsolete: Jamais Cascio of WorldChanging fame leads u.s.a. in a discussion virtually existence good ancestors and why networked global guerrillas are rendering Big War obsolete.
MP3 link.
This is, of course, based on the "Lost Hegemon Function 2" piece from May 7.
(In London. In the workshop. Of a sudden amazingly jet-lagged.)
I ordinarily fly British Airways, just I've been annoyed enough at their service (especially with regards to using accumulated FF miles for upgrades) that I decided to try Virgin. Gotta make sure that Sir Richard has the $25 million he needs for his geoengineering claiming, yous know.
Unless absolutely necessary, I don't fly United -- non since the engine defenseless fire on a flying to Philadelphia, while even so on the tarmac, and because we were already belatedly the crew didn't respond until quite literally the whole passenger cabin was yelling. Fool me once, shame on, shame on you, fool me -- can't get fooled once again. Or something like that.
Just a quick annotation: one of the 2 podcast segments recorded this weekend with RU Sirius is now available at the MondoGlobo website:
RU Sirius Show #108: Justin from Justin.tv Brings Information technology Justin Kan has shared his view of the world with all of u.s.a.… literally, since March 19, when he hooked a mobile camera to his chapeau and started streaming live video 24-7 (more than or less) on his justin.tv site. He joined us live in our studio for this program. And check out "Stereotypes" past Bos105, Justin's brother!
Hither'south the MP3 link.
You tin can run into the annal of today's RU Sirius interview here -- scan ahead to 2:45 to see his inflow.
(Yes, I'm walking with a cane. It's not a 2-chip Warren Ellis impression, I'm having an arthritis burst. Yep, arthritis. Yes, it sucks.)
The chat is lively, and worth listening to. As pictured, I have the honor of beingness the very kickoff person ever to try to spam the justin.tv video feed -- unsuccessfully, as the resolution on his camera is pretty lousy. Fortunately, he was nice plenty to read out what I wrote: the URL for Open the Hereafter.
I'm certain the money will start rolling in any 2nd at present.
That, at to the lowest degree, is the grossly-oversimplified version of John Robb'southward new volume, Brave New War. Such a parallel has nothing to practice with politics, simply with position. The United states of america, and other centralized, conventionally powerful global actors, make full a part in the geopolitical ecosystem akin to Microsoft: large and deadening to answer; wealthy and wasteful; hierarchical and ossified. Al Qaeda, and other distributed, guerrilla insurgency and terrorist movements, fill up a geopolitical function more than alike to Linux: decentralized and nimble; open to new entrants; innovative out of necessity. It'due south for adept reason that Robb refers to the conflicts at present underway as "open up source warfare," and the distributed participants, "global guerrillas."
I'll go out it to others to address the military implications of Robb'south argument; it'south enough to say that I establish his ideas compelling (this should come up as no surprise, given how oftentimes I link to his site when I write nearly global politics). I'd like to focus, instead, on what he calls out as the proper response those opposed to the global guerrillas should prefer.
Robb makes it clear that the tactics the United States (and, to a lesser extent, Europe and other post-industrial nations) now employs are bad, bad ideas. "Knee-wiggle constabulary states" and "preemptive state of war" autumn into a category Robb borrows from security specialist Bruce Schneier: "brittle security." The big problem with brittle security is that, when it fails, it fails catastrophically; moreover, by employing these tactics, the U.S. (etc.) undermines the very moral suasion and memetic influence that are amidst the nearly important tools to fight empowered extremism.
He proposes instead the adoption of "dynamic decentralized resilience:"
It is only the ability to dynamically mitigate and dampen system shocks. Specifically, it is those things we (and our state) can do to modify the configuration of our networks to ensure that intentional or naturally occurring attacks on our society don't do much damage or spiral out of control.
This is a welcome argument. The concept of resilience is useful every bit a response to a spectrum of threats, as it emphasizes not the specific counters to a particular challenge, simply the broader ability of a society or network to survive and thrive even when faced with major threats. Robb uses information technology here as a way of dealing with open source warfare; a few months ago, I used it equally a mode of dealing with environmental disruption:
"Resiliency," conversely, admits that change is inevitable and in many cases out of our easily, so the environs -- and our relationship with it -- needs to be able to withstand unexpected shocks. Greed, accident or malice may have harmful results, but [...] such results tin can exist captivated without threat to the overall health of the planet's ecosystem. If we talk about "ecology resiliency," then, we hateful a goal of supporting the planet'southward ability to withstand and regenerate in the event of local or even widespread disruption.
Robb and I are non lonely in the use of resilience every bit a fundamental part of surviving the 21st century. The Resilience Alliance profoundly expands on the notion of environmental resilience, and links information technology to concepts such as adaptive cycles and Panarchy. (I'd honey to run across how Robb would make utilise of the Panarchy argument in his own work -- there are definite connections.)
This isn't simply a coincidental use of the same discussion. The overlaps between social resilience and ecological resilience are quite profound. A pocket-sized example of this can be seen when Robb leads us through reconfiguring an existing arrangement to make it more resilient. He argues that the power grid could be made much more than resilient -- that is, much better able to absorb and mitigate threats -- by condign much more decentralized, with individual buildings becoming power generators likewise as power consumers. To be clear, this isn't a call for energy isolationism -- he doesn't want to become "off-filigree." It's a call for a much more than deeply-networked grid. And information technology happens to exist an argument very familiar to those of us looking at means to deal with ecology crises, not simply because it supports greater use of renewable energy, but because of its resiliency under stress.
Looking more broadly, Robb lists three rules for successful "platforms," or sets of services, operating under his resiliency model: transparency (so all participants can see and understand what's happening); ii-fashion (so all participants tin can act as both providers and consumers of the services); and openness (and then the number and kind of participants isn't artificially express). Again, these rules should audio very familiar to readers of (among other sites) Open the Time to come and WorldChanging.
I brand a point of highlighting these similarities in order to demonstrate that the concepts that Robb discusses every bit a manner of dealing with a particular kind of challenge actually accept far broader applicability. An open, transparent, distributed and resilient system is precisely what's needed to survive successfully threats from:
John Robb addresses some of these when referring to "naturally occurring attacks" or the value of sustainability as a way of supporting resilience. Because he focuses on the military/security manifestations, notwithstanding, he doesn't make a strong connection to the broader utility of the concept. I hope that he starts to await more closely at these other arenas every bit sources of innovation and even alliance.
The i element that Brave New War lacked, and would have been well-received, is some exploration of what kinds of counter-global guerrilla strategies might be in the offing. He's clear that the electric current arroyo is disastrous, and the resilience statement does a practiced job of showing how mail service-industrial nations can meliorate survive the threat of global guerrillas without surrendering their values. Merely I constitute myself wondering what kinds of tactics and technologies volition emerge every bit a fashion of meeting the open source warfare threat caput-on. Is it something every bit obvious as re-tooling conventional militaries to adopt more "open source" style techniques? Is it something as surprising equally a shift in focus towards what might be idea of as an "open source peace corps"? Maybe it volition require a major technological bound, where we find that the all-time counter to open source guerrillas is ultra-high-tech swarming bots, or nano-weapons, or something even more startling.
The question I have for John Robb is, then, if we build the open future, how do we defend information technology?
This strikes me equally an of import indicator:
Pasadena news site outsources local government coverage to Bharat
PASADENA – The job posting was a head-scratcher: "Nosotros seek a newspaper announcer based in Bharat to report on the city government and political scene of Pasadena, California, United states." [...] Outsourcing start claimed manufacturing jobs, then striking services such as technical support, airline reservations and revenue enhancement preparation. Now comes the next borderland: local journalism.
The editor who ran the ad argues that, since the Pasadena city council now puts its meetings online, reporters covering the city can be anywhere. And while this particular instance may non hold truthful this fourth dimension around -- city governance is more than urban center council meetings -- it'southward clearly going to be possible at some point soon.
Of grade, the editor's job isn't going to exist so stable, either. Whether considering of automated selection software ("botsourcing," as with Google News) or social filtering software ("crowdsourcing," equally with Digg), specialized editor skills are of declining value. And at that place'due south actually no reason why editorial duties couldn't be outsourced, too. Add together in remote collaboration and presentations, and the same will agree true for lawyers, accountants, even (gulp) consultants.
The combination of increasingly smart software, social network-based activities, and highly-educated depression-toll workers around the world looks likely to hitting cognition workers equally hard -- if not harder -- than previous waves of automation and outsourcing have hit ostensibly less-skilled jobs. Botsourcing/crowdsourcing/outsourcing knowledge work may plow out to be a very attractive selection, given that these tend to be higher-paying jobs. Ironically, it's entirely possible that the carbon footprint of shipping may add and then much cost to outsourced manufacturing that those jobs get re-localized, whereas the knowledge jobs (needing but an Net connexion) end up being globalized.
So are nosotros headed to a world where the simply stable jobs are those that absolutely crave hands-on contact -- health maintenance, preparation, and the like? Or to i where wages even out across the globe of skilled workers? Neither strikes me as terribly appealing or stable.
In the by, economic transitions that resulted in lost jobs inevitably led to arguments that such losses were transient, every bit new technologies and industries would be opening up, and new skills would atomic number 82 to new jobs. But that argument rests on the supposition that in that location were categories of piece of work that couldn't easily be de-coupled from the workers, considering of highly-specialized skills. In a world where the only task characteristic that can't readily be de-coupled is proximity, is information technology even possible to come up upwardly with new jobs that tin can't immediately be shipped out or chipped out?
This, coupled with the likely rise of molecular manufacturing over the next twenty to 25 years, strikes me as a key early indicator that we're shifting into an entirely new kind of economy.
The sound quality isn't all that great -- certainly more my fault than anyone else's -- and information technology's pretty articulate that I'yard coming in over a web cam... but it's another interesting instance of using web tech to bear out work that previously would take demanded travel.
Thank you for taping the talk, Cubicgarden!
Yesterday, I was an invited guest at a World Economic Forum coming together on global risks. The WEF personnel tasked the attendees with helping to effigy out key focal points for next twelvemonth's Forum in Davos. I tin't say much more until the official report is out (presently, apparently), but to requite you a sense of what the group works on, here's a link to the Global Risks 2007 document(pdf) published in Feb.
Main determination I reached: the corporations represented in this meeting were all very cognizant of the risks coming from global climate change, and none of them tried to push back on the science at all. At the same fourth dimension, they remained focused on the almost-term implications, and seemed bullheaded-sided by some of the suggestions of likely future results I offered. Nothing I said would accept come every bit a surprise to regular readers of the leading greenish blogs, but in that location were some worried looks when I was done (all related to the policy implications, not the geo-science).
Today, I spoke to the Takeaway Festival in London. I did so via Skype video, from the condolement of my home office.
The positives: did non have to fly to London for a 20 minute presentation, a win-win-win for me (no 10 60 minutes flying to bargain with), for the festival (no international airplane fare to pay for), and the Earth (far less carbon output from the videoconference than from a flying). I could sit down comfortably (arthritis flare-up once more today). Got a gamble to try something new.
The negatives: no way to get realtime feedback from the audience, whether in terms of confused looks, laughter or adulation. Couldn't talk with my hands (i.east., gesticulate for accent or balance while I talk), because I was too close to the camera -- just if I pulled dorsum enough to run into my entire upper body, the graininess of the Skype video connection would have left my face indecipherable. Couldn't see the space, since the London camera was on a laptop stuck in the back of the room, blocked by a crowd of people standing.
I don't recall I'd want to do video presentations on a regular basis, but I'm glad I got a chance to do this one.
Finally, RU Sirius has asked me to serve as co-host for this weekend'south Neofiles podcast. The guest will exist Justin, of Justin.tv set. Should be fun -- and I'll link to the audio file when it's upwardly.
24 EB 93 fourteen E0 4B C0 BD 99 44 65 AD 86 CC DE 92
...and I'd better non grab whatsoever of you using information technology!
(See here for explanation... and to get your own 128-bit number!)
In the meantime...
• Greenish Panopticon Begins: UC San Diego's Shannon Spanhake has come with a small pollution monitor built to send data to prison cell phones. She calls it Squirrel.
Squirrel fits in the palm of your paw and tin can be clasped to a belt or purse. The pocket-size, bombardment-powered mobile device tin can sample pollutants with its on-chip sensor. The current epitome measures carbon monoxide and ozone, just somewhen the device will exist able to sample nitrogen oxide and sulphur dioxide in the air, as well equally temperature, barometric pressure and humidity.It'southward what happens side by side that makes Squirrel a powerful tool in the fight confronting pollution. Using a Bluetooth wireless transmitter, the device connects to the user's cell phone. A software program called Acorn allows the user to see the current pollution alerts through a screensaver on the cell phone'due south display. The phone also periodically transmits the environmental data to a public database on the Internet operated by the California Plant for Telecommunications and Information Engineering science (Calit2), which is funding Squirrel's development.
Hmmm. Any of this audio familiar?
Keen work, Shannon!
• Micro-Dam It!: Gregg Zachary writes in the May 2007 edition of IEEE Spectrum about the growth of micro-hydro in Africa equally a manner around the ongoing free energy production crisis beyond most of the continent. Small dams, which can produce anywhere from a few kilowatts to a few megawatts of power, take proven to exist more reliable, more than environmentally audio, and more flexible than traditional hydroelectric megaprojects. The microhydro dams, which produce no more than 100 kilowatts, have become specially pop, as they can be built and maintained with minimal demands on government or exterior support.
Information technology will come as no surprise, then, that near African governments are opposed (or at best unwelcoming) to microhydro. The primary reason, though, is interesting:
It'southward a reminder that the electricity issue in Africa, as elsewhere, is as much political as information technology is technical. Big dams are prestige projects, symbols of national ability that drive employment and industry. Minor hydros, dispersed and hard for the regime to keep track of, let alone manage, seem vaguely destructive.
That reminded me of something I dug upwards back in the late 1980s, doing research on Pakistan'south development of atomic weaponry. The driver for most Pakistanis wasn't war machine might or even deterrence confronting India, but prestige: building an diminutive bomb would demonstrate to the world that Islamic republic of pakistan was as avant-garde, as capable, every bit any other pinnacle-ranking nation.
The connection between mega-projects and national pride -- especially in areas historically the target of other nations' whims -- should not be ignored by those of us seeking to alter beliefs.
• You Don't Live Longer, It Just Feels Similar It: Calorie restriction, aka cr, is a long-recognized path to longevity. Cutting the diets of mice by forty% gives them 50% longer lives than mice fed a normal, healthy diet. I'm sure we're all prepare to leap on that bandwagon.
Then biogerontologists are looking for and so-called "cr-mimetic" drugs, just as resveratrol, that play a trick on the body into behaving as if it is receiving a limited diet. That search just took a big step, with the discovery of a particular gene, pha-4, that is tied straight (and, plainly, exclusively) to the calorie-longevity tradeoff. The usual disclaimers use: nonetheless early research; may not work in humans as it does in other animals; the influence of genes isn't every bit well-understood equally popularly believed; don't look your insurance to pay for it.
• Perhaps for Cell Phones Side by side?: New Scientist reports on the development of a $10 Dna-replicating device, a inexpensive, small PCR (polymerase chain reaction) organization. PCR is pretty much a cornerstone process of nearly all genetic testing and engineering.
The device has no moving parts and costs just $ten to make. Information technology runs polymerase concatenation reactions (PCRs), to generate billions of identical copies of a Dna strand, in every bit little as twenty minutes. This is much faster than the machines currently in use, which take several hours.
It notwithstanding needs a way to isolate Dna samples for replication, so don't expect information technology to show up at Target any time before long. Even so, once it's fix, the medical applications, especially in the developing earth, will be outstanding. Maybe of fifty-fifty greater impact, though, will exist the uses adult past open-source hardware hackers, looking for ways to make the system do what the designers never anticipated.
And just expect until someone figures out how to hook the $10 Dna device to the $100 laptop...
• The Roof, The Roof, The Roof is Oddly Bright: And finally, Summertime has arrived. Less than a week agone, it was windy and rainy here; today, it's set to exist in the low-to-mid-90s. Good matter we had to replace our roof.
One of the first pieces I ever wrote for WorldChanging that got a bit of attending was Green and White, talking nearly some inquiry washed past the Lawrence Berkeley Labs indicating that lite-colored (or, all-time of all, white) roofs made such a dramatic difference in warmer climes that replacing a roof with white shingles would save more ability (from cooling) than would be generated by replacing that roof with solar panels.
When it came fourth dimension to replace the roof of our house, you'd better believe we went white. Or Ash Grey, which was a newer generation shingle with a slightly meliorate efficiency rating than the white shingles. The additional cost over the basic cheap shingles (which only come in faux-wood night colors) will be hands matched past the profoundly reduced air-conditioning bills and the one-fourth dimension rebate from PG&Due east, the local power company. All-time of all, no more sweltering at midnight.
Behavior changes matter. Organization changes matter. But let's not forget the value of offering people a chance to do the right thing when they need to meet existing needs.
(Previously: The Lost Hegemon (pt 1) and A Post-Hegemonic Future)
Few would dispute that the American armed services is, far and away, the nearly powerful conventional armed force on the planet, fifty-fifty every bit depleted every bit it is by the Republic of iraq state of war.
At the aforementioned time, few would dispute that this military force is, and by all signs will continue to exist, insufficient to quell the insurgency in Republic of iraq.
While this particular result has dramatic implications for the global position of the U.s.a., as well as for the political and economical future of the region (and the world), the larger meaning of this conflict is only beginning to become clear: conventional militaries, as a means of compelling a desired beliefs on the function of a national populace, have become obsolete. The question now is how long it will take political leaders to recognize this fact, and adapt to it.
The reasons for this obsolescence are clear: conventional military forces appear to be unable to defeat a networked insurgency, which combines the data age'due south distributed communication and rapid learning with the traditional guerilla'due south invisibility (past being indistinguishable from the populace) and low support needs. Information technology'south non just the American experience in Iraq (and, not as widely discussed, Afghanistan) that tells u.s.a. this; Israel'south latest war in Lebanon leads us to the same conclusion, and fifty-fifty the Soviet Matrimony's feel in Afghanistan and America'south war in Vietnam underline this aforementioned bespeak. Insurgencies have e'er been difficult to defeat with conventional forces, just the "open source warfare" model, where tactics can be learned, tested and communicated both formally and informally beyond a distributed network of guerillas, poses an effectively impossible challenge for conventional militaries.
To exist clear, this isn't a crude argument that networked insurgency forces are "stronger" than conventional militaries. In a stand-up fight confronting a modern regular army, whether on attack or defense, the guerillas will lose; in an insurgency, where stand-up fights are avoided, the modern army simply cannot win. But even talking about winning and losing in this context is simplistic. Networked insurgencies are best at forcing plush stalemates. When on the offense, networked insurgencies are less virtually compellence than near provocation (making the enemy more than likely to engage in acts that horrify the populace and undermine the enemy'south support); on the defense, they're less about protection than virtually disruption (making the enemy expend increasing amounts of forcefulness, money and attention on maintaining its own disquisitional support systems). As a outcome, a networked insurgency can all-time be thought of every bit a deterrent forcefulness, promising (and able) to verbal a loftier toll in retaliation for a perceived attack.
(John Robb's site Global Guerillas, along with his new book Brave New State of war, document the emergence and capabilities of the open source warfare concept, so I won't try to replicate that here. And, to be articulate, my arguments here are my own, non his.)
If deterrence equally a way of making conventional militaries obsolete sounds familiar, it should. Such obsolescence actually began in 1945, with the beginning of the nuclear era. The risk of escalation made conventional conflict betwixt nuclear-armed states functionally impossible, past making it something that must be avoided. While this didn't stop the Us and USSR from building upward considerable conventional military forces, it meant (for example) that the Soviets could field a significantly larger conventional army than could the Americans without changing the balance of power. All of the coin poured into the conventional militaries by the superpowers was functionally meaningless when it came to the threat each posed directly to the other. The Cold War military build-ups had other drivers -- power-projection against non-nuclear states (albeit with limited effectiveness), institutional bureaucracies that needed to be fed, and a conventional way of thinking that simply couldn't quite believe that the underlying organization of military power had inverse.
Nuclear weapons make conventional conflicts extremely unlikely betwixt nuclear states. Historically, this meant that nuclear states could notwithstanding mess around with conventional conflicts against non-nuclear states, with varying degrees of success. The growing empowerment of insurgent forces has now made conventional conflicts extremely costly and nearly impossible to win, as well. In time, this should come to make them extremely unlikely at the low end, too.*
Because this empowerment looks set to accelerate both technologically (such as with the appearance of cheap fabbers or the proliferation of ultra-inexpensive, ultra-smart embedded processors and programming know-how) and organizationally (as the increased participation of various globally-distributed guerilla movements increases the pool of tactics and ways to test them), fights against networked insurgencies will only become more than and more unsafe. If the lessons of Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon don't sink in this time, the side by side endeavour to utilize conventional war machine forces will lead to even costlier failure, and the side by side after that costlier all the same -- and, somewhen, the fading hegemons, ascension superpowers, regional badasses and then forth will finally realize that the Bully Game they thought they'd been playing ended years ago.
But what's the new game? Networked insurgencies are just the latest in a long development of conflict. How, and then, will the powerful again come to boss the weak?
That remains to be seen, but it'due south almost certain to involve figuring out ways to achieve networked supremacy, rather than simple forcefulness supremacy. It will very probable be much more automatic, in role due to the growing reluctance of post-industrial nations to give up the lives of soldiers, and in function due to the growing power of semi-autonomous machines to conduct out tasks beyond the capacity of the human body. Ideally, the proliferation of networked systems in the service of "politics by other ways" might even allow for the development of tools that minimize casualties on all sides. (The stalled but brilliant web comic Spiders is 1 intriguing scenario of what that kind of earth might look like.)
Despite the cease of the utility of conventional force, the lack of certainty as to what the side by side wave of global compellence ability will wait like will inevitably lead to strategic mistakes. As nosotros look alee, it'south clear that if another state -- say, Red china -- decides to take America'southward place equally the leading hegemonic power on the planet past emulating the current American model of farthermost accent on conventional force projection, that state has already become another Lost Hegemon. The arrangement has inverse, and the meaning of ability has changed.
Conversely, the first group that cracks this problem has the potential to leapfrog the others in assuming the part of global powerhouse. Given the speed with which technology and organizational models are evolving, we can't assume information technology volition be a state. Corporations seemed poised to have on that part in the 1990s; non-governmental groups are the atomic number 82 candidates today. It's entirely possible that the kind of social organisation that will become the next hegemonic force has yet to be invented. One thing is articulate: the next superpower, whoever or whatever it is, volition exist the actor that finally figures out the new meaning of ability.
* So what about India and Islamic republic of pakistan? They're both nuclear armed, and yet continue to shoot at each other. Ironically, this seems to be a outcome of the empowerment of insurgency. Nuclear rivals, non willing to chance the potential escalation of a conventional fight, may turn to the use of networked insurgency techniques as a way of maintaining a fight. As the power of networked insurgency continues to grow, however, fifty-fifty this may go untenable
Source: http://openthefuture.com/2007/05/
Post a Comment for "Fool Me Once Shame on shame on You Fool Me  You Can t Get Fooled Again"