Category Archives: Technology

Meetings I’d like to go to….Part V

Genetic Manipulation of Pest Species: Ecological and Social Challenges:

In the past 10 years major advances have been made in our ability to build transgenic pest strains that are conditionally sterile, harbor selfish genetic elements, and express anti-pathogen genes. Strategies are being developed that involve release into the environment of transgenic pest strains with such characteristics. These releases could provide more environmentally benign pest management and save endangered species, but steps must be taken to insure that this is the case and that there are no significant health or environmental risks associated with releases. Our conference will foster discussion of risks and benefits of these technologies among scientists, policy makers, and citizens.

March 4-6, 2009
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC
This is very soon – I’ll try to go to some of it if I can….

Google Devalues Everything? Bwahahaha!

From TechDirt:

This is wrong on so many levels it’s hard to know where to begin. Google doesn’t devalue things it touches. It increases their value by making them easier to find and access. Google increases your audience as a content creator, which is the most important asset you have. It takes a special kind of cluelessness to claim that something that increases your biggest asset “devalues” your business. Thomson’s mistake seems to be that he’s confusing “price” and “value” which is a bit scary for the managing editor of a business publication. Yes, the widespread availability of news may push down the price (that’s just supply and demand), but it doesn’t decrease the value at all. It opens up more opportunities to capture that value.

Let’s meet in New York City next week

I will be on a panel, Open Science: Good For Research, Good For Researchers? next week, February 19th (3:00 to 5:00 pm EST at Columbia University, Morningside Campus, Shapiro CEPSR Building, Davis Auditorium). I am sure my hosts will organize something for us that day before and/or after the event, but Mrs.Coturnix and I will be there a couple of days longer. So, I think we should have a meetup – for Overlords, SciBlings, Nature Networkers, independent bloggers, readers and fans 😉
Is Friday evening a good time for this? Or is Saturday better? Let me know.
You can follow the panel on Twitter or Facebook (I am not sure, but the panel may be recorded in some way and subsequently made available online – will check on that), or, if you can, show up in person. More information can be found here:

Open science refers to information-sharing among researchers, and encompasses a number of initiatives to remove access barriers to data and published papers and to use digital technology to more efficiently disseminate research results. Advocates for this approach argue that openly sharing information among researchers is fundamental to good science, speeds the progress of research, and increases recognition of researchers. The panel will discuss frequently raised questions such as “Can open science practices work for researchers who need to establish priority of publication to advance their careers?” and “Is open science compatible with peer review?”

The Evolution of Facebook

I’ve been on Facebook since the beginning, in 2005. I explored it and studied it. I always spent minimal amount of time on it, though. I get e-mail notifications and perhaps once a day go there to click on all the “Ignore” buttons for all the invitations. So, I do not see is as a big time drain. But every now and then I get useful piece of information there, or an invitation to something I want to attend. I also use it to monitor what my kids are doing there. It is also nice to reconnect to some people I have not heard of in 20-30 years and see what they are doing.
I am on my third set of friends now. The first – lots of people at NCSU I used for the study linked above – got unceremoniously dumped once the study was done. I did not know 99% of those kids and was not interested in their activities. The second cohort were people with Yugoslav last names. I explored their habits – most of them are expat kids, some of them still in the Balkans – and saw that they friended each other regardless of ethnicity: Serbs with Croats with Macedonians with Bosnians, etc., they joined the same Yugo-nostalgic groups (lovers of chocolate bananas, or Djordje Balasevic), and generally frowned upon overt displays of nationalism. I saw that and liked it: the parents screwed up, but the kids are OK. Then I dumped them and built my current cohort out of bloggers, scientists, tech/PR folks, etc., with just a few remaining ex-students, Yugoslavs, old high-school friends and, more recently, lots of family members.
And I use Facebook not just to connect to people, but also to promote myself, my blog, my events, and my employer – pure PR, which sometimes works (as I can see from comments, traffic coming from there, etc.).
danah boyd and Fred Stutzman got dissertations on this topic, studying social networks. And no, “friend” online does not mean what many newbies think it means. Throws off some people initially, I know. It’s a contact. On FB it’s called ‘friend’, on Twitter it’s a Follower, on FriendFeed it’s a Subscriber, etc. FB friend is as friendly as your blog’s RSS feed subscribers, or they can be real friends – this is up to you and your individual use.
On FB, you can separate your contacts into groups, e.g., family, Real Life friends, colleagues, old highschool friends, blog-friends, customers, potential customers, etc.
Facebook has evolved over the five years. Initially, FB was for college students only, soon highschoolers were added as well. They tended to friend people who they were RL friends with, hence the origin of the name. Initially, kids used it for social networking: finding people they know, their RL friends to organize parties, share homework, and keep in touch after graduation.
A couple of years later, bloggers, techies and PR-folks joined FB at the time new apps were introduced. They used it for business networking – promoting their brand, finding like-minded people, political organizing, etc. The two groups (~20s and ~40s) tried to stay away from each other, as the two style of FB use clashed.
This bi-modal distribution of FB users got disrupted over the last year – lots more 25-35-somethings joined in as well as non-tech, non-bloggy, non-business oldsters – the non-tech savvy: your Mom, your highschool friends who have otherwise no presence online… This new cohort is using FB in a middle-way, bridging the two groups already there. Some of them use FB like highschoolers – for social networking, organizing parties and flirting. Others use it like us – for business networking, organizing conferences and meetups, etc. Some combine the two quite well and are bridging the divide between the two older cohorts.
But they differ from the older cohorts by their use of communication tools on FB: the two older cohorts use Walls, Groups, Pages, Events, etc., i.e., all public spaces. The newest cohort is old-timey in that way: once they friend you, they prefer to switch on the privacy shades and Direct Message you on FB, or even switch to e-mail or Skype – their notions of privacy as they change in the 21st century are not well developed yet.
Facebook is great at finding people. It is not as good for finding things: data, information, people who are interested in same things. At about the same time – over the past year or so – blog/tech/PR types discovered FriendFeed which is better for finding people interested in the same things. Until then, FB did that job OK, but FF does it better. FB for those people is like a not-so-boring version of LinkedIn now.
So, Facebook has its utility. It does not do everything for everyone, but it has its place in the ecosystem of online social networks. And it is flexible enough that everyone can adapt Facebook to his or hers own needs. There is no one right way to use it.

You can laugh now….

…but some people knew waaay back then that news will, one day, move from expensive paper to cheap internet:

From here

TechCrunch surfaced this look at a story that ran back in 1981 that covered
how internet news would someday be delivered. At least watch the last 30 seconds. The reporter remarks it would take more than 2 hours to deliver the digital text needed to read the “online newspaper.” She added the per minute (i think) charge was around $5 and comments about the difficulty the new approach would have when competing with the .20 cent daily.
What’s in store for us over the next 30 years?

Teens and Online Social Networks

How many of you have been blogging since June 1997?
Not many, I think. But danah boyd has. And she’s been studying online social networks almost as long, first starting with Friendster, then moving on to MySpace and Facebook as those appeared on the horizon and became popular.
Recently, danah defended her Dissertation on this topic and, a few days ago, posted the entire Dissertation online for everyone to download and read – Taken Out of Context: American Teen Sociality in Networked Publics (pdf):

Abstract: As social network sites like MySpace and Facebook emerged, American teenagers began adopting them as spaces to mark identity and socialize with peers. Teens leveraged these sites for a wide array of everyday social practices – gossiping, flirting, joking around, sharing information, and simply hanging out. While social network sites were predominantly used by teens as a peer-based social outlet, the unchartered nature of these sites generated fear among adults. This dissertation documents my 2.5-year ethnographic study of American teens’ engagement with social network sites and the ways in which their participation supported and complicated three practices – self-presentation, peer sociality, and negotiating adult society.
My analysis centers on how social network sites can be understood as networked publics which are simultaneously (1) the space constructed through networked technologies and (2) the imagined community that emerges as a result of the intersection of people, technology, and practice. Networked publics support many of the same practices as unmediated publics, but their structural differences often inflect practices in unique ways. Four properties – persistence, searchability, replicability, and scalability – and three dynamics – invisible audiences, collapsed contexts, and the blurring of public and private – are examined and woven throughout the discussion.
While teenagers primarily leverage social network sites to engage in common practices, the properties of these sites configured their practices and teens were forced to contend with the resultant dynamics. Often, in doing so, they reworked the technology for their purposes. As teenagers learned to navigate social network sites, they developed potent strategies for managing the complexities of and social awkwardness incurred by these sites. Their strategies reveal how new forms of social media are incorporated into everyday life, complicating some practices and reinforcing others. New technologies reshape public life, but teens’ engagement also reconfigures the technology itself.

Definitely worth a read for everyone interested in the Web, the social networks, and in the use of those in working with kids and teens (e.g., in education).

America’s Most Wired Cities may be the small ones, under the radar

There is one paragraph in this Forbes article about America’s Most Wired Cities that I really did not like:

North Carolina suffered the biggest drop, with Raleigh declining to No. 15 from No. 3 and Charlotte dropping to No. 20 from No. 7.

That is really bad news and we need to do something about it. And while the list only looks at big cities, getting wired is much easier to implement in smaller places, for instance, we can do it in Carrboro if we work on it together.
Then, with the example of small places to look at (and perhaps shamed by them), the big cities will follow.

The super secret strategy for science blogging around the clock

You need this clock:
clock Pi.jpg
Hat-tip: Eva.

The Psychology of Cyberspace

The Psychology of Cyberspace is a course taught by John Suler in the Department of Psychology at the Science and Technology Center at Rider University. The website is a collection of a large number of thought-provoking essays on various aspects of human behavior online:

This hypertext book explores the psychological aspects of environments created by computers and online networks. It presents an evolving conceptual framework for understanding how people react to and behave within cyberspace: what I call “the psychology of cyberspace” – or simply “cyberpsychology.” Continually being revised and expanded, this hypertext book originally was created in January of 1996. See the article index which indicates the articles most recently added and revised.
In order to make these readings accessible to as many people as possible, I have written them in a style that is not overly abstract or technical. Important concepts in psychology and psychoanalytic theory appear throughout the book, but I try to present them in an “experience-near” rather than “experience-distant” way that I hope makes them useful in understanding everyday living in cyberspace. The emphasis is on practical concepts rather than purely academic ones. Other versions of these articles appear in various professional journals. These publications are indicated within the articles and in the article index.

The course/website also has a blog which, though not updated lately, contains some gems in the archives. Worth reading and bookmarking – all of it.

Radical Transparency

This article is almost two years old, but it is perhaps even more current today than it was when it first appeared:

Pretend for a second that you’re a CEO. Would you reveal your deepest, darkest secrets online? Would you confess that you’re an indecisive weakling, that your colleagues are inept, that you’re not really sure if you can meet payroll? Sounds crazy, right? After all, Coke doesn’t tell Pepsi what’s in the formula. Nobody sane strips down naked in front of their peers. But that’s exactly what Glenn Kelman did. And he thinks it saved his business.
———-snip———–
The Internet has inverted the social physics of information. Companies used to assume that details about their internal workings were valuable precisely because they were secret. If you were cagey about your plans, you had the upper hand; if you kept your next big idea to yourself, people couldn’t steal it. Now, billion- dollar ideas come to CEOs who give them away; corporations that publicize their failings grow stronger. Power comes not from your Rolodex but from how many bloggers link to you – and everyone trembles before search engine rankings. Kelman rewired the system and thinks anyone else could, too. But are we really ready to do all our business in the buff?
“You can’t hide anything anymore,” Don Tapscott says. Coauthor of The Naked Corporation, a book about corporate transparency, and Wikinomics, Tapscott is explaining a core truth of the see-through age: If you engage in corporate flimflam, people will find out.
———-snip———–
Secrecy is dying. It’s probably already dead.2 In a world where Eli Lilly’s internal drug-development memos, Paris Hilton’s phonecam images, Enron’s emails, and even the governor of California’s private conversations can be instantly forwarded across the planet, trying to hide something illicit – trying to hide anything, really – is an unwise gamble. So many blogs rely on scoops to drive their traffic that muckraking has become a sort of mass global hobby. Radical transparency has even reached the ultrasecretive world of Washington politics…
———-snip———–
All of which explains why the cult of transparency has so many high tech converts these days. Transparency is a judo move. Your customers are going to poke around in your business anyway, and your workers are going to blab about internal info – so why not make it work for you by turning everyone into a partner in the process and inviting them to do so?
———-snip———–
Some of this isn’t even about business; it’s a cultural shift, a redrawing of the lines between what’s private and what’s public. A generation has grown up blogging, posting a daily phonecam picture on Flickr and listing its geographic position in real time on Dodgeball and Google Maps. For them, authenticity comes from online exposure. It’s hard to trust anyone who doesn’t list their dreams and fears on Facebook.
———-snip———–
The new breed of naked executives also discover that once people are interested in you, they’re interested in helping you out – by offering ideas, critiques, and extra brain cycles. Customers become working partners.3 Kelman used to spend valuable work time arguing why the real estate business had to change; now his customers do battle for him, wading into Redfin’s online forums to haggle with old-school agents.
———-snip———–
Nearly everyone I spoke to had a warning for would-be transparent CEOs: You can’t go halfway naked. It’s all or nothing. Executives who promise they’ll be open have to stay open. The minute they become evasive about troubling news, transparency’s implied social compact crumbles.
———-snip———–
Which illustrates an interesting aspect of the Inter net age: Google is not a search engine. Google is a reputation-management system. And that’s one of the most powerful reasons so many CEOs have become more transparent: Online, your rep is quantifiable, findable, and totally unavoidable. In other words, radical transparency is a double-edged sword, but once you know the new rules, you can use it to control your image in ways you never could before.
———-snip———–
“Online is where reputations are made now,” says Leslie Gaines Ross, chief reputation strategist – yes, that’s her actual title – with the PR firm Weber Shandwick. She regularly speaks to companies that realize a single Google search determines more about how they’re perceived than a multimillion-dollar ad campaign. “It used to be that you’d look only at your reputation in newspapers and broadcast media, positive and negative. But now the blogosphere is equally powerful, and it has different rules. Public relations used to be about having stuff taken down, and you can’t do that with the Internet.”
But here’s the interesting paradox: The reputation economy creates an incentive to be more open, not less. Since Internet commentary is inescapable, the only way to influence it is to be part of it. Being transparent, opening up, posting interesting material frequently and often is the only way to amass positive links to yourself and thus to directly influence your Googleable reputation. Putting out more evasion or PR puffery won’t work, because people will either ignore it and not link to it – or worse, pick the spin apart and enshrine those criticisms high on your Google list of life.

Read the whole thing – all those good examples that I snipped out. Is this how you operate, either as a person or as a company/organization?

VHS is dead

VHS era is winding down – “The last big supplier of the tapes is ditching the format, ending the long fade-out of a product that ushered in the home theater.”:

Pop culture is finally hitting the eject button on the VHS tape, the once-ubiquitous home-video format that will finish this month as a creaky ghost of Christmas past.
After three decades of steady if unspectacular service, the spinning wheels of the home-entertainment stalwart are slowing to a halt at retail outlets. On a crisp Friday morning in October, the final truckload of VHS tapes rolled out of a Palm Harbor, Fla., warehouse run by Ryan J. Kugler, the last major supplier of the tapes.
“It’s dead, this is it, this is the last Christmas, without a doubt,” said Kugler, 34, a Burbank businessman. “I was the last one buying VHS and the last one selling it, and I’m done. Anything left in warehouse we’ll just give away or throw away.”….

Read the rest, for some amusing examples of what sells and what doesn’t….

Using science to make roads safer

Duke University’s John Staddon makes the case for less, and more effective, road signage in the U.S – using Durham roads and streets as examples:

ugh, WordPress does not like this format. You can see the video here or here.

From here, which I discovered here because I am fascinated by the science of traffic and driving. If only explaining the mathematical models of traffic flow and the cognitive psychology of driving to the traffic cop could get one out of a ticket….

Education 2.0

At the Western RCAC Symposium last week:
Rodd Lucier: Fertilizing the Grass Roots:

My personal suspicions are that most attendees will fail to make effective use of any of the many tools introduced today. Even with everyone recognizing that we have a long way to go: A significant knowing-doing gap will remain!

David Warlick: So Now What Do We Do?:

Then Rodd listed some comments that he overheard during the conference, that support his concern. I’m listing them here and will try to make some suggestions that may be useful. My suggestions are indented just a bit to better distinguish them from the overheard statements.

Doug Pete: How I Saw It:

David Warlick went first with his presentation “Our Students – Our Worlds”. Eyes were opened for many as David took us inside the minds and lives of today’s youth. His famous tentacles diagram affirmed that students aren’t “human” by a traditional view! It does drive home the message that they are indeed connected at levels that we suspect but don’t totally know. (at least until the texting bill comes in…) Rather than ask folks to turn off electronic devices, David let me know before the event that he would welcome a back channel through his presentation. Gulp! What to do?

Amber MacArthur: Talking about social media – A year on the road:

But what I’ve realized over time is that it’s critical for me to update my slides based on the audience that will sit in front of me. Sounds like a pretty obvious concept, one that becomes more apparent over time (also, in the web world, trends change too quickly to rely on one deck). Since I’ve spoken to such varied groups, from teams of probiotic scientists, oil engineers, and all-grades educators, I strive to find specific social media examples that will be relevant to each crowd. This usually means I spend a lot of time researching new Web 2.0 trends, videos, articles, and tips online.

Community, Collaboration & Conversation with Amber MacArthur – listen to the podcast.

Where I’ve travelled lately

I like Dopplr.com so let me test this widget:

SF authors on the future of technology

Top sci-fi authors discuss the future of technology :

Science fiction isn’t (as a rule) about predicting the future, and science fiction writers aren’t trying to predict it.
————
But many science fiction stories are set in the future, which means they need to include the future of technology (or present reasons why things haven’t changed). That is, they have to extrapolate from “what/where things have been and are” to “what/where might be.”
We invited noted science fiction authors Larry Niven, Robert Sawyer, Nancy Kress and Charles Stross to share their thoughts on technology-related predictions, including lessons learned in the ‘business’ of imagining what the future might be like. Here’s what they had to say.

Read what they say….

Co-Researching spaces for Freelance Scientists?

Pawel tried, for a year, to be a freelance scientist. While the experiment did not work, in a sense that it had to end, he has learned a lot from the experience. And all of us following his experience also learned a lot about the current state of the world. And I do not think this has anything to do with Pawel living in Poland – I doubt this would have been any different if he was in the USA or elsewhere.
You all know that I am a big fan of telecommuting and coworking and one of the doomsayers about the future existence of the institution of ‘The Office’. And you also know that I am a scientist, so it is no surprise that I have been also thinking how to connect these two – is there a way to have a coworking (or co-researching) facility for freelance scientists?
If you work 9-5 for The Man, it is understandable that you should strive mightily to sharply delineate work from the rest of your life, and to measure your worth in dollars (or place of employment, e.g., Harvard). But if you are lucky (and work to make it happen), you will do what you like to do, what you’d do for free anyway. Thus, you express your person through your work, you are what you do and your job is you, and it is perfectly fine to completely blur that distinction. If that is the case, your worth is not measured in dollars – you can say you “made it” if you can live wherever you want on the planet (or even off of it if you are adventurous), surrounded by people you like, doing what you like, and having lots of friends. You will be measured by the size of your network – who is your (mutual – it has to be mutual!) friend.
Sure, you can make many mutual friends online, through blogs, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, FriendFeed, etc. But, as a human being, you also need physical proximity to some of the people you really like a lot. What are blogs but means to find each other in order to organize a Blogger Meetup or BloggerCon?
So, if you have that luck and freedom, you will choose where on Earth to live both by the criterion of climate and natural beauty and by unusual concentration of people you really like and want to be surrounded with.
But what about your work – how can you transport your work wherever you want to live? This depends, of course, on the nature of your work. If your job is to think, read, write, communicate, publish or do stuff with computers, you can do that everywhere as long as there is electricity and internet access. You can work at home, or a corner cafe, or a nice local coworking space.
But what if you are a scientist? How can you do that?
Remember World 2.0 at Rainbows End? In that plausible world, which will cease to be Science Fiction in mere years, some scientists obviously work at universities or at institutes that may or may not be associated with universities. They are presumably hired to teach and train the new generations of scientists there. But most of scientific research is apparently happening elsewhere – in the virtual world, on the “boards”.
When I read about those “boards”, I was reminded of sites like Innocentive, Innovation Exchange, Nine Sigma or even 2collab – places where funders and researchers find each other and exchange money for discoveries – a free-market type of funding. As an alternative, it sound pretty good, though big basic science would probably still have to be funded by the government agencies.
But, Vinge never tells where those scientists live and where they actually do their research. They may pick up jobs online, but they still have to do wet work in some lab somewhere. Where? Some may be at universities, supplementing their income in this way. But many are likely freelancers (many of those perhaps without any formal degrees in science, just talented people who learned by themselves and through their thoughts, words and actual discoveries, built their reputations in the scientific community). Where do those freelancers do their research?
Perhaps in a scientific equivalent of a coworking place – perhaps something like a Science Hostel. I have been thinking about this for quite a while, but I did not know that Garret Lisi also came up with this concept. Apart from being on the cutting edge of science publishing, he is also apparently thinking innovatively about the way science in the future will be done. In his interview on Backreaction, Garett says:

I’ve been thinking about what the ideal scientific work environment would be, and the best thing I’ve been able to come up with is a Science Hostel. I envision a large house where theorists could live and work on their stuff alone or in groups while having their meals and living space provided. The idea is to give researchers time, with an easily accessible but undemanding social atmosphere, and as little responsibility as possible. And, of course, it would have to be somewhere beautiful — with good hiking and other things to do outside. For the past year I’ve been living near Lake Tahoe — a great environment for thinking and playing. Anywhere in the mountains would probably be good for a Science Hostel — even better if it’s next to a good ski hill. 🙂

Now that is all very nice if you are a theorist – all you need is an armchair. Or if your only scientific tool is a computer, you can do it there. But what if you need more?
A coworking space has three important components: the physical space, the technological infrastructure, and the people. A Science Hostel that accommodates people who need more than armchairs and wifi, would need to be topical – rooms designed as labs of a particular kind, common equipment that will be used by most people there, all the people being in roughly the same field who use roughly the same tools.
But this is not such a new idea. Remember Entwicklungsmechanik from the late 19th and early 20th century? The winters in Germany are cold, so the developmental biologists spent a lot of their time at Stazione Zoologica in Naples, where they made their discoveries by studying eggs and embryos of sea urchins. That was a Science Hostel. How about Woods Hole? Cold Spring Harbor? Perimeter Institute? Those are all Science Hostels.
But in the modern world, there can be more of those. There will be vast differences in size, type and economics. Some will be built and funded by large, rich institutions. Others will be cooperative projects. Some will be free, but by invitation only. Others will be open, but charging for space and use of the facilities. While most of the past and existing institutes of this sort only cater to people who are already associated with other academic institutions, some of the new hostels will cater to freelancers as well (needless to say, Open Access to literature is essential to development of such spaces).
And people will choose to live where the appropriate Science Hostel is located because this is where they can do their work and live their lives surrounded by like-minded people. There will be a lot of physicists living in the village that has a Physics Hostel. A lot of molecular biologists surrounding a Hostel equipped for them. Perhaps there will be a Hostel specifically geared towards research on whole animals with its own IACUC, facilities and staff.
We’ll wait and see….

Future of the Internet aka Future of Society

Jeff Cohen was one of the people interviewed for this article in Raleigh News & Observer today about the Future of the Internet:

In 2020, powerful mobile phones will rule, privacy will erode further and the line between work and home life will be faint, if not obliterated.
That’s what 578 technology gurus see in their crystal balls, according to a new report by the Pew Internet & American Life Project. The survey, “Future of the Internet III,” conducted by Pew and Elon University, envisions amazing advances in mobile devices, virtual reality, voice and touch technology — possibly even communication between mind and machine.
But will the innovation lead to better lives?
Maybe not.
“There is an undercurrent of worry in these experts about whether people will use the technology for good or for ill,” says Lee Rainie, director of the Pew project.
Although cheap, accessible technology will spread throughout the world, it won’t necessarily level the economic playing field or lead to better social understanding, the technologists believe.
In an always-on world, career choice will be key, says Janna Anderson, associate professor at Elon. “If you’re going to be living your work, you need to find something that suits you so well it won’t seem like work.”

Read the whole thing.

7 Living Artifacts And Why They Are Done For

This is a little tongue-in-cheek, on purpose, but it is also thought-provoking.
Perhaps we are not there yet, but in 5 years it will be completely correct. Power outages are keeping some of the older, analog technologies surviving on the back burner (FM radio, landline phone).
This will also happen in waves – technology pioneers first, middle-class folks in industrialized countries next, the youngsters, of course, and then the rest.
The developing world is a special case – in some cases they HAVE to use outdated tech due to unreliable source of electrical power, lack of infrastructure, etc., while in others they can skip decades of technological development and adopt the most current one (skipping landlines altogether and adopting cell phones instead is already happening in Africa).

Clay Shirky on Love, Internet Style, as a renewable material

The structure of scientific collaboration networks

On arXiv, by M. E. J. Newman (Santa Fe Institute):

We investigate the structure of scientific collaboration networks. We consider two scientists to be connected if they have authored a paper together, and construct explicit networks of such connections using data drawn from a number of databases, including MEDLINE (biomedical research), the Los Alamos e-Print Archive (physics), and NCSTRL (computer science). We show that these collaboration networks form “small worlds” in which randomly chosen pairs of scientists are typically separated by only a short path of intermediate acquaintances. We further give results for mean and distribution of numbers of collaborators of authors, demonstrate the presence of clustering in the networks, and highlight a number of apparent differences in the patterns of collaboration between the fields studied.

Big News from Lawrence Lessig

“In the summer, I will begin an appointment at the Harvard Law School, while directing the Safra Center.”

More details here.

How to organize a Smart Mob

For instance, to protest Creationist bills in state and local legislatures:

Kinesthetic learning online?

Tina writes – Kinesthetic Learners: Why Old Media Should Never Die:

…..Many classrooms, however, don’t offer this type of kinesthetic learning. The hands-on learner is left to fend for themselves and more often than not the only physical interaction they get is with the learning material itself.
You’ve seen them before. Sometimes, it’s a student whose fingers trace the words as they read them. Or the highlighter: the student who makes a colored mosaic of their text as they try to physically interact with the material. Even note-taking is a kinesthetic activity. In a variety of subtle ways, the kinesthetic learner can physically interact with their learning material.
Now, imagine these same students trying to physically interact with ‘new’ media. The method of consuming learning material is physically no different than consuming entertainment material. Your fingers and eyes make the same motions, there is no easy way to physically differentiate material, much less to physically interact with it.
Obviously, there are ways that new media can be superior. Video offers the best chance to reach all learning types. For example, a step-by-step video of a science experiment caters to visual and auditory senses while leaving the hands free to actually perform the experiment.
But for straight information consumption, new media leaves the kinesthetic learner out in the cold.

Videos. Like JoVE and SciVee.tv?
What about joysticks and Wii?

What’s an office for?

You build a mine where the ore is. And facilities right next to the mine, to extract the metals from it. And a factory next to it that turns the raw metal into parts and objects. And a train station or a port next to it, so you can move the objects to the stores you built where the people are. And you also build a town where all your employees will live.
That’s how it’s always been done.
You cannot work the land, without living on it and getting your boots muddy. If you are hoarding something valuable, you need to hire night-guards who will actually show up at work. I understand, there are many jobs that require a person to show up at a particular place at a particular time to get the job done. The actors have to actually show up at the theater for the show to go on.
But many of those same companies also have offices and headquarters. Not to mention that more and more companies are dealing with information, education, knowledge, news or entertainment. Why do they still require people to show up at the office?
When the economic times are tough, why do CEOs fire people?
Why don’t they close the offices instead?
And keep the people?
Is it because they hate to relinquish personal micromanaging control?
That’s what telecommuting and coworking are all about. Recognition that the concept of the “office” is something that belongs to the previous millennium. All the office-typical work can now be done online.
If you force people to come to the office every day, they will resent the lack of freedom. They will resent you for being overbearing and controlling. People who rub elbows with each other every day are bound to sometimes rub each other the wrong way, starting animosities, cliques and general sense of disgruntleness. The result can be this. And will be, more and more, as the new generations were not brought up to suffer indignities in silence.
There is a lot of complaining going around the business leaders’ circles about the Millennials being lazy or demanding. No, the kids see an antiquated system and are working to change it from within, demanding that you change the way you do business – it is you who ‘don’t get it’, the kids are fine.
If you close the office and keep the employees, you will get stronger loyalty and greater job satisfaction. The job will get done better. People will come up with creative ideas that can save your company.
Furthermore, you will be able to hire the best – the people who live elsewhere and have no intention to move for the job, people who are aware of their quality and cannot be bullied into uprooting their families just to work for you.
Even better, if your employees are all around the world, this means that they are walking billboards for your company. They go around certain circles wherever they are and answer the usual question “what do you do?” every day. If they are all at the HQ, you need to pay for PR. If they are everywhere, the PR is automatic and free.
But apparently, the CEOs are not even aware how outdated their thinking is. A recent survey prompted some of them to think, for the first time, about the possibilities. It will be too late by the time they moved from “hmmm, interesting idea” to “yes, we’ll do this right now”.
Kevin Gamble asks:

When working with organizations, I’ve heard it said more than once, “People are our most important resource,” and yet how many are downsizing? Do you hear them seriously considering the savings that could accrue from closing unneeded offices? I have yet to hear a single person mention that their organizations are considering closing offices in order to preserve staffing. I have heard a few mentions of consolidation of offices, but that’s different.
Even without an economic meltdown the closing of offices makes total sense. Given our current situation, closing offices is a no-brainer. Seriously, unless you are selling or producing a physical product what function does your office serve? Make a list– yes, I am challenging you to justify why you keep your offices while at the same time downsizing your work force. I’ll wait… go make that list. Now which of those functions could be satisfied in some less expensive, and perhaps better manner by a co-working facility, hot-desking, or virtual meeting space?

Landing in San Francisco – view from the Cockpit of a 747 (video)

I landed in SF twice (it’s a great visual spectacle approaching the Bay), but I had no idea what was going on in front of me, in the cockpit:

If you share something, is it useful and educational?

Hmmm, juxtaposing these three posts is thought-provoking….what is education all about? Is the ‘coolness’ factor overpowering the ‘usefulness’ factor? Thoughts?
Planning to Share versus Just Sharing:

But inevitably, with a very few exceptions, these projects spend an enormous amount of time defining what is to be shared, figuring out how to share it, setting up the mechanisms to share it, and then…not really sharing much. Or sharing once but costing so much time, effort or money that they do not get sustained. Does this sound familiar to anyone else? I don’t feel like this phenomenon is isolated to me or somehow occurs because of my own personal ineptitude, but you never know.

Kewel:

It seems that neither Tony Hirst, the person who set this operation into motion, nor any of those who are blithely praising his work, bothered to think about the data itself or what it meant. That, indeed, as Hirst himself has repeatedly stated in response to my comments, “wasn’t the point.” But if someone can advocate, and others can gasp at, such mangling of data without even thinking about what happens to that data in the process, believing it to be somehow beside the point… well, that’s a textbook case of data illiteracy as far as I’m concerned.

Am I missing the point on open educational resources?:

In the early brainstorming discussions, I staked out something of a confrontational stance… that higher education is still conducting its business as if information is scarce when we now live in an era of unprecedented information abundance. That we in the institutions can endlessly discuss what content we deign to share via our clunky platforms, while Google, Wikipedia, YouTube, TED Talks, the blogs and other networked media just get on with it… That I might not be able to legally reproduce much of the copyrighted media on the web, but I can link to it, maybe embed it, or simply tell students to search for it. This is not to suggest that sharing more of the presumably high quality content that higher education produces would not enrich the store of available information… but that the world is not waiting for us to get our act together and become a relevant force on the web. The world is moving on without us.
One of the other participants asked a question that resonated with me: if we live in an era of information abundance, why is the primary drive around OERs the publication of more content? And what other activities around the open education movement might be an effective use of our energies? What other needs have to be met?

Then read this: The Digital Youth Project – Kids Need Time to ‘Hang Out,’ ‘Mess Around’ and ‘Geek Out’:

The report notes the similarities between community norms and what educators might call “learning goals” but it clearly denotes a new position for the adult who serves as an educator. Simply stated, schools are not known for allowing “plenty of unstructured time for kids to tinker and explore without being dominated by direct instruction.”
Instead of classroom teachers, there would be lab teachers or leaders who would have a different responsibility, one that does not focus on assessing kids’ for competence. Instead, these adults would be “co-conspirators” practicing a “pedagogy of collegiality.”

Mining the Web for the patterns in the Real World

Ever since I first discovered it, I loved the idea of the Moodgrapher and I wish it continued to be developed (not all the functions work any more). What it does is plot, in various ways, changes in “moods” as reported by users of LiveJournal.
For instance, you can see the spike of “ecstatic” on the evening of November 4th, when Obama’s victory became official:
ecstatic-old.ploticus.moodgraph.jpg
Or you can track cyclic trends – here is “awake”:
awake.graph.jpg
I wish the tools could be refined even better, for instance narrowing down the time to just an hour or two or broadening it to months or years.
It would be also nice to narrow it by geography – imagine looking at various happy and unhappy moods displayed on LJ over the course of two hours after the Obama victory announcement narrowed down to country, state, county, precinct or even neighborhood, then comparing this with the official votes? We could figure out, for instance, if conservatives or liberals tend to use LJ more, or to use mood sign on LJ more, or if there are places in the country in which the electoral results are more emotional, perhaps correlated to the narrowness of results or to presence of advertising.
Of course, one can also use Google for similar kinds of tracking. For instance, one can use it to track seasonal events:
hummingbirds%20vs.%20orioles.jpg
Again, it would be nice to be able to set the precise time limits to just an hour or to many years, as well as to restrict them to geographic locations – especially for the appearance of migratory birds and such cases.
Anyone know any more tricks like these, stuff that can be used to track natural or social phenomena by tracking how the Internet responds to them?

Art of Star Wars

Start here, then keep clicking on the ‘plus’ sign on the right to see everything. Interesting…

Cool photo manipulations

lobster2.jpg
From here:

Platinum is a Brazilian image manipulation studio which uses combination of photography, illustration, 3D and CGI to “make the impossible become reality”.

How rumors spread….

NYTimes:

Eliminating daylight time would thus accord with President-elect Barack Obama’s stated goals of conserving resources, saving money, promoting energy security and reducing climate change.

Eugene Sandhu:

In order to conserve energy, President-elect Barak Obama should eliminate daylight saving time.

Boing Boing:

President-elect Obama wants to get rid of daylight saving time in the United States to conserve energy.

The game of broken telephones? Or lack of reading comprehension, or just wishful thinking? I though we were the Reality-Based Community.
More….

Perhaps they should ask Ted Stevens about a series of tubes…

The geriatric leaders of the government of Italy are making fools of themselves by trying to regulate bloggers, i.e., get them to register with the government, pay taxes, be liable for what they write, etc.:

The law’s impact would turn all bloggers in Italy into potential outlaws. This could be great for their traffic, I realise, but hell on the business aspirations of an Italian web start-up, not to mention any tech company that wants to sell its blog-publishing software in Italy, or open a social network here. In addition to driving out potential tech jobs, the stifling of free speech also can have a dramatic chilling effect on all forms of free expression, the arts and scholarship.

Or, to keep it simple:

Only someone who is utterly clueless on how the internet works, or even what it is, could come up with such an idea.

Will there be new communication channels in the Obama administration?

There is quite a lot of chatter around the intertubes about changes in the communication environment that happened between the last and this election and how those changes may be affecting the way the new White House communicates to people as well as how the new White House will receive communications from the people.
A lot of people are impatient – they want to see everything in place right this moment. Easy, guys! The inauguration is on January 20th. Until that time, Bush is the President and the Obama communications folks have time to think through, design and implement communication channels that we will definitely NOT see until the inauguration or a little bit later. So, you can pore over Change.org all you want in search for hints of the future, but it is unlikely you will see anything truly informative until January 20th at the earliest.
But in the meantime, speculation abounds.
This NYTimes article lays down the arguments pro and con (and check out the FriendFeed discussion as well – quite telling to see how some techie folks do not understand this is not a technological problem at all).
The problem is this: if a President says or writes something that is recordable – and technology is irrelevant, it could be handwriting, a magnetophone or an 8-track – it can be subpoenad by Congress. The article explores the tensions between the need for a President to have confidentiality about important matters of the state, and the need to open up new mode of communications fit for the 21st century mindset of the Facebook generation (Note: “facebook generation” has nothing to do with the actual Facebook site, or with a particular age – it is a frequently-used shorthand term for a mindset of continuity and openness in communication).
This is why Bush stopped using e-mail the day he became the President. Everything that the President says or writes becomes official record. New technology allows one to communicate too much and too informally. Chatting with friends over e-mail becomes a potential liability for the officials of such high ranking.
What is new is that Obama is the first President with that “facebook generation” mindset of constant, open communication, as opposed to a bubble-boy, smoke-filled back-rooms, secretive types that the previous 43 Presidents were. The laws, customs and trappings of his new job are going to be conflicting with his modern instincts towards openness. And people are starting to talk about a potential need to alter these out-dated laws in order to allow Obama to lead a more transparent government.
We shall see what actually happens, but we can expect, at least until/unless there are legal changes, that all the e-mailing will be done by staffers and not Obama himself. He is also going to be the first President in history to keep a laptop on the Oval Office desk (doesn’t this sound quaint?)! He will likely use the computer not to broadcast or communicate anything himself, but only to get informed (perhaps via an RSS Feed).
Another confusion in online chatter about potentially new communication is that people do not make a distinction between centrifugal (broadcasting, outwards) communication and centripetal (listening, inwards) communication.
The best example is probably this Slate article. I think Disckerson is confused. The new Prez will experiment with a number of new ways to communicate. Some of it is inside out, some is outside in. Posting the radio address on YouTube is the part of inside out. It is not the only tool and should not be looked at in isolation. Yes, it is part of his PR, but it is targeted to a set of people who past Presidents did not and could not reach: exactly the same people who are the most likely to use OTHER channels of communication to talk back to him. What Dickerson did in this text was sorta like focusing on a Food Chain and not seeing the Food Web (or forest for the trees, choose your own metaphor) – a lack of ecological thinking by a member of an old media class that thinks too linearly.
Brian Solis has collected probably some of the best ideas on the entire issue, and you should also read the various links and ideas in Josh Bernoff’s post and Lidija Davis’ post.
Obama’s first radio address was also filmed. The movie was posted on Change.org, and also on YouTube:

People like Dan Farber and Allen Stern are worried about favouritism – why YouTube and not other video services? Answer: if the only place they place a video is Change.org, then someone else will put it on YouTube, perhaps edited, with open comments, who knows what else. By posting it on YouTube themselves, the Obama comms folks are putting a degree of control over the message. In the next few months, they may decide to do the same on several other video-hosting services. This was just the first address, and YouTube, being such an 6000lbs gorilla (or is it an elephant in the room?), is the obvious place to go and test the waters first before embarking on a more ambitious program.
Also, a more ambitious program requires building the communications team. Which requires hiring people, including a Chief Conversation Officer, perhaps this guy (or me – I can do it, that’s my job right now anyway). That process has just started. People like Secretary of State are much more important positions to fill first. So, have some patience….

Imagine a paperless world (and all the saved trees)!

Will Richardson is noticing an addiction to paper and he looks at himself:

Now I don’t know that I’ve ever thought of no paper as exciting, necessarily, but I continue to find myself more and more eschewing paper of just about any kind in my life. My newspaper/magazine intake is down to nearly zero, every note I take is stored somewhere in the cloud via my computer or iPhone, I rarely write checks, pay paper bills or even carry cash money any longer, and I swear I could live without a printer except for the times when someone demands a signed copy of something or other. (Admittedly, I still read lots of paper books, but I’m working on that.)
Yet just about everywhere I go where groups of educators are in the room, paper abounds. Notebooks, legal pads, sticky notes, index cards…it’s everywhere. We are, as Alan November so often says, “paper trained,” and the worst part is it shows no signs of abating.

Me, too, to a great extent.
But how close we are to a paperless society, really?
Remember my question about the ‘paperless house’?
Speaking of educational settings, we went to a parent-teacher conference last night and, when there was a question of how to coordinate some information among a larg-ish number of people – the first suggestion (immediatelly agreed on by all in the room) was, of course, a Google Doc. What else?
There’s hope.

How to turn your alarm-clock into your worst enemy

Here are a few examples. One will feed you greasy bacon every morning. The other will donate to the GOP. Others will force you to perform either menial or mental tasks. I prefer a more gradual approach – a system that gradually increases the illumination in the room, the volume of sound (some pre-chosen music), etc. and only does something dramatic at the last, most critical point in time when you absolutely HAVE to get up.
funny pictures of cats with captions
more animals
[btw, check out the other pages on that site – there are some other cool inventions there, mixed up with some quite silly ones]

Government: open and transparent

The paranoid secrecy is one of the hallmarks of the Bush Administration. The signs are there that Obama will have the opposite approach. But how exactly?
Here, the staff of the Sunlight Foundation has posted a set of recommendations to Obama and his administration: Open Letter to the Obama Administration on How to Shine Sunlight:

Dear Mr. President-Elect,
In your acceptance speech, you rightfully called on Americans to get ready to work to address the challenges that tomorrow will bring. All of us at Sunlight affirm to pitch in and work harder, and agree that we all have to look after each other. In that spirit, we offer advice for your administration on how to undo the culture of secrecy and transform the presidential administration into a transparent operation.
Your campaign embraced the Internet and engaged millions of Americans in unprecedented ways. Keep that momentum going. Your administration can make our government more open, more responsive, more accountable and thus more trusted by the people. But, how?
I asked several Sunlighters to sound-off about how they think the next administration should act to create greater government transparency. They represent a healthy cross-section of who comprises Sunlight: technology geeks, policy wonks, bloggers, journalists, optimists and pragmatists. Here’s their advice:
————snip—————
Over the coming weeks and months, Sunlight staff will share reviews of various transition recommendations for the new administration. Readers, what do you think? How do you think the 44th POTUS should help promote a more open, accountable government? Share your thoughts by commenting below.

Why crash an internet poll?

Simon Owens just published a nice article on PBS’ MediaShift about crashing internet polls. My SciBlings PZ Myers and Greg Laden were interviewed for the article and have said some smart things with which I agree.

Are you still struggling with EndNote? How quaint….

Duncan Hull and colleagues just published an excellent, must-read article – Defrosting the Digital Library: Bibliographic Tools for the Next Generation Web:

Many scientists now manage the bulk of their bibliographic information electronically, thereby organizing their publications and citation material from digital libraries. However, a library has been described as “thought in cold storage,” and unfortunately many digital libraries can be cold, impersonal, isolated, and inaccessible places. In this Review, we discuss the current chilly state of digital libraries for the computational biologist, including PubMed, IEEE Xplore, the ACM digital library, ISI Web of Knowledge, Scopus, Citeseer, arXiv, DBLP, and Google Scholar. We illustrate the current process of using these libraries with a typical workflow, and highlight problems with managing data and metadata using URIs. We then examine a range of new applications such as Zotero, Mendeley, Mekentosj Papers, MyNCBI, CiteULike, Connotea, and HubMed that exploit the Web to make these digital libraries more personal, sociable, integrated, and accessible places. We conclude with how these applications may begin to help achieve a digital defrost, and discuss some of the issues that will help or hinder this in terms of making libraries on the Web warmer places in the future, becoming resources that are considerably more useful to both humans and machines.

The paper goes through each of the services, one by one, explains the pros and cons of each, and makes suggestions for the future development, as well as pointing out barriers and possible ways to overcome those. A couple of listed services are almost there – but are you using them? If so, why? If not, why not?

Schneier on Voting Machine Security

Ed Cone interviews the security guru Bruce Schneier about voting machines:

There are a couple of reasons that things like automatic teller machines and gas pumps are more secure. The first one is, there’s money involved. If someone hacks an ATM, the bank loses money. The bank has a financial interest in making those ATMs secure. If someone hacks a voting machine, nobody loses money. In fact, half the country is happy with the result. So it’s much harder to get the economic incentives aligned.
The other issue about voting machines is that ballots are secret. A lot of the security in computerized financial systems is based on audits, based on being able to unravel a transaction. If you go to an ATM and you push a bunch of buttons and you get out ten times the cash you were supposed to, that’s a mistake, but that mistake will be caught in audit, and likely, you will be figured out as the person who got the money by accident, and it will be taken out of your account. Because ballots are secret, a lot of the auditing tools that we in the community have developed for financial systems don’t apply.

My picks from ScienceDaily

‘Voter-Verifiable’ Voting System Ensures Accuracy And Privacy:

Approximately two-thirds of Americans voting in the November Presidential election will cast their votes on paper ballots. How can voters be assured their votes are counted and kept private?

Victorian Manchester Home To First Youth Gangs:

A historian at the University of Liverpool has uncovered extensive archive material detailing the activities of the ‘scuttlers’ – one of Britain’s earliest youth cults.

Youth From Poor Neighborhoods 4 Times More Likely To Attempt Suicide:

Youth in their late teens who live in poor neighbourhoods are four times more likely to attempt suicide than peers who live in more affluent neighbourhoods, according to a new study from Canada’s Universite de Montreal and Sainte-Justine Hospital Research Center, as well as Tufts University in the U.S. The researchers also found youth from poor neighbourhoods are twice as likely to report suicidal thoughts.

Information vs. Knowledge vs. Expertise

There is an interesting post (and comment thread) on Kevin Kelly’s blog about the exponential growth of available information. It is quite thought-provoking, but there are a couple of issues I have with it.
First issue is that Kevin took the old adage that “every answer leads to at least two new questions”, perhaps tongue-in-cheek (I hope), as if it was true:

Yet the paradox of science is that every answer breeds at least two new questions. More answers, more questions. Telescopes and microscopes expanded not only what we knew, but what we didn’t know. They allowed us to spy into our ignorance. New and better tools permit us new and better questions. All our knowledge about subatomic particles derived from the new questions generated after we invented an atom smasher.

This was probably necessary for the point he was trying to make, but it is of course not true – just a quip that scientists like to say to each other every now and then. Most scientific papers, for instance, do not attempt to answer questions, just like many scientific questions do not test hypotheses. Some are making observations, some are tabulating surveys, some are sequencing genomes, some are following hunches. There is much more to the scientific method than just question-answering or hypothesis-testing. This does not stop people from, in their grant proposals, shoehorning everything into the hypothesis-testing mode, e.g., silly stuff like “we will shoot all our heavy artillery into this dark void of the Unknown and we hypothesize that we will discover something useful” – which is not hypothesis-testing, but a brute force approach that comes before hypothesis-testing, a method to provide enormous amounts of information that can then be looked at in order to formulate hypotheses or, yes, ask questions.
And even when a scientific paper answers a question, sometimes it just closes the book on it without generating any new questions. Sometimes it generates one or two or more. But there is no mathematical or empirical proof of the saying as it stands.
My second issue with Kevin’s essay is the blurring between the concepts of information, knowledge and expertise despite his effort to differentiate them:

The fastest growing entity today is information. Information is expanding ten times faster than the growth of any other manufactured or natural product on this planet.
———————
We see the expansion of information everywhere. Less visible, harder to track, but exploding the same is the expansion of knowledge. The number of scientific articles published each year has been increasing in a steady rise for more than 50 years. Over the last 150 years the number of patent applications has increased. By this rough metric, knowledge is growing exponentially.

Perhaps I’m wrong, but for me information is something that just sits there, in computers or on the Web or in scientific papers, pretty useless on its own. It is when humans take a look at that information, filter it in an organized manner, and make sense out of it, that the information becomes organized and useful – which I think of as knowledge.
Furthermore, even this definition of knowledge is fuzzy, as it describes our collective knowledge. Collective – as in ‘collection of individual knowledges’. But some knowledge resided in individuals who make that knowledge widely available, while others do not. Thus some knowledge is more strongly integrated into the fuzzy global knowledge, and some is more or less hidden from most of us. Not to mention that not all knowledge is correct, either, or useful for anything for that matter (e.g., theological treateses come under both of those headings).
But, is individual knowledge the same as ‘expertise’? What does expertise mean?
Is it possessing knowledge or having the abilities and skills to apply it? Knowing where in the brain the pineal gland resides, or being able to surgically remove it?
Is it having a PhD (or equivalent) in the subject, or is it being recognized by others as an expert?
Is it knowing everything there is to know about a subject? Or is it knowing more than most other people about it?
Are we all experts on breathing, eating and sleeping? What is so expert about that kind of expertise if it is shared by everyone?
If it is knowing something that most other people don’t where is the cutoff point – what percentile are we talking about? I can say that I am an expert on circadian rhythms in quail – something I share with about a dozen other people in the world – as I have read the entire literature on the subject, did my own experiments and published papers on the topic. I guess I am still an expert when it comes to my field as a whole – a couple of thousand chronobiologists – although I could not possibly read all the papers or pay attention to all the sub-field research directions.
But am I an expert on blogging just because I am one of the 20 million bloggers out there? It is still a pretty small proportion of the planet’s population, after all. Am I an expert on Serbia just because I am one of 10 million or so people who was born there?
I surely write on this blog about many things, not too atrociously, I hope: politics, religion, science, technology, food, etc. I do not think of myself as an expert in any of this, but some people may think of me as one: because they know less than me about some of these topics, or because I have a blog on scienceblogs.com, or because I appear to be a nice guy.
The question is, once we agree on a definition of expertise, does it matter? Is my expertise in avian chronobiology useful to me? To the rest of the world? Or is my thinking (and then writing) about various other subjects better?
Victorian scholars knew everything about everything. With the growth of knowledge, we swung in the opposite direction, rewarding very narrow expertise. Are we now seeing the pendulum swing back? There is too much knowledge available for anyone to be able to know everything, so we cannot all become Victorian scholars. But perhaps we can all choose a range of subjects in which to become semi-experts – knowing a lot about it but not worrying about how many other people know LESS about it than we do.
The Stupid Blogger says it nicely:

Unfortunately, there’s a very simple fact in life, and it’s the knowledge that not everyone is going to be an expert.
———————
What so many people fail to realize is that being an expert is in many ways overrated.
——————–
The other option, of course, is a breadth of knowledge rather than depth of knowledge. Obviously, breadth of knowledge is knowing a little bit about a lot of things, and it’s more useful than you might think.
——————–
Having a breadth of knowledge can make living in the real world easier, not to mention more enjoyable, but it is only useful so long as you’re aware of the limitations of your knowledge and you know where to turn for more information.

Thoughts?

Lawrence Lessig for Copyright Czar!

Peter Suber, James Love and Glyn Moody have already blogged about this, but we need to make sure this spreads far and wide:

The AAP and Copyright Alliance want to prod the next President of the US to tilt the unbalanced US copyright law further toward publishers. According to a letter the AAP sent to its members (thanks to James Love and Glyn Moody), the two organizations are trying to identify the positions “that will influence intellectual property policy”, and will then “offer suggestions regarding appropriate candidates for these positions to both presidential campaigns.”
But first they want to blackball one potential nominee:
…AAP is concerned, for example, that based on their past academic relationship, Senator Obama might choose among his appointments a divisive figure such as Larry Lessig – a law professor and leading proponent of diminished copyright rights….

Yup, those are the PRISM arguments – black is white, up is down, and Lessig is anti-copyright!@#$%^&*
So, how can we help push Lessig to get appointed Copyright Czar in the Obama administration? After all, nobody in the world knows more about it than him and he would be a perfect person for the job.

Smoke Signals, Blogs, and the Future of Politics

Smoke Signals, Blogs, and the Future of PoliticsThis I first posted on June 24, 2004 on http://www.jregrassroots.org, then republished on August 23, 2004 on Science And Politics. I love re-posting this one every now and then, just to check how much the world has changed. What do you think? Was I too rosy-eyed? Prophetic?

Continue reading

Clay Shirky: It’s Not Information Overload. It’s Filter Failure.

Quick ConvergeSouth08 recap

I am back from the 4th ConvergeSouth, the do-not-miss Greensboro conference about the Web, blogging, journalism and community (and the model/inspiration for our own science blogging conferences, including the third one) . Big kudos to Sue Polinsky, Ed Cone and the cast of thousands for putting together the meeting again, making it better and better every year. And of course, thanks to Dave Hoggard for hosting the legendary BBQ with (even more legendary) banana pudding.
I rode to Greensboro with Kirk Ross and came back home with Anton Zuiker, having interesting conversations with each.
Dave Slusher and I found a common interest beside blogging – animal domestication!
Pam Spaulding was on two panels, and did a great job liveblogging the conference. Melody Watson also has interesting thoughts on it all.
At the BBQ, Anton and I talked with Anil Dash (also here) whose SixApart runs MoveableType which is the platform on which scienceblogs.com is hosted. Of course, scienceblogs.com is a complex site, with much more than just a bunch of blogs, and Anil gave kudos to Tim, the tech guru of Seed, for his amazing ability to build, fix and run our platform. We also talked about the ability of the blogosphere to effect change (e.g., in Washington). Something Anil said in a panel discussion lit a lightbulb in my head. He said that until about two years ago or so, it was very unusual for a Congressman or a Senator to receive many phone calls from the constituents. But with blogs (either big blogs like DailyKos or lots of smaller blogs acting in unison), this changed. Suddenly, the blogs can turn the ‘on switch’ and send thousands of people to ring the phone in the offices on The Hill – something for which the offices are not prepared. Instead of a few letters, or some e-mails, suddenly, for a day or two, the phone is ringing off the hook and prevents all other business from getting done over the phone. This is an element of surprise to them and thus they tend to sit up and listen! This may explain why the blogosphere-wide action to defeat PRISM was so successful (and it was so thoroughly defeated that the ridicule even outside of science blogs was widespread). I heard that SPARC got a number of call from various senatorial offices, pretty much saying “call off the dogs, we got it, we understand the issue now and will vote Yes, and please, we need to use the phones again!” As a result, despite being voted on twice (Bush vetoed the bill the first time around), the NIH mandate language remained unaltered and the bill became the law.
After the initial talk by Chris Rabb and the morning panel, I first went to a session on Social Networking for Bloggers led by Kelby Carr. That was quite an interesting discussion about do’s and dont’s of social networking behavior, etiquette, dividing personal from professional, etc. It fed nicely to what someone at the closing panel said (and I’ve been saying for a long time) – that in the age of the Web, the criteria for ‘proper behavior’ for getting a job or running for office will change, as the Facebook generation takes over, knowing that everyone has drunk pictures on Facebook and that it is OK, so let’s look at what really matters about the person, not such superficalities that insult old puritanical norms stemming from the times when such behavior, while ubiquitous, could be safely hidden from the public. Soon enough, we can stop pretending to be mortally insulted that someone, gasp, had a beer at a college party or did/said something silly or stupid at some time in the past.
My own session was small – but that was good. Those who came were interested in the science side of things, so I could quickly dispose of the more general stuff about people being active on Facebook, twitter, FriendFeed or blogs, and focus more on commenting behavior (and specifically psychological barriers to commenting) on science-related content online, be it science posts on blogs or peer-reviewed papers. I got a lot of useful feedback on this which may help me both here on the blog and at work on PLoS.
Next, I went to hear Kirk Ross on “Slow News”. As you already know, I am a big fan of Carrboro Citizen and the concept that guides its publishing model. While the panic – “OMG! The newspapers are dying!” – may well apply to large metro, state and national papers, the small, hyperlocal newspapers are doing just fine and will probably continue to do so. I am constantly online, constantly scouting for news – about science, science publishing, U.S. electoral politics, Serbia, etc. – which is a ‘pull’ model. I am interested in particular topics and actively search for them at places I trust. Thus, I may be missing something interesting which is outside of the realm of topics I actively look for. This includes news about the happenings in my own town and neighborhood (if I spent less time online and more walking the streets, I may get such news the old, from-the-horses-mouth way). For this, I need to occasionally succumb to the ‘push’ model, which I do every Thursday when I go to La Vita Dolce, get a mocha (‘Bora’s style, please’), sit back and enjoy the new edition of Carrboro Citizen. I learn which cool plant is in bloom right now, what is the controversial issue at the Town Hall this week, what is going on at my kids’ school, and what the candidates for local elections are saying. And it is all written with no rush (digest the news first, don’t rush to print) and no heed for the he-said-she-said false-equivalence mode of journalism that has been poisoning the A.S. media for decades. See, for instance, this editorial from this week’s edition (this is just the ending paragraph – read the entire thing – well worth your time):
For The Record:

This has not been lost on many. In fact, in a recent local candidate forum, a member of the GOP — yes, there are a few here in Orange County — acknowledged that it appears there are programs or missions where government actually does a better job than the private sector. Such acknowledgements are rare, but increasing. It will take years, though, for the poison injected into our political discourse to be metabolized. People will still rail about big government and taxes. But there’s a difference between pushing back in order to insist on efficiency, transparency and fairness and simply attracting the system for ideological or political gain.
In a recent New York Times column, Thomas Friedman recalled Oliver Wendell Holmes remark that “I like paying taxes. With them I am buying civilization.”
We’re a far cry from that sentiment but perhaps a little closer to understanding the role of government and how dangerous it is to entrust the whole of civilization solely to those out to profit from it.

Now, if you are a partisan Democrat you will love this piece, if you are a partisan Republican, you will hate it. But if you are unbiased in any way, you will recognize that the piece has no ideological axe to grind – it is a mix of stuff you should have learned in high school Civics and what you have learned in college freshman Economics 101, plus recent statements from the two presidential campaigns. It provides you a baseline expert consensus on what the Reality is, so you can compare the party platforms, proposals and rhetoric to the Reality and decide for yourself which party tends to better consult with Reality when designing their campaign promises, i.e., this is how journalism should be committed.
The final panel compared the roles of the Web and technology between the 2004 and 2008 elections. The two-way communication between campaign and volunteers in real time, texting, ads on games, real-time updates of the voter databases – none of those were possible in 2004, but are ably used by the Obama campaign this year (McCain campaign is relying mainly on old-style techniques: nasty robocalls, racist flyers, and negative TV and radio ads). But the main difference between the two years is video – as soon as someone does or says something on TV or a campaign event, it immediately shows up on YouTube for everyone to see. The video of the ‘macaca’ moment that millions saw in 2006 did not so much show Sen. Allen as a racist as much as a jerk – someone you do not want to vote for. The videos this year are really making the opinions change – when you see the behavior of supporters at McCain/Palin rallies, when you watch the racist, dishonest and nasty ads they are putting out, when you watch the conventions and debates (and important moments from them), when you watch Obama’s rallies, ads and speeches in contrast, when you watch GOP operatives openly lying on TV, and you watch all of that over and over again – it is easy to make up your mind.
Finally, it was so much fun meeting and chatting with Ginny Skalski and Wayne Sutton (of 30Threads), Matt Gross, Lenore Ramm, Heather Solos (you can find her here, here and here), Dan Conover and Janet Edens, Jim Buie, Robert Scoble, Ruby Sinreich, Nancy Shepherd, Lauren Polinsky, Dennis Meredith, Donna Fryer, Ilina Ewen, Vera Hannaford, Jay Ovittore, Andrea Novicki and many others.
You can see more pictures from ConvergeSouth here and more discussions here. See you all next year – same time, same place.

Internet use ‘good for the brain’

Or so says this BBC article:

A University of California Los Angeles team found searching the web stimulates centres in the brain that control decision-making and complex reasoning. The researchers say this might even help to counter-act the age-related physiological changes that cause the brain to slow down.

The Invisibility Cloak

From SCONC:

Tuesday, Oct. 14
7 p.m.
Science Cafe Durham (aka Periodic Tables): The Invisibility Cloak
Steve Cummer of Duke’s Pratt School of Engineering discusses acoustic materials that might hide a submarine or improve an auditorium’s performance. Broad Street Café, 1116 Broad Street, Durham. http://www.ncmls.org/periodictables

Cool physics on Bloggingheads.tv

Jennifer Ouelette and Julianne Dalcanton chat about space, physics and science education:

Science Saturday: Our Humongous Sky:
Julianne lays claim to a comet (14:18)
The scientific sensibility infiltrates television (05:03)
Woes and wonders of the Hubble Space Telescope (08:38)
How astronauts prepare to go into space (09:00)
Jennifer defends corpse museums (04:15)
The right way to teach science to kids (04:12)

Importance of cell phones (not internet) in health-care in the developing world

Can You Heal Me Now?

While many Americans view cell phones as indispensable to their social and professional lives, more and more Africans are finding cell phones to be indispensable to good health. In sub-Saharan villages, for example, mobile phones are playing a key role in health care delivery, says Dr. Fay Cobb Payton, an associate professor of information systems and technology in the NC State College of Management.
————————
“The pervasive use of mobile technology surprised me,” she says, noting cellular towers have arrived in many parts of Africa before land lines. “The Internet is an expensive proposition for many areas, but even in the smallest villages, people have mobile phones and use them widely.”
—————————
Nurses used to travel to rural villages and bring back notes about each patient, which had to be transcribed before a physician was consulted. Text messages, cell phone pictures, and cell phone video now allow nurses in the field to transmit patient conditions and histories directly to physicians in the clinic for faster consultations.
—————————
“It’s not enough to drop technology into an area,” she says. “We need to educate patients and physicians on the cost and care benefits and provide ongoing training so they become comfortable with using the technology to improve public health.”

From Telecommuting to Coworking

Great article in Carrboro Commons today – I know because I’m in it! The concepts of ‘work’ and ‘office’ are changing and those in the information economy are starting to adapt to the new world:
Creative Coworking offers a new dynamic:

“People left the office and cubicle and they say, ‘OK, I’m going to break out.’ … So you start doing that. You work at home. You want to get something better than the couch, so you get a table. … You start creating an office in a spare bedroom. That works great for a while,” Russell said.
“Then you get a little bored, and your spouse is like, ‘Why haven’t you gotten out of your pajamas in the past five days?’ And so they go and get dressed and take their laptop and bag and go to a coffee shop.”
“They do that for a while, but then the music starts to bug you. There aren’t enough electrical outlets. … You get frustrated, so you go back home. …”
Ultimately, all those public places with social potential don’t have all the things you need, Russell said.
“There’s a big gap between working at a coffee shop and owning your own office.”

Then, a little further down the page, you can see a familiar name …. 😉 Doing this interview was actually tons of fun!

ConvergeSouth08 program is now finalized – and I am in it

450x90more.png

ConvergeSouth – October 16 – 17, 2008 and BlogHer October 18, 2008.
It’s the weekend to be in Greensboro!
ConvergeSouth has big updates. See the updated conference schedule here: http://2008.convergesouth.com/schedule/
Read more about the video/photo walking tour here and be sure to sign up (seats are going fast): http://2008.convergesouth.com/schedule/videobustour.php
Be sure to register for ConvergeSouth here: http://2008.convergesouth.com/register/index.php
The ConvergeSouth blog will be seeing more action soon. Be sure you have the blog feed in your RSS reader: http://2008.convergesouth.com/blog/feed/
Banana pudding is on the schedule for the fourth year in a row at the Community Barbecue hosted by David Hoggard and his band of merry neighbors. Read more about the barbecue here: http://2008.convergesouth.com/events/bbq.php

You can also coordinate carpooling and room-sharing at this page.
As you can see, I am slated to lead a session with the title “Conquering Fear – Overcoming Social (Networking) Anxiety”.
Help me out here! If you walked in on a session with that title what would you expect to hear there? What would you want to hear there? What knowledge or insights of your own would you be able to contribute to the session? Do you know of any research on this topic that I should be aware of?