RE: [ba-unrev-talk] Document for Review
Graham. (01)
BTW. One may well consider our friend Rod Welch a pioneer in the field
of self-oogling. For those who don't know what he has accomplished:
www.welchco.com (02)
H. (03)
On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 10:14, Graham Stalker-Wilde wrote:
> Self-googling is a wonderful notion (though I'm sure many theologians will frown on it).
>
> As Bruce Schneier said ("Secrets and Lies") in a few years storage will be cheap enough to digitally record audio and video of your entire life. While that's not an entirely pleasant thought, a bit too much like Nietzche's hobgoblin of eternal recurrence for me, and the political and civil liberty ramifications are alarming, I *would* like to be able to put my hands on every note I've ever taken, every clipping, everything I've read about XYZ in the decade before last, etc etc.
>
> Auto google a go-go
>
> -g
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org
> > [mailto:owner-ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org]On Behalf Of Henry K van Eyken
> > Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2003 8:40 AM
> > To: ba-unrev-talk@bootstrap.org
> > Subject: Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Document for Review
> >
> >
> > I knew there was something wrong with the name, but it took nearly half
> > an hour to realize that the Pope's name is John Paul. This is one of
> > those socially embarrassing lapses of mind for many of those lucky
> > enough not to die young.
> >
> > It was also the sort of thing that made writing exams a disagreeable
> > experience because they are designed for testing young people for
> > fairly quick accuracy.
> >
> > At any rate, I got by last Fall with an 83 for Java and a 90 for Unix,
> > which probably are accurate assessments as grading goes, but from the
> > point of view of efficiency they are low marks considering the time I
> > spent on these subjects.
> >
> > I had a couple of reasons for taking those courses. One was to
> > experience what it would be like for an older person to go through them.
> > I was planning to write about that, but it is just plain impossible to
> > be objective about one's own mental capacity.
> >
> > With life expectancies lengthening, the slowing of mental functioning
> > would be an interesting area for potential digital augmentation. Maybe
> > headway could be made by some sort of an autogoogling process applied to
> > a person's own collected digital notes.
> >
> > H.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 06:42, Henry K van Eyken wrote:
> > > John.
> > >
> > > The stuff you collected about memetics is scary. I didn't realize that
> > > the advertising/marketing industry had already gone this far.
> > >
> > > On a more everyday level, I watched a segment about the life of the
> > > current Pope John, a man of truly great, world-scale accomplishments.
> > > And, yet, as I was watching, I kept on wondering how a person of such
> > > magnificence could hold beliefs that one couldn't get into my own mind
> > > with a sledgehammer. It strongly reinforced a sense that we share this
> > > Earth with peoples whose minds are structured so differently in their
> > > (nearly ?) hardwired aspects. And, yet, we are by and large able to live
> > > by much common sentiment (on foundations laid during early childhood)
> > > and much common logic (that, following Piaget, begins taking shape
> > > during our teens) and, hence, with much mutual understanding.
> > >
> > > In the meantime, the weak shall inherit memetics.
> > >
> > > Back to work.
> > >
> > > Henry
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2003-01-09 at 02:23, John J. Deneen wrote:
> > > > Re:
> > > >
> > > > >I am also
> > > > >> inclined to believe that commercial interests are (will
> > be) against such
> > > > >> granularity in pages carrying advertising.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> But, then again, your immediate concern is not with
> > web-wide level of
> > > > >> co-operative work. However, it might be well, to keep such a future
> > > > >> extension in mind.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Go figure: Ever been a victum of "contagious" products and ideas?
> > > >
> > > > It works like this. First, they find out how the mind of their target
> > > > consumer works by getting at his or her ideas and
> > subconscious thoughts.
> > > > .... (more info below)
> > > >
> > > > - John
> > > >
> > > > * Mind virus could give us shopping bug
> > > >
> > > > Tracy McVeigh
> > > > Observer
> > > >
> > > > Sunday March 26, 2000
> > > >
> > > > "It may prove to be the most successful new selling technique
> > > > the capitalist world has ever known. The 'mind virus' is the
> > > > latest form of consumer brainwashing.
> > > >
> > > > A mix of psychology and Internet technology, the aim is to
> > > > create social epidemics by feeding the right information, or
> > > > virus, into someone's mind. Once implanted, it can
> > make the most
> > > > useless of gadgets seem essential, the most unnecessary
> > > > accessory irresistible. It is a money-spinning dream.
> > > >
> > > > That is the claim of psychologist Paul Marsden, who
> > believes he
> > > > can help businesses to trigger shopping crazes for
> > their products."
> > > >
> > <http://www.brandgenetics.com/archive/Guardian%20Unlimited%20%20Ar
> > chive%20Search.htm>
> > > >
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > Mental epidemics
> > > >
> > > > "WANT to change the world? Find out how in Malcolm Gladwell's
> > > > The Tipping Point. He has "the rules" for engineering social
> > > > epidemics. You'll see how to turn an idea, product or practice
> > > > into a virulent mind virus that will sweep through society to
> > > > become the latest craze, fad or fashion."
> > > >
> > <http://www.brandgenetics.com/archive/New%20Scientist%20Mental%20e
> > pidemics.htm>
> > > >
> > > > * Genetically Modified Food and Memetically Modified Ideas
> > > >
> > > > ... "In a memetic project somewhat similar to the Human Genome
> > > > Project, evolutionary psychologists have begun mapping the
> > > > cognitive hardwired structure of our minds, and the
> > development
> > > > of associative networks have allowed researchers to map the
> > > > acquired or softwired structure of those minds.
> > > >
> > > > What is interesting about all this is that these advances now
> > > > allow for the possibility of engineering of ideas so
> > completely
> > > > adapted to the structure of our minds that when
> > exposed to them,
> > > > we automatically adopt them, sometimes in spite of ourselves.
> > > > Memeticists are now taking their first tentative
> > steps in using
> > > > this knowledge to engineer and modify cultural information; to
> > > > design fashions, fads, ideas, advertising and brands that fit
> > > > our minds, like a jigsaw piece in a puzzle. The GM mind virus
> > > > may have been a product of blind chance that just happened to
> > > > fit our minds, but the possibility is now with us of
> > consciously
> > > > and deliberately modifying the structure of information to
> > > > render it more palatable, and indeed infectious." ...
> > > >
> > > > ... "Of course, infecting others with our ideas so
> > that they do
> > > > what we want is a time-honoured human preoccupation.
> > Compliance
> > > > professionals, from door to door salespersons to
> > politicians to
> > > > religious zealots have long used the techniques of social
> > > > influence to go about their business. But the
> > difference, and it
> > > > is a big difference, is that memetic engineers are
> > developing a
> > > > theoretically informed comprehensive understanding of how this
> > > > process works that turns manipulation into a science." ...
> > > > <http://www.viralculture.com/gmmm.htm>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > * Brand Positioning: Meme’s the Word
> > > >
> > > > "Using a simple but powerful technique of memetic analysis, it
> > > > is shown how marketers can unpack how brands are actually
> > > > positioned in the minds of consumers in terms of
> > their component
> > > > memes, that is, their ‘genes of meaning’. A
> > demonstration of the
> > > > validity and reliability of memetic analysis is given
> > through an
> > > > investigation of how the notion of ‘healthy-living’ is
> > > > positioned in the minds of consumers. The practical utility of
> > > > memetic analysis in brand positioning is discussed, and the
> > > > possibility is raised of using the analytical tool to increase
> > > > profitability by ‘memetically modifying’ brands with true,
> > > > unique and compelling consumer values."
> > > >
> > <http://www.brandgenetics.com/archive/Brand%20Positioning%20-%20Me
> > mes%20the%20Word.htm>
> > > >
> > > > * Help advertising evolve: Clone consumer thought patterns
> > > >
> > > > Harnessing the power of evolution
> > > >
> > > > "Of all processes in the universe, evolution is
> > perhaps the most
> > > > awe-inspiring. What’s more, it is beautifully simple: Descent
> > > > (continuity) with modification (change) powered by a simple
> > > > mechanism of natural selection. Evolution and its effects are
> > > > all around us today; emerging, designing, producing species
> > > > adapted to their environment, antibodies adapted to
> > infections,
> > > > and knowledge adapted to the world. Indeed, the very idea of
> > > > evolution is itself a product of evolution, and has been
> > > > described by philosopher Daniel Dennett as simply the
> > best idea
> > > > anyone has ever had. We have found a way of harnessing this
> > > > process to help design advertising campaigns and
> > brands that are
> > > > highly adapted to their target markets."
> > > > <http://www.viralculture.com/admap99.html>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Gary Richmond wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Eric and Henry,
> > > > >
> > > > > Eric you wrote in response to Henry's comments on your document for
> > > > > review:
> > > > >
> > > > >>Granularity is in there. But I *really* liked your comment about
> > > > >>advertisers' possible objections!
> > > > >>
> > > > > I would also like to reinforce the concluding comment of Henry's,
> > > > > pointing exactly to what
> > > > > I would like to comment on after I return to NYC on Monday.
> > Henry wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>But, then again, your immediate concern is not with
> > web-wide level of
> > > > >>co-operative work. However, it might be well, to keep such a future
> > > > >>extension in mind.
> > > > >>
> > > > > These kinds of co-operative/collaborative concerns are what Aldo de
> > > > > Moor and I have maintained
> > > > > would distinguish a Pragmatic Web from a (mere?) Semantic
> > Web. He and
> > > > > I discussed this informally at ICCS
> > > > > 2001 in Palo Alto and, with Mary Keeler, wrote a paper, "Towards a
> > > > > Pragmatice Web," for ICCS 2002..
> > > > >
> > > > > http://infolab.kub.nl/people/ademoor/papers/iccs02.pdf
> > > > >
> > > > > For a brief treatment of the theme of a Pragmatic Web, see this
> > > > > article (to which Aldo recently directed
> > > > > me) by Munidar P. Singh, Editor in Chief of IEEE Internet Computing.
> > > > >
> > > > >http://www.csc.ncsu.edu/faculty/mpsingh/papers/columns/bi-6-3-02.pdf
> > > > >
> > > > > More when I return.
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary
> > > > >
> > > > > PS Eric, thank you for your kind words regarding my loss. Tomorrow
> > > > > begins a long, sad car trip
> > > > > to Greenville, SC.
> > > > >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>Eric.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>Glad you took it well. I was a bit in a blue mood when I wrote my
> > > > >>>response. So much to be done, so little time left for doing it.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>At any rate, a major item in your original post (and in
> > your posts way
> > > > >>>back during the days of the colloquium) is granularity.
> > Granularity in
> > > > >>>all web pages extant is very much desired. I believe that
> > > > >>>paragraph-level granularity is a good, practical goal. I am also
> > > > >>>inclined to believe that commercial interests are (will
> > be) against such
> > > > >>>granularity in pages carrying advertising.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>But, then again, your immediate concern is not with
> > web-wide level of
> > > > >>>co-operative work. However, it might be well, to keep such a future
> > > > >>>extension in mind.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>Henry
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>On Wed, 2003-01-08 at 16:19, Eric Armstrong wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>>Hey, Henry.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>Thanks for the post. I'm trying to get at basic
> > infrastructure questions,
> > > > >>>>though, rather than large design concerns. I got caught
> > up in the vision
> > > > >>>>myself, and list moved towards big-picture things.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>But mostly I'm trying to enumerate the low-level
> > infrastructure issues
> > > > >>>>that emerge when the rubber hits the road, and someone
> > tries to code
> > > > >>>>something.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>Actually, one of the things I should have put on that list is time
> > > > >>>>synchronization. When updates are happening
> > simultaneously at remote
> > > > >>>>locations, and the results are shared, "which happened
> > first" becomes important.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>(Note to Self: Examine the bread crumbs in the design
> > document for other
> > > > >>>>low level issues.)
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>Henry K van Eyken wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>>Eric.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>You are talking here about stuff dear to my heart, but
> > it is so complex
> > > > >>>>>I cannot just immediately respond in a satisfactory way
> > - especially
> > > > >>>>>because I am overloaded and my mind is getting slower
> > while my body is
> > > > >>>>>screaming to get me away from my desk.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>I would want to tick off the points you raise in a
> > media/educational
> > > > >>>>>setting, which is something I would want Fleabyte to
> > evolve into, but
> > > > >>>>>which I am not likely to ever see.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>Media, typically are close to one-way instruments, from
> > emitter to
> > > > >>>>>receiver. Oh yes, readers may write letters to editors,
> > but it is the
> > > > >>>>>editors who select what and how much of each letter
> > received is printed.
> > > > >>>>>In other words, the readers are under editorial control.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>Schools to a little better. Students may ask questions,
> > but even those
> > > > >>>>>questions may be ignored or rephrased.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>Eventually I shall have to produce an article outlining
> > how Fleabyte
> > > > >>>>>might move from being a webzine toward a collaborative tool. One
> > > > >>>>>question is: who are doing the collaborating? Another:
> > what is the depth
> > > > >>>>>of that collaboration, the commitment involved. These
> > questions ought be
> > > > >>>>>posed in a well-defined context of which I perceive
> > various stages.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>Stage one is getting, evaluating, pruning information.
> > We now have
> > > > >>>>>search engines; we lack evaluation engines. And we haven't got
> > > > >>>>>well-defined means of making individuals with their
> > limited mental
> > > > >>>>>capacity feel comfortable with an extensive body of machine-held
> > > > >>>>>information. To make matters more complex, that body is
> > dynamic with
> > > > >>>>>information continually added, removed, altered in a way
> > that any person
> > > > >>>>>who exhibits this kind of a continually changing mind is
> > considered
> > > > >>>>>fickle, unreliable, undependable, and, hence, even unemployable!
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>Stage one would involve a moving feast of involved
> > expertise, knowledge
> > > > >>>>>workers with a sense of the future and a sense of how
> > directions in
> > > > >>>>>their field are potentially being deflected by projected
> > developments
> > > > >>>>>elsewhere. (Think of Doug's "frontier outpost" people as
> > discussed
> > > > >>>>>during the colloquium!)
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>A next stage would involve "spreading the word" to a
> > critical mass of
> > > > >>>>>decision-makers, which "at bottom" is the electorate,
> > but which need
> > > > >>>>>depend on either experts trusted by their elected
> > representatives or
> > > > >>>>>depend on digitally held expertise - a benign auto pilot.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>Following that comes planning for action, the problem of
> > alternatives,
> > > > >>>>>levels of certainty, etc., all of which would lead into
> > appropriate
> > > > >>>>>action.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>I guess I have gone a little beyond the kind of
> > cooperation people
> > > > >>>>>normally think of when contemplating tools for
> > collaboration. Really, we
> > > > >>>>>are here in the domain of dynamic, coevolutionary
> > collaboration. The
> > > > >>>>>kind of stuff Doug is talking about.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>Too bad he has not been getting the needed support.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>Too bad, Fleabyte is likely to whither on the vine.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>But, by all means, let's keep on dreaming and scheming.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>Henry
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>The production of the
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>On Mon, 2003-01-06 at 18:10, Eric Armstrong wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>I've just published a document at my web site, entitled
> > > > >>>>>>Technical Impediments to Persistent Collaboration Tools.
> > > >
> >>>>>>http://www.treelight.com/software/collaboration/Technical_Impediments.html
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>I would appreciate feedback from you guys.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>The document is an attempt to identify the set of necessary
> > > >>>>>>infrastructure features that, by their absence, make it
> > > >>>>>>difficult or impossible to develop usable collaboration tools.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>Essentially, it's an "infrastructure wish list", and you folks are
> > > >>>>>>admirably positioned to tell me what's missing from the list.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> (04)